Schwarzenegger turns down Canadian drug, auto buyers rights bills

AP ^ | Thurs. 9/30/4 | STEVE LAWRENCE

[SmithL]

SACRAMENTO -- Issuing a flood of last-minute vetoes, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger struck down bills Thursday that would have helped Californians buy low-cost Canadian drugs, given some protections to car buyers and limited homeowner association foreclosures. He also vetoed bills that would have required companies to give consumers at least 30 days to claim rebates, made it easier for reporters to interview prison inmates and boosted penalties for employers who violate equal pay requirements. Altogether, the Republican governor rejected 71 bills on the last day for him to sign or veto

[SmithL]

Vetoes, vetoes, & vetoes.

[Prime Choice]

Issuing a flood of last-minute vetoes, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger struck down bills Thursday that would have helped Californians buy low-cost Canadian drugs,

How would this bill "help" Californians buy Canadian drugs? If it involved shelling out cash to subsidize people doing that, Arnold did the right thing.

given some protections to car buyers and limited homeowner association foreclosures.

Car buyers seem to have enough protections already, and -- last time I looked -- foreclosures only happened when you had a chronic history of not paying your bills on time. Why should the state limit that?

He also vetoed bills that would have required companies to give consumers at least 30 days to claim rebates

Um...you buy the product, you take it home, if it works, you mail in the rebate the next day. If it doesn't, you take it back. Duh? Why does anyone need 30 days to do that?

made it easier for reporters to interview prison inmates

Okay, let's set something straight: inmates are rejects of society. I'm sick and tired of seeing them glorified in the Leftist media.

[tom h]

"foreclosures only happened when you had a chronic history of not paying your bills on time. Why should the state limit that? "

I would have supported the foreclosure one. The issue here is payment of homeowner association dues. The web is filled with true stories of a homeowner in dispute with his association over a few hundred dollars, and losing his house as a result. Association CCNRs are weighted such that associations, if they want to, can be Nazis and seize your property.

Do a Google search for "foreclosure homeowner association" or check out some of the below links:

http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/articlePrint.cfm?id=344783

http://www.ccfj.net/HOACArally.html

http://money.cnn.com/2004/03/09/pf/yourhome/homeownersassociation/

[Prime Choice]

I would have supported the foreclosure one. The issue here is payment of homeowner association dues. The web is filled with true stories of a homeowner in dispute with his association over a few hundred dollars, and losing his house as a result. Association CCNRs are weighted such that associations, if they want to, can be Nazis and seize your property.

I don't buy the Nazi claim. These people willingly signed up to be a part of that asinine association. And then they cry foul when the very rules they agreed to bite them on the butt? Please.

Anyone stupid enough to join a "homeowner's association" deserves the sort of insanity you describe. A man's home is supposed to be his castle, not part of a communist collective.