Transcript: Tom McClintock Debates Gil Cedillo, author of illegal licenses bill

CNN Lou Dobbs Tonight ^ | 12/15/2003 | Tom McClintock/Gil Cedillo

[Amerigomag]

Congrats. Very sharp observation. Let me give you an insider's peek at what's going on because you are the first member of the forum to catch the deception. Please excuse the length of the reply but you deserve the details.

In the truest sense both Prop 57 and 58 are shams. The object of the sham is to get the electorate to suspend, recind or repeal the constitution's restrictions, even temporarily, which then removes the voters from the loop. The governance can then legally indebt without the voters specific imput. Hers's how it's being done.

Quick background. You'll remember from basic California civics that you can't include more than one issue in a single initiative. For example, you can't either rescind, repeal or suspend provisions of the constitution AND authorize a specific bond on the same initiative. Two initiatives are required. That's were Prop 58 comes in. It not only enables Prop 57 but it also enables the legislature, without the currently required specific voters consent, to accomplish the same thing if Prop 57 fails.

The game plan is sound. How do we (the governance) get the electorate to approve a measure, the bond, that is not terribly popular. Answer. We don't. If we want to borrow we really only need the amendmentment and if we also get the bond it's a plus but it is not necessary. We can always legally borrow the money, without the voters specific approval if we can just get them to, even temporarily, suspend the constitutional restrictions.

So this is what we're going to do.

1) Not emphasize to the voters that what we are proposing is extrodinary by allowing them to become aware that both Propositions are required to authorize the bond. Too much knowlege leads too many embarassing explanations of the gravity of what we are doing.

2)Propose Prop 57, which is controversial, so that the electortate will focus on only that issue. Let the opposition's energy and resources be spent fighting Prop 57 and hope they will disregard Prop 58 because it appears to be close enough to the voters will to be a slam dunk.

3)Frame Prop 58 in a manner that belies it true purpose, allowing the governance to indebt without specific approval, yet appears to be meeting the demands of the mob: a "sort of" spending cap.

When and if you can get your hands on the first legislative draft of Prop 58, review it with a careful eye, not only for what it authorizes, but also for what it does NOT exclude: General fund borrowing, by the legislature and the governor with out the currenlty, necessaary approval of the electorate.

[heleny]

Thanks, but I'm not the person who figured out Prop 58 is bad. Calcowgirl explained it to me yesterday on another thread. And, obviously you got it, too, as well as the treacherous strategy behind it. Yikes!

Your explanation would probably be better posted on http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1041469/posts, which discusses McClintock's ABX5 9 speech (where I got the quote) and Prop 57.

If you start a thread for ACAX5 5 or Prop 58, you might need to get something from McClintock in the title to attract more attention (from his supporters and from his detractors), unfortunately. Most people don't care about the props yet.

[VU4G10]

	"Come to grips" with an estimated 8 million to 12 million illegal immigrants and "determine how we can legalize their presence."

[Amerigomag]

Calcowgirl explained it to me yesterday on another thread. And, obviously you got it, too,

Nope. I'm not the author of the explanation nor did I get it from Calcowgirl. I posted the explanation anonymously as soon as I received the author's email this afternoon. The reply to you was the result of reading your comment just after having read the email. They were remarkably similar and someting I hadn't realized. Remember the topic of this thread is widely seperated from the shenanigan described. Sorry.

The author is apparently having serious second thoughts about what he/she helped achieved in October. Reading between the lines of the introductory part of the email, I don't think the author realized the degree of spousal influence in the new executive. The author requested anonymity because while his/her name is probably not easily recognizable on this forum it would be to the person whoes signature is now on the bottom of the author's paycheck.

If you start a thread for ACAX5 5 or Prop 58,

In view of the current war on vanities I'll pass. Calcowgirl will spread the word.

[truth_seeker]

"What would "Governor McClintock" have done differently than Governor Schwarzenegger?"

Gov. McClintock would not get himself elected, whereas Gov. Schwarzenegger got himself elected.

Lotta difference.

[heleny]

Tom McClintock explains it in the last few paragraphs of his floor speech on ACAX5 5 "Budget Reserve Act," which is incorporated into Prop 58.

http://www.tommcclintock.com/newsroom/details.cfm?pr_id=PR031212C

........
It is a radical departure from 154 years of constitutional law.

It temporarily repeals one of the oldest provisions of the state constitution—a provision that dates back to the original constitution of 1849. Since statehood, the constitution has required that bonds can only be used for a "single object or work."

Since statehood, the constitution has prevented one generation from passing on its day-to-day expenses to the next. This measure temporarily removes that provision so that you can do what no generation before you has ever dared to do: steal from the future.

Let us be honest. This is nothing but a Trojan Horse. Its façade is appealing but pointless. But hidden inside is the power for one generation to pillage and plunder the future to pay for its own appetite—a power that the Constitution has held at bay for 154 years.

THAT is the purpose of this measure. That is the SOLE purpose of this measure.

And that is why, sadly, I must cast a no vote today.

Thanks for sharing the information you got. Maybe your source heard/read Tom's speech, too. I should have just read his page first, instead of making people on FR explain it, which doubtless will be asked another 100 times before the election!

I hope talk show hosts and news/editorial writers figure it out, too, before they influence people on Prop 58 when the election nears.

[DumpsterDiver]

Richard Alarcon's sister is the head of the CA Communist Party.

This interests me. Do you happen to know her name?

[TomasUSMC]

Just finished watching the revised History Channel's "Alamo", complete with calling the defenders Illegal Aliens and Pirates, Jim Bowie not fighting at all, and only 60 Mexican KIA, and increasing the garrison
to 250. Calling the Mexicans very diciplined blah blah blah.

Remember this, the first battle of the Alamo was when the Texans took it from the Mexicans. In that Battle their were 300 Texans with no cannon against 1200 mexicans and artillary inside the Alamo. It took the Texans 1 day. No siege, no artillery, just the SPIRIT OF FREE MEN, WUPPIN BUTT. The Mexicans were allowed to leave with only having to give their word they would not return. They broke their word and offered no quarter to the Alamo's garrison a few months later.

Illegal immigration now is rewriting history.

[TomasUSMC]

THAT HELPS MATCH ANY WILLING EMPLOYER WITH ANY WILLING Prision slave laborer in China.

Guess what. President Bush is not right on immigration, he is wrong. Once we win the war on terrorist, we can start one on illegal immigration, Nafta, and Gatt. It may be to late then but first things first. Islamist are killing Americans now, Illegals are killing Americans off slowly. First things first.

[Amerigomag]

Maybe your source heard/read Tom's speech, too.

Again nope.

The pity is that McClintock wasn't more specific. That McClintock didn't specifically say.

"If you don't vote for Prop 57 it doesn't really matter because the bonds will be legally authorized anyway. If Prop 57 is defeated it doesn't really matter because the bonds will be legally authorized anyway. If Prop 58 is passed, even if Prop 57 fails, the bonds will be legally authorized by the legislature without your direct approval as long as the legislation refers to the bonding as the California Economic Recovery Bonds.

[sully777]

Now I understand why McClintock is unloved by certain people. He doesn't fit into their agenda. I guess he's still playing spoiler!

[RS]

"Governor Schwarzeneggar and company say there's no deal.

If, however, the Governor is "working very constructively" with Cedillo and the Illegal Alien CDL lobby "to craft a bill that will ensure that we have safe highways for all of California," what's the difference? "


... and just when was it that STATE SEN. GIL CEDILLO became someone whose statements could be trusted as fact ?

[Pelham]

It will be back, Arnold will "fix it." Then we will collect signatures and overturn his Illegal Alien CDL bill.

Just like clockwork. And it will interesting to see Arnold's reaction when he finds the fury of the California voter going against him, instead of for him. I don't think he believes this will happen. Yet.

[calcowgirl]

Thanks heleny... for keeping me in the loop on the discussion (I was away for a couple days). I'm hoping we see more exposure in the media of the downside to proposition 58. It appears like one of those warm fuzzy propositions.... but the devil is always in the details.

No on 55!
No on 56!
No on 57!
No on 58!

[Pro-Bush]

Ping! A must read!

[JustPiper]

Clearing throat, M? Are you sure I must read? ;)

Pssssssssssst

[RS]

"STATE SEN. GIL CEDILLO (D), CALIFORNIA: Yes. We're working very constructively with the governor, looking forward to craft a bill that will ensure that we have safe highways for all of California.
Gee, thanks, Arnie. I'm sure glad I voted for McClintock. I just wish everyone had."

I'm surprised - For some reason I was under the impression that you did not take as Gospel the words of Sen. Cedillo.

Since you obviously now believe everything he says, then you must believe that SB60 is great for California also.

[RS]

"A 13.5 percent reduction effective January 1st would cure the entire deficit in 18 months "

Y'know ... I wonder what a Governor should do if a business whose payroll and purchases spends 13 Billion in this State announced that they were just going to fire all their employees and shut down in the next two weeks ? What steps he would have to take to insure that CA's economy dosen't fall into a pit - How long it would take to dig out from a hit like that ?

[usadave]

Cedillo is placing race before nationality by striving to help his fellow Latinos, the illegal aliens, at all costs.

[Nea Wood]

Yes, I "obviously now believe everything Cedillo says." That's quite a leap for you to come to that conclusion just from what I posted. Obviously you voted for Arnold and don't like McClintock. Fine. You have a right to your opinion. My opinion is that Arnold will reintroduce the driver's license bill and try to sneak it back in, but with "background checks" or some other add-on which will supposedly make it all "okay." We'll see who turns out to be right. But kindly do not read things into what I say.