Posted on 10/25/2006 10:31:01 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
The governorship of Arnold Schwarzenegger has been like a three-act play, making it challenging for California voters to figure out exactly who he is politically or what a re-election victory on Nov. 7 would portend for the next four years.
Elected in the October 2003 recall of Democratic Gov. Gray Davis, the Republican action-movie star took office intent on “cleaning house” in Sacramento and “blowing up boxes” in the state bureaucracy.
But he also showed a willingness to collaborate with the Democratic-controlled Legislature to pay down what was then a $21 billion state budget deficit and overhaul a costly workers' compensation system.
In 2005, Schwarzenegger morphed into a strident partisan. He railed against Democratic legislators and public employee “union bosses” and called a special election for a four-part “reform agenda” that voters soundly rejected.
Chastened after that shellacking, he vowed to work with the Legislature to the point of embracing Democratic proposals such as raising the minimum wage, offering discount prescription drugs and curbing greenhouse gases – some of which he had earlier vetoed.
Yesterday: When Phil Angelides took over as state treasurer in 1999, he targeted investments not only to make California money but to achieve social goals, as well.
“The thing that makes assessing the Schwarzenegger administration really interesting and really frustrating is that more than any other governor since Jerry Brown, he is still an enigma,” said Tim Hodson, director of the Center for California Studies at California State University Sacramento. “There are clearly some consistent philosophical beliefs, but we've had at least three different governors since 2003.”
Voters plainly prefer the current incarnation over last year's.
Schwarzenegger holds a double-digit lead over his Democratic opponent, state Treasurer Phil Angelides, despite what many believe is shaping up as a Democratic rout nationally.
Voter opinion about Schwarzenegger's performance has shifted as wildly as his governing style.
In the fall of 2004, the Field Poll showed that 65 percent of the state's voters approved of the job he was doing. His approval rating dropped to 36 percent in the fall of 2005 but had climbed back to a respectable 48 percent as of late last month.
That leads most analysts to conclude that Schwarzenegger has settled on a governing style that suits him – one that would continue into a second term.
“He's a smart guy,” said Jack Pitney, a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College. “He knows that when you have a flop, you don't repeat it. When you have a hit, you do a sequel.”
Schwarzenegger is not a career politician and has scant options should he desire to become one. The Austrian immigrant is constitutionally barred from running for president. And he would seem temperamentally unsuited to the U.S. Senate because his impatience with the legislative process led to the biggest blunder of his governorship – the 2005 special election.
“I think he wants to build a legacy, and that dictates a more serious persona,” said Barbara O'Connor, director of the Institute for the Study of Politics and Media at Sacramento State. O'Connor noted that Schwarzenegger has mostly chucked the publicity stunts and overused movie lines that characterized his first two years in office.
“We don't get the movie lines because I think he's carving out a new him, which is the deal maker,” she said. “You can't be a caricature of yourself and be a deal maker. You have to listen and negotiate and be taken seriously.”
Schwarzenegger's attempt to overhaul state government and its politics through the initiative process was met with resistance from Democrats and public employee unions. It didn't set many Republicans' hearts aflutter, either.
Teachers, nurses, firefighters and police officers protested outside the governor's events, often in such numbers that Schwarzenegger had to slip in through a back door or garage.
“The kind of barnstorming that got him elected didn't sell so well in the second year when he had a determined enemy who could fight back,” said Jaime Regalado, director of the Edmund G. “Pat” Brown Institute of Public Affairs at California State University Los Angeles.
Former state Senate President Pro Tempore John Burton chalked up the special election to naiveté driven by Schwarzenegger's impatience.
“I think he probably did realize, as most people who have never gotten elected to something, that you can't do it all yourself,” the San Francisco Democrat said. “He took it in the shorts.”
Schwarzenegger has issued several public mea culpas for the special election, most recently in this month's debate with Angelides, when he was asked to identify his biggest mistake in office.
“I went too fast,” he said. “I decided that if the legislators don't agree with me in the first two months that I would go to the people.”
The governor recently indicated that the bipartisan cooperation that marked this year would continue if he wins a second term.
“I think we are on to something where we start trusting each other enough that we can do many more things together rather than fighting each other all the time,” he said in an Oct. 12 interview with The San Diego Union-Tribune's editorial board.
Schwarzenegger hails his three-year record as adding up to nothing less than rescuing California from the depths of economic despair. He touts that California has gained more than 600,000 jobs on his watch.
By his reckoning, when he overturned the tripling of the motor vehicle license fee on his first day in office, he pumped $12 billion into the state's economy. Cutting workers' compensation was worth another $11 billion.
“That's $23 billion we put back in the private sector,” he said. “That is what stimulates the economy. That is what created the 635,000 jobs, that $23 billion in additional revenue.”
Schwarzenegger's self-portrayal as the “incredible job-creating machine” doesn't stand up to scrutiny, said economist Edward Leamer, director of the UCLA Anderson Forecast.
Leamer said the governor is correct that California has gained more than 600,000 jobs over the past three years, but he said that represents nothing more than the state's share of a growing national economy.
“We grade on a curve,” the economist said. “We want to know if California is doing well as compared to the rest of the nation.”
By that standard, he said, California's job growth as a percentage of the national economy was slightly better under Davis than under Schwarzenegger.
Schwarzenegger also claims to have reversed the job hemorrhaging he contends occurred during Davis' time in office. “Businesses were fleeing the state,” he said during the debate with Angelides. “People were losing jobs right and left.”
That, too, is fiction, Leamer argued.
“There's no doubt that there are anecdotes about people leaving,” he said. “But offsetting that are expansion of companies here and companies moving here. The reality is California is doing OK. Sacramento can take credit that they haven't screwed it up, but they can't take credit for the relative behavior of the California economy as part of the national economy.” Schwarzenegger took office determined to tame a massive state government bureaucracy.
“Every governor proposes moving boxes around to reorganize state government,” he said in his 2004 State of the State address. “I don't want to move boxes around. I want to blow them up.”
With that, he launched the California Performance Review – a commission that solicited ideas from state employees and experts on how to streamline government.
It produced a report containing 1,200 recommendations for saving money and improving services, including the elimination of one-third of the state's boards and commissions.
Nothing really happened.
“The boxes proved to be pretty darned sturdy,” said Claremont McKenna's Pitney. “He learned the lessons that would-be reformers have been learning for decades, which is that people become comfortable with existing bureaucracies and it's hard to change those structures. Just about every agency and every bit of red tape is there because there's somebody who wants it there.”
In a highly partisan political landscape populated predominantly by ideologically rigid liberals and conservatives, Schwarzenegger is an anomaly.
“He's consistently moderate to liberal on social issues,” Pitney said. “He's held the line on taxes. While he talked about restructuring government, he never talked about massive reductions in its size the way a lot of conservatives would have liked.”
In his first State of the State address, Schwarzenegger declared: “We do not have a budget crisis; we have a spending crisis.”
Although the $21 billion budget deficit he inherited has been slashed to $5 billion, that owes more to massive borrowing and an unanticipated tax windfall than fiscal discipline.
Schwarzenegger trumpeted reduction of the deficit as “an extraordinary accomplishment” to the Union-Tribune editorial board. Still, there are automatic formulas that drive state spending at a faster clip than normal revenue – the structural deficit.
If Schwarzenegger has a plan for eliminating the remaining deficit, it seems to be “let the good times roll.”
“There is no reason why we cannot continue on with that same momentum and wipe out that structural deficit,” he said.
For that, he is chided not only by Angelides, but by the state's nonpartisan Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill.
“Five billion dollars in the state context is still a lot of money,” Hill said. “It's more than we spend on the University of California. It's more than we spent on the state universities.”
Occupation: California governor
Age: 59
Hometown: Thal, Austria
Residence: Brentwood
Education: Bachelor's degree, University of Wisconsin-Superior
Political/government career: California governor, 2003-present; chairman, President's Council on Physical Fitness, 1990-92
Professional career: Bodybuilder; actor
Family: Wife, Maria Shriver; four children
Just a little mid-morning work-out post for the aRnoids..
--
“He's consistently moderate to liberal on social issues,” Pitney said. “He's held the line on taxes. While he talked about restructuring government, he never talked about massive reductions in its size the way a lot of conservatives would have liked.”
In his first State of the State address, Schwarzenegger declared: “We do not have a budget crisis; we have a spending crisis.”
Although the $21 billion budget deficit he inherited has been slashed to $5 billion, that owes more to massive borrowing and an unanticipated tax windfall than fiscal discipline.
Schwarzenegger trumpeted reduction of the deficit as “an extraordinary accomplishment” to the Union-Tribune editorial board. Still, there are automatic formulas that drive state spending at a faster clip than normal revenue – the structural deficit.
If Schwarzenegger has a plan for eliminating the remaining deficit, it seems to be “let the good times roll.”
Arnold Schwarzenegger Party: Republican
Occupation: California governor
Age: 59
Hometown: Thal, Austria
Residence: Brentwood
Education: Bachelor's degree, University of Wisconsin-Superior
Political/government career: California governor, 2003-present; chairman, President's Council on Physical Fitness, 1990-92
Professional career: Bodybuilder; actor
Family: Wife, Maria Shriver; four children
Professional status: Girly-man
I've had about as much of the Schwartz as I can take. I am voting Republican on the entire ticket but voting for the Libertarian in protest. I am not usually an advocate of this behavior (not aligned with the cut and run conservatives usually). BUT I've finally had it with this buffoon. Not that Angelides is not the devil incarnate, but Arnold has completely lost my respect -- and I voted for him in the recall election.
I am voting primarily to elect McClintock and defeat a bevy of terrible propositions. I have never seen in my life a politician so opposed and insulting to his base. Never.
In his first State of the State address, Schwarzenegger declared: “We do not have a budget crisis; we have a spending crisis.”
-----
This is very true. California is suffering from a MAJOR LIBERAL SPENDING CRISIS. The problem is that even Arnie will not stop spending....
Just a little mid-morning work-out post for the aRnoids..
--
If you consider Jim Robinson, Tom McClintock, Ben Stein, & Sean Hannity "aRnoids", please count me in.
A poster was booted from FR last night for promoting Angelides, which is EXACTLY what you're doing with your name calling.
Pay down?
By his reckoning, when he overturned the tripling of the motor vehicle license fee on his first day in office, he pumped $12 billion into the state's economy. Cutting workers' compensation was worth another $11 billion. “That's $23 billion we put back in the private sector,” he said. “That is what stimulates the economy. That is what created the 635,000 jobs, that $23 billion in additional revenue.”
The PR folks are getting more creative every day!
Saturday's episode of reinvention was particularly revealing.
With one, flippant, callous, sinister statement the Austrian branded a fellow immigrant a hate monger and characterized the rumored allegations a criminal act, effectively shattering the dreams of an innocent citizen, illegally ending his campaign at its peak. And all for a small political gain in the immediate future. I'm sure that the list of public figures above would instantly evaporate into the mist if the doodlelady account championed that magic moment of reinvention.
A poster was booted from FR last night for ... what you're doing.
In a game of high stakes poker it's said that "You should know when to hold em, when to show em and when to ..."
I'd suggest folding while the shirt is still on .....
You just love putting words in other people's mouth's don't you?
Nothing but dissing comments, and always claiming that the "ilk" are to blame and working against the GOP in this state.
FRankly, the Ca GOP is on life support and even if it wins a handful of offices , it won't be because of the candidates, No , it will all be credited to aRnie, after all , it is all about aRnie and always has been.
If saying that is now considered sacrilege at FR, then ban my ass cuz I am sick of this acid test pronouncement by some around here of late that if you don't like the GUb , you're a dem..
For christ sake, do you actually know how much dem support he has had and will continue to have, but that doesn't matter to a few focused folks here... that spending has continued unabated and victories on some social issues were still achieved and even proposed by a Gub with an R by his name hasn't disappointed most dems nor does the composition of his staff and advisors, oddly enough.
No, it's all about jabbing sticks at folks and badgering them with little snippets of previous posts, pretty petty stuff, imo.. More worthy of DU , imo..
If FR wants to be an official mouthpiece for the New Majority or the RMSP then let them say so openly but quit the pretense that we are obligated to toe any line around here or can expect to be excoriated for seeing things differently or at least being willing to research issues on our own and make our own calls.
None of us relish having another democRat in the gUb's office, but frankly, on far too many issues, there is little noticeable difference,, yet anyone here who voices concerns is made out as only working to get Philth elected..
I am sick and tired of the same old pap, the same old crap and the same looming deficits into the distant future and only more promises of large debt being offered as "solutions", all sanctioned these days by a bunch of folks here who seem to be able to turn their heads and look the other way on a heckuva lot of issues yet are only too willing to lambaste anyone who speaks up..
You have been one of the least respectful of many here qutie frankly, I hope you and others here are proud of your efforts to run down conservatives here, all to make a moderate out to be the 2nd coming.. of what , I know not,, certainly not Reagan.. if the grandstanding manner of governance is any indication of what we can expect for 4 more years and with a CA GOP country club elite as the new conscience of the party, then we will likely see 200
Billion dollars buidgets and 100 Billion debtloads.. all the fault of the ilk, of course.
A poster was booted from FR last night for promoting Angelides, which is EXACTLY what you're doing with your name calling.
---
You call that name-calling? Grow some skin, DL.
Too bad folks couldn't get booted as easily off of FR, a conservative forum, for campaigning and running pom pom acts for RINOs that spend like dems and go out of their way to take the base for granted while ushering in more gay and green appointments in his administration than ever by any leader in the state's history....
PS ,, Hope you didn't break a nail hitting the Abuse button last night on SFS. It might snag on your pom poms.
Twern't me, darlin.
Save the cheerlader, save the world.
Pssst, Normie, you and the rest of your ilk ain't conservatives. Mountaintoppers, maybe, but no force which could win a California election.
are you saying that as an old dem and extracting pleasure from saying it? or do you really think that little of the conservatives here at FR that you take every opportunity to snub them? and take more pleasure from that?
your history of posts speaks volumes as to how solid you are for the conservative agenda and how readliy willing you are to forsake it and criticize anyone who calls you or the Gub on it.
I do have a pretty low opinion of the ilk who would prefer marxist pigs over questionable republicans. That is ilk specialty.
lol.. that's OK, your opinion isn't worth much to most here anyway.
Besides if I wanted advice, you would be the last person I would go to for help with issues and how to vote on them, well, one of the last.
I'm voting straight McClintock. Oh yeah, you've had some differences of opinions with his. Or were those simple, harmless, tiny wedges you tried to drive? You know I think ilk are scum so your attempt to insult me caused no wound.
you don't like dissent, much less reasonable debate.. God forbid anyone have an independent thought.. or choose to examine issues rather than buy into what others say..
also, I find it more than a bit amazing and also amusing how Tom was pretty much called a selfish idiot only a couple years ago and now he is used as a shining example of how good conservatives should behave... just amazing.
Too bad , off the record and on the air waves, he is not a lockstepper like some here continue to be.
You're mistaken. Mistaken or deceitful, nothing new from the ilk.
and you are a waste of time discussing much of anything California issue-wise here at FR..
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.