Where we go from here: Fighting Arnold’s bond-based momentum

There aren’t that many progressive bloggers focusing exclusively on California politics.  But, pretty much all of us have noted something about how this bond package will affect the governor’s race.  Julia at BetterCA has her opinion, Frank at CPR has his, and Randy at Bayne of Blog has his.  I know Bradley doesn’t like it when you call him a blogger, but he’s got his thoughts too.  And from the other side, Dan Schnur, a Rep operative, posted on FlashReport yesterday that this all but locked up the governorship for another 4 years.

The infrastructure bonds that the legislature put on the November ballot this morning will re-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger. Already armed with advantages over either of his Democratic opponents on taxes, driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants, and Jessica’s Law, the presence of bonds providing money for road, school and levee construction gives Schwarzenegger an issues arsenal that will be almost impossible for either Steve Westly or Phil Angelides to defeat.(FlashReport 5/5/06)

Now many of us would argue with parts of his logic.  I have a HUGE quibble with his belief that anything to do with immigration is a good issue for him.  But, that being said, I think if you nibble around the corners of the analysis from both sides, you get to an overall consensus this was a win for the Governator.

Until today, all he had to run on was the Worker’s Comp “De-form”. (See this BetterCA post about it.) I don’t intend on getting bogged down on Worker’s Comp, but you could get bogged down quickly.  In short form, the Worker’s Comp Reform has had much smaller of an impact than Arnold would have you believe.  In fact, Fabian Nunez called for another round of reform  on it just last month.  Suffice it to say that Worker’s Comp and the failed “Year of Reform” was not the greatest platform from which to run.

But Schwarzenegger found a winning issue in the infrastructure bonds.  It’s a sore spot of Liberal Democrat and Conservative Republican alike.  Who can vote against better roads?  More accessible housing?  Flood protection?  Well, in the end, the Democrats couldn’t stand up to this populist message.  Poll numbers for a bond package were just too high.

But the Dems did a good job on reining this one in.  Arnold had proposed a $222 Billion dollar infrastructure package.  It has now shrunk to under $38Billion.  Not chump change, but not quite $222 billion either.  But at any rate, it’s enough for Arnold to proclaim that he is the “Let’s Build It Governor.”  True, it’s Bullshit.  Arnold Schwarzenegger is no Pat Brown.  Pat Brown revolutionized not only the state, but the entire nation.  He provided a model of how to build infrastructure.  He built the incredible higher education system through his Master Plan for Higher Education.  He provided a water plan that is still, although clinging to life at this point, still the basis for our water delivery.  These bonds do not approach Brown’s broad vision.  By the way, if you are interested in Pat Brown, check out Ethan Rarick’s Pat Brown book, it’s a good read.

See the flip for more analysis

These bonds are broadly popular.  In April’s Field Poll (PDF), 57% of Californians approved of Arnold’s bonds package, with just 30% disapproving.  This includes a net approval of 11 point amongst Dems.  This is all during a time when he was at 39% overall approval, 47% disapproval.  And Dems had a 42% net disapproval.  So with Dems, Arnold had a net 53% swing from overall approval to the bonds.  This is a very, very good issue for him.  A real winner.

And the thing that is going to be even harder to overcome is the fact that there will be Democrats campaigning for this package.  Sen. Perata and Speaker Nunez worked hard on this package, and I’m sure they would genuinely like to see it pass.  A failure on the bond deal would not be a good thing for them politically.

And in addition to those considerations, add in the fact that both Angelides are almost forced to support the package.  And today they both announced that they support the plan – in principle.  Angelides has been a long proponent of bonds to improve infrastructure, dating from before Arnold’s plan.  So he has to come out in favor of “Arnold’s plan”:

“The agreement by legislative leaders on a $37 billion infrastructure bond package is a victory for our State and for future generations of Californians. This is a realistic infrastructure investment package that – when combined with a responsible and truly balanced budget that fully funds our schools – will help build California’s future.

“I’ve been a forceful and consistent advocate for using bonds to invest in an environmentally sustainable future. I’m pleased that this new plan draws from those values, adding a housing and transit component to promote smart growth, providing funds to secure our levees and enhance our educational resources.

“I applaud Senate President pro Tempore Don Perata and Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez for fighting for an infrastructure plan that will put California on the high road to a sustainable future and a strong economy.”(NewWestNotes 5/5/6)

Phil’s campaign does a good job emphasizing the fact that the legislature designed this package.  Also, he pumps a few areas that he’s fond of: smart growth, levees, and levees.  In general this does a good job tying this package to his values.

And Westly?  Well, he has a track record of supporting Arnold’s bonds.  Is he going to change now?  Hardly: he can’t logically not support these bonds.  And so he does:

“I applaud the Democratic leadership for reaching across party lines to ensure that California can begin rebuilding its crumbling infrastructure.

“We must move past the partisanship that has paralyzed this State and work together to tackle the tough issues facing California.

“This $37 billion investment is vital to California’s future. We must protect those funds from waste, fraud and abuse. I am calling upon the Governor and the Legislature to put tough fiscal controls in place to ensure this bond is a boon – not a boondoggle – for California.”(NewWestNotes 5/5/6)

Again, this is a well-crafted release.  I like that Westly rolls his audit and clean government ideas into the mix.  Westly’s been all over the government efficiency thing recently, and this message just reinforces that.

But Arnold Schwarzenegger is not unstoppable.  First thing that I would point out is that I am in favor of this bond package.  However, the Dems who helped to work out this package should not appear with the Governator.  He wins if he can regain the bipartisan/moderate patina.  Having Dems at his side at campaign events would do just that and give him a big boost.  Angelides is running as the anti-Arnold and would be harmed if all of a sudden Arnold wasn’t that bad.  Westly, well, he’s getting pegged as a kindler, gentler Arnold.  If the real one is already seen as kind and gentle, he’s in a world of trouble.

Next: repeat this mantra: “One good idea does not a good governor make.”  He has had one, I repeat one, success since he has been elected.  This bond package is his ticket.  Oh sure, he was maneuvered into signing some other good bills, but this is really all he’s got.  You really think he’s going to start campaigning about immigration?  He’s going to start playing Arnold the Nativist.  I think not.  And education?  Hardly!  He can’t say one word without a throng of CTA teachers surrounding him and calling him on his bullshit.  Sure he could say that he was going to use the extra revenue this year to repay the looted Prop 98 funds, but you, I and about 12 million California voters know that this is not true.  And the teachers will make sure that they don’t forget.

So, how do we win on two fronts – the bonds and the governor’s race?  We change the subject as much as possible.  The bonds will practically approve themselves.  At this point, who is out there to protest them? McClintock – he voted against all but flood control?  Well, now that he’s Arnold’s running mate, that would be very poorly viewed upon.  So let the bonds do their own work.

And what should we talk about? 

1) Education.  The looted Prop 98 funds have still yet to be returned, regardless of whatever Dan Schnur has to say. 
2) Special Interests Arnold: The governor who vowed to crush the special interests, and called teachers girly men…yup, this is still him.  Now he is ok with taking special interest money, as long as it is a Grover Norquist-approved special interest.  In summary: Indjuns: bad.  Slave labor supporting, anti-tax wingnuts: good!
3) Prop 73 Redux.  2/3 of the state is pro-choice.  These are the people that are going to vote for a Dem governor.  Arnold endorsed 73 last time.  Let’s not tip-toe around this issue.  We need to take a stand on this issue.  Voters on the left will appreciate it, and pro-choice voters who are waivering will be attracted to a firm stance.
4) The Environment: Arnold tasked a committee to come up with a plan to reduce greenhouse emissions.  Then when he gets the report and Grover doesn’t like it, he hacks it to bits in his proposal to the legislature (Dianne Feinstein: “my heart fell when I saw that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger had backed away from a strong position on global warming.” (SacBee 4/13/06)

And finally, on the day of the primary, as soon as we know the nominee, we rally around him.  Whether it’s Westly or Angelides, it doesn’t matter if you are luke-warm on him now.  If your guy doesn’t win the primary, well switch on over.  If Westly wins, Angelides, Nancy Pelosi and the 2 senators need to do a press conference the next day saying how much they support him.  If Angelides wins, Steve Westly, and his rainbow of supporters should do exactly the same.  Because in the end, what’s important is that Arnold returns to his acting career and Brutal Deluxe comes out in 2008, not 2012.

CA-50 Republican Poll Shows Busby With Decisive Lead

This looks like great news, so why am I skeptical? Over at Flash Report, the drumbeat for right wing Republican darling, Eric Roach, to run against Republican lobbyist Brian Bilbray has become frantic. Roach, for his part, remains silent. In fact, Roach has missed two deadlines established by his own spokesman for an announcement of his intentions. Last week, we were told Roach would have an announcement by week’s end. This week, the same line. No announcement.

Now to this latest poll. The numbers for Busby are outstanding. In a poll of 450 potential voters, skewed heavily with Republicans, Busby outperforms Bilbray 43% to 37%. This seems pretty unusual, so let’s look at the poll a little more closely.

First, the poll was commissioned by conservative Republican and Eric Roach supporter, Bill Hauf. Hauf ostensible wanted to find out both Bilbray’s position in his race against Busby, but also the mood of the conservative electorate. The poll appears to have been designed to insure that Bilbray’s liberal tendencies would be exposed.

Second, the poll used a classic “push poll” methodology. The money question of voter preference is preceded by questions designed to predispose the respondent to make a specific choice. For example, prior to asking if a voter prefers Busby or Bilbray, there might be a couple of questions about Bilbray the lobbyist. Or, depending on the poll, a question about Bilbray eating the flesh of young children.

Third, the poll was designed to scare Republicans. Bilbray (the eater of living children) performed far worse against Busby than Roach, the white knight of the Republican right.

However, this poll is good news for Busby. The margin of error is too great to be just the product of the “push poll” bias. And, it shows that Republican support of Bilbray is incredibly weak.

The continuing drumbeat of bad news regarding the Bush Administration and the support of Republican leaders like Cheney and Hastert are huge negative for Bilbray. In fact, the mainstream party support for Bilbray is playing right into both Busby and Roach’s hands.

The result here is great for Busby, a major negative for Bilbray and a big inducement to Roach to take on Bilbray (for his own good).