Posted on 08/29/2005 3:19:39 PM PDT by calcowgirl
Memo to Arnold: Don't take the conservative base for granted.
The Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, started out the program today with Hugh Hewitt, and in addition to the slate of proposition on reform the Governator wants to pass, lots of issues the base out here cares about were brought up. Here's how that interview went:
HH: We kick today off with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has thrown the California political map into a complete tumult with a special election coming up in November. Governor, good to talk to you.
AS: Hello, how are you, Hugh? This is great to talk to you.
HH: Thank you. It's always good to have you on, Governor. Before we go to the initiatives, and we've got to get through each of them, let me ask you. Your neighboring governors, Governor Napolitano, Governor Richardson, have declared border states of emergency in Arizona and New Mexico, respectively. Is that grandstanding?
AS: Well, I think that they have different issues than we have. They have real emergencies on the borders, they have livestock being killed, they have human trafficking, they have drug trafficking, and they have also the same problem we have, which is the flow of illegal immigrants coming in. But they have...I just recently came from a border Governor's conference in Mexico, and all of the Governors got together that are on the borders, and we talked about that. And we came up with a resolution about all working together to create more security on the border, and protect the borders and all that. So it's been a major issue, but they have an even bigger problem than we have.
HH: All right. Now I want to go on to the initiatives, because you made a roll of the dice here, and you've thrown California's political calculus, and thus, the country's, into a little bit of upheaval, especially with Prop. 77. I'm not sold on redistricting, Governor. Tell me why I should vote for this.
AS: Well, I think that what is important is that the last time we did redistricting, it was the politicians that drew the district lines. And when politicians draw district lines, that means that they are drawing it in a way that protects themselves. It protects the incumbent. So what they have done is they've built this little castle, and to protect themselves, not let anyone else go in, and not creating competition. And in order...instead of protecting the people, the voters, they've protected themselves. It was all about them, rather than about the voters, about the people out there that need to be protected. And so when I was elected, I said that I will be a Governor that will be the people's Governor, and I want to protect the people, not the politicians. So it is important that we redo that, and it is a panel of retired judges that have no vested interest in the outcome. They should draw the district lines so that it is fair, and is competetive between Democrats and Republicans. Because what they have done when they drew the district line is they have picked the voters. And that is the wrong way to go, because it has to be the voters that pick the politicians, not the politicians picking the voters.
HH: Now Governor, I know a lot of retired judges, and some of them are quite sweet, but there are many I wouldn't let change the oil in my car, much less my Congressional districts. How do we know we're not going to get bums?
AS: Well, because they will be selected, and it will be a good and fair selection and all that. I think that this is very important that we have...the question always is...with everything is, do you want to continue the old system? Do you want to keep the status quo? Do you really want to have the politicians draw the district lines that is in favor of them, rather than in favor of the voters? That's really what the issue is here. And I always said that I want to reform the system, and I want to make sure that the people are represented the proper way, because the people are working hard out there, it's the people that are paying the taxes, that live by the rules and all this. And they should really be fairly represented so that there is a competetive district, so that Democrats and Republicans can compete and go out there and campaign, rather than fixing the system the way it is right now.
HH: All right, Governor. Let's turn to public school teachers. Yesterday, we did a story on the Canton Timken Public High School in Canton, Ohio, which had sixty five pregnant high school girls out of a total of 490 girls. That school's obviously broken down. What's got you taking aim at the public school teacher's tenure?
AS: Well, I think that we always said that there is a huge problem we have in education. We are spending this time, I mean this year, we increased education spending by $3 billion dollars. It's the hugest increase. We are spending $50 billion dollars altogether in education. It's the most that we have ever spent in the history of California. And we are not getting what we are supposed to get. You know, the system has to be reformed, but at the same time, we need to make sure that we don't tackle all of the problems at the same time, and do it one at a time. The first thing I said is let's start with the teachers. It is unfair that after two years, teachers have lifetime guarantees for their jobs, and if they're good or bad, they stay in there. You can't get rid of bad teachers. And you cannot reward good teachers with bonuses, or recognition pay, which I have proposed. All of those things are just wrong the way it is done right now. So what I propose in my teacher's tenure is, let's increase that after not two years you get the lifetime guarantee for your job, but after five years. Let the teachers prove themselves, because there are so many talented and so many hardworking teachers out there. And they should get rewarded. But the ones that are not making it, we should be able to get rid of them, and I think we should do the weeding out early on.
HH: Now Prop. 76, the companion initiative, goes after state spending, and part of that is school funding. Are you proposing to cut school funding?
AS: No, no. We never want to cut anything. As a matter of fact, it's quite the opposite. We want to increase funding for education, because as you know, I'm an education Governor. I want to make sure that education gets a fair amount of money, but we have to also show accountability. People want to see accountability, that the money is spent wisely, and more that 65% go into the classroom. That's what we are shooting for. What is happening right now is the money does not go into the classroom. It doesn't go towards the teachers. It goes to many other things, and administrative costs. So we want to clean house there. We want to make sure that the parents get their moneys worth, because they are paying the taxes. And we want to make sure that the children get the best education possible. So teachers tenure is the thing to start, and then we're going to continue on and expand and create real reform in education. But the important thing is we have to increase education spending, pay as much attention to education as possible, and really treat the teachers the right way, with respect, and give them a merit pay, and increase their pay.
HH: Now, there are a whole bunch of other initiatives on here that you did not put on, but I'd like your opinion on two of them. Prop. 73, which is a waiting period and parental notification for minors seeking an abortion. Will you vote for Prop. 73, Governor?
AS: Well, to be honest with you, I'm right now focuses only on our propositions. So we stay focused, so I don't go all over the place here, and talk about many initiatives, all of the initiatives. So this is why we always get involved with the other initiatives down the line. So maybe in October, we'll get involved with the other initiatives. But right now, it is important for us to talk about teachers tenure, to talk about living in our means, Proposition 76, and Proposition 77, which is the redistricting. And may I remind you, the key thing here is that when you talk about living within our means, is that the state stops spending more money than we take in. What created this huge mess, and why we had the recall election, was simply because our legislators could not keep control over their spending. They rung up a $22 billion dollar debt. That's what I have inherited. And they still today did not get the message. They're still spending more money than we have. This coming year, our structural defecit will be an additional $7.5 billion dollars. We cannot continue this way. And I simple reason why this is bad is that not only because we are not living within our means, but we never save enough money to really build an infrastructure, to work on our highways and freeways. We cannot afford all of these things. We need to build more schools. We need to build hospitals, emergency rooms. We need to create more nurses, more teachers. There's so many challenges ahead of us. If we continue always living in debt, we cannot afford what we need...
HH: That's absolutely true, but can you expect conservatives to get up and march, and you need them to march on this stuff, if you're not out there for say paycheck protection? I mean, that one's...that's the nuclear weapon that's been unleashed here. If the unions lose their stolen money from their people, they're going to be crippled. So are you going to be out there for Prop. 75?
AS: Well, again, like I said earlier, I'm not getting off...in principle, I'm for all of those things, but we are not going to get involved in endorsing any of the other initiatives. What is important is that we're using November 8th as the time for all of California to rally together and go to the polls and to vote, and to create real change. Because the legislators are incapable to create real reform in California, which we need so badly, in order to fix the broken system. I always promised the people that when I come into office, I will fix the broken system.
HH: Will you be appointing the new Justice on the California Supreme Court before the election?
AS: I don't think it will be before the election, but I mean...
HH: Are conservatives going to be happy, Governor?
AS: We are right now going through the process, and it is, as you know, it's always very important that we appoint the right person, the most competent person, the person that really has skills and experience.
HH: But it's got to be a conservative. I mean, Janice Rogers Brown was the most conservative member of that court, and if you come in with a moderate, aren't the conservatives going to sit on their hands for you, Governor, next year?
AS: You can count on it that we will do the right...we will pick the right choice, and that we will do the right replacement.
End of interview.
I think you can thank carry okie for that. He caught a few of them in his net last week, so they're not ready to take'm on yet :o)
Wow cowgirl, you have a knack for understatement!
It only took about forty of those "Morning Glory and Grace" comments before I realized Hugh was not going to be someone I could listen too very often.
He may be a shill. I think it's more that he just doens't get it. If Bush says jump, Hugh wonders how high? If Arnold needs an outlet, Hugh is flattered that he will even come on his show.
There's a good way to go after a guy like Schwarzenegger. You rib him about issues. You don't have to offend him to the point that he won't come back.
For instance, when the interview is over you say somethig like, well Arnold my friend one of these days I'm going to convince you that our schools, hospitals and state would be better off if we got our border under control.
It's been nice having you on the show. Arnold would probably fire back with a quip of his own. At least the issue would be raised.
You could use the same tactic on a number of issues. You could also liven up the interview with little barbs done in a friendly manor.
Hugh isn't serving conservatism that well IMO.
Interviews like this one are worthless. He didn't even reinforce the core issues.
That would be Governor McClintock.
Hewitt is too partisan to be enlightening too often. That is my take.
well I gave up on HH when he bailed on Tom McClintock and jumped on the Ahnold bandwagon in 2003...
don't have time for "fair weather friends", "traitors" or "backstabbers!"
Hewitt like to elect folks with an R after their name. That is job one for him. The rest is rather uninteresting detail for him.
"There was a time when a thread like this would have the Arnie-bots swarming all over it like wasps on a rotting piece of meat on a sunny day. What happened to them?"
I think they "threw in the towel" a lonnnnnng time ago...
Ya don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to recognize a RINO when ya see one.
And again, I won't say "I told ya so!" LOL
Can we use this in a court of law? This is a confession!
Well, we can certainly remember it when we get to the polling booth next time...
A few Arnold's supporters have come around. They now realize and understand what many FReepers knew back during the recall election. Arnold's a liberal and a RINO. He's a lousy governor.
See RE:#9
>>>>He's no longer a reformer; in people's eyes Arnold has become a part of the liberal Sacramento establishment and that's why his poll numbers have hit rock bottom. As Daniel Weintraub says, Arnold has become the problem and not the solution.
And you may be right.
"I guess this means conservative."
He's nothing but a RINO and a mouthpiece for Pete Wilson who will tell him who to pick and it won't be a conservative.
That is why I am more interesting that Hewitt. :)
In all fairness, I bailed on Tom too.
Look, in 2000 I voted for Pat Buchanan. The border issue was very important to me. I thought we must get our borders under control, tighten up on Visas and quit letting people from terrorist states enter our nation. Boy did I catch grief for that.
In hindsight, I think I made the right call. Let me tell you something, if Al Gore would have made it in because of Buchanan voters in Florida, I would NOT have been a happy camper.
I understand where you folks are coming from. I think there's merit on my side as well.
Hugh does not serve the party well, if he does not sell conservatism and pound home solid core issues. Conservatism light, is a poor substitute for conservatism.
LOL
>>Wow cowgirl, you have a knack for understatement!
Those weren't my words--they were Hewitt's.
Yes, partisan without the slightest bow to conservatism.
>>They now realize and understand what many FReepers knew back during the recall election. Arnold's a liberal and a RINO. He's a lousy governor.
They still try to defend the indefensible.
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.