Face à une baisse des revenus fiscaux du fait de la crise du crédit subprime, schwarzenegger annonce des coupes de dépenses

[vincponcet]

Incroyable tout de même.

Pour au moins deux raisons.

Un politicien qui anticipe, c'est déjà étonnant. En plus, il montre qu'il comprend un peu l'économie en se disant "moins de crédit, moins d'achat, les prix des maisons baissent, les recettes des taxes foncières vont donc baisser fortement l'année prochaine".

et sur la réponse, tout autant incroyable de la part d'un politicien. A la baisse prévisible des recettes fiscales, il annonce des coupes dans les dépenses.

En France, on en est encore à parier sur une croissance de 2.5%, et quand on sera au fond de la récession, on invoquera des grands travaux et subventions/allocations en tous genres afin de "soutenir" l'économie.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?…/f165649S53.DTL

Schwarzenegger announces fiscal emergency to cut budget

By AARON C. DAVIS, Associated Press Writer

Friday, December 21, 2007

(12-21) 16:56 PST SACRAMENTO, (AP) --

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Friday said the budget proposal he will release next month will come wrapped in a fiscal emergency declaration, a move that will force lawmakers to tackle California's darkening budget picture months earlier than they otherwise might.

The emergency means lawmakers will have to reopen the budget the governor signed in August and consider almost immediate cuts to schools, prisons and aid programs to the poor.

Since those cuts will have to come when agencies already have spent more than half their promised funding for the year, the options available to save money may be drastic.

For example, the Schwarzenegger administration this week floated the possibility of granting early release to more than 20,000 low-risk prison inmates. Such a move could save the state nearly $800 million through 2010.

Schwarzenegger's promise to issue an emergency declaration comes as shrinking revenue from the collapsed housing market and slowing taxable sales is threatening to leave the state with a budget shortfall of $10 billion to $14 billion over the next year-and-a-half.

It will be the first time Schwarzenegger will have invoked the fiscal emergency provision that was included in Proposition 58, the balanced-budget measure voters approved in 2004.

Technically, the declaration to come on Jan. 10 will require the governor to propose a plan to rebalance the current budget and force the Legislature to cut costs or increase taxes within 45 days.

The special legislative session will focus only on the $2 billion that will need to be slashed during the current fiscal year. Lawmakers will deal with the greater deficit projected for the 2008-09 budget year when they negotiate that spending plan next summer.

In a statement issued Friday, Schwarzenegger said he wants to control the growing deficit with spending cuts. He promised to "move quickly in the special session to bring this year's budget back into balance."

"I firmly believe that the way to solve our chronic budget problem is with fiscal restraint. We will figure out how to get spending in line with revenue," he said.

Assemblyman John Laird, chairman of the Assembly Budget Committee, said he agreed with the governor's decision to pair the emergency declaration with the release of his spending proposal for the coming fiscal year. In that way, lawmakers can begin considering long-term fixes.

But he also said it appeared telling that Schwarzenegger was planning to wait nearly three weeks to issue the emergency declaration.

"I think he's waiting until January because his proposals aren't ready yet," said Laird, D-Santa Cruz. "He doesn't know what to cut."

Schwarzenegger's announcement came amid the latest round of downbeat economic news.

The state Employment Development Department said Friday that California added just 900 payroll jobs in November, following a loss of 13,500 jobs in October.

"Recent data about the economy will increase the pressure on state and local budgets this year and next," said Stephen Levy, senior economist at the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy.

Any state budget cuts to education or social programs — which account for more than three-fourths of the state's budget — are likely to draw criticism from Democrats, who control both houses of the Legislature.

They can make the final decision about spending cuts without support from minority Republicans because they require only a simple majority to enact.

A tax increase would need a two-thirds majority and require support from Republicans, who say they will oppose any such attempt.

Schwarzenegger holds veto power over any plan passed by the Legislature.

___

Associated Press Writer Alex Veiga in Los Angeles contributed to this report.

[DiabloSwing]

L'argent poussant sur les arbres, les français auraient tort de s'en priver !

[A.B.]

Il est loin d'etre parfait, mais il me surprend souvent positivement le governator.

[vincponcet]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206…&refer=home

Schwarzenegger Seeks Budget Overhaul, Spending Cuts (Update1)

By Michael B. Marois

Jan. 8 (Bloomberg) -- California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will call for across-the-board spending cuts and a constitutional amendment to overhaul state finances amid the biggest budget deficit of his tenure.

Schwarzenegger, a 60-year-old Republican, will make the proposals during his annual State of the State address today, according to excerpts of the speech released by his office. He has already said he intends to declare a fiscal emergency to deal with the gap that's expected to exceed $3 billion in the current fiscal year and swell to as much as $14 billion in the 12-month period beginning July 1.

``It used to be that Sacramento plugged deficits by grabbing money everywhere it could -- pension funds, local governments, bonds, gas taxes meant for transportation,'' Schwarzenegger said in the excerpts. ``But we tightened the noose by taking away those options. We now have no way out except to face our budget demons.''

Schwarzenegger said the cuts are needed as revenue lags behind spending amid an economic slowdown caused by the worst housing market slump in 16 years. He has often complained that budgets are hamstrung by mandatory spending increases that hamper his ability to balance the state's books.

``The problem is that, while revenues are flat, automatic formulas are increasing spending by 7.3 percent,'' said Schwarzenegger, who came to office in 2003. ``Even a booming economy can't meet that kind of increase. So the system itself is the problem.''

Gimmicks

Schwarzenegger, a former body building champion and Hollywood actor, was swept into office in part on voter angst over how his predecessor Gray Davis handled the state's perennial budget problems.

Schwarzenegger vowed to bring an end to spending plans that were balanced with accounting gimmicks and borrowing. Once in office, he won approval to borrow $15 billion to plug a deficit in 2004. He has since diverted money to the general fund originally intended for schools and local transportation agencies.

``Never have I seen more brazen gimmicks employed than under this administration,'' said Senator Tom McClintock, a Republican from Southern California. ``My experience with this governor is that there is absolutely no relationship between what the governor says and what the governor does.''

Budget Process Change

Schwarzenegger has tried twice since taking office to revamp the state's budget process. Lawmakers in 2004 opposed his plan to cap spending. Voters the next year rejected a constitutional amendment to restrict state spending to the prior year's level plus three previous years' average revenue growth.

California traces its current fiscal dilemma to falling home sales and prices, which have crimped sales tax receipts as consumers buy less. Lower property tax collections have also weighed on the state, forcing it to send more money to schools to offset diminished local-government collections.

At the same time, wildfires in Southern California increased expenses, and the state was forced to set aside more money for teacher pensions. Legal battles have also left California without anticipated revenue from Indian tribe casinos.

Democrats, who control the Legislature, say Schwarzenegger and Republicans must consider higher taxes rather than pare vital social services to close the budget gap.

``We're not going to cut our way out of this,'' said Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, a Democrat from Oakland.

Battle Lines

Republicans vow to block any proposal raising taxes to cover the deficit, said Assembly Republican leader Mike Villines. Republicans, while a minority in both chambers, can thwart passage because Democrats are eight votes shy of the needed two-thirds supermajority needed to raise taxes. Republicans last year held up passage of the budget for two months over proposed spending.

``We will not raise taxes this year to help liberal spending programs,'' Villines told reporters in the Capitol.

California, the biggest borrower in the municipal bond market, is rated A+ by Fitch Ratings and Standard & Poor's, their fifth-highest rankings, and a comparable A1 by Moody's Investors Service. Only Louisiana has lower credit ratings among U.S. states.

S&P on Nov. 20 lowered its outlook on $48.2 billion of California debt to stable, signaling that the state is unlikely to win a higher rating.

Typical Bond Trade

Yesterday, a 10-year California bond traded between securities dealers for 100.74 cents on the dollar to yield 3.9 percent. That is 0.33 percentage point, or 33 basis points, more than top-rated debt. In March, that same bond traded for 4 percent, 21 basis points more than top-ranked debt.

California's budget woes aren't unique. Thirteen states face shortfalls totaling $30 billion next fiscal year, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a Washington research group, said in a Dec. 18 report.

To contact the reporter on this story: Michael B. Marois in Sacramento at mmarois@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: January 8, 2008 16:24 EST

[José]

Et rebelote !

Schwarzenegger plans to cut state worker pay to cope with late budget

By Kevin Yamamura

Last Updated 6:24 pm PDT Wednesday, July 23, 2008

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger plans to sign an executive order next week that will temporarily reduce pay for more than 200,000 state workers to the federal minimum wage of $6.55 per hour to preserve cash in the midst of a month-long budget standoff, according to a draft copy of the order obtained by The Bee.

But a spokeswoman for Democratic state Controller John Chiang, who pays the state's bills, said he would ignore the governor's order, likely forcing a court battle.

"He will pay state workers the salaries that they have earned, and that's full salary," said Deputy Controller Hallye Jordan.

Administration officials said the governor expects to take the action Monday.

"The administration is looking into many different options to preserve cash to ensure we have enough to cover our costs," Schwarzenegger communications director Matt David said.

The Republican governor, in the executive order, argues that the late state budget means there is "a real and substantial risk" that the state will not have enough cash to pay its bills.

He says that his action complies with a 2003 ruling by the California Supreme Court that made clear that without a state budget in place, federal labor laws require the state to pay most workers "either federal minimum wage or, for those employees that work overtime, their full salaries." The order would require state agencies to stop authorizing overtime for most employees.

The governor also plans to issue a hard hiring freeze except for state jobs "directly related to the preservation and protection of human life and safety." He also will suspend work for all retired annuitants, permanent intermittent employees, seasonal employees, temporary help workers, student assistants and some contractors.

The order, which would take effect for the August pay period, envisions that state workers would be paid their full back salaries once a budget is signed.

Jordan, Chiang's spokeswoman, said the state will have sufficient cash to pay its bills through September and then, if a budget is still not in place, will go to the private credit market.

The state Supreme Court, Chiang said in a prepared statement, "has never addressed the legality of withholding full salaries versus paying minimum wage (and) the governor's proposed executive order would only invite more extensive and expensive litigation. Worse, should the courts find that withholding full pay is illegal, the state will be liable for treble damages."

Chiang's statement called the proposed move "a cynical attempt by a governor who has spent the past few weeks going up and down the state criticizing others for political posturing."

Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, issued a statement blasting the idea.

"I don't think it is wise for the governor to use working men and women as hostages for the state budget," Florez said. "I think it shows weakness on his part as a negotiator. The men and women who do the hard work that keeps our state running deserve their full pay."

Court decisions over the years have given the state authority to pay many bills, including employee salaries, despite the lack of a budget.

This move by the administration is an effort to preserve money in case the budget debate drags on through September, when internal cash reserves are expected to run dry and the state would be forced into the distressed and expensive private credit market.

It also is likely to have a serious political effect on lawmakers, who will feel the heat from public employee unions.

Lawmakers have yet to vote on the budget, now 23 days late, that has a $15.2 billion deficit in the $101 billion general fund. The entire budget, including bonds and special funds, is $144 billion. Both houses of the Legislature adjourned until Aug. 4, but today, the Senate summoned its members for a vote next Tuesday.

Terry Halleck, president and chief executive of The Golden 1, said that the company would likely float loans to its members if the governor cuts their pay. The Sacramento-based firm has a history of offering such deals to its direct deposit members during budget delays.

The Golden 1 was founded in Sacramento by California state workers 75 years ago. Today it's the nation's sixth-largest credit union with $6 billion in assets. About 100,000 of its 686,000 members, roughly 15 percent, are employed by the state.

"Certainly, as a credit union started by state workers, we would immediately give consideration to what we could do to help our members," Halleck said in a cell phone interview.

Any loan program would need board approval. Board members Pedro R. Reyes and P. Craig Cornett, who are both state executives, "would not be allowed to participate in discussion or voting" on a state worker loan program, Halleck said.

While The Golden 1 has branded itself as the dominant state worker credit union, others have similar loan programs.

Sacramento-based Schools Financial Credit Union, for example, started a "budget impasse" loan program on July 1, making zero-interest loans available to members crunched by the budget delay. It also offers loan payment extensions for state employee members who have lost income.

"We've had a policy like this in place for years," said Nathan Schmidt, Schools' vice president of marketing.

Under former Gov. Pete Wilson, the state in 1992 paid 93,000 workers with IOUs when it ran out of cash, a practice later deemed illegal by a federal judge.

That year, the budget impasse lasted a then-record 64 days, as California was deep in a recession and Democrats and Republicans fought over spending cuts and taxes.

The IOUs became an embarrassing milestone for California budget-making, as it marked the first time since the Great Depression that the state paid bills in scrip.

Banks initially cashed the IOUs for employees when the state began issuing them that summer. But as the budget stalemate grew longer, some banks refused to accept them, sparking legal action against the state from public employees.

In 1995, U.S. District Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr. found that the IOUs, or registered warrants, were not "cash or its equivalent" and did not constitute a prompt payment in violation of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act. The state reached a settlement in 1996 in which it granted state workers as many as seven additional days of paid leave.

http://www.sacbee.com/749/story/1104742-p2.html

[Serge]

Un éléphant (républicain), ça trompe énormément !