California and the IMF: Perfect Together?

If California’s financial mess is Greek to you, then maybe it’s time you took a look at the troubles plaguing Greece — to see the parallel between the Mediterranean nation and the American nation-state.

So writes Terry Keenan (of CNN and Fox News fame) in the New York Post,  citing the “very real possibility” that the erstwhile cradle of democracy will need a bailout from its European Union buddies, or maybe even the International Monetary Fund, to stave off a debt default. Meanwhile, the Golden State looks to Washington for a multi-billion handout/bailout to void a fiscal meltdown this summer.

Here’s Ms. Keenan’s take:

For Arnold, Greece is the Word

“Like Greece, California and the 49 other states can’t print their own currency, and, like Greece, California can no longer pay its bills without the help of a central authority — in this case Washington, which has pumped up the state’s finances with billions in stimulus dollars.

Yes, to be sure, last summer, the State of Schwarzenegger did issue IOUs for a time in a desperate bid to keep California afloat, but it’s a stunt not likely to be repeated. Suffice it to say, California is as dependent on Washington for a sound currency as Greece is on Brussels.

More worrisome, while Greece is the Delaware of the EU, representing just 2 percent of its economy, California’s economy is the sixth-biggest on the planet, clocking in with about 13 percent of national GDP. This week the price of credit default insurance on California’s bonds rose to levels that are double the prices back in October. It’s not a huge stretch to imagine a day this year when California has a failed-debt auction, similar to the one in Portugal last week that led to new worries about Greece and market panic around the world.”

Here’s a thought. Since California’s economy dwarves Greece’s why not cut to the chase, circumvent Washington, and go straight to the IMF for a bailout? After all, the IMF’s Web site describes its core mission as ”working to foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce poverty around the world.”

 

Sure sounds like California, doesn’t it?

 

Besides, if it guaranteed an IMF jackpot by likening our woes to those of Greece, maybe Arnold would reprise his role as “Hercules in New York” (btw, the future governor’s first feature film).

 

Guv’s Race: Is Brown Green, Or Green w/ Envy?

We won’t know for another four months whether Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman will square off as the finalists in California’s governor’s race. But if that’s the case, two issues are a virtual certainty: Whitman’s wealth, and the environment.

And this past weekend: a preview of coming attractions.

First, Meg’s mega-millions.

Jerry Brown

In an appearance before a gathering of young Democrats in San Francisco, Brown played the class-warfare card, pointing to Whitman’s $40 million investment in her own campaign.   

“California is deeply in debt, you could say it’s bankrupt, and we can always find new sources of money but it’s always good to make use of the money you have and to get more out of every dollar, and I would say how one spends money in a campaign would be on indicator of how you might spend the people’s money.”

 

 

So much for that endorsement from New York City Mike Bloomberg . . .

 

 

As for the environment, keep an eye on initiative currently in circulation that would suspend the implementation of AB 32, the state’s climate-change law signed into law by Governor Schwarzenegger, for the immediate future.

 

 

If the ballot measure passes in November, AB 32 would go on hold until California’s unemployment falls to where it stood in 2007. In other words, not anytime soon.

 

 

Here’s where the fun begins.

 

Once again, the political world seemingly revolves around Anold

The backers of the initiative are counting on tea-party momentum to carry the day. Whitman would love to tap into that same anti-establishment sentiment, especially if she’s running against a long-in-the-tooth politician like Brown. And it wouldn’t be a big leap if she got on board, as she already supports a one-year suspension of AB 32.

 

 

But doing that risks the wrath of one Arnold Schwarzenegger, who sees AB 32 as his landmark achievement. Thus it’s no surprise that Brown, who’d sorely love the Governator’s endorsement, has already waded into the debate, as it were, by fiddling with the initiative’s title and description — one of the perks of being Attorney General.

 

 

And the measure potentially has California’s business community twixt and tween. They’re no fans of AB 32, as this blog item shows. But they too don’t want to get on Schwarzenegger’s bad side, as a Republican governor is the business community’s best friend when it comes to vetoing liberal-drafted legislation.

 

 

Last week, Brown waded further into the debate when his office tinkered with the initiative by chucking its “California Jobs Initiative” title.

 

 

In its place, this nifty piece of government gobbledygook, meant to appal votes along the coast:

 

 

“Suspends State laws requiring reduced greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming, until California’s unemployment rate drops to 5.5 percent or less for four consecutive quarters. Requires State to abandon implementation of comprehensive greenhouse-gas-reduction program that includes increased renewable energy and cleaner fuel requirements, and mandatory emission reporting and fee requirements for major polluters such as power plants and oil refineries, until suspension is lifted.

 

 

Ick.

 

 

It’s not the first time that an environmental initiative has impacted a governor’s race. You might recall Prop 128 — the Big Green initiative — and the 1990 contest between Pete Wilson and Dianne Feinstein.

 

 

The measure, which proposed to ban a slew of pesticides, raised a ruckus with the ag community and Central Valley voters. It went down to defeat on Election Day, as did Democrat DiFi, confirming the conventional wisdom at the time that Earth Day boasts didn’t translate in Election Day votes.

 

 

Twenty years later, in another open-seat election, the dynamics are different. The effort isn’t to get an environmental initiative enacted. Instead, this time around, it’s an initiative to put a current green law on hold.

 

 

Should make for a fun debate.