Posted on 10/01/2006 10:18:46 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
Reflecting a year of cooperation with Democratic lawmakers, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger marked the end of the legislative bill-signing period Saturday, vetoing bills at a lower rate than in the first two years of his term and approving several measures he had previously rejected.
The flurry of last-minute signings came as analysts said Schwarzenegger has taken more moderate public positions this year and departed from the more conservative and strident tone of last fall's special election campaign.
"The signing decisions are more reminiscent of 2004 than 2005," said Tim Hodson, executive director of the Center for California Studies at California State University, Sacramento. "Whether the explanation is election-year politics or that 2005 was an anomaly entirely depends on your view of Arnold Schwarzenegger.
"One of the fundamental questions of this election is which Gov. Schwarzenegger will be sworn in next January."
Schwarzenegger signed 910 bills this year and vetoed 262, or 22 percent of the total sent to his desk. In both of his first two years in office, he averaged a veto rate of 24 percent.
In 2005, Schwarzenegger signed 729 bills and vetoed 232. From the start of his term on Nov. 17, 2003, to the end of the 2004 session, he signed 959 bills and vetoed 311.
But some critics said Schwarzenegger's more moderate stance is simply a bid by the Republican governor to win re-election in a Democratic state.
"Schwarzenegger's continually changing his positions, masquerading as a Democrat this election year in an effort to save his own hide," said Brian Brokaw, a spokesman for state Treasurer Phil Angelides, Schwarzenegger's Democratic rival in the governor's race.
Brokaw noted that Schwarzenegger had previously opposed raising the minimum wage and lowering the price of prescription drugs, but signed such measures this year.
Schwarzenegger's campaign countered that the governor should be credited for working with the Legislature this year, just as he declared he would after acknowledging that's what voters wanted when they rejected his special-election measures in 2005.
"When Phil Angelides attacks the governor for breaking through the Sacramento gridlock and successfully working with the Legislature in a bipartisan fashion, Phil Angelides is living up to his reputation as a pessimistic, partisan Sacramento politician," said Schwarzenegger campaign spokesman Matt David.
Democratic lawmakers were generally pleased with the governor's actions this year, though they were disappointed by some of his vetoes.
Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez, D-Los Angeles, said he disagreed with the governor's vetoes of a universal health care proposal, workers' compensation reforms and a bill granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.
But Nuñez still called the governor's attitude a "sea change from last year" and said it was a good year for the Democratic agenda.
"If you look at the last year, it was pretty clear that he had a failed agenda, one which would move the state further to the right," Nuñez said. "California voters sent him a message that that's not the direction they want to go in. So this year, he wrapped himself around the Democratic flag."
Even while siding with Democrats on many issues, Schwarzenegger managed to keep his business allies satisfied. The California Chamber of Commerce listed 39 "job killer" bills that it strongly opposed this year, saying they would harm the economy.
Chamber spokesman Vince Sollitto said only 11 of those made it to the governor's desk and as of Friday, he had vetoed seven and signed two, both related to global warming.
Bookmark this FO.
And don't start spinning that you really meant he vetoes 30-35% of democrat bills.
By your own research, Arnold DID veto a third of the Democrat bills. I guess it really bothers you that he didn't also veto a third of the Republican bills. He vetoed less than 7% of the Republican bills.
Link to YOUR POST:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1707482/posts?page=27#27
Another thing, is that he vetoed the bills which were the worst and would have had the worst impact on CA: he vetoed the universal healthcare bill, the drivers licenses for illegals, vetoed financial aid to illegals, some anti-gun bills ( http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1711509/posts ), he vetoed the anti-Walmart bill, he vetoed the homosexual marriage bill and the couple of bills to teach homosexual accomplishments in schools, he vetoed the sneak abolishment of electoral college bill.
And remining everyone that Angelides WILL sign ALL of these, if he becomes governor. There would be NOTHING to keep the leftist socialist Dem controlled CA Legislature in check.
"Even while siding with Democrats on many issues, Schwarzenegger managed to keep his business allies satisfied. The California Chamber of Commerce listed 39 "job killer" bills that it strongly opposed this year, saying they would harm the economy.
Chamber spokesman Vince Sollitto said only 11 of those made it to the governor's desk and as of Friday, he had vetoed seven and signed two, both related to global warming."
ahhh, but the 2 he signed were the big ones,
No?
1 Job Killer AB 32 Núñez Global Warming Pollution. Signed 2 Job Killer AB 1835 Lieber Automatic Minimum Wage Increases Signed 3 Job Killer AB 2641 Coto Halts Economic Growth Signed 4 Job Killer SB 44 Kehoe Affordable Housing Development Impediment Signed 5 Job Killer SB 1368 Perata Electricity: emissions of greenhouse gases Signed 6 Job Killer SB 1379 Perata Biomonitoring Signed 7 Job Killer AB 1012 Nation Fuel Mandate Vetoed 8 Job Killer AB 1884 Chu Unemployment Insurance Compensation Benefits Vetoed 9 Job Killer AB 2209 Pavley Unemployment Insurance Benefit Expansion Vetoed 10 Job Killer SB 840 Kuehl Government-Run Health Care Vetoed 11 Job Killer SB 1414 Migden Health Care Tax Vetoed 12 Job Killer SB 1489 Ducheny Gov Agency Potential Harassment of Employers Vetoed 13 Job Killer SB 1523 Alarcón Development Projects - Superstore Retailers Vetoed
hey cowgirl, with Arnold leading Angelides by 10+ points looks like conservatives are completely irrelevant in CA.
I think that is what pains you most, your irrlevancy, not that Arnold will win.
Well hopefully McClintok can win.
You are spinning, as predicted!
Once proven wrong, you simply change your argument.
Vetoing 30% of ALL bills is not the same as 30% of Democrat bills.
Why is he vetoing ANY Republican bills? He is a Republican Governor and these were bills that already passed the leftist legislature. How bad could they be? No worse than Global Warming and Minimum Wage Hikes, let alone the Public Benefits for Illegal Aliens that he signed.
Sierra Club California 2006 Priority Bills
1 SB 1360 Kehoe County records: conservation easement registry Signed
2 AB 1870 Lieber Smoking Vehicles Signed
3 AB 2021 Levine Public utilities: energy efficiency. Signed
4 AB 2296 Montañez Landfill Financial Responsibility Signed
5 SB 1796 Florez Flood Protection Vetoed
Actually, my post has nothing to do with the election. It has to do with the constant posting of inaccurate information, apparently knowingly.
The politics we have seen of late is based on 10 second soundbites and propaganda that can't pass a smell test. I would like to see some integrity and honesty put back in the process, otherwise we aren't any different than the leftist scum that put a "D" next to their name.
Conservativism is anything but "irrelevant" in California.
Why do you seem to relish the use of that term?
After all, this is a website for Conservatism.
when was the last time a conservative won a statewide race in CA? 1994?
"Vetoing 30% of ALL bills is not the same as 30% of Democrat bills. "
===
No, it isn't. Vetoing 30% of the Dem bills, which is what Arnold did, is actually MUCH BETTER. For Republicans and conservatives, that is. And he signed 93% of the Republican bills, vetoed the most of the worst job killer bills.
I can see that you would be very upset -- your socialist bias is showing.
""After all, this is a website for Conservatism."'
While I undersand that, FR is hardly typical of CA public opinion
"2 Job Killer AB 1835 Lieber Automatic Minimum Wage Increases Signed"
There you go spreading misinformation again. He did NOT sign the "automatic min wage increase".
Arnold had them take out the automatic raise provision. That was a big deal. He deserves credit for that.
Of course the account is spinning .. its wheels.
As with all partisan accounts, the FairOpinion account has a handicap that it can never overcome: The audience.
FR doesn't care about electing Republican candidates one why or the other.The issue on FR isn't the candidate's party registration. It's the candidates governing philosophy.
The FairOpinion account can promote, spam, beg and threaten but it will never enjoy success selling a liberal on a nonpartisan, conservative forum.
"It has to do with the constant posting of inaccurate information, apparently knowingly."
===
Well, YOU should know all about that, trying to pass false info right in this thread, that I just corrected.
But REAL conservatives don't try to get socialist leftists elected, by constantly attacking their Republican opponent, as some people here are doing, pretending to be conservatives.
McClintock, the conservative icon specifically said:
"Like many of us, I too have disagreements with some of the Governor's proposals. These differences, however, do not justify the abandonment of our party's responsibility to work tirelessly to reelect this Republican governor and to elect our GOP candidates to statewide and legislative offices.
For this reason, I view any effort to attack Governor Schwarzenegger as an attack on my own candidacy and those of every Republican seeking partisan office in 2006. "
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1568122/posts?page=51#51
Very clearly, those who continue to attack Arnold know full well, that conservatives staying home or voting third party will help Angelides. THAT is their mission. As they say, never mind that they claim to be conservatives, watch what they do, and what they do is actively trying to suppress the conservative vote to help leftist socialist Dems win.
The only Republican they keep mentioning is Mountjoy, who has less than a snowball's chance in you know where of beating Feinstein.
Someone coined a very appropriate term for them: DICC-s
(Democrats In Conservative's Clothing)
"FR doesn't care about electing Republican candidates "
===
Most people here very much care to NOT elect leftist, socialist Democrats. Only the leftist plants are agitating against Republicans, trying to help socialist Dems win and fully take over CA and the country.
Read my post on this thread with a quote from conservative McClintock.
There you go again... still spinning. Nothing I posted was inaccurate, FO.
Before you said Arnold vetoes 30-35% of ALL bills.
Now you say Arnold vetoed 30% of DEM bills.
The latter is true, as my research shows. But it does not make your prior comments true no matter how much you want to call an apple a orangutan.
>when was the last time a conservative won a statewide race in CA? 1994?
Probably the last time the GOP didn't abandon them in the campaign.
While they favor supporting so-called "moderates", recent history shows that it doesn't work.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1711494/posts?page=80#80
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.