topnav

Home Issues & Campaigns Agency Members Community News Contact Us

Community News

Open dialogue among community members is an important part of successful advocacy. Take Action California believes that the more information and discussion we have about what's important to us, the more empowered we all are to make change.

Showing posts with label budget cuts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label budget cuts. Show all posts

Thursday, January 8, 2015

Join us, statewide budget action day!

Join us Friday!


Throughout the state we are rallying to  "tear down the wall of poverty" for California's most vulnerable! Find a location near you and join us!

San Francisco
350 McAllister St.
When: 12:30 PM
Contact: Pete Woiwode, 510-504-9552
pete@communitychange.org

Sacramento
Capitol Room TBD
When: 11:00 am or following Governor Brown's statement
Contact: TBD

San Jose
1381 South First St. 95110
When: 10:00 AM
Contact: Pete Woiwode, 510-504-9552
pete@communitychange.org

Fresno
2550 Mariposa Mall 93721
When:10:00 AM
Contact: Rose Aguste
raguste@healthaccess.org

Los Angeles
300 S. Spring Street 90013
When: 12:00 PM following budget release
Contact: Aurora Garcia, 562-519-3106
agarcia@communitychange.org

San Bernardino
300 N. D Street 92418
When: 11:00 AM
Contact: Maribel Nunez, 562-569-4051
mnunez@communitychange.org



Friday, January 10, 2014

CPHEN Statement on the California Budget Proposal for 2014-15

CPEHN logo

News Bulletin

January 9, 2014
Statement from Ellen Wu, Executive Director of CPEHN,
on the California Budget Proposal for 2014-15
Governor Brown’s proposal for the 2014-15 state budget, released yesterday, increases funding to health and human services but misses an important opportunity to restore some of the devastating cuts that have impacted the health of California’s communities of color.

The budget proposal includes a $670 million increase to Medi-Cal, mostly for already-enacted implementation of the Affordable Care Act. And while the proposed budget “forgives” the past years of uncollected cuts to Medi-Cal providers, it leaves in place a 10% reduction of Medi-Cal rates. Additionally, the budget proposal does not restore any of the other previous cuts to Medi-Cal benefits.

For more than a decade our communities have been asked to endure painful cuts to services due to structural deficits in the state budget. The passage of Proposition 30 in 2012 has been critical to providing much needed revenue for the state. California must use this opportunity to demonstrate a commitment to its most vulnerable communities by restoring previous cuts to our health and human services programs as well as making sure Californians who remain uninsured have access to affordable coverage.
Visit our Policy Center for a detailed summary of the budget proposal.
If you have any questions, please contact Cary Sanders at csanders@cpehn.org.
If you would like to change your contact information, please email info@cpehn.org.
If you would like to unsubscribe from CPEHN's Action Alerts, please email unsubscribe-actionalerts@cpehn.org.
If you would like to unsubscribe from ALL CPEHN email communications, please email unsubscribe-all@cpehn.org.

GET INVOLVED

·         Share With a Friend
·         Join Our Network
·         Follow Us on Twitter @CPEHN
·         Like Us on Facebook
·         Donate
© 2014 / California Pan-Ethnic Health Network / info@cpehn.org
MAIN OFFICE: 1221 Preservation Park Way, Suite 200, Oakland, CA 94612
Phone: (510) 832-1160 / Fax: (510) 832-1175
SACRAMENTO OFFICE: 1225 8th Street, Suite 470, Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 447-1299 / Fax: (916) 447-1292

Friday, December 20, 2013

Steinberg proposes $50 million for treating mentally ill criminals

Democratic state Senate leader Darrell Steinberg wants California to spend $50 million on programs that try to keep mentally ill criminals from re-offending.

The proposed legislation calls for bringing back a program that existed for about 10 years in California. The "Mentally Ill Offender Crime Reduction Grant" program allows counties to apply for funding to support mental health courts, substance abuse treatment, and employment training programs. Those efforts would reduce recidivism and crowding in California jails, Steinberg said, and help mentally ill people become more stable.

"We are trying to bring back something that was a great success in the late 90s early 2000s that went away as a result of the budget cuts," Steinberg said during a press conference this morning, where he was backed by law enforcement and mental health care leaders.

"We do not have a specific funding stream dedicated to providing mental health services to people in jail that continue once they leave jail and get into the community... We had that before, prior to 2008. We want to reinstate that and make it part of our overall approach."
Steinberg said lawmakers should treat California's projected budget surplus with an approach that dedicates one-third to paying down debt, one-third to reserves and one-third to spending.

"We shouldn't be shy about saying that there are areas of public investment that we must make, that are important," he said.

Speaking in support of Steinberg's proposal today were Stanislaus County Sheriff Adam Christianson; Sacramento County's Chief Probation Officer Lee Seale; Sacramento County's mental health director Dorian Kittrel and Sacramento County Supervisor Phil Serna.

PHOTO: Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, in March 2013. The Sacramento Bee/Hector Amezcua



Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2013/12/steinberg-proposes-50-million-for-treating-mentally-ill-criminals.html#storylink=cpy

Monday, February 25, 2013

California braces for impending cuts from federal sequestration


California's defense industry is bracing for a $3.2-billion hit with the federal budget cuts that are expected to take effect Friday.
But myriad other federally funded programs also are threatened, and the combined effect is expected to slow the momentum that California's economy has been building over the last year.
As the state braces for pain from so-called sequestration, there are warnings of long delays at airport security checkpoints, potential slowdowns in cargo movement at harbors and cutbacks to programs, including meals for seniors and projects to combat neighborhood blight.
Despite the grim scenarios from local and state officials, economists say the cuts' overall blow to the economy would be modest, felt more acutely in regions such as defense-heavy San Diego and by Californians dependent on federal programs, such as college students who rely on work-study jobs to pay for school.
Critics say the cuts come at an inopportune time because the economic recovery in the U.S. and California is still weak.
"We need stimulus, not premature austerity," Gov. Jerry Brown said during a break at the National Governors Assn. meeting in Washington.
Rep. John Campbell (R-Irvine) contends that critics of the cuts are exaggerating the effects.
"If we can't do this, what can we do" to reduce Washington's red ink, he asked. "We ought to be panicked about the day when people won't buy our debt anymore because we borrowed too much."
If automatic spending cuts occur as planned, the growth in the country's gross domestic product is likely to slow by 0.4 percentage points this year, from about 2% to 1.6%, economists said.
California's GDP would see a similar slowdown. The state stands to lose as much as $10 billion in federal funding this year, according to Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy in Palo Alto.
Levy said the more than $1 trillion in cuts planned over the next decade include "items in the federal budget that invest for the future," such as support for research and clean energy, that particularly affect California because of its "innovation economy."
The ripple effects the cuts might have on business and consumer confidence — which would further dampen economic activity — remain to be seen, said Jason Sisney, a deputy at the state's nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office.
"We're at a point where gains in housing and construction markets have begun to take hold," Sisney said. "A slowdown from sequestration would come at just the moment that the economy was beginning to right itself."
Jerry Nickelsburg, a UCLA economist who writes a quarterly economic forecast on the Golden State, said the state's recent economic gains would provide a buffer against sequestration.
"California can absorb it," Nickelsburg said. "Will it slow economic growth? The answer is yes. Will it result in negative economic growth? I think the answer is no."
Los Angeles officials project that the city would lose more than $100 million at a time when they're struggling to close a hole in the city's budget.
Douglas Guthrie, chief executive of the Los Angeles city housing authority, said Monday that rent subsidies to as many as 15,000 low-income families would be cut an average $200 a month, forcing many families to search for less expensive housing. His agency also might face as many as 80 layoffs in an already reduced workforce.
But Guthrie said in a letter to the Los Angeles City Council that the housing authority must plan for the "painful consequences" of the federal budget cuts and is preparing to send warning notices to participants in the housing assistance program "as soon as we see that the cuts are made and there are no immediate prospects to resolve the budget crisis."
At Yosemite National Park, snow plowing of a key route over the Sierra would be delayed, ranger-led programs are likely to be reduced and the park would face "less frequent trash pickup, loss of campground staff, and reduced focus on food storage violations, all of which contribute to visitor safety concerns and increased bear mortality rates," according to the National Park Service.
Some programs, such as Social Security, would be spared from the $85 billion in cuts nationwide due to kick in Friday. But defense programs are expected to be cut by about 13% for the remainder of the fiscal year and domestic spending by about 9%, according to the White House budget office.
The Obama administration sought Monday to highlight the effects close to home in an effort to step up the pressure on Congress to replace across-the-board cuts with more targeted reductions and new tax revenue collected from taxpayers earning more than $1 million a year.
The Los Angeles Unified School District is bracing for a loss of $37 million a year in federal funding. Supt. John Deasy said Monday that he is sending a letter to the California congressional delegation warning about the "potential very grave impact" of the cuts on Los Angeles schools.
Rachelle Pastor Arizmendi, director of early childhood education at the Pacific Asian Consortium for Employment in Los Angeles, said she anticipated that the cuts would cost her agency $980,000 in federal Head Start funding. That would force PACE to eliminate preschool for about 120 children ages 3 to 5.
"It's not just a number," she said. "This is closing down classrooms. This is putting our children behind when they're going to kindergarten."
The nonprofit serves about 2,000 children, providing most of them two meals a day in addition to preschool education. The cuts would mean PACE would have to lay off four of its 20 teachers, forcing the closure of eight Head Start classrooms, Arizmendi said.

Friday, February 22, 2013

Federal cuts could cost California billions


Gov. Jerry Brown arrives in Washington today to meet with the nation's governors as federal leaders deal with a pending deadline for budget cuts that could damage California's fragile recovery.
The across-the-board budget cuts known as sequestration could lead to cutbacks in defense, healthcare and other areas, putting California's fiscal health in danger.
Jason Sisney, a spokesman for the state's legislative analyst, said the cuts could mean "a few billion dollars" less for state coffers because of the resulting slowdown in economic growth.
When asked about the possibility of those cuts taking effect, Brown refused to say whether he wanted Congress and President Obama to renegotiate. He said the wrangling in Washington only underscores the need for state budget-makers to be fiscally prudent.
"I can’t discern what they’re going to do in Washington because I'm not even sure they know themselves," Brown said. "But the takeaway for California is that we have to maintain a prudent surplus because we could lose hundreds of millions of dollars by decisions that Congress makes."

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Corporate Taxes on Table in Cliff Talks

By DAMIAN PALETTAJANET HOOK and CAROL E. LEE—Jared A. Favole contributed to this article.
Via the Wall Street JournalThe White House has told Republicans it would include an overhaul of the corporate-tax code as part of any deal to reduce the deficit, people familiar with the talks said, a move to court business groups as budget negotiations intensify.

Corporate taxes hadn't until now been part of budget talks aimed at averting spending cuts and tax increases set for January. Much of the focus has instead been on the expiring individual income-tax rates.

The offer from the White House came amid a fresh round of proposals from both sides, as President Barack Obama and House Speaker John Boehner exchanged counteroffers to address the so-called fiscal cliff. Big gaps remain between Democratic and Republican negotiators, and while talks are continuing, there is no guarantee a deal will be struck, with or without a corporate-tax revamp.

On Wednesday, Mr. Boehner criticized Mr. Obama's latest plan, saying it is unbalanced by focusing too much on tax increases. "His plan does not begin to solve our debt crisis; it actually increases spending," Mr. Boehner said.

The White House's corporate-tax suggestion wasn't specific, according to officials familiar with the offer, other than committing to overhaul the corporate tax code in 2013. White House officials, in making the suggestion, cited a corporate-tax plan the administration unveiled in February but said they weren't wedded to any specifics.

Left unclear is the crucial question of how any revamp would affect companies' overall tax burden. That is one reason why Republicans considered it a tactical offer only, and not one that might help seal a deal.

As part of its budget proposal, the White House also slightly lowered its target for new tax revenue to $1.4 trillion, down from Mr. Obama's initial offer of $1.6 trillion, officials said. It retained items from an earlier offer that had irked Republicans, included new stimulus spending and an increase in the U.S.'s borrowing limit.

Mr. Boehner, an Ohio Republican, responded Tuesday with a proposal that wasn't "dramatically" different from the one he made to the White House last week, according to an official familiar with the talks, who declined to elaborate.

The flurry of activity showed the talks were moving along, albeit haltingly. Messrs. Boehner and Obama discussed the negotiations by phone Tuesday evening. The White House in recent days also has been talking with Democratic leaders about the types of spending cuts that might accompany any deal, to calm increasing queasiness in the party over the direction of the talks.

In a brief update on the House floor earlier Tuesday, Mr. Boehner asked, "Where are the president's spending cuts?" He added: "We are still waiting for the White House to identify what specific cuts the president is willing to make." He accused the White House of "slow-walking" the talks. Republicans viewed the White House's latest offer as not that different from its first—heavy on new taxes and light on ideas to trim spending.

Political reaction to the corporate-tax idea split along party lines. A senior Democratic aide described the addition as a smart way of making concessions without having to touch entitlement programs.

Republicans said they didn't consider the move a concession at all, given their assumption that the corporate tax code would be tackled at some point. "It's a red herring," said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel. He said keeping individual rates low was a more immediate priority because of its impact on small businesses, many of which aren't structured as corporations, and whose owners pay taxes through the individual tax system.

The White House earlier this year proposed lowering the corporate rate to 28% from 35%, and even lower for manufacturing companies. Lower rates would be combined with eliminating some tax deductions in the White House plan, with the net effect being that the tax burden on companies would remain about the same. But it would be a simpler and clearer system, which many CEOs have sought.

Many Republicans have offered similar proposals, though their proposals call for lowering the corporate rate to 25%. Neither plan gained any traction.

An overhaul of the corporate-tax code came up repeatedly during Mr. Obama's recent meetings to discuss the fiscal cliff with chief executives at the White House. Some CEOs signaled a willingness to accept higher individual tax rates to bring in more revenue, but they said the corporate code needed to be redrawn because it hurt U.S. competitiveness. By agreeing to include an overhaul of the corporate-tax code as part of these discussions, the White House could be trying to further attract business groups to its deficit-reduction plan.Democrats and Republicans involved in the cliff talks are trying to design a two-phase timetable. If a deal is reached, it would lock in some changes to taxes and spending rules by the end of 2012 and then require a number of more significant changes next year to entitlement programs and the tax code. The White House's corporate-tax plan would fit into the second phase, giving lawmakers, White House officials and business groups time to work through the details.
The White House's February proposal to redesign the corporate tax code received a lukewarm reception from business groups. Many were supportive of the proposal to lower rates but worried about which industries might get hurt by an accompanying elimination of tax breaks. Many large businesses were also unhappy the White House didn't back a proposal to shield profits from foreign affiliates from U.S. taxation.

Still, business groups saw that early proposal as a starting point, and hoped it would lead to a comprehensive deal, a point several echoed on Tuesday during a conference call organized by the Business Roundtable trade group.

"Start at wiping out all of the deductions, figuring out where that tax rate is—whether it's 25%, 22%, 15%, whatever it is," said Douglas Oberhelman, the chief executive of construction-equipment maker Caterpillar Inc. CAT +0.71% "I think all of us are on that wavelength today to begin the process."

Corporate income taxes make up about 10% of revenue collected by the government. In the fiscal year ended Sept. 30, the government received $2.449 trillion in revenue, with $242 billion of that coming from corporate income taxes.

Big differences remain between the two sides, and in public the Republicans and Democrats continued to hammer at each others' ideas.

The administration's new proposal made no major concessions on entitlements such as Medicare, which it is withholding until Republicans give up ground on tax rates. Republicans likewise want first to see more details on spending cuts.

The Business Roundtable for the first time Tuesday backed the possibility of higher tax rates as part of a broader package of changes to reduce the deficit. The group previously called for extending all the Bush-era tax rates.

John Engler, president of the Business Roundtable, an influential trade group that represents large corporations, said he thought a proposal to overhaul the corporate tax code would be well-received by Democrats and Republicans, but wouldn't be enough to replace Republican demands for spending cuts. Still, he said it would help expand the scope of the package, which could ultimately draw more backers.

A small but growing number of Republicans have argued that the party should give up on blocking any rate increase on higher-income Americans and instead shift focus to securing spending cuts as part of the deal.

Some Democrats regard Republicans' eventual concession on taxes as a foregone conclusion, and they have begun to talk among themselves about which concessions on entitlement programs they might be asked to make.

The three leading proposals floated by Republicans include increasing the eligibility age for Medicare, requiring wealthier people to pay more for Medicare and changing the formula for calculating Consumer Price Index adjustments to slow the growth of Social Security benefits.Many Democrats are especially concerned about looming Medicare cuts if they include a GOP proposal to raise the eligibility age. "If people are working in coal mines in West Virginia, it's really inhumane to talk about raising the eligibility age," said House Assistant Democratic Leader Jim Clyburn of South Carolina, who is close to Mr. Obama. "For those of us in air-conditioned offices to talk about raising the age, that's fine for us to say."

Many Democrats acknowledge that any deficit-reduction package will include proposals they don't like. "There's no way to do this without both sides giving up something," said Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad (D., N.D.).

Administration officials have been engaged in conversations with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to bring them along as Mr. Obama negotiates with Mr. Boehner. Those conversations have picked up in recent days as the White House takes soundings from Democratic leaders on what might be possible for the party to stomach in a final deal.

Republicans are frustrated that they haven't secured larger spending-cut commitments from Mr. Obama in exchange for what they see as a major and early concession from Mr. Boehner on tax revenue, said people familiar with the talks.

In his speech Tuesday, Mr. Boehner argued that Mr. Obama's proposed tax increase barely scratches the surface of the deficit problem.

"Even if we did exactly what the president wants, we would see red as far as the eye can see," Mr. Boehner told the House. Aides said Mr. Boehner decided to make the speech because he believed recent reports of tentative progress in his talks with Mr. Obama played down differences that remain on spending.

The White House rejected Mr. Boehner's complaint that Mr. Obama hadn't put forward detailed spending cuts.

"What we haven't seen from Republicans to this day is a single specific proposal on revenue," White House spokesman Jay Carney said. "And in fact, we've seen less specificity from Republicans on spending cuts than the president himself has proposed."


Friday, October 26, 2012

Yes on Proposition 30--San Bernardino Phonebank


When: Every Saturday from 10:00-2:00 p.m. Monday 5:00-8:30 p.m.

Where:
El Sol Promotores--Neighborhood Center
972 N. Mt. Vernon Avenue
San Bernardino, CA 92411
Cross Streets: Mt. Vernon Avenue Between 9th and 10th Street

Food and Beverages will be provided.

Proposition 30 "Local Schools and Public Safety Protection Act"

-10.3% income tax bracket for singles who make $250,000-$300,000 and couples who make $500,000-$600-000

-11.3% income tax bracket for singles who make $300,000-$500,000 and couples who make $600,000-$1 million

-12.3% income tax bracket for singles who make $500,000 and more and couples who make $1 million and more

-A four year temporary sales tax increase of 1/4 of a percent, equaling an increase of 1 penny for every four dollars spent

-This would raise an estimated $9 billion dollars which would mostly be earmarked for realignment and the Prop 98 funding guarantee

If Prop. 30 Does not pass:
We can either ask the wealthiest in the state to pay a fairer share or we can further shift the burden of cuts onto the rest of us.

With your YES vote on Prop 30, we can:
K-12
-Stop another $6 billion in cuts to our schools this year.
-3 week reduction and elimination of summer school Higher Ed
- Prevent steep tuition hikes for college students and their families.
-Invest in our schools and colleges so we can prepare the next generation for the jobs of the future.

Health and Human Services
-Low income children and adults will lose access to medical care and medicine due to higher co pays
--reduced funding
-Elderly and Disable Adults will see reduced access to critical medical and support services which may include: In Home-Support Services, wheelchairs, oxygen tanks, hearing aids, prosthetics, and physical and occupation therapy


Event Sponsored by: California Partnership and Students/Staff/Faculty from Colton and San Bernardino City high schools.

For further questions or want to volunteer contact:
Maribel Nunez: (909) 300-1478

Monday, September 17, 2012

Jerry Brown warns of stark budget cuts

Gov. Jerry Brown says voters need to make a hard choice about how much government they are willing to pay for. Photo: Ken James, SFC / SF

Sacramento --
Gov. Jerry Brown is willing to remake California in his own austere image, but he doesn't think the 37 million people living in the Golden State will like it.

Californians face a "day of reckoning" this November, when they will have to make the hard choice about how much government they are willing to pay for, the governor said Saturday in an interview with The Chronicle.
"There is a lot of magical thinking in Washington and in Sacramento and, maybe, I might even say, Western civilization," he said. "We had it easy and now the moment of truth is upon us. ... We've got to pay for what we want.

"And if we don't want to pay, then we have to deprive ourselves of that which we would like, and it's very hard to get people to make that choice."

Brown said the result of his Proposition 30 initiative on the November ballot will be a "compact between the people and the government" that he will implement.

But voters need to realize that without the new revenue, the cuts needed to get the budget into balance will leave California a very different state.

"I'm ready for austerity, OK?" the former Jesuit seminarian said. "I took vows of poverty, chastity and obedience. I am ready, OK? I don't recommend it, but we will do whatever is needed within the law to balance the budget and do the work of government the best way I can."

Tough decision

The governor's ballot measure, which would raise the sales tax by a quarter cent for four years and the income tax on high earners for seven years, will force that decision.

"I will do everything I can to help people make an intelligent choice, but whatever the people decide, they have decided, and I will be their instrument of execution," he said.

Brown said he plans to raise at least $30 million to promote his initiative, which faces not only opposition from groups that are against any increase in taxes, but also competition from another measure - Proposition 38 - that would raise income tax rates on nearly all Californians and dedicate the money almost entirely to public schools.

The governor said Prop. 38 would not fix the state's budget problems and would be akin to putting icing on a burned cake.

"You can't fool around with the frosting," he said. "You have to deal with the cake."

Because the state's general fund - basically the main checking account to pay for services - provides the bulk of money to public schools, not shoring up the fund will impact schools no matter the outcome of Prop. 38, Brown said.

"If that fund has got a big hole, that hole will show up in every classroom in California," he said. "That's just the way it is, so you've got to fix the budget. My plan is built to help the schools, but also to fix the budget."
Brown's proposal will raise as much as $9 billion per year, according to the Department of Finance, with that money providing money for schools and other state services. Prop. 38 would raise about $10 billion per year for 12 years and require that most of the money be spent on public schools.

For the first four years under Prop. 38, $3 billion of the annual revenue would be dedicated to paying back the state's bond debt, which proponents argue will help the budget. The principal financial backer of the measure, wealthy Southern California civil rights attorney Molly Munger, said Friday that the bond money would help to not "leave anybody in the lurch."

"What we need to do this year is we need to save our public schools, and we need to get out of this budget crisis in a near term way and give us some breathing room on all those big question issues," Munger said.

Getting on the ballot

Holding a public vote on increased taxes and straightening out California's finances have been the paramount objectives of Brown's third term in the governor's office, but he was stymied by Republicans in the Legislature last year. Brown had wanted the Legislature to place the measure on the ballot, but that required a two-thirds vote from lawmakers that never came.

So the governor went another direction, collecting enough signatures to place the measure on the ballot.
If the ballot initiative fails, the famously frugal Brown said he would "fix the budget based on the absence of money."

To illustrate his approach to austerity, he began pointing at objects around his office.
"This is my desk, I paid for it," he said, pounding his fist on a large table. "That desk, I paid for that. ... That little thing belonged to my father. That table, I paid for that, OK? I didn't fix the rug. That's Arnold's rug," he said, pointing at stains on the carpet.

He wondered aloud how he could be any cheaper, adding that he ate a 2-day-old tuna fish sandwich for lunch Friday.

The governor said he would be spending the weekend considering the hundreds of bills that await either his signature or his veto. He bristled when asked what else might be on his agenda during his four-year term, listing a host of objectives he already has started, including a timber harvest plan and expanding oil production in Kern County.

"I'm doing stuff, you know. How much time in the day is there?" he said. "I'm not going to a lot of events. I'm not going to play golf. I'm not going to games. I'm not going to movies. I'm not going to Hawaii. I'm doing stuff."
Wyatt Buchanan is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: wbuchanan@sfchronicle.com

Friday, June 8, 2012

Governor wants to cut funding in school science


Science and technology may stimulate the state's economy, but the governor wants to cut funding for a second science requirement in high school.

The California finalists for Intel's Science Competition have developed truly amazing things; they began their projects in high school. The genetic test James Thomas of San Jose generated will be helpful.

"I created a model that actually has 92 percent accuracy in predicting the on-set of alcoholism in individuals," said Thomas.

The technology Jessica Richeri of Riverside developed will change the way we drive.

"My research finds a way to avoid traffic jams in the future with an autonomous robotic vehicle," said Richeri.

Supporters believe this illustrates how innovation can stimulate California's economy, that these kids are tomorrow's 
job creators, and it all begins with STEM: science, technology, education and math.

But because of California's continued budget crisis, the governor proposes to cut the second year science 
requirement in high schools to save $245 million.

For decades, schools have always gotten reimbursed by the state for teaching a second science class, but Gov. 
Jerry Brown wants to move away from state mandates because they're too expensive. He dropped by the science fair and said the cuts mean districts will have to find the money themselves to continue the program.

"I personally went to the School Board and said this is a good requirement, but we want the locals to pick up that up. Otherwise, they charge us," said Brown.

Critics say, though, after years of decreased state funding, schools can barely keep the lights on, let alone pay 
for science curriculum.

"The problem is all of this is being done during a time when other states and other countries are boosting their 
science and technology education to make their students and their population more competitive in this global 
market," said Matt Gray from the California STEM Learning Network.

The other problem is University of California and Cal State both require two years of science for admission. So if 
you're in a school where you can't take a second class, it'll be tough to get in.


What are the options?

"I go to Carnegie Mellon University," said Richeri.

"I'm going to MIT this fall," said Thomas.

Sounds like a California brain drain.

Via: http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/politics&id=8674570