Budget decisions
Which way should Sacramento go: Cut the deficit now and patch up the budget, or fully fund crucial social services? Discuss today's Opinion Daily.
Comments will close after two weeks.
From the Los Angeles Times
| Advertisement |
|
|
The Latest | news as it happens
- Schwarzenegger names new lieutenant governor - L.A. Now 11/23/2009, 5:12 p.m.
- Plavix advertising indirectly cost taxpayers an extra $207 million over five years - Booster Shots 11/23/2009, 5:09 p.m.
- Alternative Apparel celebrates its green initiative - All The Rage 11/23/2009, 5:02 p.m.
- Yalapa, Mexico: Stand-up paddle surf workshop in paradise - Los Angeles Times Travel | Daily Deal Blog 11/23/2009, 4:57 p.m.
- Get ready for carpools in City Section - Varsity Times Insider 11/23/2009, 4:48 p.m.
Save more than
I don't want my children to pay for the social services of today. Overspending today and forcing our children to bear the burden of paying for todays costs is simply unethical! We must balance the budget today and cut entire programs. Hard decisions but they must be made. I worry that the Democratically controller legislature will spend and spend until the bulk of the states revenue goes to debt service.
Cut NOW @ 3:29 PM PDT, Mar 10, 2008
I think a program-by-program approach is most useful. Each agency providing services also provides stats about their results. If some programs are not demonstrating the promised results, cut or reduce them, and focus funds on the programs that ARE meeting results. Likewise, if some programs exist only to fatten coffers of a given politician's constituency and have no real benefit to the state, have the courage to cut those out. I know there is excess spending in the system. The budgetary process should allow that to be excised in lean times, and in robust times, have he discipline to reduce the debt.
Anne M. @ 10:15 AM PDT, Mar 10, 2008
The legislature had extra money and added it to the foster care budget. Now there is no extra money, so there is nothing to give to the foster care budget beyond what it would have if there had been no extra money in the past. Advocates will scream that this is a cut, but they will be getting everything they were to receive plus the one year bonus money from last year.
ajk @ 7:19 AM PDT, Mar 10, 2008