COMMUNITY COMMENTARY:

On Jan. 10, Gov. Schwarzenegger announced his budget proposal for the 2008-09 budget year. The governor’s proposed budget includes a 10% across-the-board cut to government departments, suspension of Proposition 98 (the automatic funding mechanism for schools), the early release of prisoners, the closure of numerous state parks, more borrowing and new fees.

It does not yet contain new general taxes. I commend the governor for sticking to this model. In 1991, various taxes were passed to ease the deficit. It was estimated the tax increases would generate billions in new revenue and, true to form, we spent all of that money based on those estimates. But, of course, California businesses and consumers, some of the most taxed in the nation, adjusted their habits or moved out of state to avoid paying more taxes. When revenues didn’t reach estimates, the roller coaster started over and our addiction to spending the money grew. I cannot support the concept of the majority party, that we can tax our way out of a problem. The government will become accustomed to the new level of taxation and spending.

The budget roller coaster we ride is often on auto-pilot. In fact, very little of the budget can be controlled by the governor or the legislature. When politicians want another government program, the fact that we cannot afford it is not an imposition. Safeguards to prevent myriad services and programs from providing incentives to illegal immigrants are rarely built in. The cost of illegal immigration is estimated at more than $10 billion annually. Now our state in is the red and struggling to meet even the most basic of services. When these basic services fall by the wayside, we borrow by the tens of billions.

The governor’s 10% across-the-board cuts are said to be the “fair” way of cutting without taking sides. While I can appreciate that the governor is trying to be fair, all government functions are not the same. Governments are formed to provide basic functions such as courts, public safety, schools and infrastructure. Who would have ever thought these services would have to compete for funding with other specialized programs as each generation of politician tries to leave his or her mark on an expanding government? For example, in 2007, under pressure from federal courts, the legislature passed a prison reform bond to prevent the early release of prisoners. This borrowing was to prevent just the scenario the governor has proposed in this year’s budget — calling for the early release of tens of thousands of inmates.

Was the legislature hoodwinked? This policy puts the elimination of unfilled, vacant civil-service positions on the same moral ground as releasing prisoners onto the streets. I take issue with that. Being fair is a sound goal, but public safety comes first. Why stop at cutting everything 10%? Why not look at every government program and start permanently eliminating or consolidating them? If we can’t secure prisoners, why secure bloated bureaucracies?

One of the newly proposed fees is to provide for California fire protection.

This high priority public safety issue is undeniably an essential state function. However, I am leery of any new “fees” that are to supplant general funds for a general fund function.

As I’ve noted above, the legislature will simply spend the general fund money the new special fee supplants and become addicted to that new level of revenue. Then the roller coaster ride starts anew.

One of the positive aspects of Schwarzenegger’s proposal is an overdue attempt to rein in our out-of-control budget. The governor will take advantage of his authority to call a fiscal emergency and ask the legislature to make cuts, mid-year, to stop the bleeding. However, none of it will matter if we don’t install budget process reforms, if we don’t address the issue of categorical and auto-pilot spending, and if we don’t curtail non-essential programs.

Without genuine reforms, we will end up right back where we are today: $14 billion in debt and at the trough of the roller coaster ride we call a state budget process.

JIM SILVA is an Assemblyman for the 67th District.