Politicians decide state budget without the full picture

Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders were flying blind as they attempted to fashion a new state budget for the fiscal year that begins July 1.

They know the state faces a multi-billiondollar deficit that the budget will attempt to close — at least on paper — but they really don’t know how big it could be because they don’t really know how much revenue the state’s tax system will generate.

Not only have revenues stagnated over the last year, thanks to gyrations in the stock market and the larger economy, but the unprecedented six-month delay in the deadline for filing federal and state income tax returns creates even more uncertainty about how much money politicians have to spend.

Newsom picked a number — a guess, really — and declared in May the state has a $31.5 billion deficit to close. The Legislature’s budget analyst, Gabe Petek, then declared that revenues would fall short of Newsom’s assumption and raised the projected deficit by several billion dollars.

Legislative leaders published their joint version of the budget, passing it June 15 to meet the constitutional deadline. It uses Newsom’s more optimistic revenue projection, rather than Petek’s, and would boost spending from $306.5 billion in Newsom’s budget to $311.7 billion.

Summary

After last week’s pro forma budget action — essentially a drill to protect legislators’ pay from being docked if the June 15 deadline was ignored — Newsom and legislative leaders will finalize a revised version.

However, whatever they adopt as a “final” budget will not be truly final, given the vast uncertainty over revenues, and additional revisions could continue for months.

There are some genuine di erences to be resolved, along with the macro issue of potentially chronic deficits in the remainder of Newsom’s second and last term as governor.

One of the highest profile conflicts is whether the state will give local transit systems the billions of dollars they say they need to avoid a

■ See WALTERS, page A5

Guest Column

Why

Letters to the Editor

Maternal and infant mortality

EDITOR:

The principal measure of a nation’s quality of life of its citizens is to measure longevity and mortality rates. Those measurements include many factors — one the more important ones being maternal and infant mortality rates Statistics published by the Centers for Disease Control’s Center for Health Statistics, 1990-2021, indicate that our profit-driven healthcare system is failing us badly (no news there), and is criminally liable on one particular front: maternal mortality (defined by the CDC as the death of a woman while pregnant or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy ... (more on CDC’s website).

From 1990 to 2021 the rate of mortality of expectant mothers went from 6.3 deaths (per 100,000 live births) to 32.9 deaths per 100,000 live births, a 505% increase.

The news is actually worse than it looks because the largest spike in maternal mortality occurred at the end of the reporting period. In 2018 the U.S. had 17.4 mother mortality rate; in 2021 the rate climbed to 32.9 MMR, a 96% increase in three years.

Not surprisingly, these third-world statistics have not deterred the GOP’s ceaseless attempts at abolishing Obamacare, Medicare, Social Security, Medigap, food stamps and other programs designed to help the poor.

If these figures do not stir your conscience, it reflects a lack of empathy — a trait that separates most mammals from other animals. The absence of empathy also separates Democrats, for whom this trait is part of their political credo, from MAGA Republicans, for whom empathy is for suckers and losers. When I see MAGA Republicans professing to be good Christians, I wonder what Jesus must think at seeing his loving philosophy turned into meanness for political reasons.

JOHN GARON Placerville

Visit