Schwarzenegger to lay out ugly options for voters

FROM SACRAMENTO — Normally it's called the "May Revise." But what Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will unveil today is a "get out of jail free" card for himself and legislators.

First the background:

Each May, California's governor revises his January budget proposal for the fiscal year starting July 1. The spending plan is updated to reflect the state's latest revenue take, particularly the April income tax returns. This year's returns were the sorriest since the Great Depression.

Schwarzenegger had planned to wait until after next Tuesday's special election to revamp his proposal -- much of it already enacted in February -- because nearly $6 billion in budget money is riding on the results.

But with polls showing all the key propositions headed for defeat, Schwarzenegger decided to spell out the potential upshot to voters now.

He'll produce two budget versions. One will assume that the ballot props he and the Legislature proposed somehow pass. The other will assume that they are rejected.

If they pass, there'll be a need for draconian spending cuts totaling only $15.4 billion -- on top of $16 billion already slashed in February. If the props fail, the level of cutting will be practically unfathomable -- $21.3 billion.

To put those numbers in perspective, we're looking at total general fund spending of from $85 billion to $90 billion.

So what does Schwarzenegger's roll-out today mean politically?

By detailing the hideous options that will remain if the budget props fail, the governor is shielding state policy makers from blame for the ugly results.

They'll be freed -- or at least should be -- from the consequences of their inevitably unpopular actions.

Voters can ignore the governor or refuse to believe him. They can dismiss his warnings as phony scare tactics, as the propositions' opponents contend. But the choice is theirs.

The day afterward, if the props are rejected, Capitol politicians will be free to butcher programs, fire public employees, even raise "fees" with majority votes. They'll have a voter mandate to do just about anything they want.

What about the voters' "message?" After all, this is being promoted by opponents as a "Send 'em a message!" election.

And what message would that be? Whatever the missive, it won't be coherent. It'll be loud gibberish:

Quit raising taxes!

Stop cutting services!

Live within your means!