This post is an appraisal of the latest talking point hear on "Fight The Power" radio.
When certain concepts are incessantly repeated it seems clear to me that there is a "self-chum feeding" frenzy going on. Certain constructs are being fortified as people get their talking points aligned.
From the past few days of listening in (prior to the military action in Libya) the key focus had been "Republican Governors" and their attempt to implement a "Tea Party agenda", impacting Black America. The triggering conflict was the back end of the Georgia legislative session where serious budget conversations had transpired. With the state facing a major shortfall the budget ax was swinging. As certain programs were cut - a "racial face" was assigned both as a motive and to the victim of these cuts.
From this other callers sought to craft a pattern. That which is happening in Georgia is also happening in Wisconsin, Ohio, New Jersey, Florida, South Carolina, Alabama. It became clear that their focus was indeed on "Republican Governors".
I found it odd that they had nothing to say about California, New York and Illinois. All of these places have gaping holes in their state budgets as well. There have been pink slips handed out to state employee and serious spending cuts in popular social programs as well. WHY is it then that their intent is not "evil" like their GOP counter parts?
It comes as no surprise to me that we are in the early days of the 2012 election season. Various factions are seeking to crystallize a message that each will run on in 2012. For "Fight The Power" - the siege mentality triggers in them the will to find an ideological enemy that threatens to "Turn Back The Clock" to the days were Black folks had no legal rights. I have no problem with them expressing their concerns. I only have a problem with their selective indictments.
The state of California offers itself up as a case study on fiscal management. IT has/had a $26 billion shortfall that has to be dealt with. Aside from the interplay between the governor and particular unions - the end results are similar: layoffs and massive spending cuts.
- Governor Brown And The "Tax Referendum" Challenge With The GOP
- California Legislature Prunes $7B From Budget Including Social Spending Programs
If he can't get the one vote he needs on the bill to eliminate redevelopment agencies, finding "$1.7 billion just got a little harder," Brown said.
Brown has proposed $12.5 billion in spending cuts and a five-year extension on the 2009 tax increases on purchases, income and vehicles, which would net $14 billion a year. After negotiations between Brown and a group of five Republican Senators on the tax extensions hit a wall this week, Steinberg and Perez, D-Los Angeles, decided to try to force the action with budget votes.
They said they felt they could make a statement on the seriousness of their purpose with cuts that will fall hard on many people.
"Today, we're making tough decisions," Perez said. "We're taking these actions because it's our responsibility to do so."
While Senate Republicans joined Democrats almost unanimously on budget votes, Assembly Republicans accused Democrats of choosing to make painful cuts to force voters to accept tax extensions.
"There's things we could have done instead of throwing the elderly and children and the most vulnerable under the bus," said Assemblywoman Shannon Grove, R-Bakersfield. "To give us these cuts that address the most vulnerable is pathetic."
The cuts included $1.6 billion in general fund reductions for health care programs. Low-income families would have their premiums increased and would pay mandatory copayments. Visits to physicians will be limited to seven, though exceptions can be made for those with significant medical needs.
What remains a mystery is how Brown and the two Democratic legislative leaders can pull four Republicans -- two in the Senate and two in the Assembly -- to get the required two-thirds vote to place his tax extensions onto the ballot.