Petitions ARE Available NOW!!!
Click the badge below FoR more info
Posted on 10/01/2005 9:53:58 PM PDT by calcowgirl
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger discussed his Nov. 8 ballot measures yesterday at the Joslyn Senior Center in Escondido.
He also sought to clarify his position on same-sex marriage, saying he believes that gay and lesbian couples should be entitled to the same legal protections as heterosexual ones, but that marriage "should be between a man and a woman."
The governor weighed in on the emotionally charged topics at a meeting with The San Diego Union-Tribune's editorial board during a visit to the San Diego area to campaign for his Nov. 8 special election ballot agenda.
Some Latinos have criticized Schwarzenegger as having failed to appoint enough Latinos to judgeships and high positions in his administration. Schwarzenegger said he has been so preoccupied with California's economic woes since his election in the 2003 recall that he has not paid as much attention to Latino concerns as he should.
"We in the administration have not done the best job with Latinos," the governor said. "It is regretful to say that because I concentrated so much on fixing the economy, fixing this and fixing that and was overwhelmed with so many different things when I took office, that we have, not intentionally, but just neglected to bring in more Latinos, have more meetings, more outreach to Latino groups."
He added, "I am committed to doing much more and for us to focus on that now because that's a mistake that was made."
Schwarzenegger received a solid 32 percent of the Latino vote two years ago as the top candidate to replace ousted Democratic Gov. Gray Davis, according to a Los Angeles Times exit poll. Since then, his esteem among Latinos has slid precipitously. In a poll released this week by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California, only 18 percent of Latino voters approved of the job the Republican governor is doing.
Schwarzenegger has been assailed by Latino leaders for praising the Minutemen border watchers and for refusing to sign legislation allowing illegal immigrants to obtain special driver licenses after initially signaling his intention to do so.
He later said he would not sign a driver license bill until the federal government adopts a uniform nationwide policy.
Schwarzenegger also caused a stir in April for saying the United States should "close" the border. The Austrian immigrant governor quickly said that this was a misstatement because of language problems and that he meant to say "secure" the border.
"Because of my stand on driver's licenses for undocumented immigrants, because of my stand about securing the borders, automatically I have been labeled as someone that is prejudiced, someone that is a racist, someone that just doesn't want other immigrants to enjoy the same kind of opportunities that I have had when I came over here as an immigrant and all that, which is all a bunch of nonsense," he said.
Art Torres, chairman of the California Democratic Party, said Schwarzenegger has a lot of lost ground to make up with Latino voters.
"It's impossible to think that he couldn't find one Latino to put in his Cabinet," Torres said. "That's kind of stretching it.
"I don't think that he's a racist. I don't think he's anti-Latino," Torres added. "I just think some of his comments have been ill-founded and incendiary to the Latino community. And I guess now he's realizing that, given the poll numbers."
On Thursday, Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill that would have legalized same-sex marriages in California while signing four bills to outlaw various forms of discrimination against gays.
The governor reiterated yesterday that in vetoing AB 849, he felt bound by Proposition 22, the successful 2000 ballot initiative that says "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."
"I cannot go against Prop. 22," he said. "Just simply, I will not let the legislators tamper with the people's vote."
Asked how he voted on Proposition 22, Schwarzenegger, who has resisted expressing a personal opinion about same-sex marriage, hesitated and then said he "probably voted for it."
The governor said public attitudes about same-sex marriage might well have changed in the five years since Proposition 22 was approved with 61 percent of the vote. One public opinion poll recently suggested that Californians were evenly split on the issue.
"If they go back to the people, it could easily be that it will win, that it will pass, that we will have marriage amongst gay couples," Schwarzenegger said.
He did not respond directly when asked what position he would take if an initiative to legalize same-sex marriage were placed on the ballot.
"I personally think that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. But I think a gay couple should have all the rights that a marriage has," he told the Union-Tribune editorial board, which regularly hosts newsmakers to discuss current events and invites reporters and editors from the newsroom.
Yesterday morning, Schwarzenegger promoted the package of Nov. 8 ballot measures he is backing at a meeting of about 200 people at the Joslyn Senior Center in Escondido.
The governor came armed with a new study by a sympathetic business group that concluded that Proposition 76, his initiative to control state spending, could actually increase school spending over the long term rather than cut it as opponents contend.
Larry McCarthy, president of the California Taxpayers Association, said Proposition 76 would allow the state to earmark one-time revenues, such as the proceeds from this year's tax amnesty, for education without increasing the state's permanent financial commitment to schools.
"Under current law, it is impossible really to give schools any one-time money," McCarthy said.
Cal-Tax's view that Proposition 76 would result in more funding for schools than current law is not shared by the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office, which writes the ballot pamphlet analyses and issued a 13-page report on the measure yesterday.
Legislative Analyst Liz Hill said in her report that "budget reductions resulting from the spending limit or (the) governor's new authority could apply to schools."
The main parts of Proposition 76 impose a loose limit on the growth in state spending, based on the average of revenue growth in the three previous years, and allow the governor to make midyear spending cuts if the budget falls out of balance and the Legislature fails to close the gap within 45 days.
Outside the senior center, an estimated 180 protesters shouted and chanted against the governor and his ballot propositions. Led by longtime Escondido firefighter Mike O'Connor, wearing his helmet and toting a bullhorn and a U.S. flag, the protesters lined up along Broadway and Park Place.
"Why don't you come out here where the real people are?" O'Connor shouted into his bullhorn.
Mike Diaz, another Escondido firefighter, sat atop the Escondido Firefighters Association's antique fire engine, sounding its loud siren, shortly after the governor's arrival in a dark sport utility vehicle.
Although most of the demonstrators appeared to be firefighters from throughout North County, they were joined by teachers and nurses who also object to Schwarzenegger's ballot initiatives.
"The governor needs to hear from the working folks, but he seems to be listening mostly to big business," said Sandy Dewees, an emergency-room nurse in the Palomar Pomerado Health district.
Ping! This article is loaded with various subjects.
The governor said public attitudes about same-sex marriage might well have changed in the five years since Proposition 22 was approved with 61 percent of the vote. One public opinion poll recently suggested that Californians were evenly split on the issue.
"If they go back to the people, it could easily be that it will win, that it will pass, that we will have marriage amongst gay couples," Schwarzenegger said.
He did not respond directly when asked what position he would take if an initiative to legalize same-sex marriage were placed on the ballot.
"I personally think that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. But I think a gay couple should have all the rights that a marriage has," he told the Union-Tribune editorial board, which regularly hosts newsmakers to discuss current events and invites reporters and editors from the newsroom.
"Schwarzenegger also caused a stir in April for saying the United States should "close" the border. The Austrian immigrant governor quickly said that this was a misstatement because of language problems and that he meant to say "secure" the border. "
===
So how come people around here aren't giving Arnold credit for his support of the Minutemen and his views on illegal immigration and border security?
He is trying so desperately not to dis-please anyone... And he is failing miserably!!!
Asked how he voted on Proposition 22, Schwarzenegger, who has resisted expressing a personal opinion about same-sex marriage, hesitatedand then said he "probably voted for it."
This is something he actually did.
No matter how he softened it, he still vetoed the same sex marriage bill, and drivers' licenses for illegals.
Can you honestly say if you were facing re-election that you wouldn't soften your statements, while letting your actions speak louder?
Good point.
Did you miss the FACT that Arnold VETOED the homosexual marriage bill? You seem to be so focused on trying to make it sound, as if he were supporting it.
I just posted my post 10, before reading your post.
Sounds like it's "here y'all go again time" --- Arnold detractors will NEVER give him credit.
Ha! Both just stating the obvious.
What is with yours and others obsession here on FR to stifle all dissent and run what oft times appear little more than a cheerleading operation from your own side of the gym?
If we aren't constantly praising your guy like you, you make it out like we are the ones running FR off into the moderate weeds in the ditch, while your guy can rarely do wrong in your eyes.
We're only a few (actually,quite a few it seems) that are trying to critically examine the mess we are in and make both sides of offered reforms and their potential effects available for all to review and decide on their own.
If I want fluff and a back-slapping thread, I'll check one of yours out, they're usually good for a few.
If I want meat, calcowgirl among many others serves up meat and potatos and cold beer, no poms poms.
Arnold detractors will NEVER give him credit.
lol.. That is bullpoop and you know it, shame on you for using such absolute statements like that, he has gotten credit but it's like some here think it has to be part of a mantra that all here have to repeat over and over or they're not with it.
No, I didn't miss it. In fact, I posted an article on it. But I am also watching what else he does. On the same day, he signed 6 other pieces of Pro-GLBT legislation, handing over yet more rights to homosexuals. I am one of those who believes that the people, by passing Proposition 22, opposed not only Marriage in Name, but Marriage in context of the benefits and incentives that society has granted it.
As such, I see Arnold's announcements that he believes homosexuals should have all the rights of married people as something to note.
Arnold is almost begging the GLBT activists to put this back on the ballot. He also has been sitting on a Supreme Court appointment for an inordinately long period of time. He has said he won't make the appointment until after the election--more politics! My guess is that the appointment will be pro-homosexual marriage, carefully masked from public record.
I conclude from your posts that you are like NewzJunkey in supporting Arnold's position that homosexual's should have all the same rights and opportunities of married people?
In all fairness, for a man who doesn't even remember how he voted relative to a very contentious subject, I find the inclusion of the word "probably" in his response substantial enough to question the accuracy of his statement.
Regarding the Veto, that was a good step. But that is not the end of the issue. I am interested as to where we go from here. His comments are not encouraging. See also post above.
"you make it out like we are the ones running FR off into the moderate weeds in the ditch"
====
Well, you all DO keep trying to get Democrats elected in CA and defeat propositions, which would help reform CA...
Even McClintock is giving strong support to Arnold and the propositions, because he recognizes that it's good for California.
But the "dissenting vocal few" is even willing to be viciously against spending cuts, which they were advocating before, just to defeat Arnold's agenda, never mind, that it will also seriously harm California.
He remembers. He didn't lie and say didn't vote for the ban. He softened it, like a politician running for re-election.
Norman, Norman, Norman... there ARE a few here who NEVER give him credit, but you're not one of them.
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.