Posted by
Playful Walrus on Wednesday, December 23, 2009 5:22:47 PM
This Los Angeles Times editorial discusses what Governor Schwarzenegger has to say about our projected $21 billion state deficit.
But he's seen enough disastrous budget years now to know how readily -- and wrongly -- many people blame the state's problem on illegal immigration.
They are not immigrants. The legal term is: illegal alien. Immigrants are people who move here legally with the intention of staying and becoming Americans.
But illegal immigration didn't get California into its budget fix, and full federal payment -- an unlikely prospect -- wouldn't get us out.
So what? This doesn't mean that we shouldn't point out the costs illegal aliens bring - and ask for compensation from their home countries, or the federal government. The guy who breaks into my car isn't the cause of all of my problems, but I'm sure as heck going to prosecute and sue him if he is caught.
Playing to the anti-immigrant chorus, even in a quest for federal money, undermines the message every Californian must hear: We cannot currently pay for those programs that we consistently list as our top priorities, including first-rate education, transportation and public safety, and it's not because of the size of the undocumented population. It's because of our appetite for services, the structure of our tax system and the dysfunction of our government.
Most of us are not anti-immigrant. We are against illegal aliens being allowed to stay here and live off our foolishly socialistic systems. But the rest of the statement is correct, though I suspect accidentally. The editorial board wants to raise taxes, but our high taxes actually contribute to the problem.
He has been an outstanding spokesman in the fight to combat greenhouse gas emissions and global warming, dueling with the deniers on the weekend talk shows and touting California's policy progress around the globe.
One of the last things California needs is to pushing residents and strangle businesses with restrictions under the phony guise of "global warming" prevention.
But perhaps because his career has put him so directly in touch with the popular imagination, he also gives voice to the common wisdom of the day -- even if that wisdom is wrong, as it is when it assigns the state's troubles to public workers, welfare recipients and illegal immigrants.
Yes, it is a problem when there are millions of retired public workers whose retirement pensions continue to draw billions of dollars in taxpayer money.
Yes, it is a problem when too many people are drawing welfare for too long from a system that skipped the Clinton-era reforms that improved the welfare situation in other places.
Yes, it is a problem when unskilled illegal aliens come here and take much more public money than they contribute in taxes, and even worse when they commit identity theft and violent crimes.
Unsurprisingly, the editorial doesn't go on to say what the "real" problems are.
Since splitting the state is a dream that will never happen, some things that will help:
1. Making public employee unions get written permission on an annual basis from each member before using that member's dues for political causes (= to promote the growth of government).
2. Changing the legislature to a part-time, unicameral, and overall smaller legislature.
3. Allowing business to flourish by reducing regulations, restrictions, red tape, and taxes rates.
4. Reducing serious crime by asking the federal government to bring in the National Guard to "sweep and hold" gang-infested neighborhoods, and for ICE to deport illegal alien gang members.
5. Requiring photo ID to vote.
6. Running our prisons like they are run in other states that spend far less per prisoner.
7. Telling all incoming government employees from this moment forward that they will be responsible for saving for their own retirement; they can do it through professional associations and unions if they want. Aside from compensation for ongoing work, the taxpayers will not pay any more.
8. Spending tax money on maintaining existing infrastructure and core obligations; encourage private development/operation of new infrastructure, schools, etc.
In addition to setting the stage for more criticism of Prop 13, it looks like the paper is trying to soften us up for the illegal alien shamnesty push by Obama and company.
I wonder what the editorial board would do if it could be proven that illegal aliens were making marriage neutering more unlikely? I think it would put them all in the fetal position... which is dangerous for a paper that supports abortion.