Health Care Supporters Dropping Faster Than Democrat Candidates

The latest is the Governator who after actually considering what the health care bill will entail decides that no, he won't be back:

In his annual “State of the State” message today, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger withdrew his support for the health care reform measures Democrats are attempting to finish up in Washington, DC.

“While I enthusiastically support health care reform, it is not reform to push more costs onto states that are already struggling while other states get sweetheart deals,” the governor said.

The White House had in the past brought much attention to Schwarzenegger’s previous support for the effort.

“Health care reform, which started as noble and needed legislation, has become a trough of bribes, deals and loopholes,” Schwarzenegger said. “You’ve heard of the bridge to nowhere. This is health care to nowhere.”

Arnold, dude, you need better speech writers. "health care to nowhere?" Pathetic.

Sorry for the slight digression but Schwarzenegger is realizing what many of us have been saying since the beginning of the debate; someone will have to pay. It's either the states or the feds but in both cases it's the citizens. Ahnuld got caught up in the liberal mindset that government revenue is his money to work with and forgot that it's money taken by force from workers and businesses. It's purely and simply tax money, which by definition is not money created by a good product or idea but taken under threat of prosecution from those who are the lifeblood of the country.

Perhaps if Arnie didn't have DiFi and Babs Boxer as his senators and was blessed with elected representatives with better political cunning (read smarter) who could have held out and got a deal like Ben Nelson did, his states' health care costs could be paid by wage earners in "clinger" states like Pennsylvania, Alabama or Oklahoma.

The Best Case For the 2nd Amendment Yet

California is in dire financial straits with a huge deficit and the Governator's apparent distaste for tackling the real problems like illegal aliens and a fat state government. So what does he decide? Setting free 27,000 prison inmates:

Reporting from Sacramento -- The state budget deal negotiated by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and legislative leaders would reduce the population of California prisons by nearly 27,000 inmates in the current fiscal year.

That would be done with a combination of new measures, including allowing some inmates to finish their sentences on home detention, creating new incentives for completion of rehabilitation programs and scaling back parole supervision for the least serious offenders.

So there you go, instead of cutting loose 27,000 state workers who, to be honest, wouldn't be missed. Arnold is cutting loose 27,000 criminals who will--if recidivism rates are to be believed--mostly turn back to crime; especially in this economic climate. Happily for liberals, they won't be returned to prison because there won't be any room. That is until the liberals get mugged and become conservatives.

So we'll get a chance to see just how the repressive gun laws in California jibe with thousands of newly released criminals. It should be quite a spectacle.

The Death of the Golden State

Those who've read this blog for awhile know that I was a Californian for a decade. I lived in the most beautiful city in America--San Diego--and would not hesitate to return if I could. I love the state, it's people and the ability to do everything from ski to hike in the desert to swim in the Pacific Ocean all in one day.

That said, my former home state is dying a slow but predictable death.

Onerous government regulation has driven even the most loyal businesses out of state in a migration that has nearby states like Arizona, Oregon and Nevada reaping the benefits. Mexico has also seen a nice influx of exasperated business owners taking their wares to less oppressive climes.

From strict environmental regulation to insane tax laws, the reasons are myriad. Businesses want to stay and have developed deep roots in the state but in this economy are making the decision to pick up and go. We may be seeing another example soon:

Everything was fine until the city started running out of money in 2007. Suddenly, the city announced that it was going to ignore its own ruling and reclassify us in the higher tax category. Even more incredible is the fact that the new classification was to be imposed retroactively to 2004 with interest and penalties. No explanation was given for the new classification, or for the city's decision to ignore its 1994 ruling.

Their official position is that the city is not bound by past rulings -- only taxpayers are. This is why we have been forced to file a lawsuit. We will let the courts decide whether it is legal for adverse rulings to apply only to taxpayers and not to the city.

We work with hundreds of outside agents, consultants, independent contractors and support services -- many of whom pay taxes to the city of Los Angeles. This spurs a job-creating ripple effect on the city's economy. Yet I suspect many companies like ours already have quietly left town in the face of the city's taxes and regulations. This would help explain the erosion of jobs.

Regardless of the outcome of our case, the arbitrary and capricious behavior of some bureaucrats is creating a lose-lose situation for everyone involved. If we win in court, the taxpayers of Los Angeles will have lost because all those tax dollars will have been wasted on needless litigation.

If we lose in court, the remaining taxpayers in Los Angeles will have lost because their burden will continue to swell as yet another business moves its jobs -- and taxpayers -- to another city.

The Governator has mired the state in the worst recession seen in decades by his own policies. Instead of being pro-business or at least semi pro-business, he's taken the liberal Republican route and increased environmental regulation. He's done nothing to tackle the immigration problem and has instituted a tax policy that is so regressive as to make it socialistic.

Californians have watched home prices decline to one-half the level they once were and taxes have increased on even the smallest products. From San Francisco down to San Ysidro, inane regulations coupled with massive job losses have placed a burden on the state that will take years to get out from under.

Were a smarter approach of massive tax cuts in concert with healthy government layoffs implemented, the state would be in a much better financial situation and would still be the economic engine that drives the country. Instead it's now a third-rate state with a horrible credit rating and a really nice environmental record.

Congratulations.

California Going Conservative?

Maybe the Governator is realizing that conservative ideas are the only ones that will save his state.

First he's contemplating doing away with a major welfare program:

Could California become the first state in the nation to do away with welfare?

That doomsday scenario is on the table as lawmakers wrestle with a staggering $24.3 billion budget deficit.

County welfare directors are "in shock" at the very idea of getting rid of CalWORKs, which has been widely viewed as one of the most successful social programs in the state's history, said Bruce Wagstaff, director of the Department of Human Assistance in Sacramento.

If it's one of the "most sucessful social programs in history" why does it cost so much money? Successful generally means it pays for itself or is balanced and the program definitely is not.

He's also toying with the idea of a flat tax:

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said today that he would like to see such “radical” proposals come out of a commission now studying an overhaul of the state’s tax system. The governor told the editorial board of the Sacramento Bee that he hoped the commission would not be afraid to propose something like “a 15% straight tax.”

“That’s the kind of radical, daring kind of a proposal that I want to see on the table so we can look at it and say, ‘Oh, let’s study this, maybe that is the way to go,’ ” Schwarzenegger said during the discussion, which was webcast.

The current system, based on highly unstable income tax revenue that fluctuates with the economy, “doesn’t work,” Schwarzenegger said.

Advocates of a flat tax, which applies a single tax rate to all income, say it increases compliance with the tax codes because it is so simple and easy to understand. But opponents dislike that it taxes the wealthy at the same rates as the poor.

Emphasis mine.

Of course they do. Can't have fairness in the plan, now can we? It would work pretty well though. And even though it would be 15% on everyone, it would still be carried by those who make the most. Say the "poor" make $30,000 per year, they would pay $4,500 in taxes while someone making $100,000 would pay $15,000. It would be equiatble and raise known known amounts of revenue and if they were to get rid of exemptions they would be able to budget accordingly.

Expect serious pushback from the tax industry and California tax collecting entities.

It's time for new ideas and bold initiatives because Lord knows that spending money we don't have has been a disaster. It would be nice to smack Obama upside the head with reality if this approach works even a little bit.