Posted on 03/17/2006 10:58:00 AM PST by calcowgirl
SACRAMENTO – Hours after suffering a major election-year defeat by failing to put his ambitious public works bond on the June ballot, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger guaranteed that the entire package would be put before voters in November.
“We are going to have this year the infrastructure done. That I can guarantee you,” Schwarzenegger told a Capitol news conference yesterday. “We will have it done this year. We haven't been able to do it by June. But we will do it by November.”
As a deadline approached Wednesday night, marathon negotiations to place a $50 billion bond issue on the June 6 primary election ballot collapsed under the weight of multiple disputes between and within the major political parties and both houses of the Legislature.
“No one is going to leave the negotiation table,” Schwarzenegger insisted yesterday. “I see a great move forward. Like I say, everyone made a tremendous effort on this whole thing. I don't see a glass half empty, I see a glass half full.”
The Republican governor proposed the massive bond issue in his State of the State address in January to begin the work of repairing California's long-neglected roads, levees, schools and other public facilities. Despite polls showing Californians solidly supported the plan, he could not persuade the Legislature to approve it.
The emphasis on popular projects was also a means of attempting to restore some of his political luster, which was badly tarnished after voters soundly rejected his contentious “reform agenda” in the November special election.
A June bond issue, if approved by voters, would have given the governor a solid – and rare – accomplishment on which to run for re-election this year.
“It's a missed opportunity,” Jack Pitney, a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College, said of the bond deal's demise. “Had it gone through, he could begin to rebuild his image as a bipartisan problem-solver. He can still do that, but as the year wears on, partisan conflict will make that harder.”
A Democratic legislative leader voiced confidence yesterday that an agreement could be reached in time for the November ballot, but stopped well short of Schwarzenegger's guarantee that the package would go forward in its entirety.
State Sen. President Pro Tem Don Perata of Oakland said he was “very optimistic about our ability to get the job done.”
“Senate Democrats and I remain committed to giving voters a comprehensive bond measure that addresses the long overdue investments we need to make in transportation and schools,” he said.
Schwarzenegger praised the Assembly for approving $19.5 billion in school bonds and $4.15 billion levee bond late Wednesday, even though neither was passed by the Senate. He said those bills would serve as the basis for future negotiations for the November ballot.
“And now the rest will be done in these coming weeks,” he said. “We have to continue working.”
Assemblyman George Plescia, who will become the Assembly Republican leader next month, said something will have to get done quickly or not at all.
He noted that the Republicans' push for more reservoirs was by far the biggest sticking point in the negotiations and that the issue won't go away anytime soon.
“I think it will be a very difficult thing to address it and get a package on the November ballot,” the San Diego Republican said.
Plescia said supporters want more surface water storage not only for needs in the Central Valley, but for San Diego and other areas.
Schwarzenegger acknowledged the problem.
“This is an issue that almost became a religious issue,” he said. “That's amazing. It was like a holy war in some ways, because it was like people draw the line and they say we have to have water storage.”
Conservative Republicans were spooked from the outset by the $222 billion total price tag on Schwarzenegger's 10-year infrastructure package and the massive borrowing it would entail. The governor had wanted to place bonds totaling $68 billion before voters during elections through 2014. But Democratic legislators trimmed his proposal to a bond package totaling nearly $50 billion.
Steve Frank, a conservative blogger and longtime Republican activist, said the bond deal's collapse is a blessing in disguise for Schwarzenegger.
“This thing would have gone down to a glorious defeat in June,” Frank said. “And that protects him from another defeat like the special election defeat.”
Rather than charging ahead with his bond package, Frank said, Schwarzenegger needs to dramatically reshape it into something Republicans would find fiscally prudent.
The legislative defeat “keeps it off the table for a while so that they can come up with a real plan that satisfies the needs of Californians as well as the principles of the Republican Party,” Frank said.
Capitol watchers questioned whether the Legislature could revive the deal at all, given the loss of momentum combined with election-year politics.
“In Sacramento, the sense of urgency is what often compels them to do anything and the sense of urgency is now gone,” said Bruce Cain, director of the Institute of Governmental Studies at the University of California Berkeley.
Legislative Democrats may be reluctant to put something on the ballot – even if most of them want it – if it helps Schwarzenegger in his re-election campaign against either Democratic contender, state Treasurer Phil Angelides or state Controller Steve Westly.
“It's a much trickier political equation for Democrats in November,” said Republican strategist Dan Schnur. “There's a way to do it, but they need to figure out how to campaign for Arnold Schwarzenegger's bond package at the same time they're campaigning against Arnold Schwarzenegger.”
The governor voiced confidence that Democrats could put election-year politics aside.
“I don't see that Democrats are trying to work against me,” Schwarzenegger said. “I'm telling you that both parties wanted to make this place a better place.”
The collapse of the bond package also raised fresh doubts about the governor's leadership ability as he was unable to round up the votes of enough Republican legislators to close the deal.
Swept into office in the 2003 recall election, Schwarzenegger presided over a productive 2004 in which he brokered bipartisan deals that made progress in overcoming the state's chronic budget deficit and overhauled the worker's compensation system.
But despite Schwarzenegger's superstar status, his across-the-board defeat in last November's special election and the unraveling of his bond package showed he has yet to master the use of the formidable bully pulpit that comes with the governor's office.
“I don't think the infrastructure bonds per se are important,” said Republican political consultant Sal Russo. “They're important because he said they're important. You can set the agenda. But if you set the agenda and fail to achieve it, that hurts you.”
Keep making fun of Republicans and fiscal conservatism, Arnold. That will surely make you more popular with your supposed "base".
Why doesn't he just get it over with and register Democrat. I'm sure they would be happy to have him as their candidate for Governor.
Arnold is a DELUSIONAL girly man.
(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.")
(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.")
when was the last time government spent 220BILLION
and it the outcome was good?
(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 count on it Arnold. It was a throw away vote.
"For this reduced package, the Republican governor came up with the needed Republican votes in the Assembly, for the first time in this convoluted process. But with a twist, because by the time the Assembly voted, Republican members knew this latest plan was actually dead on arrival, making it a free vote to remove intense pressure to provide the governor with something for his re-election campaign."Actually, it was a gift Arnold. Take it for what it was worth (saving face), but don't count on it being a starting point.
--Source: Bill Bradley, LA Weekly
Put it on the ballot by all means. I won't be voting for it.
I can't believe that someone who ran on fixing our budget woes is now using a 222 billion dollar borrowing package to get re-elected.
This state is making me crazy.
There's nothing wrong with the concept, it's all in the details here and that's being hammered out. And better, it goes to the voters. This is what democracy is about.
I've never seen a socialist who was too conservative for the Democrats, here or anywhere else.
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-me-bond17mar17,0,6636387.story?coll=la-headlines-politics
Many Found Elements to Hate in Gov.'s Plan
Neither Democrats nor Republicans liked what they were hearing from Schwarzenegger before
talks stalled on the infrastructure project.
By Jordan Rau and Robert Salladay
March 17, 2006
For a few hours Wednesday night, it looked as though Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger had salvaged an improbable victory.
(snip)
Schwarzenegger had guided the talks in a Rashomon-like process involving individual meetings with the four leaders of the Legislature. One would depart the governor's suite only to find that his understanding of the deal on the table differed from that of his colleagues.
Time and again, the governor assured Democrats he could deliver Republican votes that never came. And the legislative chiefs proved incapable of crafting a deal on their own as they had under previous administrations.
(snip)
Rebuilding California's physical foundations was supposed to be the centerpiece of Schwarzenegger's political resurrection ... But it quickly became clear that the plan also included something to hate for everyone. The Assembly's Republicans, far more frugal than the governor from the same party, strongly objected to the amount of money Schwarzenegger wanted to borrow to pay for his program; it would cost taxpayers more than $3.7 billion a year to pay off.
Democrats, meanwhile, demanded billions more for their favored areas: mass transit, urban parks, affordable housing and hospitals.
(snip)
Still, Schwarzenegger was adamant about a June deal. "If we can't do this by Friday [March 10], we are all losers," he told the leaders at a joint meeting last week, according to two participants.
By Tuesday ...The fed-up leaders walked together to Schwarzenegger's office to say they wanted to start over, aiming for a smaller, less-divisive plan for the November ballot.
Schwarzenegger would have none of it. "He said flat out this was not acceptable," Perata said.
The administration tried to ratchet up the pressure on Republicans, asking donors and local activists to weigh in on Schwarzenegger's behalf. It didn't work.
By Wednesday night, the only thing the leaders could agree on was a $4.1-billion package to refurbish California's levees. Then the Assembly approved $19 billion in education bonds as well — violating that agreement, in the Senate's view. The chamber adjourned without taking action.
FYI -- more details.
Even the Democrats wanted a smaller package, but Arnold wanted to shoot for the moon.
We are a Republic, not a Democracy. Next you'll be chanting the SDS Mantra of "Let the People Decide".
SACRAMENTO — Differences between the Assembly and Senate, Republicans and Democrats, California’s seemingly endless water wars — even the governor’s appetite for political extravaganzas — contributed to the failure to put a public works bond measure on the June ballot.
“The basic problem was the issue was a very large one,” Senate Minority Leader Dick Ackerman, R-Tustin, said Thursday. “We were unable to come together on all of the parts in time to make it for the June ballot.”
Negotiations on a record-setting bond measure that would have generated about $50 billion for highways, mass transit, flood control, schools, parks, affordable housing and other public works projects stalled Wednesday as time ran out to qualify the proposal for the June 6 ballot.
The Assembly tried to salvage at least part of that package, approving a $19.5 billion school and university bond measure and a $4.15 billion flood control bond bill Wednesday night.
But the Senate didn’t take up either of those measures, approving only a $1 billion supplemental appropriation for flood control.
Senate leaders said they still wanted to try to get a broader multi-subject “megabond” on the November ballot.
“We just think it is wiser that Californians have a comprehensive (bond) plan before them to improve their lives ...,” Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, said Wednesday after the Senate adjourned for the week.
“You start breaking this thing apart and it once again looks to the voters of California like we don’t know what we’re doing.”
But Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, said lawmakers and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger might have to rethink the idea of trying to put one huge bond on the November ballot.
“We have been here for two weeks, three weeks, trying to close the final deal on the megabond, turning the screws, getting to the last 5 percent to shut it down, but it’s tough to do that,” he said late Wednesday night. “At this point, we’re going to have to re-evaluate whether the megabond concept is the right way to go. I could not get a single Republican vote on a megabond package even after we had agreement with the governor.”
Democrats have majorities in both houses of the Legislature, but they need some Republican votes — at least two in the Senate and six in the Assembly — to put together the two-thirds majorities required to pass bond measures.
Schwarzenegger initially proposed a $68 billion bond package to help pay for a 10-year, $222.6 billion spending plan, which would have been the most ambitious effort to rebuild California’s infrastructure since the 1960s.
“I set my goals high,” he told reporters Thursday.
But lawmakers balked at approving that much in bonds, saying it would generate too much in state debt.
Schwarzenegger agreed to reduce the amount of bonds and drop some of the projects he favored — money for prison, jail and courthouse construction. He also agreed to add funding for parks, mass transit and affordable housing, projects favored by Democrats.
But Ackerman said that even with a smaller bond package of around $50 billion, there were still too many “moving parts” to get an overall agreement in time to make the June ballot.
The key stumbling block preventing a bond deal was a dispute over funding for new reservoirs, something that has become almost a “religious issue” for Republican lawmakers, Schwarzenegger said.
“It was amazing,” he said. “It was almost a holy war, something they have been fighting for a long time.”
Republicans wanted the bond measure to include about $1.3 billion for reservoirs. Democrats offered $500 million for reservoirs plus another $500 million for additional underground water storage.
Most Democrats and environmentalists say there are environmental problems with each of the five reservoir projects in California under consideration by the state and federal governments.
Ackerman said the reservoir debate developed late in the bond negotiations and “became more and more important (as) more and more of the water community got involved.”
He said there also were differences between the two parties and the two houses over how much in bond funds to allocate for what he described as traditional “bricks and mortar” infrastructure — highways and levees, for example — versus programs such as park acquisitions, mass transit, coastal cleanup efforts and affordable housing.
Nunez said he knew the Senate wouldn’t vote on the school bond measure the Assembly approved Wednesday night, but he thought the Senate would take a vote on the $4.15 billion flood control bond.
He said that “in no way, shape or form” was he trying to pressure the Senate to approve the school bonds.
“We told the Senate we wanted to take up the levees, and we also wanted to take up the bill for education,” he said. “It wasn’t like we surprised the Senate.”
Instead, the Senate caught the Assembly by surprise by approving a $1 billion appropriation bill to pay for emergency levee repairs, Nunez said. He said he hadn’t looked at the measure and couldn’t predict if it would pass his house.
Perata said there was “some dispute over language” in the flood-control bond bill and that he and Ackerman decided just to ask the Senate to approve the appropriation bill.
“We wanted to make sure that because we did not meet the June deadline on our bond proposals, that we do not fail to meet our responsibilities on the levees,” Perata said Wednesday night. “We have taken care of that this evening.”
Schwarzenegger said he was confident he could put together a bond deal in time to get it on the November ballot, although he agreed it wouldn’t be easy.
“I did not come to Sacramento expecting things to be done easily,” he said. “If I wanted things to be done easily I would have stayed on the movie set ... (with) people telling me I’m the greatest.”
But Ackerman predicted lawmakers and the governor will need to reach an agreement before state budget negotiations and election campaigns take precedent.
“We just sort of put an artificial deadline on ourselves,” he said. “If we’re going to get it done, we need to get it done in the next few weeks. Otherwise, there are these outside distractions.”
(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.")
(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.")
Governor Arnold, 2005 state of the state address
{snicker}
That's our Arnold. :-/
(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.")
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.