Skip to content
Subscribe

The Budget and what's fair

Published:

It is officially Mid-January 2010, and California is still nearly $20 billion short in budgetary funds. $19.9 billion is a lot of money, and so it makes sense that Governor Schwarzenegger is looking to balance the books. On January 8, the governor announced an 18-month plan to address the massive shortfall, which included $6.9 billion in expected funds from the federal government. The press release from the Governor’s Office informed readers that this part of the plan will help in “reforming the state’s relationship with the federal government,” by obtaining “monies owed to California for faulty reimbursement formulas and federal mandates.” Specifically, flawed financial reimbursement formulas, the use of federal funding before December 31, 2010, and unpaid, unfair federal mandates are described as the “fair” ways by which California will obtain nearly $7 billion to close the gap.

The first category includes the Federal Medical Assistance Program, for which the state is seeking a “more equitable” refund rate of 57 percent versus 50 percent. If the federal assistance level was to rise by 7 percent, the state would expect an additional $1.8 billion in funding. The second category includes federal funding (through the federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) of such programs as CalWORKS and Child Support Services, to the tune of $2.1 billion. The last category includes $1 billion for assistance toward the state’s support of prescription drug costs and “ervices paid for by Medi-Cal instead of Medicare.” The state is also requesting $86.9 million for foster care payments and nearly $1.9 billion for federal funding of California’s special education programs and “full reimbursement” to California to go toward costs incurred under the State Criminal Alien Assistance program.

What’s fair is fair, right?

It seems unwise for a state as (normally) prosperous and powerful as California to count on debts and reimbursements for a fiscal year. As the federal government itself is relying on excessive debt spending, it seems unwise for California officials to suddenly demand their federal counterparts start ponying up. Even more cringe-worthy is the second demand, that ARRA payments be extended. If the state cannot support a program, it is a good sign that the state must either give up that program, or cut from programs of lesser importance to the voters.

It is commendable that the governor is looking for ways to save money and balance the budget, but perhaps unwise to begin demanding that the federal government pay every nickel and dime it may owe, while simultaneously demanding that the very same federal government continue to pay for programs unique to California.

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

The Budget and what's fair

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us