Posted on 05/23/2009 7:01:21 AM PDT by kellynla
While politicians debate whether this week's rejection of various spending initiatives in California marks the beginning of an antitax insurgency, I can't help but wonder what might have been had Arnold Schwarzenegger immediately pushed for reform upon taking office in 2003.
The Arnold of the state's recall election was the Barack Obama of the 2008 presidential election. He was a man of wealth and privilege, restyled as a populist outsider and overhyped by a fawning media, who came into office with a window of opportunity to achieve most anything his heart desired. For Mr. Schwarzenegger, that window remained open for about a year.
Sacramento Democrats recognized that taking on the celebrity governor was a fight they would lose. But Mr. Schwarzenegger failed to seize the opportunity. He needed to make entrenched lawmakers an offer: Either work with him on budget and government reform so everyone can have a nice bipartisan bill-signing, or expect a knock-out fight at the polls over a set of ballot initiatives.
Had he done so, he might have gotten some of the good ideas that the state needs -- such as setting up a serious rainy-day fund and creating an honest spending cap -- enacted into law.
Would the Democrats who control California's legislature have rolled over that easily? We'll never know, but the threat of taking the issue to the voters is how the governor got workers' compensation reform through the legislature within six months of taking office.
Mr. Schwarzenegger did offer a plan to revamp state government during his honeymoon phase in 2004. But his approach -- the "California Performance Review," or CPR -- was a metaphor for his political failure. It involved a 275-member task force that produced a 2,500-page proposal.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
ping
Where are all those FReepers who supported this clown in 2003?
Back at the DU I guess...
It will be a joy to see this Austrian creep slink off into the sunset with his repulsive vampire wife. I despise both of them, as I despise the entire Kennedy family.
The problem isn’t his politics, but his personality. Arnold Schwarzenegger isn’t a badass, he just plays one in the movies. He’s really a very nice guy - too nice for politics. He wants to be liked, and is unhappy when he’s not.
This is what happens when someone runs for the higher offices without experience. If he’d come up through the ranks he’d have either grown a thicker skin or been run out of the game altogether.
..the same emotionalism that was Arnold fever mutated into Obamalaria a few years later...
McClintock could never have been elected in California. It isn't his policies; the guy is just not cool. You have to be cool to get elected here. Reagan was cool. Even Pete Wilson had a little sumptin sumptin...but McClintock is like that mean neighbor who keep your ball when it goes over the fence and lands in his yard. He comes off like an old Crab-Ass.
You are right. Arnold is just way over his head so he treats his political work the way he has approached his life; simply as a popularity contest.
As for despising him, or his wife, or anyone for that matter, hate is not a winning strategy. Listen to how the Cheney haters sound. We don't want to be them.
..it would be interesting to know who you voted for president in ‘00 and ‘04...
There WAS a spending cap and had been for over twenty years, the Gann Spending Limits passed soon after Proposition 13. Arnold got rid of them in his first set of ballot initiatives, Propositions 57 & 58. Then he went to Wall Street to borrow $15 billion, thus paying off the bond houses that provided the seed money for his campaign and costing California a cool half billion unnecessarily because he chose not to use California bond houses.
When are these idiots at the Wall Street Journal going to get it? ARNOLD WAS PART OF A MASSIVE GLOBALIST SCAM, PERPETRATED FROM WALL STREET.
Not true. The Gallup numbers of the late recall election show clearly that it was the conservative defection to Arnold out of fear of Bustamante that kept Tom from winning the recall.
It is NOT impossible for a conservative to win in California. Even after a completely incompetent campaign, Simon came within 360,000 votes of beating Davis.
Good thing you weren't around when George Washington was alive.
I voted for Bush both times but I did so reluctantly, just as I reluctantly voted for McCain in the last election. The point I was making is that folks who voted for Bush should be careful about criticizing those of us who voted for Arnold. Bush was no conservative and I NEVER voted for him or McCain in the primary. Once we get to the general election I work within the realms of reality and vote for who will destroy freedom more slowly.
You mis-characterize what I was saying...I did not say a conservative can't win; I said an uncool conservative can't win. I made the point it is possible to be cool and conservative and I gave two examples. I said McClintock can't win because he comes off as a very uncool old crab-ass.
I'll fess up - I was one who thought Arnold would be good for the GOP. I thought he was a true fiscal conservative, based upon his statements about Reagan making him a Republican, his coming from a socialist country, and his financial prowess. I also thought he would campaign for Bush in 2004, and possibly help make California competetive again for Republicans.
I obviously underestimated the influence of his wife, and how much of a whimp he would turn out to be in facing the Democrat legislature. His poor performance in getting his initiatives passed - this from a guy who should be the ultimate pitchman - was just sad.
Stupid me.
Just curious...did you vote for him in 2006 too?
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.