All posts by Brian Leubitz

Uncategorized

CA-SOS: SacBee SOS Profile

The Sacramento Bee is running a series of articles profiling candidates for constitutional offices.  Today, the Bee profiled Secretary of State Candidates:

In Sacramento Democrat Deborah Ortiz’s first bid for a legislative seat, the cover of her campaign flier carried a single word: gutsy.

Ten years later, Ortiz, now a state senator, hopes to ride the same rock-the-boat image to victory in her race for secretary of state.

But Ortiz faces a fight to represent Democrats against incumbent Bruce McPherson, who is unopposed in the June 6 Republican primary. State Sen. Debra Bowen, Ortiz’s Democratic opponent, is an aggressive, no-nonsense Marina del Rey lawmaker with a disarming sense of humor.(SacBee 5/10/06)

Check out the article and tell your friends.  Hopefully we can get some Dems educated about the race before the primary is over.

Uncategorized

New Westly Ad attacks “$10Billion Tax Increase”

( – promoted by SFBrianCL)

Steve Westly has a new ad today, not yet available on the web, that focuses on the issue of taxes.

State Controller Steve Westly launched a television advertisement Tuesday that implicitly accuses Treasurer Phil Angelides of proposing a “$10 billion tax increase.”
Even though the ad does not mention Angelides by name, it represents the sharpest televised message launched by either Democrat in the run-up to the June 6 gubernatorial primary. (SacBee 5/10/06)

Westly’s ads have been far more successful than the Angelides ads.  Of course, that is partly due to the fact that Angelides has not run as many on TV.  I think this is an interesting one though.  This actually focuses on an issue that will be very important during the general.

Now, of all 3 major candidates, none has really given a clear explanation on how they plan to repay Prop98 funds and balance the budget.  Westly has been talking about government audits and the lottery. Phil has talked about raising taxes on the upper incomes.  And Arnold…well…maybe he can hook you up with some oceanfront property.  It’s great, it’s right near Barstow.  You’ll love it.

But this ad does ratchet the pressure up between the two Dems.

Westly campaign spokesman Nick Velasquez denied that the latest advertisement breaks the positive campaign pledge the controller promoted last month.

“This is an ad that focuses on the controller, what he’s done and what he wants to do,” Velasquez said. “It makes no reference to his opponent. This is an ad about Steve Westly and not anybody else.”
***
The latest ad calls Westly “the only Democrat for governor who hasn’t proposed a $10 billion tax increase,” according to a transcript provided by the campaign. It also promotes Westly as “the only candidate for governor who’s a former teacher, with children in public school.”

The last claim may be another swipe at Angelides, who sent his three daughters to the private St. Francis High School in Sacramento.

I’m not too troubled about the children in public school thing.  I actually think it is something that our politicians should be using in their campaigns.  It is more than bit hypocritical to talk a big game about education, and then send your own to private schools that only the rich can afford.

As for the taxes, it’s a very important issue.  I would really love all 3 candidates to just lay their cards on the table and issue a proposed budget with all of their campaign promises.  However, that is not likely anytime soon.  In the meantime…let’s watch those ads I guess.

Los Angeles Area, Orange County

Howard Dean thinks the OC is a fine place to party build

Gov. Dean paid a visit to the OC, where the Republicans get more mone than any other county in America.  He’s directly challenging the Republican Party’s ATM.

“I can’t think of a better place to build (the party) than Orange County,” Dean said in a phone interview shortly before the Democratic Foundation of Orange County event, which was closed to the press.

“(The county) has a reputation of being conservative, but even conservatives don’t like corruption. So some people might consider us. … We have a chance if we stand up and say what we believe.” (OC Register 5/9/06)

Arnold Schwarzenegger

Perspectives from Crazyville: What are they saying about the Bonds Tour

1 Comment

In my very long post over the weekend, I said that that the Democrats of the Legislature should be very careful about campaigning with Arnold Schwarzenegger for the bond measures.  I just think that the bonds will likely pass without joint campaign events, and we don’t need to give Schwarzenegger his patina of bipartisanship back.

Over at FlashReport, they agree with me.  Huh?  Well yes, they feel that the Democrats shouldn’t be campaigning with the Governator.  First, well, Jon is skeptical of any government spending at all.  He would prefer the levees continue to age, the roads continue to be unmanageable, and are schools continue to have poor physical plants.  But to the more political aspect of why Jon doesn’t want them on the tour:

In my humble opinion, inviting enemies of freedom and liberty to fly on his airplane is not the best start.  Especially given that Perata and Nunez probably don’t believe that any single person should be morally allowed to accumulate enough wealth to own their own plane(FR 5/8/06)

Ah, yes, those enemies of liberty.  On my list of enemies of liberty, I have Osama, Zarqawi, Hamas, Colombian drug runners, and Don Perata.  Huh?  Fleischman needs to grow up and knock it off with this kind of bullshit rhetoric.  There are only a few true enemies of liberty and freedom and none of them are in the California Legislature.  This trash talk is beneficial to nobody and creates an even more hostile atmosphere.

Uncategorized

CA-11: The Ball is Rolling for McNerney

1 Comment

Jerry McNerney picked up the San Jose Mercury News endorsement (Hat tip to Jerry’s Blog).  The Mercury News also endorsed Pete McCloskey over Pombo in the Republican Primary.  It’s not particularly hard to see how the editorial board feels about Pombo: Any of the candidates, even Republican McCloskey is better than Pombo.

Even before he became associated with the sleaze surrounding disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, even before he was accused of taking a family vacation on the government’s dime and even before a watchdog group called him one of the 13 most corrupt members of Congress, it was clear that Richard Pombo had to go.

The conservative seven-term Republican congressman from Tracy has a record of radical anti-environmentalism that has imperiled the nation’s natural resources, is wrong for the country and is out of step with a state that’s known for its environmental leadership.
***
On the Democratic side, two good candidates have emerged as leading contenders. Neither Jerry McNerney, 54, an engineer and wind-energy consultant from Pleasanton, nor Steve Filson, 59, a United Airlines pilot and retired U.S. Navy commander from Danville, has held elected office. But both bring good ideas and have energized various Democratic Party constituencies. Of the two, we find McNerney’s message more compelling.(SJ Mercury News 5/8/06)

The editorial gives good reviews and descriptions of all three competitors to Pombo.  The choice is a bit muddled now, but we know what needs to happen.  Richard Pombo must go.

As, I’ve written here, I think McNerney will be a better candidate because of his connections to the grassroots.  The national party will support him this time if he wins the primary. They have to, they smell blood in the water all around Pombo.  McNerney will bring the assets of the grassroots to bear against Pombo.  This year it will be enough to take that seat back from the radical anti-environmentalist Richard Pombo.

And in a complete rejection to the “You’ve had your chance” line of “thinking”, the Mercury News touts the fact that McNerney has run against Pombo before:

McNerney ran against Pombo in 2004 and got 39 percent of the vote, despite receiving no support from the state or national Democratic Party and being massively outspent by Pombo. That experience should come in handy in November.

Uncategorized

CA-50: Roach not running

It’s a sad day over at FlashReport.  Eric Roach has announced that he will not be running against Brian Bilbray in the June Primary for the CA-50 congressional seat.

This morning I spoke with Eric Roach, the top-vote getting conservative in last month’s special election in the 50th Congressional District.  So let me be the first to share some unfortunate news (unless you are a big-spending Republican).

It is with great sadness that I share with you the news that after much consideration, Eric Roach has decided not to actively campaign for Congress in the regular GOP primary in the 50th Congressional District.  Eric would have been an outstanding candidate who I personally think could have cleaned liberal/moderate GOPer Brian Bilbray’s clock in that GOP only primary and gone on to win election to the full two-year term in November.(FlashReport 5/8/06)

Aww, poor Jon is upset.  Sorry, I have to keep the Schadenfreude out of this.  Fleischman was, shall we say, the loudest and proudest of the Run,Eric, Run crowd.  He believed that Bilbray was some sort of a moderate/liberal. (Uh…yeah, compared to Roach’s channeling of James Dobson and Grover Norquist). 

But, he does make a compelling argument for Busby defeating Bilbray in the special runoff in June. His argument: turnout.  If Roach doesn’t run, then conservatives stay home.  (“Without Roach on the ballot, Bilbray has a big challenge ahead of him in turning out conservative voters.”)  His argument comes from national numbers that conservatives are disapproving of Bush and other federal Republicans.  Uhh…duh!  People are mad at Bush because his administration is incompetent, not because they aren’t throwing them the bone.  I think the common voter on the street, even the conservative ones, value competence over ideology.

And Francine Busby fits the bill of competence to a tee.  She did a wonderful job as a school board member.  She will be an excellent Congressman.  And in another endorsement of Busby, Jon Says:

If I lived in this Congressional District, I would go to the polls and vote for Bilbray over Busby.  She is awful.  But that said, given that I have traveled to every part of California, it seems, to help candidates in important special elections, but I am so frustrated at what moderate GOPers have done to hijack our majority and imperil its very existence, that I am not to motivate to get myself to San Diego anytime soon.

Well, anytime Jon Fleischman calls you awful,  you know you’ve done something right.

Arnold Schwarzenegger

What makes a Poll worthwhile: Angelides by 10 over Westly

3 Comments

Randy Bayne at The Bayne of Blog has a post about a SurveyUSA poll conducted for SF’s KPIX-TV (local CBS affilliate).  It has him with a 10 point lead:

Here’s the question and the exact breakdown.

  Question:If the Democratic Primary were today, and you were standing in the voting booth right now, who would you vote for? Phil Angelides? Steve Westly? Or some other candidate?

  41% Angelides
  31% Westly
  17% Other
  11% Undecided

The margin of error is a little high, 4.9%, and I’m not sure how this poll should be viewed. As most people know, I don’t look to closely at polls as predictors. But the tread is moving away, big time, from Westly toward Angelides. It should also be noted that undecided is way down when compared to previous polls.

Now, the LA-Times poll just before the Convention had Westly up 13 with 45% undecided.  Perhaps the party endorsement made a big difference.  Perhaps the fact that Angelides now has some ads. 

Or perhaps polling in this state sucks.  There are just too many people and too many distinct interests.  4.9% MoE…ya…right.  I’m waiting for the next Field Poll.  At this point, that’s the only polling operation I have any trust in to do work in California.

But, at any rate, this will put an end to the incessant “momentum Marketing”.  A poll is no reason for me to vote for you, especially not a primary poll.  I know some people love the electability card, but at this point Arnold has so much more name ID than either Angelides or Westly, that any poll is going to pick that up.  Now, once we have a nominee and the hoopla surrounding the primary, then I’ll pay attention to those polls.

Uncategorized

CA-42: More Information on why you should run against Gary Miller

1 Comment

As I told you earlier Rep. Gary Miller (CA-42) is a proud co-author of HR 4437 which makes all undocumented immigrants felons and demands deportation.  This bill is nothing but a bone tossed in the direction of the Nativists in the Republican party.  But here is what Rep. Miller has to say about the ridiculous bill:

March 27, 2006- Congressman Miller made the following statement today urging congressional passage of HR 4437, a bill he co-authored that enlists military and local law enforcement help in stopping illegal border crossings, requires employers to verify the legal status of their workers and builds 700 miles of fencing along parts of the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border:

“I strongly believe the U.S. government must maintain a tough and unified policy on immigration to effectively curb the influx of illegal aliens entering our nation. The so-called ‘guest-worker’ proposals being considered are nothing more than a mechanism to provide amnesty to millions of illegals living in the United States. ( Gary Miller’s website)

But you would probably figure that Mr. Miller has a district where this kind of harsh rhetoric is A-OK.  Well, let’s look again.  CA-42 is in Southern California!  It has a VERY sizable minority community.  WHile the percentage of immigrants is not clear, try these numbers on for size: 23.8% of his district is Latino, 17.5% is Asian. How do these people feel about his proud position on 4437?  Who knows, but I’m guessing that if somebody stands up to this trash-talk, people will listen.

On the flip I’ve included the detailed 2000 demographic data for the district from Miller’s website.



                                           % Unit             Total           % Dem           % Rep                  Black   %Black    Asian  %Asian  Latino  %Latino

District     County        T Place          of all  Persons     Reg   Dem Reg   Reg   Rep Reg   Reg  % Gore % Bush     Pop    Pop      Pop    Pop      Pop    Pop 


42           Los Angeles   C Diamond Bar     100.0    56287    28264    10383   36.7    11684   41.3   48.7   48.1     2971    5.3    25217   44.8    10393   18.5

                           C La Habra Heigh  100.0     5712     3345      755   22.6     2086   62.4   26.9   68.5       87    1.5     1154   20.2      779   13.6

                           C Whittier         30.1    25151    15929     5654   35.5     8198   51.5   38.4   57.8      295    1.2     1601    6.4     8168   32.5

                           U Rowland Height   85.6    41581    16151     6442   39.9     5664   35.1   52.8   44.3     1232    3.0    22524   54.2    11189   26.9

                           R Remainder         1.6     2742     1177      304   25.8      558   47.4   40.8   57.9       44    1.6     1748   63.7      276   10.1

             Sum                                     131473    64866    23538   36.3    28190   43.5   45.4   51.3     4629    3.5    52244   39.7    30805   23.4


             Orange        C Anaheim          16.9    55395    31190     8199   26.3    17759   56.9   33.5   63.5     1263    2.3     9615   17.4     7369   13.3

                           C Brea            100.0    35410    20257     5911   29.2    11018   54.4   34.6   61.6      561    1.6     3619   10.2     7205   20.3

                           C La Habra        100.0    58974    23873     9017   37.8    10761   45.1   43.3   53.0     1200    2.0     4044    6.9    28922   49.0

                           C Mission Viejo   100.0    93102    56514    14743   26.1    31367   55.5   35.4   61.1     1452    1.6     8604    9.2    11266   12.1

                           C Placentia        19.6     9132     4277     1276   29.8     2254   52.7   38.8   58.1      276    3.0     1489   16.3     1788   19.6

                           C Rancho Santa M  100.0    47214    23864     5767   24.2    13426   56.3   33.9   63.7     1084    2.3     4404    9.3     6139   13.0

                           C Yorba Linda     100.0    58918    35655     8499   23.8    21561   60.5   29.0   67.7      863    1.5     7366   12.5     6044   10.3

                           U Las Flores       19.3     1083      475       90   18.9      290   61.1   32.9   66.8       23    2.1      111   10.2      102    9.4

                           R Remainder        15.9     8284     4705     1260   26.8     2606   55.4   32.9   62.6      126    1.5      333    4.0     1384   16.7

             Sum                                     367512   200810    54762   27.3   111042   55.3   34.6   62.2     6848    1.9    39585   10.8    70219   19.1


             San BernardinoC Chino           100.0    67168    24895    10561   42.4    10289   41.3   48.9   48.2     5575    8.3     3988    5.9    31830   47.4

                           C Chino Hills     100.0    66787    29483    10026   34.0    13942   47.3   43.1   54.2     4077    6.1    16112   24.1    17151   25.7

                           R Remainder         3.2     6148     1773      651   36.7      866   48.8   37.6   59.3      750   12.2      152    2.5     2303   37.5

             Sum                                     140103    56151    21238   37.8    25097   44.7   45.4   51.8    10402    7.4    20252   14.5    51284   36.6

Sum                                                  639088   321827    99538   30.9   164329   51.1   38.5   58.3    21879    3.4   112081   17.5   152308   23.8
Arnold Schwarzenegger

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.

Arnold Schwarzenegger

Bond Deal Done!

1 Comment

Looks like we have a bond deal for a $37.3 billion package.  They went late…very late into the night to get this deal done.  It will go to the voters in the November gubenatorial general election.

The Senate moved the four-piece infrastructure package – $19.925 billion for transportation projects, $10.416 billion for K-12 education and colleges, $4.09 billion for flood protection and $2.85 billion for affordable housing – on separate, two-thirds votes that were completed at 12:30 a.m.

The Assembly followed by approving the same package of bonds, the largest in state history, by 3:30 a.m.(SacBee 5/5/06)

Self-congratulatory comments were being tossed all around.  There was even talk of bipartisanship *gasp*.

“It’s nice to get something accomplished,” said state Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland. “This is probably the biggest accomplishment certainly I’ve seen in this building in quite awhile, just in terms of our commitment to the future of the state’s economy and its infrastructure.

“It’s also a textbook example of what bipartisanship can look like.”
***
“I’ve been up here for 11 years, I’ve been involved in a lot of bonds and bond negotiations, and this probably has one of the best balances among interests that are important to Republicans and interests that are important to Democrats,” said Senate Republican Leader Dick Ackerman of Irvine. “Somebody asked me earlier who lost and who won. I don’t think either side. If you have a good bond, you can have everybody be winners.”

Well there are some words which you don’t hear bandied about too often in Sacramento.  It looks as if in the end, when the Governor cleared out, the Legislators were able to get this done.  Yes, I know Arnold will take as much credit as possible, but I think the real credit should go to the legislators who worked tirelessly for several months to get this done for the people of California.  Arnold’s grand plan was changed and sculpted by the legislature. 

Will he run as the “new Pat Brown”?  Yes. 

Does he deserve that title? Hell no.