WASHINGTON MONUMENT STRATEGY

by Virginia Postrel  •  Jul 8, 2003 at 11:53 am

http://www.dynamist.com/296/washington-monument-strategy

The Long Beach Press-Telegram is spitting mad about the spreading meme that Californians must choose between higher taxes and no basic services:

By presenting the public with only two choices, higher taxes or dramatic cuts in vital services, state politicians and special interest groups are taking a page from an age-old political storybook, absolving themselves of blame and scaring the public into believing it's up to them to solve the state's budget problems. Take your pick, people: Either pay more or prepare for a crime wave. Pay more or deal with a generation of uneducated kids. Pay more or get ready to toss frail seniors into the gutter. Are you really that cold-hearted? What an infuriating, self- serving ruse....

The state has been unwilling to play by the most basic financial rules you can't spend more than you earn without running into severe problems. During the dot-com boom politicians gave systematic favors to the special-interest groups that finance their campaigns, like the prison guards union, jacking up their budgets, salaries and pensions way beyond anything necessary for inflation or population increases. The numbers tell the real story: State spending has increased 40 percent in the last four years alone, as revenues increased 25 percent (spending for inflation and population alone would have increased the budget 21 percent).

Read the whole thing.

Riffing off an LAT article, CalPundit illustrates the mentality that led to this mess. Every feel-good idea becomes politically untouchable, and every program is assumed to a) achieve its goals and b) be the only way to achieve its goals. His favorite, and mine, is the $50/month payment to blind people for dog food: "[Republicans are] proposing to eliminate dog food for blind people? I can see the TV ads already." Now think about that. Sure, blind people may need dog food. But they need shampoo, deodorant, electricity, and computer equipment too. Does every need require a special--and untouchable--appropriation? Isn't that what disability payments are for?

This attitude doesn't just protect nice-sounding programs to support dogs and blind people. It also protects the powerful prison-guard lobby. Deny them anything and you'll see crime running rampant. Who could be against more money for prison guards?

The Reason Public Policy Institute has a special website section devoted to the California budget crisis here.

I'm now going home to Texas, where there's no income tax and they still build roads to handle the traffic.