Arnold's going to make quite a few of Free Republic's resident grumpsters mighty unhappy if he keeps on enacting his campaign promises. No doubt they'll find some perceived gripe to complain about, however...
Analysis: Demos Likely to Go Along with Governor's Budget Plan
Friday is the deadline for the state legislature to put the governor's $15 billion bond and state spending cap on the March ballot.
Political analysts say in the end, Democrats will likely go along with the governor to get the plan on the ballot.
ping!
Arnold's going to make quite a few of Free Republic's resident grumpsters mighty unhappy if he keeps on enacting his campaign promises. No doubt they'll find some perceived gripe to complain about, however...
Following is from Bakersfield Californian
Schwarzenegger's progress on plans for first 100 days as governor
The Associated Press
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has set out an agenda for his first 100 days in office, which began Nov. 17 with his swearing in as California's 38th governor.
Wednesday was his 17th day in office.
The following is a list of what Schwarzenegger has promised he would do during his first 100 days in office - and whether he's taken action so far:
-Repeal the recent tripling of the state vehicle license fee.
Yes. Schwarzenegger issued an executive order Nov. 17 rolling back the car tax.
-Call a special legislative session.
Yes. Schwarzenegger called three simultaneous special sessions. They began Nov. 18.
-Repeal a law that lets undocumented immigrants get driver's licenses after Jan. 1.
Schwarzenegger signed the repeal of the law Wednesday, after action Monday by the Assembly and last week by the Senate.
-Pass a jobs package with "real workers' comp reform."
No.
-Make spending cuts to address the current imbalance.
No.
-Freeze spending and complete an audit of the state's $99 billion budget.
No.
-Get the state a "fair share" of Indian gambling revenue.
No.
-Renegotiate state employee union contracts.
No.
-Submit a budget for fiscal year 2004, which begins next July 1, that closes a deficit estimated at $10 billion to $25 billion. Also, restructure debt built into this year's budget.
No.
-Streamline education bureaucracy and send more money to classrooms.
No.
-Pass an open-government constitutional amendment and ban fund-raising during the state budgeting process.
No.
Break out the pretzels and beer, this is going to be an interesting night at the fights!
I know I'm supposed to understand this somehow, but I'm completely lost.
If the Legislature passed the law, it was because they thought it was good public policy - right?
Now they've repealed it before it even went into effect??
The way I see it, either it was good public policy when they passed it - in which case they're cowards for repealing it just because Davis got thrown out - OR, it was bad policy to begin with - in which case they were idiots for passing it, and THEY should all be thrown out!
At the very least, those who voted to enact it and THEN voted to repeal it, have got to be either cowards or idiots - RIGHT??
Okay... Maybe my categorizations are extreme... but even toning down the rhetoric, they've got to be either "morally compromised" or "intellectually challenged"...
Or am I missing something here? Did something substantive change - some Federal policy, or something - between the time that the law was enacted and the time it was repealed, that would provide a *rational* reason for a legislative body to act in such an apparently irrational fashion?
I really am dumbfounded... I mean, assuming the latter is not the case, it seems to me an inescapable conclusion that the Legislature - or, again, *at least* those who flip-flopped on the issue - are by all rules of logic either - okay, cowards or idiots.
Again, please forgive my irascible tenor, I really hate Demonrats and find it hard to restrain myself - but I'm REALLY confused by this. How could any Legislator do this and not expect to be ridiculed and lampooned by both his/her/its opponents in the next election?
Are Communfornians so dumb that they don't even *see* the irrationality of this?