Posted on 02/19/2006 5:26:58 PM PST by NormsRevenge
SACRAMENTO (AP) - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is learning that getting a major program such as his $222 billion public works plan through the Legislature isn't as simple as the "action, action, action" mantra he is fond of reciting.
That's particularly true during an election year and after his popularity nose-dived in 2005, when voters rejected all four of his initiatives during the November special election. Democrats and Republicans have criticized at least some parts of the plan, and administration officials concede it will face changes.
"We know there will be dialogue (between the Legislature and governor) that will change the exact mix of priorities," state Finance Director Mike Genest told a legislative committee recently.
The Senate's leader warns that if a deal isn't struck soon, the Republican governor could be forced to run for reelection in November without being able to claim credit for beginning to solve the state's backlog of public works projects.
"If this doesn't get done before the (June) primaries and before we start our budget negotiations, we will never get it done," said Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland.
Schwarzenegger wants to spend $222.6 billion over the next 10 years to expand highways and intercity rail, upgrade levees, build more schools, prisons, jails, courthouses and reservoirs, and undertake certain other public works projects.
Funding for the plan includes selling $68 billion in state bonds, which need approval from lawmakers and voters.
The governor wants the first of those bond measures to go on the ballot this June. The rest would be spread out on ballots through 2014.
The deadline for lawmakers to add bond proposals to the June ballot is March 10. If they fail to meet that deadline, getting a measure on the November ballot could be tougher, given the political pressures as campaigns for governor, legislative seats and other state offices heat up.
Enacting a plan to start addressing California's long-neglected infrastructure needs could be key to Schwarzenegger's re-election chances. A poll taken by the Public Policy Institute of California found that the governor's weak approval ratings improved after he announced the plan last month in his State of the State address.
"It's in his best interest as a candidate to give voters something they've been clamoring for for years," said Perata. "He needs this."
But so do Democrats, who control both houses of the Legislature.
Polls show lawmakers' popularity is even lower than the governor's, and Perata himself said 2005 was essentially a lost year legislatively. Democratic leaders want to show they can pass substantive legislation that helps the majority of Californians.
When Schwarzenegger revealed his plan, he did so from a position that was much weaker than when he entered office in 2003. The next year, Schwarzenegger used his sky-high popularity and bipartisan appeal to push workers' compensation reform through the Legislature and persuade voters to pass bonds that helped close a record budget deficit.
His approval ratings have plunged since then, culminating in the rejection of all four of the measures he placed before votes in last November's special election. He wanted to have more power over state spending, take redistricting duties away from the Legislature, lengthen the probationary period for new teachers and make it tougher for public employee unions to raise campaign contributions.
Schwarzenegger's poll numbers have improved somewhat since then. The Public Policy Institute survey found that his approval rating among likely voters had climbed from 38 percent to 45 percent since October. He also seems to be more flexible this time than he was in some previous negotiations with lawmakers.
"The governor's been fairly consistent since day one," said Vince Sollitto, a Schwarzenegger spokesman. "He welcomes the Legislature's involvement and input and understands there are other ideas that need to be considered in the art of reaching agreement and is optimistic that can be accomplished."
But Sollitto also said Schwarzenegger wanted to see a "long-term, comprehensive plan" approved.
"Trying to do this piecemeal doesn't provide the comprehension that's needed," he said. "But more importantly, it doesn't provide the stability in funding that's required for the type of projects needed to significantly reduce congestion ..."
Democrats aren't eager to hand the Republican governor a major victory right before he runs for re-election, but they need do something to boost their own standing with voters, Perata said.
"Our approval ratings are lower than the governor's," he said. "Together we would have a hard time getting elected most places in the world. If we can do something together, it will enhance his chances and ours."
But Democrats have staked out sharply different positions than the governor's on financing for the public works plan and what the money should buy.
They want bond money for parks, housing, port improvements, earthquake upgrades for hospitals and more money than Schwarzenegger is proposing for mass transit. They've also downplayed the need for new prisons, jails, courthouses and reservoirs.
Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, said recently that a third of the bond money spent on transportation should go to light-rail, bus and other formers of public transit.
Schwarzenegger, he said, was proposing less than $100 million for transit, compared to about $8 billion for highways and roads.
Nunez also said recently that members of his caucus didn't want to sell more than $30 billion in bonds - less than half the amount Schwarzenegger wants to sell. Nunez said debt payments on a larger bond package could consume money needed for schools.
Democrats also criticize Schwarzenegger's request for a constitutional amendment that would put a limit on annual bond debt payments. They say it could cripple the state's ability to replace structures destroyed by a massive earthquake or other natural disaster.
Republican lawmakers have their own proposals, including a pay-as-you-go constitutional amendment that would require the state to set aside a percentage of annual state budgets to pay for public works projects. That would reduce the need to sell bonds, they say.
"We want to see efficiency. We want to see accountability," said Assembly Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Bakersfield. "Currently, in the (Democratic) proposals I don't see all that.... If it's not accountable to the public, I don't see how we can go with it."
Perata has labeled the pay-as-you-go proposal a "nonstarter." Other Democrats contend it could end up costing the state more than selling bonds.
Lawmakers would need at least two Republican votes in the Senate and six in the Assembly to put together the two-thirds majorities required to place bond measures on the ballot.
Nunez said drafting an infrastructure plan that could get those super majorities is a "tall order."
"It's not going to be easy to negotiate this over the next three weeks," he said. "(But) I am committed to getting this done, either in June or November."
Perata has labeled the pay-as-you-go proposal a "nonstarter." Other Democrats contend it could end up costing the state more than selling bonds.
---
and the Gub seems to agree with the head Dems, surprise surprise.
It's all or nothing.
Good luck, California, ya gonna need it.
I stood out as one of the folks who agreed to support the last bond measure over quite a few objections around here. I took a lot of heat for it. I thought it was prudent since it took place just months after S taking office.
I don't support $1 dollars worth of new bonds until we get our financial house in order. I want to see cuts. I want to see a sound budget proposed, one that doesn't base it's reasoning on a temporary hyper economic condition.
Frankly I'd rather see Tom challenge Arnold in a primary. I do not want four more years of this guy. Frankly, putting up with him for two plus years was painful enough.
Don't hoget your your hopes for any significant changes at the convention.
The Ca GOP is hellbent on destruction. It may well be time to just let it go.
It has become demLite in more ways than many would like to admit or can realize.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
Don't get your hopes up for any significant changes at the convention.
there, that's better for my previous post.
I agree with all your comments but one. Let's go with demLeft, not demLite. There's nothing moderate about much of what the CRP supports these days IMO. About the only thing they don't support is the marxist ideology. Even then, when you see them taking a pass on the border issue which marxist groups support, you realize they're even supporting some of those issues by default.
That's the week. You never know with Ahrnold, the RINO, he may give illegals drivers license before the next election if it feathers HIS chances for re-election. What a worthless turd the pubbies went after. Any republican behind his reelection is not a republican.
LOL.. I will note that. ;-)
If the rest of the Ca GOP knew what was being done in their names without them knowing about it, both parties would be run out of office and town... and deservedly so.
I'd sure like to believe that.
"Frankly I'd rather see Tom challenge Arnold in a primary."
So ... which result of that would you prefer - Tom not become Lt. Gov ... or a Dem in the Gov. seat ?
"You never know with Ahrnold, the RINO, he may give illegals drivers license before the next election if it feathers HIS chances for re-election."
LOL - I get a kick out of those here that seem to be upset that Arnold rope-a-doped old one-bill Gil on that.
Tom win the governor's postion. Thanks for asking.
If I didn't know better I'd suspect you are a student of Professor Fo. Calssic!
I don't understand the reference, so you better lay it out a little clearer. Sorry. Thanks.
Or in this case, not taking an official position on immigration enforcement is supporting open boarders. A variation on the when good men do nothing theme.
Schwarzenegger is indeed enabling illegal immigration but no one need resort to what was not said to make the point. What was done, enforcing geopolitically anonymous enrollment in public education, emergency room admissions compliance standards, a promise for the eventual legalization of driving privileges for illegal aliens and the recent promotion of a huge, infrastructure, bonding package to meet the needs of California's rapidly expanding population, almost exclusively the result of illegal immigration.
I wouldn't necessarily disagree with your premise.
Look Schwarzenegger is a pinhead for not getting together with the other Governors in the southwest and demanding Bush get off his ass and do something. I fault him for that in no small measure, but it goes beyond that for me.
Schwarzenegger is not a well-grounded republican or conservative. The CRP leadership should be. It's those pinheads that I dispise. They are weak kneed idiots. The CRP should be gutted and a new party resurected in it's place.
I would stipulate that any office holding Republican from the prior organization should by default be banned from holding office again. Hell, I'd even go so far as to expel them from the party.
Bummer.
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.