Since taking office in January, Brown and the legislature have cut spending by $9 billion and have taken other steps to reduce the deficit.

Now, I don’t think this is another short-term fix or fiscal gimmick. It seems to me that financial realities have backed Brown and everyone else in Sacramento into a corner, so they actually have to do something. But the whole business leaves me skeptical on how all this will actually be possible.

On to my main point: Brown plans to reduce the amount of taxes required to balance the budget. Californians will pay $2 billion less in income taxes this year than proposed in the January budget. In addition, the governor will increase spending on K-12 education. For years, according to Brown, the state has shortchanged public education in order to balance the budget, forcing school districts to borrow in order to balance their budgets. This leaves me to wonder what is getting short-changed this time around?

The answer? Perhaps state government. The revised budget eliminates 43 boards, commissions, task forces, offices and departments that represent an inefficient use of taxpayer dollars. As services are returned to the local level, the departments of mental health and alcohol and drug programs will be eliminated. The revised budget also proposes to merge the Healthy Families Program into the Medi-Cal program, reducing costs and creating a single health care program for low-income families.

Now, I am in no way a political expert, math major or anything of the sort, but somehow I can’t get the old idiom “rob Peter to pay Paul” out of my mind. Am I crazy? Isn’t this just taking money from one program and using it on another? Will it really fix anything? Isn’t it just a vicious cycle, or am I so politically naive that I am missing the whole point?

I encourage our readers to take a look at the proposed cuts and be honest. Gimme some help here! What are your thoughts?

And by the way, when Peter got robbed to pay Paul, did Paul object?