California budget negotiations hit a new snag (Senate Republicans oust their leader!)

LAT ^ | Feb. 18, 2009 | Eric Bailey and Patrick McGreevy

[americanophile]

Reporting from Sacramento -- As California's government continued its grinding downshift toward insolvency, efforts to close the state's nearly $42-billion budget gap hit a new snag late Tuesday as Republicans in the state Senate ousted their leader.

Around 11 p.m., a group of GOP senators, unhappy with the higher taxes that Senate leader Dave Cogdill of Modesto agreed to as part of a deal with the governor and Democrats, voted to replace him in a private caucus meeting in Cogdill's office. Shortly before midnight, it was still unclear who would replace him. Cogdill's ouster could be a major setback to budget negotiations. Cogdill was a lead negotiator on the budget package and had committed to voting for it. If he were removed from his leadership post, a new Senate minority leader would likely try to renegotiate the deal, which lawmakers spent three months forging.

Meanwhile, the Senate remained deadlocked after hours of debate, still without the final Republican vote required to achieve the two-thirds majority for approval of more than $14 billion in new taxes.

The frenetic day had begun with legislators carting sleeping bags, pillows and suitcases to work. Sen. Ron Calderon (D-Montebello) brought a bottle of cologne. Republican Sen. Sam Aanestad, an oral surgeon from Grass Valley, passed out toothbrushes. Cots were ordered from the state Office of Emergency Services....

[Impy]

Oh right that was a ballot initiative wasn’t it. Than goodness for that.

[calcowgirl]

What? No jet lag? LOL.

As to the Assembly, yeah, there were 3 early defectors. Villines and 2 others... I forget who.

[calcowgirl]

They keep trying to change it to 50, or 55%. Even Arnie pushes for that when he can’t get those “radical right wingers” to go along. The same mantra is used for pushing open primaries — you know, the method to ensure that no conservative ever gets elected.

Sheesh... I’m really beginning to despise these folks.

[calcowgirl]

3:40AM Still nuttin’ in the Senate.

Another thread was started with the AP article:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2188171/posts
Calif. Republicans Oust Leader Amid Budget Talks

[Impy]

The “top two system”? Is Arnie for that too? (bring back Gray Davis!). That **** is unconstitutional in my opinion.

[blueplum]

thanks - i’m sitting here trying to figure out how many homes were sold in the past 5 years, divided by 14billion in new taxes, but my calculator doesn’t have enough zeros! my head hurts lol

[calcowgirl]

Yeah, I believe it is the top-two system. Tom Campbell, who is running for Gubbie in 2010 is also a big proponent (along with going to a national popular vote for national elections). Doncha love these pubbies? LOL

‘Open primary’ may be headed to 2010 ballot
Capitol Weekly ^ | 12/16/08 | John Howard
Posted on Tuesday, December 16, 2008 4:48:20 PM by NormsRevenge

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Wednesday plans to discuss his goals for political reform that may include a push to change California's primary election laws.

The governor and those close to him who helped spearhead the recent change in the state's redistricting laws are expected to voice suport for open primaries, which would allow voters to cast primary ballots for any candidate, regardless of partisan affiliation. A ballot initiative could be before voters by 2010, perhaps even earlier, to change the state's primary laws.

Schwarzenegger has already signaled his support of an open primary. That issue - and others - are expected to be covered Wednesday by the governor in a public briefing on political reform.

"He (the governor) believes we need to have a robust debate about that and other political issues," said Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron McLear. "You can anticipate that, as he has through his governorship, he will continue to push for political reform."

One view of the partisan paralysis gripping the California Legislature is that it could be eased by embracing open primary elections, in which voters can cast ballots for any candidate regardless of party affiliation. The notion is not new - some 13 states already have open primaries and 20 more have variants, and California had open primaries in 1998, before its law was thrown out by the courts. But reformers, the governor and others now see open primaries in California as a possible answer to a Capitol frozen in partisan gridlock.

(snip)

[Drago]

Just sent a scathing e-mail to Mr. Villines...indicating my unhappiness with his commitment to vote “yes” on $14 billion in new taxes. I also suggested he join Mr. Cogdill and step down as Assembly GOP leader!
Not happy!

[calcowgirl]

I’m still trying to get used to the word “quadrillion.” ;-)

[calcowgirl]

I remembered the other two Republicans in the Assembly that are said to be voting for this:
Roger Niello (Fair Oaks) and Anthony Adams (Hesperia).

[Drago]

I’m still trying to get used to the word “quadrillion.” ;-)

I am still trying to wrap my head around this one:

"...if we started spending $1 Million the day Jesus Christ was born, and spent $1 Million every day since then, we still would have not spent $1 Trillion!"

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2178687/posts

[calcowgirl]

4AM update

They recessed at 1:15AM and all Senators were told they were on call and not to leave the building.

Since then, no action. I hope our guys are taking a good nap.

I wonder if Dems heads exploded with the Cogdill/Hollingsworth news. (Ahhh... to be a fly on the wall).

[calcowgirl]

I’ve seen something like that before.
The numbers they are throwing around (and dollars they are wasting)
is really quite phenomenal when put in perspective.

[calex59]

Personally, I think this one deserves consideration: If you had a measly 1 billion dollars and never received any interest on it, you could spend one million dollars per year for 1000 years before you ran out of money. The Trillion is even more startling but we used to only work with billions.

I remember back in the late 1950s when I was just starting to really get interested in politics there was a budget meeting, with a Democrat Senator giving an account(this was in the paper, BTW)of expenditures. One Republican kept asking for clarification of monies and the Democrat finally blew up and asked "What? Do you want me to account for every little billion?". True story and one of the reasons I decided to not vote party, but to vote the person(I was born a Democrat but of course didn't stay one very long!).

[calex59]

"...if we started spending $1 Million the day Jesus Christ was born, and spent $1 Million every day since then, we still would have not spent $1 Trillion!"

Ok, I figured it out, 2739.72 years at a million a day. That kind of puts things in perspective doesn't it?

[Drago]

Yep...$1 Trillion = the “Stimulus” package + interest. Sad.

[calcowgirl]

I guess I misunderstood the vote count by only listening to audio.

The vote stood at 23-12, 4 short of passage, with the 4 Senators I mentioned abstaining (vs. being MIA).

I got that from John Myer at KQED who was “twittering” from location. He does a radio program and said he would be updating at 5:50am and 6:50 am.

You can view his commentary on twitter here:
http://twitter.com/KQED_CapNotes

Or tune in for a public radio update:
http://blogs.kqed.org/capitalnotes/

[Boiling Pots]

Government is designed to be inefficient.

If you want an inefficient organization, give equal power to 3 people.

[calcowgirl]

I think it’s about 565 million each minute, since the founding of the our nation.

[truthkeeper]

Great reporting, girl. Thanks.