"Recalcitrant" Repugs would rather see California crash and burn than approve a tax increase......

[marmar]

You elect assholes, you get assholery.....




from the San Francisco Chronicle:



Talks fail to end California budget impasse
Matthew Yi,Wyatt Buchanan, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau

Monday, February 16, 2009



(02-16) 04:00 PST Sacramento -- A long-awaited plan in the state Legislature to solve a record budget deficit was thwarted for a second night Sunday as legislative leaders and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger anxiously searched to find one more Republican senator to support the budget vote.

Schwarzenegger and the Legislature struggled for more than three months to find a compromise to close the $40 billion deficit. After finally reaching a breakthrough in talks last week, they entered the weekend confident that the Legislature would approve the budget bills that the governor was supposed to sign by today. But their confidence - and prospects for a budget - unraveled Saturday when it was apparent that Senate Republican leader Dave Cogdill could deliver just one - his own - of three GOP votes needed in the upper house to clear the two-thirds majority required for passage. Sen. Roy Ashburn, R-Bakersfield, abstained, but is expected to be a second Republican vote in support of the package.

Without a spending plan, California may rapidly reach what Schwarzenegger calls "financial Armageddon" - the state runs out of cash this month, infrastructure projects come to a halt, and the state's credit rating takes a further pounding.

On Sunday night, after marathon sessions that lasted more than 24 hours, both houses of the Legislature adjourned and said they would return Monday morning to continue pursuing the vote.

Leading up to this weekend's votes, Schwarzenegger and legislative leaders were careful not to say that there had been a budget compromise because they wanted to prevent lobbyists from pressuring lawmakers prior to any vote. But by Sunday, as exasperation grew, some lawmakers admitted a spending plan was in place and that votes had been secured - or so they thought. .........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/15/MNSD15UNQH.DTL&type=politics&tsp=1

[droidamus2]

1. Similar...

This is very similar to what the Republicans tried on the federal Stimulus/Jobs bill. The thing is they don't want a few concessions from the majority they want to write the bill themselves even if they are the minority. I really think this country needs to get rid of all these super-majority requirements for passing legislation. Yes, I am aware that there is a down side to straight majority votes as it makes it easier to pass bad legislation and could lead to a 'tyranny by the majority'. I think the super-majority rules were implemented with the idea that the parties involved would have some desire to work out a compromise. With one party, the Republicans, determined to say no to anything that they didn't write or that might help the Democrats all the super-majority does is put the minority in the position to run the government even though they weren't elected to do so. The majority winners in an election, in this case the Democrats, have been chose by the electorate to lead and set the direction for the country for the opposition to act like little children and rant and rave and refuse to play the game is ridiculous. I really hope that their obstructionist ploy ends up hurting them big time in the next election. Hopefully the last two elections have shown them that negative campaigning does not work maybe after a couple of more administrations we can show them that obstructionism won't work either.

[Javaman]

2. what is happening to california is a classic example of what would have happened

to the nation had mclame and failin been appointed.