Posted on 10/14/2006 8:32:12 PM PDT by calcowgirl
Tom McClintock visited our editorial board and delivered a devastating analysis of the infrastructure bonds that changed my vote on 1B. (I was already opposed to 1C and 1D.) He noted that historically bonds were used to pay for major projects that last for at least a generation, under the theory that if it takes 30 years to pay off, the people here in 30 years should still be benefiting from it. He said that argument was crucial to rationalizing passing bonds, since, with interest costs, they end up costing $2 for every $1 spent.
But McClintock said the highway-transit bond (1B); the education construction bond (1C); and the affordable housing bond (1D) were so badly written by the Legislature that less than half of the money in each actually goes to projects that will last a generation. Instead, a majority of the money goes to ongoing program costs, routine maintenance, etc. Which, as he notes, is ridiculous, given that bonds are the "most expensive way we can possibly finance" government operations.
The slim bit of good news is that the levee bond (1E) is about 75 percent devoted to projects that will last a generation. McClintock backs it as a result.
He provided an, oh, infinitely more accurate and honest look at the infrastructure bonds than we got from Arnold yesterday when he visited the U-T editorial board. The governor went on and on about how he was the one who was finally and gloriously rebuilding California. He bristled when I questioned him on spending and budgets and compared some of his practices to Gray Davis'. But on the bonds, as on the budget, he's not remotely the fiscal conservative he pretends to be.
Love it!
Arnold has a 51% Approval rating while the Legislature has a 63% Disapproval rating.
1% more trust NEITHER (39%) Arnold or the Legislature to make the "tough choices" on the budget than trust Arnold (38%) while only 21% trust the Legislature.
We really needed to scrap the current legislature, redraw the districts and try to bring it back from the abyss of Reconquista socialism.
Different topic... but we need to get some of this judge info over on your voter guide thread (see the comments also):
http://www.flashreport.org/blog0a.php?postID=2006101314115045&authID=2005091915442370
No on Kennard
No on Connell
Thank you for the hot new polling data. I wouldn't put much stock in the absolute percentages, since if you look at the Datamar report it turns out that it's a robo-poll and the mix of people polled (e.g., Republicans vs. Democrats, men vs. women, etc.) is not necessarily representative. Datamar says that it re-weights the results, but that can introduce it's own uncertainties: We aren't looking so much at survey results as at the "secret weighting sauce" which Datamar uses.
Having said that, I give it considerably more credence as a tracking poll. Assuming that the demographic mix and subsequent weightings are consistent, then the movement from September to October is very informative. Obviously the big tax measures are losing ground (great news!) and at least some of the big bond measures are in trouble (more great news). Prop 90 (eminent domain reform) is losing a bit of ground, and I suspect will end up as a nail-biter on election night. The campaign finance measure is so far behind, regardless of my doubts over Datamar's absolute accuracy, that it has zero chance of passing (more great news).
All in all, a fairly encouraging poll.
The slip in Prop 85 is disturbing.
You must not have heard Tom on the John Ziegler show last week.
His support of Arnold is real.
BTTT
It's sad to think that a guy as smart as Tom may not get to where he should be because he's cross-eyed.
HOME RUN BUMP!!!
Who wants taxes on time payments with high interst, on top of current taxes anyways???
Hay! Stand by with that bashing bilge and name calling!! It's getting entirely too juvenile!!! I'll take tubebender's attitude and politics over your's any day of the week!!! (and that goes for your terminally divisive UnFairOpinion buddy, too)
I was always taught that money for maintenance of roads nationwide came from gasoline taxes. Ergo: You use the gas to drive on the road, you are paying for the maintenance. Also, large vehicles pay extra for weight fees, which is supposed to be halping to pay for roads that their extra weight beats up.
Former Governor (???) Gray Davis raided the highway funds more than once. Even with reduced driving due to the price of gasoline, the road funds accounts should have more money in them. Counties are also guilty of raiding their road funds for social programs.
I am not sure where the money got spent in California under Davis, as it went into the General Fund and he left a few IOU's. Pensions that have been over the top and politicians per diems come to mind.
No one could spend more money more unwisely that Jerry Brown and Gray Davis. Now it has come home to roost in California.
Wish McKlintock would make a larger presentation including these facts.
I'll stand by Tom McClintock, thank you.
Works for me!!!
I pretty much agree with your assessment.
The polls give some indicators but are far from conclusive.
There are some positive signs though!
No surprises here...
btt
Thank you!
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.