Posted on 12/02/2008 9:34:59 AM PST by NormsRevenge
OC Republican Party Chairman Scott Baugh invited me to attend a small get-acquainted lunch on November 20 with Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner. As readers know, Poizner is already running hard for the Republican gubernatorial nomination in 2010.
This was the first time I had listened at any length to Poizner, and I came away with an overall positive impression. Poizner brings a number of strong qualities to his campaign: he's energetic, articulate, personable and has a sense of humor. And let's face it: his ability to self-fund from his personal fortune is a tremendous asset for a Republican in a state where TV ad campaigns are hugely expensive, and Republicans lack the ground-troop infrastructure that unions provide for Democratic candidates. The biggest issue in the 2010 is going to be the economy and the budget. They aren't separate issues: budgetary health ultimately depends on economic growth. The liberal mantra that "we can't cut our way out of the deficit" is only true in so far as liberal tax-and-regulatory policies retard prosperity.
Poizner is well positioned vis-a-vis any of the Democratic contenders: he's a built successful businesses, created job and pioneered technological innovation. He now runs a large state agency. None of the Democratic contenders bring that kind of private sector experience to the game. It allows Poizner to more talk to voters about the economic realities that Sacramento liberals seem genetically incapable of grasping: Our neighboring states are far-more business friendly, and California become increasingly uncompetitive as a business location if we continue along the Democratic-Schwarzenegger road to economic stagnation. Poizner understands that the ever-changing nature of the state's tax-and-regulatory policies, in addition to the sheer weight of that yoke, that is a drag on the economic growth.
The lunch consisted primarily with Poizner telling us his story and a broad outline of why he's running and what he wants to accomplish. I'm sure it's the same spiel he's given a hundreds times already. it's good, but very general . I was impressed, but if someone asked me afterward what specifically Poizner would do as Governor, I'd be hard pressed to offer more than generalities like "fight to cut taxes."
A couple of things about the lunch really stood out for me, one good and one not-so-good.
Contract With California-Style Campaign On the plus side, Poinzer said his plan is to campaign from the start on a finite, specific agenda of policies he will pursue as Governor --- something he can point to and tell voters: "If you like these policies and think they'll help California, then vote for me. If you don't, then vote for the other guy."
That may sound elementary, but most candidates run on shifting generalities, because specifics invite attacks and limit a candidate's wiggle room. Poizner's approach promises the possibility of real debate, and by getting out early with a defined agenda -- and the means to communicate it -- gives him an advantage in framing the debate.
Progressive Taxation The negative side was related to taxes. I was getting a little frustrated with the Q & A portion of the luncheon: it was too much of attendees telling the candidate what they thought about him, rather than trying to elicit specifics from the stump spiel.
So I piped up and asked Poizner for specifics on how he would reform the code: Would he cut taxes? Flatten the income tax? Make it more broad-based?
Poizner said we need to lower tax rates because they hurt the economy, but then added there would still be progressivity because he "thought the wealthy should pay more" and those less well-off should pay less -- a sentiment that a chill down my conservative spine.
"Let me challenge you on that and push back a little," I said, pointing out that if we concede the philosophical legitimacy of progressive taxation, then we are fighting on liberal, not conservative terrain -- and forcing us to constantly fight a rear guard action against raising rates.
Poizner didn't dispute or accept my point, but added that he supports lower, flatter rates as part of achieving the ultimate goal of a flat tax (which I favor, if readers hadn't figured that out yet).
That exchange left me unsure of what to think. Judging by his words, Steve Poizner accepts the principle behind progressive taxation -- which leaves us haggling with liberals over price. I'm willing to accept a degree progressivity as a trade-off in order to lower tax rates, but as a compromise that doesn't concede the validity of progressive taxation. That's what President Reagan accomplished with his 1986 tax reform that left us with a two-rate system that lowered the top rate from 50% to 28%.
This sticking point aside, Steve Poizner clearly understands what ails California's economy and budget. I'd like the opportunity to interview him in more depth regarding more specific solutions, but judging from his experience, rhetoric, record and what I've learned of his general political principles, I believe Poizner would prescribe the correct medicine.
Competitive Primary? At one point, the topic turned to the the composition of the GOP gubernatorial field. Poizner ticked off the names of his potential rivals -- Meg Whitman, Tom Campbell, Carly Fiorina -- but expressed the hope they may decide not to run and he'd have an unobstructed run during the primary, a sentiment seconded by Scott Baugh.
I understand where they are coming from, but I think an unopposed primary is a bad idea, both for Poizner and the California Republican Party.
We tried that in 1998, when anyone even thinking of challenging Attorney General Dan Lungren was strongly discouraged from doing so. Meanwhile, the Democrats were engaged in a ferocious gubernatorial primary between Al Checchi (remember him?), Rep. Jane Harman and Lt. Governor Gray Davis. The conventional wisdom was Lungren could husband his strength and be better positioned to defeat the scarred victry of the bloody Democratic primary.
Instead, the flabby, untested Lungren campaign never found its footing and was crushed by Davis be almost 20 points.
Poizner will be a better general election candidate if he defeats credible, well-funded challengers in the primary. It will bring out his strengths and weaknesses as a candidate in the spring, rather than the fall. And it's not as if he's going to run out of money due to an expensive primary.
Plus, California Republicans would benefit from a rough-and-tumble contest in which issues and ideas were debated and hashed out.
A long, tough primary didn't hurt Gray Davis in 1998, and it didn't hurt Barack Obama in 2008.
All in all, I came away generally impressed with Steve Poizner, but wanting more details about his proposed policy agenda, the philosophy behind it and how he arrived at that philosophy.
Poizner said we need to lower tax rates because they hurt the economy, but then added there would still be progressivity because he "thought the wealthy should pay more" and those less well-off should pay less -- a sentiment that a chill down my conservative spine.
"Let me challenge you on that and push back a little," I said, pointing out that if we concede the philosophical legitimacy of progressive taxation, then we are fighting on liberal, not conservative terrain -- and forcing us to constantly fight a rear guard action against raising rates.
Poizner didn't dispute or accept my point, but added that he supports lower, flatter rates as part of achieving the ultimate goal of a flat tax (which I favor, if readers hadn't figured that out yet).
--
Some choices sane folk in California have these days, huh?
The best thing may be just to liquidate your assets and get the hell out, about the only real Hope or Change on the horizon in either party.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Just as you say, we have few options.
McClintock ran two good, and good-humored, campaigns for statewide office, Lt. Governor in 2006 and, I think, Controller before that. He didn’t try to run as a “centrist,” but he was bashed as OMG HE OPPOSES ABORTION and lost both.
My “option” may be to move to Georgia or South Carolina in the next few years ...
Poisoner, go away RINO.
“his ability to self-fund from his personal fortune is a tremendous asset” Why is it that Rich Republicans (that run for office) are usually liberals??
Isn’t there a good Conservative (PREFERABLY-Christian) Businessman out there that can fund the grass-roots to “root-out” our RINO-Moderates??
PLEASE!!..
How's that worked out so far?
So it may be a Re-Deux of the Presidential election, huh?
Alaska and British Columbia are high on my list. The poodle can grow a nice coat of fur in no time. Wifey can just bundle up. as long as she can get qvc and home shopping , she’ll adjust just fine. ;-)
One initiative we must get accomplished is not to count illegal aliens in census. Our census will count everyone unfortunately illegal aliens. When we write the districts it should count population of legal residents and citizens, not include illegal aliens. This would help us gain a couple seats in the state senate and state assembly. Otherwise California is a beautiful place to live except the politics. Have been to other places and no other place like San Diego. Cant find beaches in Idaho.
Poizner was a pioneer in cell phone tracking, for commercial gain, and digital mapping of personal habits, again for commercial gain.
So, if you every wondered how Best Buy knew where you were before you shopped at their store and where you went after you shopped, thank Poizner.
Egads! With that line up, Poizner might actually qualify as the "most conservative" (despite being a lib!) I guess we are well on our way to creating Duf's vison of the "Purple Party."
A ficus plant would do a better job than Ah-nold. Off-White Davis did a better job than Ah-nold.
Agreed. But isn’t it sad that we now drop to the “better than Arnold” measurement?
Yup. In a sane world, Tom McClintock would be the Governor (and President-elect ;-)) and passing off the office to someone like Duncan Hunter.
Norm, can I digress here on the use of the word “weinie”? I think it is a derivative of “Wiener” which means from Vienna, thus Vienna sausages and wieners. The dictionary gives “weenie” and “weeny” as meaning the same. I think if we are going to call somebody a name, “weenie” would be the best spelling, because it also implies “small” as well as “like a sausage”. But I am always amused by the people who advertise “wiener pigs” and “weiner pigs” with handmade roadside signs. The correct spelling would be “weaner” pigs, meaning they had been weaned. And then I see that “weaner” is also a term for a Anglo person trying to be a Mexican, meaning a “wannabe beaner”. Maybe we should ask Michael Savage.
No problem. I’ll oui-nee out and note your digression. :-)
That's all I need to say.
-PJ
Touche’ Good one BTW!
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.