Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Arnold's plan could reshape Legislature
LA Daliy News ^ | 7/17/04 | AP

Posted on 07/18/2004 10:10:45 AM PDT by NormsRevenge

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

1 posted on 07/18/2004 10:10:46 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *calgov2002; california


2 posted on 07/18/2004 10:11:14 AM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi Mac ... Godspeed x40 ... Support Our Troops!!! ......Become a FR Monthly Donor ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

hmmm


3 posted on 07/18/2004 10:13:10 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
"Other states with full-time legislatures include New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin."

All the usual suspects.........put them all on part time.....and bi-year like in TX.

4 posted on 07/18/2004 10:17:40 AM PDT by spokeshave (strategery + schadenfreude = stratenschadenfreudery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

FRom the Sac Bee/Margaret Talev

excerpted and linked from the Bakersfield Californian

Stalled budget makes Schwarzenegger consider reforms

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (SMW) - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is learning first-hand what Republican and Democratic experts have been saying for years: It's the system, more than the governor, that makes responsible and timely budgeting in California so difficult to accomplish.

For all his star power and bipartisan appeal, the governor is almost three weeks into the fiscal year and can't get lawmakers to agree to a budget deal, even after adding to the state's structural deficit to meet demands of lawmakers from both parties.

Talks dissolved last week over tangential partisan disputes driven by businesses, trial lawyers and labor unions.

Public policy advocates say Schwarzenegger should embrace his frustration with the way things are, go directly to voters and ask them to adopt ballot initiatives that could ease future budget gridlock.

"It's the kind of thing he may have to do - to take some of these issues to the people," said Leon Panetta, who was President Clinton's budget director and chief of staff and now runs a public policy institute in Monterey, Calif.

"I think Schwarzenegger has a license from the California voters as a result of the recall to make waves."

5 posted on 07/18/2004 10:19:56 AM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi Mac ... Godspeed x40 ... Support Our Troops!!! ......Become a FR Monthly Donor ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Unicameral Legislature?


6 posted on 07/18/2004 10:20:18 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Possibly, that may a bit much to accomplish reform-wise or to make work in such a large state with such an array of ethnic and social interests.

But getting people talking about things like this is positive at this point.

I wish he would release his CPR now and add fuel to the fire. ;-)

7 posted on 07/18/2004 10:25:27 AM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi Mac ... Godspeed x40 ... Support Our Troops!!! ......Become a FR Monthly Donor ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

You can take your open ballot primary Arnold, and stick it where the sun don't shine.


8 posted on 07/18/2004 10:49:03 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are truly stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Unicameral Legislature?

It would be better to revist and toss Reynolds v. Sims. The problem with the State Senate is that it used to represent the counties in much the way that the US Senate represents the States (especially before the 17th Amendment). That ruling was in direct violation of the Article IV guarantee of a Republican form of government.

9 posted on 07/18/2004 10:53:08 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are truly stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
That ruling was in direct violation of the Article IV guarantee of a Republican form of government.

Does anybody in American actually understand the meaning of a "republican form of government" any more after being force fed with democracy, democracy, democracy ad infinitum?

10 posted on 07/18/2004 10:57:24 AM PDT by snopercod (I've got skin and you've got bark; What's the difference in the dark? - Deborah Henson-Conant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

"You can take your open ballot primary Arnold, and stick it where the sun don't shine."

THAT NEEDS REPEATING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


11 posted on 07/18/2004 11:08:33 AM PDT by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
Does anybody in American actually understand the meaning of a "republican form of government" any more after being force fed with democracy, democracy, democracy ad infinitum?

You've gotta wonder. In fact, I would prefer that boards of supervisors select a single county representative. People don't understand that with your county officers selecting the Senators, local elections actually matter more and representation improves. So does communication from the local to the State level.

12 posted on 07/18/2004 11:09:41 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are truly stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
By 2006, California could have a dramatically different political landscape

Thsi would be a HUGE improvement!

13 posted on 07/18/2004 11:12:31 AM PDT by BunnySlippers (Must get moose and squirrel ... B. Badanov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
By 2006, California could have a dramatically different political landscape

Thsi would be a HUGE improvement!

14 posted on 07/18/2004 11:12:31 AM PDT by BunnySlippers (Must get moose and squirrel ... B. Badanov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spokeshave
All the usual suspects.........put them all on part time.....and bi-year like in TX.

Do that with the feds too! Let them be in session every two years. For 6 months. Then they go home. It does not matter if some of them are there at all anyway. Just consider the case of John Kerry. He has not been in the US Senate for over a year. Didn't matter. Which was about the same as when he WAS there ALL the time.

15 posted on 07/18/2004 11:28:49 AM PDT by isthisnickcool (Strategery - "W" plays poker with one hand and chess with the other.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
The notion of a part-time Legislature, coupled with term limits, alarms many veteran political observers, including Barbara O'Connor, director of the Institute for the Study of Politics and the Media at California State University, Sacramento.

"They would be more dominated by big business and lobbyists and the infrastructure that surrounds the Capitol," she says. "I think that's not necessarily a good solution."

If the pols are there part time and can't make a career of the legislature, how would that increase the lobby strength?

I really don't get the lobby principle, obviously.

Go Arnold!

16 posted on 07/18/2004 11:46:29 AM PDT by hattend (I'm on the Mark Steyn Ping List! I'm somebody!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

As a former California resident, I can tell you that the legislature in that state is corrupt and arrogant even by politician standards. But the problem is gerrymandering and special interest money (ACLU-style liberalism of the state's 'Rat party makes it worse). While a part-time legislature sounds appealing, California is just too populous and too complicated (economically and ethnically) for such an option. Remember, the population is approaching 35 million.


17 posted on 07/18/2004 12:09:23 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued
California is just too populous and too complicated

Uh, just which new laws are we in need of ?

18 posted on 07/18/2004 12:35:26 PM PDT by AlBondigas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: AlBondigas

"Uh, just which new laws are we in need of ?"

The real question should be, would they have enough time to void all the existing laws that shouldn't exist?

We don't need any new ones!


19 posted on 07/18/2004 1:43:58 PM PDT by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
I like that idea almost as much as repealing the 17th.

Here where I live, the county supervisors are all "at large", rather then being elected by district. The county is so small that it doesn't matter much.

20 posted on 07/18/2004 1:48:50 PM PDT by snopercod (I've got skin and you've got bark; What's the difference in the dark? - Deborah Henson-Conant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson