Both parties in California have a lot of fun with the old credit card.

There must be about five bond propositions on every election ballot, all for absolutely noble and essential purposes, of course. Most pass, unfortunately. Bonds are apparently considered by the voters to be "free money." I typically vote against every one on a statewide basis, although I have voted in favor of certain local city bonds for specific purposes (new library, fixing school buildings). Our city has handled its finances relatively well, although the tech bust didn't do it much good.

Any attempts to ramp back spending in Sacramento are being met by screams of outrage and rending of garments. As we have seen in the Federal realm, even attempts to restrict the GROWTH of spending is met with such a reaction. A true spending freeze, or an actual reduction, would be met with a reaction similar to what a baby barbeque would receive.

What chaps my ass about all this is that California spending grew by over 36 percent over Gray's administration. During the same period, population and inflation have grown at a combined rate of 21 percent. Revenue has grown 28 percent. Please note that if the budget had grown by only 21 percent to keep up, granting the assumption that government spending should even be rated on a per-capita basis--that we might now be enjoying a surplus.

As with the Federal government, it is impossible to conceive that ALL the spending is totally essential to our existence, but that is how it is presented. Until we can get past this, I see no solutions.