Times-Standard

Times-Standard
Article Launched: 01/09/2008 01:21:27 AM PST

Thadeus Greenson
The Times-Standard

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger outlined his intent to make sweeping changes -- both immediate and permanent -- to California's budget system in his State of the State address Tuesday, drawing differing views from local representatives.

Where state Assemblywoman Patty Berg saw opportunity, state Sen. Pat Wiggins saw a lack of leadership.

”I am disappointed, though not surprised, by the Governor's proposal for cuts across the board,” Wiggins said in an e-mail to the Times-Standard after Schwarzenegger's address. “This proposal lacks thought, vision and courage. While some cuts will have to be made, he needs to provide more leadership in these difficult times.”

The governor spoke for about 30 minutes, announcing his intent to make across-the-board budget cuts to address next year's projected $14 billion deficit, again pushing for a constitutional amendment to tie state spending to revenue and, at the same time, reiterating the need to reform the state's public education system and invest $500 billion into failing infrastructure.

But, it was the governor's commitment to working across the aisle, with Republicans and Democrats alike, that caught Berg's ear.

”I actually thought it was a pretty good speech, all in all,” Berg said in an interview with the Times-Standard. “I like the idea of engaging in partnership to solve this problem.”

As for the budget, Berg said the state has spent years dealing with budget woes through cutting, spending and borrowing.

”We're at the end of all those possibilities ... My feeling is that everything needs to be on the table, and we need to hear everybody's ideas and work on this together,” Berg said.

Saying that the governor has the power to pencil out budget spending he does not support -- yet has largely failed to do so -- Wiggins said she does not support a constitutional amendment to regulate state spending.

”(The governor) doesn't need any additional tools in order to move our state in a positive direction -- but he does need to make choices more difficult than what we have seen and heard from him so far,” Wiggins said.

While she said she isn't sure a constitutional amendment is necessary and doesn't think slashing across the board is the right path to balancing a budget, Berg said she clearly sees the state's financial crisis as an opportunity to retool priorities.

”It's about what kind of state California's going to be in the 21st century,” Berg said, adding that today's budget decisions will dictate what California will look like in the future. “The important question is this: What do the people of California expect from state government?”