Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger likes to say that his proposed bond and budget-balancing measures will effectively cut up California's credit card and throw it away for good.

But first he wants voters to authorize him to charge just one last purchase, to the tune of $15 billion.

Voters on March 2 will decide whether to approve Proposition 57, a $15 billion bond measure to help stretch out payments on the state's built-up debt. They'll also consider Proposition 58, which requires lawmakers to enact a balanced budget, establishes a budget reserve and prohibits future borrowing to shrink deficits.

"We will be out of the hole, and we will be back to recovery," Schwarzenegger said last week as he solicited support from a group of students visiting Sacramento.

The companion propositions have received widespread, bipartisan backing, with the Republican governor and Democratic state Controller Steve Westly pairing up on the campaign trail and in television ads. The measures are linked, so both must pass to be enacted.

A spectrum of supporters, including the state Democratic Party, the California Taxpayers Association and the California Chamber of Commerce, call them the best option for a state that has been swimming in red ink for three years.

"Those of us that have to vote on the budget are all very enthusiastic about 57 and 58 because we know that if it doesn't pass, it just makes the problem that much worse," said Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, D-Los Angeles. "We are the ones that have to vote on those cuts."

Opponents - who include Democratic state Treasurer Phil Angelides and Sen. Tom McClintock, a Republican from Thousand Oaks - say the bond measure will strap future generations with the expensive cost of the current budget crisis.

"It solves nothing," McClintock said. "It takes our problem, makes it ... worse by adding interest and then dumps it in our children's laps."

McClintock and Angelides have been the most outspoken foes of the twin measures. Schwarzenegger and Westly, in contrast, have unleashed a multimillion-dollar campaign to urge their passage.

They have raised large-figure donations from a mix of Democratic and Republican donors, including teachers, public employee unions, and law-enforcement and anti-tax groups.

As he did for the successful after-school initiative that helped propel him onto California's political scene and the gubernatorial recall that won him his office, Schwarzenegger is drawing packed audiences on the stump.

He has staked his 2004-05 budget - and some say his political reputation - on the passage of the bond measure, which lagged in early polls.

"It's extraordinary for a governor to put so much of his political capital on a pair of ballot propositions, particularly this early in the governorship," said Jack Pitney, a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College. "It's a calculated risk, because if they go down, the state will have even bigger fiscal problems, and his reputation for ballot-box magic will take a hit."

If the measures succeed, however, they will cement Schwarzenegger's reputation as the "action, action, action" governor and force lawmakers to continue to keep an open mind about his policies, Pitney said.

"Then he can claim credit for taking a proposition that was losing and turning it into a winner, which is very unusual," he said.

Dubbed the "Economic Recovery Bond Act," Proposition 57 would let California issue up to $15 billion in bonds to pay the state's accumulated deficit as of last June.

The bonds would be repaid over the next nine to 14 years from the state's general fund and from money specifically set aside in the state's reserves.

The voter-approved bonds would replace another borrowing package that was included in the budget that Democratic Gov. Gray Davis signed last summer. Davis had called for $10.7 billion in deficit-financing bonds that would be paid back over five years.

The Schwarzenegger bond measure would provide savings to the state in the short term, but would cost taxpayers more in the long term because it is larger and would take longer to pay off, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office.

Schwarzenegger administration officials have said the Davis bond would be "Plan B" if Proposition 57 fails, but it is facing a legal challenge.

The conservative Pacific Legal Institute, representing the Fullerton Association of Concerned Taxpayers, argues that the bond plan violates the state constitution's prohibition against year-to-year debt without a vote of the people.

A similar argument prevailed in court last year, when the state tried to sell bonds to cover about $2 billion of its pension costs.

They also say the Davis bond would require the state to find $5 billion more in budget savings - or impose higher taxes - in the near term.

Democrats who have backed the governor's bond measure say it would help prevent deeper cuts than the state has endured in the past three years and than those Schwarzenegger is proposing for the coming budget year.

"We think that there is no alternative for the state this year except to pass the bond," said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton.

But some conservative Republicans have fought the idea of borrowing instead of chopping spending.

"It was a bad idea when Gray Davis proposed borrowing $13 billion to paper over the deficit. It is still a bad idea to borrow $15 (billion) to paper over the same deficit," McClintock said.

If voters reject the Schwarzenegger bond and the court rejects the backup, the state still would need to pay off $14 billion in short-term debt in June.

Schwarzenegger Finance Director Donna Arduin said the State Controller's Office is also working on a plan to secure short-term loans to prevent a bankruptcy-like situation if the bond and backup fail.

Angelides, who is in charge of managing the state's investments, is the only high-ranking Democrat to publicly blast the bond plan. He has called for alternative approaches to filling the hole, such as raising income taxes for the state's highest earners.

"There are many credible ways to close this deficit other than massive borrowing," he said.

Schwarzenegger must convince voters otherwise, Pitney said.

"People might be inclined to reject something that big," Pitney said. "But if he drives home the point that the state really has no other plausible choice, then he can turn public opinion around."

The bond's companion measure, Proposition 58, started out as the governor's proposal to make the state's existing constitutional spending cap more strict.

But the governor struck a deal with Democratic legislators that stopped short of a spending cap and instead became a proposed constitutional balanced-budget requirement.

Some Republicans have been critical of the compromise, saying it lacks the teeth to truly hold down spending.

The state's constitution now requires the governor to submit a budget plan in January for the coming fiscal year that is balanced. But the law does not require that spending and revenues balance in the budget that the Legislature ultimately passes or the governor signs.

Proposition 58 would require by law that the state enact a balanced budget.

It also builds into law a formal process for the governor and the Legislature to address budget shortfalls midyear and requires the state to sock away money in a reserve fund for tough economic times.

The constitution now requires the Legislature to establish a "prudent" reserve, but the new measure would require specific percentages to be transferred into the reserve account each year until it reached $8 billion, or 5 percent of the state's general fund revenues. Half of the transfers into the rainy-day account would be dedicated to repaying the bond.

Finally, the second proposition would prohibit most borrowing in the future to cover deficits, although it would let the state use short-term loans to steady its stream of cash throughout the fiscal year.

"We are cutting up the credit card from the politicians," Schwarzenegger told the students in Sacramento. "It's a balanced-budget initiative, so they never can get us into this mess again."