Friday, February 1, 2002
Page 7
AFFAIRS OF STATE (Column)
Governor’s Budget Reveals Sick Set of Priorities
By DAVID KLINE
The state budget proposed by the governor each year is about more than just dollars and cents. The spending plan reveals the priorities of the person who submits it, showing how much various programs and services—and the people who use them—are worth in his eyes.
That being the case, it’s a very sad day in California. Gov. Gray Davis has just let it be known that impoverished seniors are worth very little to him. Worth less, in fact, than arts programs, bonuses for teachers and payoffs to nursing home owners, to cite just a few examples from his new budget.
Davis has proposed canceling a scheduled cost-of-living increase for the SSI/SSP program, which gives monthly payments to the poorest of the poor seniors.
In Sacramento, a person qualifies for SSI/SSP if he has less than $2,000 in assets to his name. A couple can qualify with less than $3,000 in assets—and that includes the value of cars and other property. These figures vary from region to region depending on the cost of living, but in every case the recipients are very poor.
The maximum benefit is $750 per month for an individual or $1,332 for a couple. These amounts just increased on New Year’s Day, and they are scheduled to go up again next Jan. 1 when a federal COLA will increase the payments by $9 a month for individuals and $15 for couples.
California is scheduled to kick in some money, too, so the benefit would increase another 3.9 percent next year. This is the COLA that Davis wants to cancel to save the state government $132 million.
There certainly is merit in cutting back on state spending, especially since the state has gone on a wild spending spree in recent years. In 1998, Gov. Pete Wilson proposed a $74 billion budget. In 1999, Davis upped the ante to $77.5 billion, then $99 billion in 2000 and $105 billion last year. This massive growth has far outpaced the growth of the state’s population or the rate of inflation.
The choices made by Davis, though, are cause for concern. He proposes saving $132 million by canceling the COLA for those who live in poverty, while at the same time recommending that the state spend $2 million on cash bonuses for nursing homes that provide quality care—isn’t that their job?
Just two weeks ago, Davis spent another $4 million on a Cesar Chavez Day project. The money went to 64 organizations that engage children to participate in community-improvement projects in the name of the late union leader—something Habitat for Humanity and other private groups manage to do without state funding.
Here are some other allocations proposed by the governor:
•$86 million for a program under which long-time teachers help other veteran teachers who are experiencing “professional difficulties.”
•$21 million to give $20,000 bonuses to new teachers who agree to work in low-performing schools.
•$45 million for an anti-tobacco media campaign.
•$10 million to tell people to watch out for “predatory lending.”
•$10 million to give $10,000 or $20,000 bonuses to teachers who earn certification by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.
•$10 million to help 800 private arts groups stay organized enough to survive.
•$2 million for a California Arts Council program which, among other things, “provides teacher training on tolerance and diversity.”
•$433,000 to collect and analyze information related to crimes against abortion providers—something the existing police force is perfectly capable of doing without special, politically motivated funding.
In a good year, some of these expenses wouldn’t be objectionable. The predatory lending education, for example, might help seniors avoid losing money to con artists. But in a year when we’re canceling benefits for the poorest members of society—those who already HAVE lost everything—it doesn’t make sense. The state should concentrate on other matters and let private groups like AARP continue their well-funded efforts to raise awareness of the issue.
The foolish spending detailed above is just a drop in the bucket, but it amounts to $190.4 million, or enough to pay for the SSI/SSP cost-of-living increase and a $58.2 million tax cut to help the economy. Sadly, our governor has decided that anti-smoking commercials and diversity training are more important.
With this sort of leadership, it’s no wonder the state is in such a fiscal mess.
— Capitol News Service
Copyright 2002, Metropolitan News Company