Posted on 07/05/2007 12:01:32 PM PDT by calcowgirl
About six weeks ago, I published a column ["Arnold can't give us 'green' cement," also at FR] in a number of newspapers warning that the governor’s dueling promises to radically reduce carbon dioxide emissions while delivering a new era of public works comprised a public policy charade of breathtaking mendacity. Highways, dams and aqueducts require heavy construction equipment and prodigious amounts of concrete that in turn produce enormous amounts of carbon dioxide. I wrote:
“The governor is now on the horns of a dilemma of his own making. He must either confront the fact that AB 32 was an intellectually dishonest stunt or that his $40 billion of infrastructure bonds were a fraud. There is no third option.”
Last week, Gov. Schwarzenegger fired Dr. Robert Sawyer, his own appointee as chairman of the California Air Resources Board. The CARB’s longtime executive director, Catherine Witherspoon, resigned in protest yesterday. And they’re not going quietly into that good night.
CARB is the agency principally responsible for implementing the governor’s AB 32, and Sawyer and Witherspoon were taking that mandate seriously. And why shouldn’t they? According to the governor, this is the most important legislation of the century and the very survival of Planet Earth hangs in the balance.
But when Sawyer and Witherspoon actually tried to begin implementing AB 32 by imposing severe limitations on diesel construction equipment, the governor’s office bluntly warned them to back off, including a candid phone message that Sawyer saved. The state’s contractors have plainly warned the governor that enforcement of AB 32 would shut down most of their equipment.
Having spun his way into this fix, the governor couldn’t stop himself. The official reason he gave for firing Sawyer was that he just hadn’t been environmentally tough enough. Both Sawyer and Witherspoon have impeccable environmental credentials dating back to the days when the “Green Governor” was still hanging out at Gold’s Gym and his claim must be particularly galling to them and their supporters.
I think this controversy is going to continue for some time. Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez has scheduled public hearings in the Assembly starting on Friday, giving Sawyer, Witherspoon and the entire green establishment a high-visibility forum to air their grievances.
Don’t expect many Republicans to rise to the governor’s defense. Just three months ago during his East Coast environmental tour, he called any opponents of AB 32 “fanatics” and promised their political extinction.
The Greeks called it “hubris,” and in their classic tragedies it was the root cause of the fall of many a prince.
Mr. McClintock is an expert on matters of the State budget and fiscal discipline. He is a Senator in the California State Legislature and ran for Governor in the 2003 recall election. His valuable website is found at carepublic.com [McClintock index]
Why not. I'm all for it.
Why wait? He can't run again anyway.
Ahnold has lost his way since the special ballot election to vote on his three propositions. His propositions were right on. McClintock’s own analysis showed they were good proposals. However, leading up to the special ballot, instead of leading the conservative charge to kick out the unions and “blow up the boxes” as only Ahnold could do, he began backing down. In the televised debates, he refused to debate with the opposition. After his proposals lost, he’s instead joined the opposition and has been further and further off the track ever since. I hope he gets booted out ASAP.
Not that myth again, please. Arnold’s leftist turn took place long before the special election. Remember Prop 57/58? Or not supporting the Ward Connerly bill and calling folks “right wing crazies”? Or proposing the largest budget in State history? Or embracing Gray Davis’s other borrowing schemes?
As to the propositions, they did little to attack the real problems in state government. His so called “spending cap” authorized more borrowing and deferred expenditures, which would have enabled him to spend even more! The campaign was totally inept, attacking and insulting every group from which he needed support! His support of the parental notification initiative was mediocre, at best.
Arnold doesn’t have a conservative bone in his body. He’s a special-interest Kennedy tool that thrives on power, nothing more. He’s the same Arnold he was the day he was elected.
Reading those, you get the impression that Mr. Arnold sees himself as operating on a far larger stage...guess that nasty birth clause for president gets in his way...
We're not going to let that one pass either. The sign says: Revisionists Not Welcome.
Few were fooled by the Austrian. The Senator was not among that distinct minority.
He got permission from the speaker of the house...
He refers to California as a “nation state” and has said his job is to “prepare us for our global future.”
Whoever recruited this guy for office should be shipped to Gitmo.
I agree. And McClintock was put in an awkward spot... having to support supposedly "Republican" positions or get stomped on by the CRP. Unfortunately, they stomped on him anyway.:-(
I am happy to see that starting to crumble. Acknowledging the reality of the Trojan Horse is a tough, but important, first step.
Sorry, I can't seem to find that authority listed in my copy of the Constitution. Did the speaker happen to specify just which article grants her that authority?
yuk, yuk, yuk!
beware austrian weight lifters who want to save the world.
EXCELLENT!!
As always, thanks for the ping.
The Constitution? That old parchment serves merely as a guideline.
Pelosi's office could not be reached for comment.
My first question would be. How were those subjective conclusions expressed by the Senator?
My next question. When did the Senator offer his opine regarding the Governor's motives? Or his relative morality?
What special insights about morality and sincerity enable a professional, politician to judge the character of his brethren.
I did say that these were just my opinion. They were not derived from any specific words of the Senator. I believe that he did look for the positives within the agenda to be supportive (I think we saw that many times in word, and deed), and tried to be supportive of those items. I believe he was less skeptical than many of us, as evidenced by many of his same gestures. Do you not like to take a man at his word? It is *my opinion* that that is what Tom was trying to do.
As much as everyone tried to paint Tom as a rigid idealogue, he was much too pragmatic under the circumstances. Again—my opinion.
Thanks for the McClintock Pings!
Amen, Tom is a treasure and a man of integrity and courage, but I’m being redundant...
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.