Redistributing Money from Michigan to California?

The "debate" over whether (read it!) or not the federal government (i.e., the 49 poorest states in America) should bailout California is underway at the New York Times. That's right: it's a serious question whether taxpayers in Saginaw, MI are obliged to pay the debts racked up by Californians. Two excerpts:
  1. From Peter Schrag: "Many (Americans) may also be shocked to learn that California voters, even during the latest fiscal crisis, have cheerfully continued to pass one billion-dollar spending program after another without the revenues to pay for them."
  2. Jean Ross calls it "unthinkable" to approve Schwarzenegger's plan, which "would would slash funding for schools and community colleges by $5.3 billion - a cut of more than $750 for every student in California’s public schools; add 940,000 children to the rolls of the uninsured by eliminating the Healthy Families Program, which offers low-cost health coverage to low-income children; and end the CalGrant Program, putting college out of reach for tens of thousands of young people – the work force California needs to ensure its economic future."
"Unthinkable," huh? I like this issue because it doesn't feel "liberal" or "conservative" or political -- it seems philosophical, and common sensical. The unemployment rate in South Carolina, where the glimmer has always been humble, is currently 12.1%. California needs to sell some of its celebrity jewelry before looking to Carolina for a bailout. (Sorry, Monica!)


Monica said...

Heh. California is in the toilet. It's not a good time to be here. I'm totally on board with selling some of the celebrity jewelry. But I still love LA...I hope that you all will do what you can to save us.

Casey said...

Well, when you put it nicely like that... okay. As long as you promise to put a TJ-Maxx on Rodeo Dr.