Posted on 08/20/2003 12:39:12 PM PDT by annyokie
Arnold speaks out.
Inferred, perhaps.
Mercury News
Posted on Sun, Aug. 17, 2003
Democrats, Republicans bicker in California recall
Simon's campaign announced it had begun running radio ads chiding Schwarzenegger after the actor's top economic adviser, billionaire Warren Buffett, said he believed California's famed Proposition 13 had driven the state's property taxes too low.
``Gray Davis tripled our car taxes, and now Arnold Schwarzenegger's team wants to triple our property taxes,'' Simon said in the ad. ``Which just goes to show you, don't send a liberal to do a tax-fighters job.''
Schwarzenegger spokesman Rob Stutzman accused Simon, who ran against Davis last year, of misrepresenting the actor's positions.
``Bill Simon looks like he learned a lesson from Gray Davis last year and is putting distortions on the air,'' Stutzman said. ``He knows as well as anyone that Arnold Schwarzenegger is a staunch supporter of Prop 13 and to say anything else is disingenuous.''
Just to be sure, the campaign released a paper statement from Schwarzenegger reiterating his support for the tax-cutting measure, a popular rallying point for conservatives.
``Warren and I have talked about Proposition 13, and he clearly understands my strong unequivocal support for the initiative,'' the statement read. ``I expect many dynamic ideas and policy recommendations from my team. But with regards to my position on Proposition 13, my position is rock solid in support of that initiative.''
Let me disagree with you on that one. Both Simon and McCLintock got enough votes statewide last November to win the recall election. However, if both men stay in the race, they both will lose.
Simon has the money, the name recognition, and the organization to win this thing. Another plus for Simon is he is NOT associated with the career politicans of all stripes who occupy Sacrmento. He can legitimately claim a populist banner and run as a clean hands outsider.
I'm very skeptical of McClintock's plan to use the courts to "void" 42 billion dollars of long term energy contracts. What happens when the court throws the case out, or worse what happens when all the energy providers who lose their contracts cross California off their customer list?
It may not be. The source was a political scientist at some school out in California. He sounded reasonable for a professor. Britt Hume was impressed with the figure but didnt challenge it. As I understood it, it would include all things covered by propositions, Medicaid and other mandates, that health fund (for kids?) that California has. Things that are mandated where if you qualify for program, the expense is incurred. In any event it is a large percentage, just like Federal budget.
Does California vote on overall budget first or do they vote on individual programs. I guess my point was how do you cut the overall budget if in fact the sum is the total of the pieces that cant be cut? Not a flame Im just curious as to whether can just cut overall budget to reduce spending.
Like the man said, it'll be easier to see what's being spent after an outside audit. First you have to fully understand what the numbers represent (not what they appear to be on the surface) before you can begin cutting.
Bingo!!! We have a winner! But where as you think that you can just give te people an onslaught of your values by attempting to push in a very unelectable candidate in a state where conservatives are in the vast minority.
It seems to me that the only thing you'll be achieving a 2nd victory for the Democrats. So what was the whole point of the recall then if your just going to replace one Democrat for another?! What the frick was the point?! Besides making Republicans look like a party that is out of touch with most Californians by trying to run this election as if it where some primary and splitting their vote between an electable a candidate and one that would be constantly demonized if on the off, off chance that he magically won in a state where Republicans are in the vast minority!.
But if you want to embarress the party by displaying a lack of pragmatic strategy. Go right ahead! Sink the Ship!
In case you missed it, several weeks ago the courts decided that anyone voting No on question 1 could vote for a candidate on question 2. So its not only those voting "yes" on recall that are voting for the replacement candidate.
Dems really have two candidates but they cant cannibalize each other because they are on two separate issues.
If the minimums are set by total revenues for a year, then Arnold literally would have to do nothing to balance much of it - just figure out what revenues are, and adjust the budget accordingly. But if the revenues are tied to previous years, then the budget is caught in a constitutional vice...
Which is why I said a few days ago that if McClintock was smart he would barter his support (while he still can) for some input into Arnold's policymaking. But if he waits too long, and loses, he will have no influence at all.
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.