Jerry Brown vetoes bill to help elderly, disabled .

[Webster Green]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/07/26/BAF01KE1VF.DTL&feed=rss.bayarea

[Cool Logic]

1. Regrettably, money, or lack thereof, will continue to be a problem in the foreseeable future.

[katnapped]

4. Not for the rich though!

They gots puh-lenty of it!

[slackmaster]

5. The rich always have plenty of money

That's why we call them rich.

[Cool Logic]

6. I suppose that depends on your definition of "rich."

I don't imagine a 250k couple with a mortgage, a couple of kids in college and all the other expenses that come with life, would call themselves rich.

[MattBaggins]

7. But I bet those evil teachers are over paid

amiright?

[Search and Destroy]

9. compared to what?

A 30k couple with a mortgage, a couple of kids in college, and all other expenses that come with life?

[Luminous Animal]

12. Then they are idiots because they are, indeed, wealthy.

[Urban Prairie]

13. Maybe not, but they sure are to me, when compared to the annual income of my wife and I.

We receive <10% of their annual income, and we don't have any children (just 3 cats) and we don't have employer-paid/supplied health insurance, life insurance or dental/vision care as well, I have to pay for dental and vision care out-of-pocket, and can't afford to purchase health insurance for my ill wife, who has been diagnosed with symptoms of fibromyalgia and she also has untreated spinal (cervical) stenosis-arthritis (I have Medicare) She applied for Medicaid last fall, and she was DENIED b/c my annual disability income is (merely) about $200 above the maximum allowed in our state for a married couple. (Poverty level x 57%).

Even a millionaire would need to call a multi-millionaire or billionaire "rich" when compared to himself or herself.

But a couple grossing 250K annually (obviously not what their net "worth" is after subtracting their debts) or more ARE rich, even if they "think" that they aren't, when compared to many if not most other US citizens, and especially vs a married couple's annual income on a global basis.

[Make7]

2. Governor Brown's veto message:

 
http://gov.ca.gov/docs/AB_96_Veto_Message.pdf
 

[demosincebirth]

3. Misleading title.

[Webster Green]

8. Why? n/t

[housewolf]

10. Go read his veto statment

Link in reply above in Make7's Reply #2

He explains his reasons - it's a copy of a program that needs reform and was recently de-funded, and this bill doesn't reform the program or solve the problems.

[Luminous Animal]

11. The ADHC program did not need reform and Brown's veto never clamed that it did.

The "problems" occurred after the program was cut from the budget and now the admin is scrambling (and wasting a lot of time) slicing the services offered by program into tiny and farming them out to multiple agencies.

Stupid.