Taxes are like dog food, said Gov. Schwarzenegger, urging voters to support the budget-related ballot measures in the May 19 special election. The propositions, 1A to 1F, would allow the state to borrow and transfer $5.8 billion in revenue, and would authorize temporary tax increases to bring an additional $16 billion.

“At my house, we have dogs, and I’m the one in charge of feeding them every morning,” he said. “If I put out a whole week’s worth of food, they would eat it all and not have anything to eat for the rest of the week. Dog food, tax revenues – it’s the same thing.”

(He also said, “Some smart-aleck reporter will say I compared the Legislature to my Labradors.” Yup, says smart-aleck reporter. It’s too good to pass.)

The governor’s metaphor was intended to get Californians to vote yes on Proposition 1A, which would trade higher taxes for two years to help fix the state’s immediate budget problem in exchange for long-term reform – creating a spending cap and transferring money to a “rainy-day” fund in good fiscal years.

But according to a recent poll by the Public Policy Institute of California, it’s going to take more than images of boisterous Labradors to get voters to pass 1A. The statewide poll, with a margin of error of plus or minus 2 percent, has 39 percent supporting 1A, 46 percent voting no, and 15 percent undecided. In fact, according to the PPIC, except for Proposition 1F, which would prevent state officials from getting pay raises during budget deficit years, the measures all have less than majority support.

The other measures include: Proposition 1B, which would require the state to pay schools an additional $9.3 billion total over a number of years beginning in 2011-12, but will not go into effect unless voters also approve 1A; Proposition 1C, authorizing the state to borrow $5 billion against future lottery profits in 2009-10 and $5 billion in 2010-11; Proposition 1D, allowing the state to temporarily take money from early-childhood programs: $608 million in 2009-10 and $268 million annually (through 2013-14); and Proposition 1E, authorizing the state to take about $230 annually for two years from mental health programs.

Legislative leaders from both parties have endorsed the six measures, which are a result of lawmakers’ efforts to close the $42 billion budget gap.

“If we vote against Prop. 1A, we’ll be right back in the hole,” says Central Coast Assemblyman Bill Monning. “If it fails, we lose $11 billion in revenue by 2011-12.”

1A remains the most important piece of the puzzle – and the most controversial, taking hits from both sides of the political spectrum. The far right doesn’t like it because it would increase taxes; the far left because it would control state spending. The Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association, an anti-tax group, is fighting it, and Republican gubernatorial frontrunners state Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner and former eBay CEO Meg Whitman also oppose the measure – and the entire budget ballot package.

The progressive-minded League of Women Voters also opposes 1A, 1C, 1D and 1E. “We oppose these measures because they are not the solution to our long-term financial crisis, with the continuing structural deficit in the state budget and flowed budget process,” said League President Janis R. Hirohama.

Additionally, a new report by the California Budget Project, a think tank advocating fiscal policy to help the poor and middle class, says 1A won’t solve the state’s long-term money problem: “1A would not address California’s existing structural shortfall… that exists in all but the best budget years.”

Meanwhile, the deficit grows and the dog bowl remains empty.