Subject:

Comments:
: Is the Cal budget deal constitutional? It seems like an attempt to "immunize" the State from claims, particularly by bond holders. It sounds like the State agreeing with itself that it cannot touch certain revenue. But part of the deal to which the State agreed, in borrowing money, was that the full power of the State would be used to pay the money back. Now the State is saying that it doesn't have the power it used to have, because it has agreed not to go after local revenues. Isn't this a slippery slope? If the economy continues to sour and debt repayment is in doubt, couldn't the State further remove itself from its powers to raise revenue, and thereby avoid debt repayment? It seems the budget deal is akin to southern states' attempts to "immunize" themselves from Civil Rights legislation by "getting out of" the public education business and then claiming they didn't have the power to enforce the law. That was turned back by the Federal Courts, and this budget deal probably will be turned back as well. States cannot go "out of business" with respect to its powers. Comment? : : John Ryskamp

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: