Dan Walters (Sacramento Bee): The politics of budget numbers

[Jack Rabbit]

From the Sacramento Bee (registration required)
Dated Sunday April 10

The politics of budget numbers prolong state's agony
By Dan Walters -- Bee Columnist

California's budget crisis - upward of $40 billion in deficits so far and still counting - is arguably the state's most pressing political issue.
It's already cost one governor (Gray Davis) his office and resolving it has so far eluded his successor (Arnold Schwarzenegger).

As important as it may be, however, the budget imbroglio is merely a symptom of California's larger, more pervasive crisis of governance: the chronic inability of the governor and the Legislature to deal with the pressing issues that a complex, fast-growing and fast-change society produces.

We got into the budget mess because of the system's breakdown, and we will remain mired in it until the system can repair itself - if, indeed, repair is possible. There's an entirely respectable theory that California is fundamentally ungovernable because its socioeconomic and geographic fragmentation make social consensus - a precondition to governance - virtually impossible.

Read more.

[robertarctor]

1. Dan Walters is a GOP ringer

He got hired at the Bee after the old Sacramento Union wingnut screed went bellyup, so that the wingnuts wouldn't accuse the Bee of being exclusively liberal. Walters and his colleague Daniel Weintraub, along with Sacramento News & Review columnist Jill Stewart, can be counted on to give California GOP talking points a public voice.

Take Walters as seriously as you would any Townhall.com columnist.

[Jack Rabbit]

2. He's a lot more conservative than I am, I agree

But he deserves to be taken more seriously than Townhall. Walters is one of those fellows with whom I usually disagree who mangages to get his facts right and, therefore, I take seriously.

[mitchtv]

3. I find ir hard to read DW

he makesan efort to appear impartial than disregard it competely. Our local RW rag has him a lot.

[Jack Rabbit]

4. Don't sell him short

Mitch, I gather from some of the things you've written that you're a tad older than I am. That means you remember Ronald Reagan from the days he was governor. I turned 15 the week he was elected governor in 1966.

I thought Reagan was better as president than he was as governor. I thought he was a dreadful president.

Nevertheless, the guy never ran in an election that he didn't win easily. What the hell was going on here? Was I really so out of touch that I just couldn't stand such a popular leader?

Dan Walters helps me understand why people like Reagan (and Deukmejian and Wilson and -- most importantly right now -- Arnold) appeal to most voters while turning me off.

If we can understand that, we might be able to counter the case people like Reagan make to voters. It's a lot more effective than throwing up your hands and saying, "You like that creep? You've got to be crazy." That never works.

[mitchtv]

5. you're right I was 21 then

but i came to SF in June 67( summer of love) Reagan was elected that year because of his celebrity,and his promise to save money, sound familiar?. one good talking point: Arnold days he's going to wait until after the regular election to put his pension initiative on the ballot. After? why not with? He acts like $70 million is his money to spend