No. But it would go a long ways in explaining why he has a fundamental misunderstanding of the California budget, the process in which a budget is enacted, and the structural factors that influence income revenue the state receives, as well as economic factors at play.
First and foremost, Arnold was elected in a recall election. One of the reasons was that the previous governor, Gray Davis, was horrible. From ruinous energy deals that locked the state into multi year contracts that resulted in billions of dollars in higher costs to the car tax to the multi billion dollar state deficits...the state was already on the brink financially. There was nearly a
35 billion dollar deficit before Arnold took office.
One of the reasons why the state has horrible cyclical budget situations is that we rely heavily on capital gains tax revenues/stock option cashing income revenue/financial market revenues from our wealthy residents (e.g. silicon valley millionaires, etc). When the markets do well, we do well. When they go south...we go south. We overtax our wealthy and our lower classes pay nothing in taxes. Therefore, we get boom and bust cycles.
The recall was in 2003. What happened a couple years before? The tech bubble popped and the market collapsed.
Our economy is also heavily influenced by real estate. We go through boom and bust real estate cycles regularly. Home building, construction, trades are huge economic drivers. When the housing market boomed along with the stock market the state started to get back on its feet. What happened in 2007-08?
Our housing market got annihilated. It collapsed. The stock market got hammered.
Arnold was governor from late 2003-2010.
The person criticizing Arnold...who I am no fan of...never voted for and think is a piece of ####...really doesn't know what they are talking about.
Never mind the fact that Democrats have controlled both chambers of our legislature for my entire life...literally 40 years. They pass the budget. They pass a multitude of things that influence spending.
Moreover, our public employee unions, including teachers, are very strong. In fact, there was an initiative passed in the late 1990s or early 2000s that required X percent of the state budget to go to education and that it always went up with each increasing year of revenues...but could never be reduced when revenues decreased, etc.
And though it is beyond the scope of what I want to get into tonight...when you factor in the underfunded pension obligations there is a structural deficit issue that is being papered over with smoke and mirrors as Moonbeam kicks the can down the street. Arnold tried to reign in the pension nightmare and was savagely fought on that by Democrats and the unions.