![]() |
|
March 2004 | ![]() |
|
|
|
||||
| HOME | SEARCH | CONTACT US | SITE MAP | ||||
THE ECONOMIC RECOVERY BOND ACT Legislative Bond Act THE QUESTION Should the state of California borrow 15 billion dollars ($15,000,000,000) through the sale of bonds to provide financing for California's budget deficit? THE SITUATION California's General Fund budget supports a variety of programs, including public schools, higher education, health, social services, and prisons. In 2001 the economic and stock market downturns caused state revenues to decline sharply. Policymakers reduced program expenditures, raised revenues, and used a variety of other measures, including various forms of borrowing, to deal with the shortfalls. Bonds have been traditionally used to finance major capital outlay projects. Recently, the state used bond financing to help close shortfalls in its General Fund budget. Last year the Legislature and the Governor authorized the sale of a $10.7 billion bond to eliminate the budget deficit that would have existed at the end of 2002-03. This bond is currently being challenged in court and has not been issued. (Short-term borrowing, due to be repaid in June 2004, is being used to finance the carryover 2002-03 deficit.) The state is facing another large budget shortfall in 2004-05, which is estimated to be in the range of $15 billion. This estimate assumes that the currently authorized $10.7 billion deficit-financing bond is sold and the carryover 2002-03 deficit is taken off the books. THE PROPOSAL Proposition 57 would authorize the state to issue a $15 billion bond to address this year's budget shortfall. This bond would be used instead of the currently authorized $10.7 billion deficit-financing bond. Certain funds transferred to the state's Budget Stabilization Account (created by Proposition 58 on this ballot) would be used to accelerate the repayment of the bond. Proposition 57 would become effective only if Proposition 58, on this ballot, is also approved by the voters. FISCAL EFFECT The bond would provide up to $4 billion more now to help with the budget shortfall but would have higher costs in the long term and take longer to pay back than the currently authorized bond. It would be repaid by one-quarter cent of sales tax revenue. Funds from the state's Budget Stabilization Account (BSA) created by Proposition 58 would be used to accelerate the repayment of the bond. Assuming the maximum contribution from the BSA, the bond would be paid back in nine years. Annual cost would be $1.2 billion in 2004-05, increasing moderately thereafter. WHAT A YES OR NO VOTE MEANS A YES vote means the state could sell $15 billion in bonds to pay existing budgetary obligations. A NO vote means the state would not sell $15 billion in bonds but could instead sell $10.7 billion in bonds as previously authorized by the Legislature to pay a smaller level of existing budgetary obligations. SUPPORTERS SAY
OPPONENTS SAY
For more information: Supporters: Join Arnold, 916-442-7757, www.joinarnold.com Opponents: Senator Tom McClintock, 916-448-9321, http://tommcclintock.com
You may link to any individual proposition page. You may print and circulate this copyrighted material if you use it in its entirety (the introductory page plus the four proposition pages) and give credit to the League of Women Voters of California Education Fund. Send comments concerning the format or usability of this page to lwvc@vcwatts.org |
| |
|
|
|
|