Yes.
Posted on 11/14/2005 9:02:02 AM PST by NormsRevenge
In 1945, Winston Churchill was swept from office in a devastating election defeat just days after leading England safely through World War II. As he watched in morose silence as the results rolled in, Clementine sat beside him, patted his knee and said, “If you ask me, Winston, it’s a blessing in disguise.” Churchill growled, “At the moment, madam, it is very well disguised, indeed.”
I’m not going to pretend that Tuesday’s election was anything other than what it was: an unmitigated and stunning defeat of some of the most basic principles of good government ever put to a vote: that government should live within its means; that politicians shouldn’t chose who gets to vote for them; that teachers should demonstrate sustained competence before they’re granted lifetime tenure; that public employees have a right to decide for themselves what candidates they’ll support with their own money; and that parents have a right to know if their teenaged daughter is undergoing an abortion.
Nor am I going to pretend that the election can be easily dismissed as a fluke. It was a major setback in the cause of reform and a major victory for the government unions that are now ascendant, emboldened and unchallenged in their domination of our political and legislative process.
There are many lessons to be learned and to be learned well. But as Mark Twain warned, “We should be careful to get out of an experience only the wisdom that is in it and stop there; lest we be like the cat that sits on a hot stove-lid; she will never sit on a hot stove-lid again--and that is well; but also she will never sit on a cold one anymore."
I have always said that it is naïve to believe that the same legislature that got California into its mess is going to get it back out. The Governor learned this during the first year of his administration, when, despite a few cosmetic and incremental successes, no serious reforms survived the legislature and the state’s finances continued to deteriorate (masked by a $15 billion infusion of borrowed money).
The governor ultimately had no alternative than to bring this impasse to a head and appeal directly to the people. He could have maintained a façade of bipartisanship, contented himself to tinker at the margins, put forth pleasing half-measures while the state’s deficit continued to mount – but he chose finally to confront the state’s condition boldly and forthrightly. And he knew that to do so, he had to confront the government unions responsible for that condition.
Should the election have been called sooner, when civic attention and the Governor’s popularity were at an all-time high? Could the reforms have been better selected, framed and crafted? Would a clearer presentation of these issues have prevailed?
Those shoulda-coulda-woulda questions are important ones and I don’t begrudge the pundits who are now raising and answering them. But they should be tempered by Teddy Roosevelt’s observation that, "It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again (because there is no effort without error or shortcoming), but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause…”
Now the watchword is “compromise,” but through all this soothing rhetoric there is a hardened reality: the government unions are now in a stronger political position than ever and no “compromise” will escape the Capitol without their seal of approval. And that means the state will continue to drift upon the course that has already brought it to the brink of insolvency, until the next crisis awakens voters.
Elections are decisive moments in time that record a snapshot of public judgment, but they are conducted in a dynamic world where events can quickly reshape the political landscape. If the fundamental course of the government is not changed – and the government unions have an intense self-interest and demonstrated ability NOT to change – crises will visit California with increasing frequency and intensity. In such an environment, the politics of the state could shift very rapidly.
Whatever the Governor does in response to the election, it is imperative that he levels with the people on the actual fiscal condition of the state and that he is very clear and uncompromising in presenting the solutions that must ultimately resolve it. And when watered-down and meaningless changes are all that emerge from the legislature, he must resist the temptation to proclaim them as anything more.
We humans are creatures of habit. We instinctively resist change and engineer our institutions of government to resist it as well. Change occurs in a society only after the necessity for it finally overcomes our own resistance. That is why serious reforms only come in a state of agitation – and why the recall succeeded in 2003, while the reforms to consummate that recall failed two years later. The recall proceeded while the public perceived a crisis and the reforms were attempted when they did not.
When the next crisis comes, the Governor will find a new appreciation among Californians for what he was trying to do in this election, and a more receptive electorate to do so in the next.
GOTV makes a lot of difference. I know that, traditionally, in special elections in California conservatives usually have better turnout than liberals. So, something must have changed pretty radically to get this kind of result.
I couldn't believe that San Luis Obispo county voted down Prop. 73. The only way I can see that happening is with a very well executed DemocRAT GOTV, and a lack of corresponding GOP/conservative GOTV. Where were the pro-life voters on that one?
Possibly. But we still are not close to billions. In 2005, his vetoes totaled $190 million, including line-item vetoes.
None of the new stuff he vetoed is free and would have costs from now to whenever. What would have been the cost of the illegal alien drivers licenses?
According to the Senate analysis, less than $10 million a year. (Approx $30-40 million in cost, offset by $30 million in new revenues)
I believe his vetoes have been far offset in dollar magnitude by his support of other new programs, including stem-cell research, servicing of the massive borrowing, hydrogen highways, the Sierra Nevada Conservancy, etc.
Truer words were never spoken. Take a look at all of these "true believers" as they post on this thread. The majority, though often claiming conservative credentials, are anything but conservative. Scratch the "We love Arnie" surface and what you will find are the usual GOP Big Tent RINOs, liberals and moderates.
The facts are that Arnold's propositions failed for several reasons that have little to do with conservatives but a lot to do with Arnold.
My prior comments on this travesty still apply:
" Then he can live with the results. He masqueraded as a conservative reformer/cost cutter during the Recall so he sure as hell doesn't deserve any further conservative support. If he doesn't get off his ass and start fulfilling all of those earlier promises damned soon, I'm done with him. I couldn't care less that he's got a big "(R)" after his name. Deliver or get the hell out. How's that for a "message"?
"The problem was Arnold. He failed to inspire the base, while the Rats went crazy getting everyone possible to the polls (wonder how many illegals were included). Arnold could have inspired the base if he had mounted an aggressive program of cost reductions and cuts shortly after taking office. Instead, he did nothing to fulfill any part of his campaign rhetoric. Finally, he got together his four initiatives which turned out to be confusing (76 & 77), and were too little/too late. By then, the base questioned Arnold's reform seriousness beause his two years in office mostly revealed him to be long on talk but short on action when it came to cost cutting (his interview statements about "we never want to cut anything" certainly didn't help). The fact is, the base simply didn't trust Arnold, so many didn't bother to go to the polls. That, combined with the Rat's nuclear spending anti-Arnold program, made the difference."
I'll stand by those comments.
And for the GOP Big Tent types who continue to plague this conservative site, the conservatives of Orange County carried their share of the Arnold burden because all four of his propositions passed in Orange County.
Unfortunately, we are seeing much too much of this attitude among both major parties. I think the "elitist political class" is a better descriptor than "elitist liberals" as they seem to come in both the color of blue and the color of red.
Geez you are correct.
We would have been better off with Davis as our governor. He would have saved us a lot of money.
How stupid I was.
If given the opportunity one day, McClintock would make a fine governor. He may not have Schwarzy's public persona, but he understands California politics and is a solid conservative Republican. Arnold has advanced his political agenda for two years now and he's failed to make a difference. California has borrowed so much money, the states future generations will be paying for the mistakes of Boy Davis and Schwarzy for decades to come.
California remains in a perpetual state of fiscal crisis.
"Where were the pro-life voters on that one?"
Probably at home sticking pins into their vodoo doll of Arnold.
Good comments. I haven't seen any evidence that conservatives stayed home, and it is contrary to what I saw among family, friends and acquaintances. Based on the fact that the two propositions that came closest to passing were both red-meat conservative bait (73 and 75), I would say a good amount of conservatives showed up at the polls. The fact that both Prop 78 and Prop 79 went down in flames also shows conservatives showed up. Who didn't show up were the vote-in-lockstep GOP loyalists who were actually pushing Prop 78.
Heck, when I realized I wouldn't be in town to vote on Tuesday, I drove all the way to Norwalk on the previous Sunday morning to do "early voting," compliments of Diebold. I voted yes on 73-75. I saw little conservative or positive about any of the other measures.
Bullshit. Why don't you join you fellow citizens in trying to preserve what's right in the Republic rather than cede it to socialism or Mexico?
Well you're right. And every day that Schwarzenegger fails to clean up this mess, you guys look wiser and wiser.
He needs to put some ink in that veto pen, and start using it.
He doesn't need a budget passed until next summer. Now would be a very good time to tell the legislature that NOTHING goes past his desk until some of the things that were on the ballot are addressed.
As for the $50 billion bond idea, it didn't float Arnie. Get to work!
Chuck P ROCKS.
Yeah, that's the last thing we need is a contested Republican L.G. race when we already have the best state-wide candidate available and we need to keep all the money in our warchest to win in November.
Indeed. I hope the RINOs aren't planning to muddy the waters in the AG race too (ain't holding my breath though)
I would say you have democrats, RINOS and conservatives.
The discussion was not about Davis.
Are you saying that a Republican Governor should not have his feet held to the fire to uphold his campaign promises, ad infinitum, because you think he was better than the alternative on election day, years earlier?
From what I am hearing, turnout in the more GOP-heavy counties was low, while turnout in the nutty costal areas up north was high, add to that every union member in the state being told that Arnold hated them and wanted to kill them and their whole families with Prop. 75, and they got their folks out.
Our GOTV program fell flat. Or our people were mislead as much as others about the props and believed the lies.
And of course, there are those who were perfectly aware of what was going on and couldn't be bothered to vote at all (pieces of crap). Don't know how to explain them...
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.