[courtesy of California Progress Report]

By State Senator Sheila Kuehl

This is my third essay on the California budget. My first essay set out some background information on actions taken by the legislature http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/05/first_in_a_seri.htmlto re-balance the 2007-2008 budget given shrinking revenues. The second reviewed the Governor’s budget as he presented it in January of this year. http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/05/second_in_a_ser.html This essay will present the changes made by the Governor in his May revision of the 2008-09 budget, usually referred to as the “May Revise”.

Changes in Projected Revenue

Things went from bad to worse in the new estimates of state revenues projected for the July 1, 2008-June 30, 2009 budget year, which reduced expectations by another 6 billion dollars. Although $7 billion in “solutions” had been adopted to balance the 2007-08 budget (see my second essay for this year), rising costs combined with dropping revenues to widen the shortfall to 15 billion dollars in the latest projections.

Changes in Expenditures

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

Governor Will Release Budget Changes on May 14th
Advocates Fear More Cuts Likely - Pressure Rises to Increase Revenues

by Robert in Monterey [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

By State Senator Sheila Kuehl

This is my fourth essay for 2007 and the second of several to come on the 2007-2008 Budget. In this essay, I will set out some of the cuts and non-budget changes demanded by the Republican Senators between August 1st and August 21st, when the budget finally passed, as conditions for their providing one more vote (25 Democratic Senators having voted yes, and one Republican Senator indicating he would vote yes at the next convening).

Request to Eliminate the “Structural Deficit”

The major budget-related change demanded by the Republican caucus was the elimination of the “structural deficit” in the 2007-2008 budget. A “structural deficit” exists in a current year’s budget when proposed expenditures exceed expected revenues. By the time the budget had failed three times to garner the final Republican vote (that last vote taking place on August 1st), the structural deficit had already been reduced to $700,000,000 out of a total budget of over $105 billion (about 6/10 of a percent).