Reason Online: California's Silent Big Spenders

[marmar]

California's Silent Big Spenders
Political class refuses to explain why the state requires hysterical spending growth

Matt Welch | May 28, 2009


Say this much for the French: At least they have the couilles to come right out and argue why government needs to be bigger and more intrusive. I may not agree that the state should enforce "solidarity," or protect people from the alleged ravages of "hyper-capitalism," or promote national values to an increasingly blasé world, but at least these are concrete articulations of a positive government agenda, one that is buttressed by France's semi-legendary (if slipping) public sector productivity.

You will hear no such arguments in California, even as a surly political/journalistic class continues its bitter campaign against "small government zealots" and voters who failed to heed their wisdom this month about the necessity of approving yet another round of budget gimmicks and tax hikes. Curiously, in the face of evidence that state spending growth has outpaced population-plus-inflation growth under each of the last three governors, the people busy sounding the alarm against "annihilating" budget cuts have fallen tellingly mute when it comes to explaining just why Californians should pay more and more money for government services every year.

What, exactly, has been the return on this added investment? If spending under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger increased 6.75 percent a year during mostly good times, surely there must be, say, a 3 percent increase in the quantity or quality of...something? Crickets.

Instead of making the positive case for big government, or at least beginning to explain, let alone defend, what Sacramento does with all that money, California's political class has instead opted for a four-pronged strategy: deny, scare, attack, then call for higher taxes.

First is the denial that there is a government-growth issue in the first place. This takes some intellectual dexterity, since the facts indicate otherwise. .........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.reason.com/news/show/133772.html

[ContinentalOp]

1. Aha, I was wondering where all of the CA bashers were getting their info from.

Apparently Reason magazine! Telling.

[marmar]

2. Huh?

:shrug:

[ContinentalOp]

4. I'm just amused that somebody would post an article from Reason magazine as an O.P. on DU. -nt-

[marmar]

5. Umm, OK.....I'll seek permission before I post from Reason next time, if it pleases the court.

n/t

[Egalitariat]

3. The Dot-Com boom was a horrible thing for California. Their tax revenues swelled

tremendously as people got rich while creating little true value.

And the legislators created new programs that spent the newfound tax revenues, and guaranteed/mandated future spending, in a way that assumed the dot-com riches would last forever.

The key is to save money in good times so you can ride out bad times. I learned that in 2nd grade. Apparently, none of our politicos were at school the day they taught that.