On this edition of Capitol Hour AM 1380 with host Mitch Zak, Assemblyman Curt Hagman discusses current election strategies for the Republican party.

Assemblyman Hagman discusses his legislation to end pensions for politicians.

Everyone knows that trying to pass any kind of meaningful public employee pension reform in the Democrat-dominated legislature would be an extremely difficult proposition. But surely Democrats would be eager to work across party lines and end the practice of politicians taking home generous pensions, right?

Wrong.

In a display of how influential public employee unions truly are in Sacramento, their representatives came in droves to the Assembly Public Employees, Retirement and Social Security committee to oppose the common sense. Opposition included even those groups not affected by the bill.

Just to give a sense of the opposition; CalSTRS, SEIU, Professional Engineers in California Government, California State Sheriffs’ Association, California District Attorneys Association, California School Boards Association, Small School Districts’ Association, California Fraternal Order of Police, Professional Peace Officers Association and Judicial Council of California who are constitutionally exempt from my legislation. So far the only possible compromise offered from the various organizations has been, “We’ll remove our opposition if you exempt us.” The committee gave me the option of continuing to work with the opposition and I accepted in the hopes we could craft a solution to a problem.

I’m not terribly optimistic they will come to the table but I feel this issue is too important and the fight needs to continue.

I introduced this important political reform legislation to prohibit officials elected to any office of any kind in California, from receiving any government retirement benefits. This would have included elected officials and pension systems at the city, county and state levels. This legislation would have saved taxpayer money and prevented politicians from negotiating pensions from which they would personally benefit.

This is perhaps the worst conflict-of-interest of all – politicians voting themselves lavish pensions. After all, how can any politician seriously fight for pension reform when they themselves enjoy a generous pension of their own? Yet from the beginning when I spoke to my Democrat colleagues they refused to support this common-sense reform.

They said they understood the spirit of my bill and were willing to work with me to address the concerns of opponents – namely the public employee unions. During the hearing, the opponents of my bill actually said – without any hint of irony – that my bill would discourage qualified candidates to run for office. This is just laughable. They must have forgotten the fact that state legislators do not receive a pension of any kind and this has not deterred quality candidates from running for office.

My bill would have simply closed the loopholes that allowed other elected officials to receive a pension. Rather than killing my bill outright, the Democrats opted to delay consideration of AB 738 for at least another year. That is the least they can do, given that explaining away a vote to protect pensions for politicians is not exactly popular with working Californians.

Still, it will do nothing to prevent a likely ballot initiative to ban pensions for politicians, which Ventura County Supervisor and a leader in the fight to reform California, Peter Foy has promised may happen – and soon.

Nevertheless, I am committed to passing AB 738 next year with the hope that more public outrage will encourage Democrats to join me in doing the right thing. Californians have expressed strong support for overhauling the state’s flawed pension system for its workers. According to a recent USC/Los Angeles Times poll, 70 percent of California voters surveyed support capping the pensions of public employees. Even 66 percent of self-identified liberals agreed.

There is simply no excuse for government to continue to fund pensions for politicians. Every dime we spend rewarding politicians with pensions is money that we don’t have to spend on vital services relied upon by California families. Public service should be about doing what’s right for the hard-working citizens we are each privileged to represent.

It should not be about personal financial gain. While modifying pensions for rank-and-file employees is one thing, ending generous pensions for politicians should not be a partisan issue. Democrats and Republicans should be able to agree that public pension giveaways are simply unsustainable.

Assemblyman Hagman discusses the Democrats’ faulty plan to balance the state budget through tax increases

The California legislature saw its shadow and now the budget is in chaos again. The Democrats, who control the legislature, state that education and public safety will wither unless their proposed tax increases are adopted. These scare tactics had an impact on us several years ago when the Democratic legislature opted to “temporarily” increase taxes to prevent this onslaught of anarchy. Those increases did not solve our problems because nothing was structurally changed within California’s budget.

The past is repeating itself. The tough decisions were rolled down the road and now we must deal with it again. With California facing a $26.6 billion budget deficit, Sacramento has no choice but to cut spending and make meaningful reforms to prevent another fiscal disaster.

Unfortunately, the Democrats rammed through a series of budget bills that contained more of the same gimmicks, borrowing, fund shifts and delays that got California into this budget mess in the first place. While the budget bills voted on recently contained some modest savings to reduce the deficit, their plan actually increases spending by 31% over three years. They even rejected $1.7 billion of Governor Brown’s proposed cuts to welfare and social services programs, hoping that Californians will someday approve $55 billion in higher taxes on themselves.

Democrats claimed their plan is a “balanced” approach of cuts and taxes. However, the cuts in their plan last for only one year, while the taxes they seek would be on the books for five years. Any time you see the word “temporary” your mind should read “permanent” based upon past actions. In addition, many of their cuts come from what is called “realignment,” where the state shifts some responsibilities to local governments.

In practice, it could jeopardize public safety in my district and communities across the state. For example, 68,000 felons who would have previously served time in state prison would be transferred to crowded local jails and subject to early release. Releasing criminals before they have served their time is a recipe for disaster.

The most glaring aspect of the Democrat budget is the absence of reform. Instead of more taxes why not implement pension reform…and a spending cap…and a reduction of business regulations through pro-jobs reforms. On pensions, the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office has reported that state pension costs have grown from $1.4 billion to $6 billion over the past decade. By comparison, we will spend $9.8 billion on higher education this year.

Without reform, lawmakers may soon be forced to choose between bloated pensions and our children’s future. With a spending cap Republicans want spending to increase no faster than the rate of inflation and population growth, with extra money going primarily to reserves and debt repayment.

Finally, if we make it easier for job creators to invest in our state, we will see more companies hiring more people, which would lead to more tax revenues to adequately fund priorities such as education. That is what pro-jobs reforms will bring to California. In contrast, higher taxes will make it less likely for employers to invest in California.

Sadly, Democrats have chosen to move forward with their budget which will lead to more deficits. That is why I will continue to fight for serious budget solutions that will end the failed status quo. We simply cannot afford to continue the taxing, shifting and deferring of previous years deficits that have led to our existing dilemma.

We can all celebrate now that Election Day is behind us. Campaign literature has stopped crowding our mailboxes, the street corners are clear of candidate’s signs, and those recorded messages about who to vote for have stopped clogging up our machines. But what do the results mean for the Golden State?

We can all celebrate now that Election Day is behind us. Campaign literature has stopped crowding our mailboxes, the street corners are clear of candidate’s signs, and those recorded messages about who to vote for have stopped clogging up our machines. But what do the results mean for the Golden State?

While the rest of the country has reaffirmed the two-party rule, the balance of power in California is now lop-sided. Not only will Jerry Brown be back in the Governor’s office for a third term, but we currently have a Democrat-controlled Legislature since they have increased their majority in the Assembly. Furthermore, the people approved Proposition 25 which allows the Democrats to craft and pass budgets on a simple majority vote without any Republican votes necessary.

For Republicans, there is no getting around the fact that Democrats will now be in charge of state government. Although taxpayers and small businesses fear the potential for more taxes and bigger government, there is still reason for hope. If we look at the other state ballot measures besides Prop. 25, we see the people displaying a decidedly anti-tax bent. For example, Californians overwhelmingly rejected Prop. 21, which would have raised the car tax by $18. Voters also rejected Prop. 24, which would have repealed tax incentives for job creation in California providing people saw through the misleading ads that framed these incentives as tax loopholes. Because of Prop. 24′s defeat, our state remains competitive with other Western states in the fight for new jobs. While the people gave Democrats the power to pass their own budget, they also passed Prop. 26, which stops state and local politicians from raising hidden taxes on goods like food and gas by a simple majority vote thus making it harder for the Legislature to raise taxes through the back door. Essentially the voters gave with one hand and took with the other.

Of course, no one should be surprised if Democrats push for higher taxes when the Legislature reconvenes next year. Big government interest groups will feel like they will have a friend in the Governor’s Office come January, but it remains to be seen how Governor-elect Brown will respond to their demands. After all, he did run a fiscally-centrist campaign promising no new taxes without voter approval.

Whatever course chosen, I will hold Democrats accountable for their budget choices in the months ahead. The people expect a budget that is not only passed on time, but also passed without gimmicks and higher taxes. Working families deserve an honest no-tax budget, and I am committed to fighting for their priorities in the next two years.

As I begin my second term in the State Assembly, I look forward to working with both Republicans and Democrats on the issues that matter most to Californians: encouraging more private sector jobs, cutting wasteful spending, and protecting public safety. The election is over, and it’s time for both sides to get to work.

Proposition 19: Legalize and Tax Marijuana – OPPOSE
Proposition 20: Redistricting for Congress – SUPPORT
Proposition 21: Vehicle License Fee for Parks – OPPOSE
Proposition 22: Bans State Form Borrowing or Redirecting Local Funds – SUPPORT
Proposition 23: Suspends AB32 – SUPPORT
Proposition 24: Repeals Corporate Tax Benefits – OPPOSE
Proposition 25: Majority Vote for Passing a Budget – OPPOSE
Proposition 26: Two-Thirds Vote for Approving Fees – SUPPORT
Proposition 27: Eliminates Redistricting Commission – OPPOSE

And Please Remember to Vote for Meg, Carly, and our other fellow Republicans!

“Late! Late! Late!” said the White Rabbit.

After an embarrassing 100 days after the start of the 2010-11 fiscal year, the California Legislature finally approved the most-delayed budget in state history. The passed budget, one I voted against, is flawed. It is not balanced and moves our budget “woes” on to next year while doing little to solve the inherent problems our state faces.

While the passage of a “no-tax” compromise budget is welcome news for many Californians sick and tired of Sacramento politics, the delay could have averted if the Democrats, who control the Legislature, had worked with the Republicans earlier. After all, Governor Schwarzenegger released his budget proposal on January 8, giving Democrats ample time to craft their counterproposal and begin negotiations with him and the legislative Republicans.

The majority party controls the legislative calendar so discussion on the budget never occurred. In fact, my Assembly Republican colleagues and I asked Democrats to begin bipartisan negotiations in early March so we could avert this painful budget delay. We even placed 100-day countdown posters on our office doors to let Democrats know how many days were left before the end of the fiscal year. Sadly, the Democrats decided to hold out in the vain hope that Republicans would agree to raise your taxes. This was in stark contrast to the Republicans proposal, who lined up behind the Governor’s no-tax budget framework in early May. Democrats could barely agree on which taxes to raise. As a result, the constitutional deadline to pass a budget on June 15 came and went. It wasn’t until August that the majority party Democrats released a budget relying on billions in middle-class tax increases; a plan that was utterly unrealistic given California’s high unemployment rate. Higher taxes would have killed more jobs.

While I am pleased that Californians were spared from higher taxes this year, there was no excuse for the Legislature to pass a budget 100 days after it was due. If my company did that, I would be out of business; if a student turned in their work that late, they would receive an “F.”

While the deadline to pass the 2011-12 budget is less than eight months away, it is imperative that the top priority of the incoming Legislature and new Governor must be to a balanced, on-time budget. We cannot afford another 100-day impasse that will worsen our long-term budget problems and damage our economic recovery. Lawmakers should not be working on lesser priorities and trivial bills until we pass a no-tax balanced budget. We must consider reforms that will encourage a speedier process, such as adopting a two-year budget which would allow more time to study the effectiveness of state spending. I am even in favor of not getting paid until a budget is passed.

While we took a good step this year by placing reforms on the 2012 ballot that will create a “rainy day fund”, we need to do much more. Passing an on-time balanced budget will depend on the Democrats’ ability to realize that higher taxes only kill jobs and make our state’s problems worse. Until there are more fiscal conservatives in the Legislature, fasten your seatbelts; we could be in for another long and bumpy ride next year.

Assemblyman Hagman discusses private vs. public jobs

At a time when 2.2 million Californians are out-of-work, even Democrats now agree that job creation must be government’s top priority this year.

It seems everyone is now talking about jobs, but actions speak louder than words, especially when it comes to votes on pro-jobs legislation.

Recently the California Chamber of Commerce, an organization familiar with the job creation process, ranked lawmakers on their votes on crucial legislation last year. Assembly Republicans earned a cumulative 99 percent rating while Assembly Democrats received a 26 percent rating.

Although it is good that Democrats are at least talking about jobs this year, they are not talking about creating an economic climate that is favorable to private sector entrepreneurship.

Instead, they are talking about jobs subsidized by taxpayers, financed by unsustainable big government programs in health and welfare. Democrats claim that their approach would protect jobs yet what they don’t say is that their proposals would only protect government jobs. These jobs are tied to powerful public employee unions who have resisted attempts to cut costs to help the state live within its means.

In contrast, Republicans have pushed a package of bills this year designed to jump-start private sector job growth because we recognize that real economic growth comes from areas such as manufacturing and retail. The main reason our economy is weak is because the private sector has lost almost 1.3 million jobs since 2005, resulting in drastic declines in tax revenues. Even worse, the state has added more than 38,000 government jobs in the same time period according to figures provided by the Employment Development Department.

These numbers make it clear we have a jobs crisis in the private sector, not in government. Assembly Democrats ignore this reality by rejecting spending reductions. Instead they proposed a complicated scheme of more borrowing and more taxes on job creators to protect the growth in government jobs. These higher taxes include $900 million in new oil taxes each year, which would cause gas prices to go even higher. This would be in addition to other proposals to raise taxes on income, car registration, and even Internet sales. In the end, the people who would lose the most under the Democrat approach would be taxpayers forced to pay higher taxes and employers who will find it even more costly to create and retain jobs in California.

As a small-business owner, I understand that job creation must expand in the private sector. To stimulate private sector job growth, I have supported proposals to streamline the permit process for new businesses and to also provide investment tax credits to emerging industries. I also authored legislation that would ensure existing funds help businesses train new employees which would be used for its intended purpose only, and not diverted to protect welfare programs.

Unfortunately these and other Republican ideas were killed by Democrats, who continue to push for higher taxes. More taxes will cause the private sector to shrink even further. If we want California to get back on track, then the Democrats who lead the Legislature need to realize that we need private businesses to prosper here, rather than in other states. The sooner they realize that, the sooner we can get people back to work.

Assemblyman Hagman discusses California’s current budget crisis

Weeks have passed since the beginning of the 2010-11 fiscal year to pass a state budget. Yet California is still without one and people are right to ask what on earth is going on in Sacramento.

Months before the budget deadline, my Republican colleagues and I called on Democrats to work with us. We posted 100-day countdown calendars on our office doors as a reminder that the deadline was fast approaching and urged them to work with us so we would have a solution in time.

Unfortunately, the Democrat leadership rebuffed our hand of cooperation. They instead said that they would rather delay the budget process until Republicans agree to raise your taxes and reject spending reductions.

Some political observers even said that the delay could be a ploy to convince Californians that the two-thirds requirement to pass a budget was the main cause of the delay. One liberal Democrat went so far to say that his party should allow the state to reach a more desperate situation when kids go back to school in August to get Republicans to sign off on higher taxes.

In the meantime, I have been meeting with constituents and stakeholders to listen to their budget concerns. We discussed ways we can address those concerns in a difficult economy and conveyed their suggestions to my colleagues. Yet we have seen no real action from Democrats, other than press conferences to pound home the theme that the state “needs more revenue “(code for higher taxes) to protect government spending and welfare programs we cannot afford.

Even more telling, we have not seen a unified and detailed budget proposal from Senate and Assembly Democrats that can be vetted. All they have put forward is a “statement of principles” that reaffirms their commitment to big government. A statement of principles is not a serious budget that will close a $19.1 billion deficit.

As a result, without a balanced budget in place California state government spends $52 million more each day than it receives in revenues.

In contrast, my Republican colleagues and I have made it clear that we support the Governor’s budget blueprint he released in May. It is a detailed plan that addresses the deficit without higher taxes.

Republicans have always been willing to work with Democrats to craft a bipartisan budget that protects taxpayers and funds essential services such as schools without raising taxes. We know that tough choices will need to be made to reduce spending, which is why we have asked Democrats for months to work with us.

Yet the Democrat leadership shows no signs of urgency and refuses to budge, hoping that weeks of delay will work to their advantage. We must get down to work on the budget now, so we can get California back on track. It is long overdue for Democrats to work with Republicans on passing a responsible no-tax budget that will move our state forward. A delay may serve the interests of a few liberal politicians and interest groups, but it hurts the state as a whole.

Passing a balanced budget is one of the most important – if not the most important – duty of a legislator. We are elected to make tough choices and I stand ready to do my part to craft a responsible, no-tax budget as soon as possible.

Assemblyman Hagman supports the recent Supreme Court decision that upholds our Constitutional right to bear arms.

Californians who legally own firearms can be encouraged by last month’s U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling. In a landmark decision, the Court found that the constitutional right to bear arms applies not just to the federal government, but to state and local governments as well. In other words, owning a gun in the home for self defense is now officially recognized as a fundamental American right that cannot be violated by overzealous politicians on any level of government.

This is a remarkable defense of our Second Amendment right. This specific issue came about because Chicago instituted a misguided city-wide ban on handguns, which was intended to clamp down on deadly gun violence. Instead of just targeting thugs, it restricted law-abiding residents from owning guns to protect themselves in their own homes. Thankfully the Supreme Court saw it correctly, acknowledging that “Self defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day,” as Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion. The Court’s ruling recognizes the original intent of the Second Amendment which provides that: “…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

However, this victory is only a first step, as it is still unclear where the decision will lead for the future of our current gun laws and those that could be enacted in the future. Indeed, Justice Alito wrote that the ruling “does not imperil every law regulating firearms.” In the years going forward there will be significant battles over the true meaning of this ruling, and the numerous complex rules and regulations governing firearms. Particularly in California, the ruling gives Second Amendment supporters a powerful argument to challenge dubious proposals that hurt lawful gun owners. We now need to work on challenging the most restrictive laws that are already in place. While no one can predict the long-term consequences of the Court’s ruling, there is a good chance it will lead to future victories over restrictions on Second Amendment rights and force lawmakers to think twice before passing more burdensome laws.

Government has a critical responsibility to help ensure the safety of our families, but it needs do act in ways that respect our rights as a free people. We can keep our communities safe by improving enforcement of existing laws that target criminals who use guns. Taking guns away from the “bad guys” and putting them behind bars will make California safer, without targeting law-abiding citizens.

With the Supreme Court’s reaffirmation at the judicial level, I hope we can now move beyond debating attempts to undermine the Second Amendment in the Legislature. It is time for lawmakers to stop undermining lawful gun owners with more restrictive measures and to start working on issues that matter most to hardworking Californians, such as job creation.

Assemblyman Hagman discusses California’s economic climate.

Unfortunately, The Clash’s 1982 hit single is ringing true with California’s businesses today. Senate and Assembly Democrats have released their respective budget solution which adds more than $6 billion in higher taxes and $9 billion in new borrowing. This comes only a year after the legislature passed a massive $12.5 billion tax hike on Californians, which was the largest tax hike in our state’s history.

The Democrats claim their proposals are about jobs, but nothing in their plans will do anything to bring to a halt more California businesses leaving to a less burdensome state. In fact, private sector jobs were ignored in their report as they promoted government jobs and so-called green jobs. We will continue to see an exodus of private sector jobs to other states that have lower taxes and regulations.

As a small business owner myself, I know firsthand how complex it is to comply with all the government regulations imposed by the Legislature. Combined with the high taxes and fees that each business has to pay, it is very expensive to retain jobs, much less create new ones. Sadly, my experience is similar to thousands of other small business owners who find it hard to compete in California. During the past 18 months I have found numerous business entrepreneurs, like the following three, who have shared their experiences about the punitive business climate in California. A) The CEO of an aerospace parts manufacturer in the San Gabriel Valley recently said that “Regulations, taxes, uncertainty about state leadership make California unlikely for future expansion.” He said they are expanding in Nevada instead where it is easier to create jobs. B) Another manufacturer of medical devices said that taxes are hurting their ability to grow and that Sacramento is not listening to their needs. C) Yet another CEO of a bakery business said that “California bureaucracy is endless” and seriously considering leaving the state.

With more than 2.3 million Californians unemployed, it is clear that the Legislature must make job creation a top priority. That means stopping the migration of businesses to other states and countries, and fostering a more welcoming businesses environment with less red tape and lower taxes. If we do not foster such an environment, more businesses and the tax revenues they generate will leave the state, which will leave less money for public services such as education and law enforcement. More businesses are sure to leave if the “raising taxes Democrats” get their way on a variety of things such as gas and income. This will make our budget problems even worse.

The problem is not that hard-working Californians and job-creating businesses are paying too little in taxes, as they already bear the seventh-highest tax burden in the nation according to the non-partisan Tax Foundation. The real problem is that we do not have enough Californians working and businesses thriving so they can generate tax revenue. In other words, California has a jobs problem, not a tax problem.

Right now, I am fighting hard to pass legislation that will make it easier for entrepreneurs to invest and create jobs in California. With more people working, we will see more products and services being bought, which will lead to more tax revenue to fund the public services we need. It would be a win-win situation that will turn our state around. Instead of focusing on what taxes need to be raised and by how much, it is time for the Legislature to focus on creating and retaining jobs in California. We need to make sure Clash’s punk-rock band lyrics don’t become the new mantra for this decade.