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.

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.

[Originally posted by Chuck Dupree at NorCal Politics on October 23,2005]

Bush and Ahnold, sitting in a tree…  The only real difference I can see between the two is that Ahnold was successful at something.  The something was crap, but he was a successful purveyor thereof.  He didn’t need friends of his fascist father to bail him out of every venture, like a certain President we know.

Thus, my view is that Der Gropenfuhrer figured his popularity would not benefit from being photographed beside Our War President, whereas the Leaker-in-Chief figured his popularity couldn’t possibly be hurt by being photographed standing beside the killer of the Predator.

On the other hand, the Democrats do themselves no favor by harrassing the Gubernator for not hanging with his non-friend.

They’d be better off trying to come up with some proposals of their own.  This is the microcosm of the national macrocosm: Democrats afraid to mention their own ideas, hoping to win because the Publicans self-destruct.  True, they will self-destruct, taking the country with them.  But the Democrats need a platform, more specifically a non-corporate platform, to take advantage of this.  Following the Kathleen Brown playbook (“I’m one inch to the left of my opponent, so you have to vote for me”) will not work.

[Originally posted at Norcal Politics by Lane Schwark on October 23,2005]

The LA Times has an article today that should serve as a warning to anyone considering voting in favor of Prop 76. Entitled "Would State Budget Cap Pinch Like Colorado’s?", the article looks at how a similar cap in imposed in Colorado 13 years ago has "strangled" that state’s government. The Republican Governor and even the Chamber of Commerce want the cap lifted for five years so they can catch up.

The problem: Colorado’s spending controls appear to have worked too well. Now some of the most strident fiscal conservatives in Colorado — long viewed as a model for others considering such restraints — say the cap has strangled government. There is talk of closing community colleges, privatizing the university system, releasing inmates early.

Owens said he never saw it coming.

"I don’t think it was designed to cripple government," he said of the Taxpayers Bill of Rights, or TABOR, amendment his state’s voters approved. "This is an unintended consequence."

Continue reading [From NCP] No On Prop 76 →

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.

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.

(Bumped up – promoted by SFBrianCL)

UPDATE: Bill Bradley  is reporting that the Reps are now holding it up for budget considerations.  Arnold must be freaking it out at this point.  He needs this to run on.  We’ll see whether Arnold can actually excercise a little bit of leadership over HIS OWN PARTY.  I doubt it, but you never know.  At this point, my money is on no deal.

UPDATE: 8:24 PM: I hear that the Reps have demanded (and recieved) an additional billion in levee funding.  Well, I’m not too troubled by that.

UPDATE: 8:14 PM: It seems all over the place at this point.  Bradley says says that we’ll be delayed long into the night.  Another source has told me that some Republicans are having some hangups on transportation issues.

The bond deal is back again.  A vote appears likely for tonight.

In a sign of an impending agreement, legislative leaders scheduled floor votes for tonight to put $35.3 billion in bonds on the November ballot to build roads, housing, levees and schools.

Legislative leaders worked into the evening Wednesday on the details of the package, but broke shortly after 10 p.m. without announcing an agreement.
***
State Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, scheduled a vote for 5 p.m. today, while Núñez planned to call his chamber into session at 5:30 p.m.
(SacBee 5/4/06)

So, we’re getting close to the announcement.  Arnold needs this.  Arnold really, really needs this.  What does he have to run on?  What has he accomplished as governor?  Worker’s Comp isn’t going to win a whole lot of elections in this state.

We’ll be waiting with baited breath for news of the votes.  I’ll check back in when I hear anything.

Today’s California Blog Roundup is on the flip. Longish, as it’s been a while. More regular roundups will resume shortly. Teasers: Marc Cooper on the state of the Democratic Party, the horse race (meh), PPIC exposes some “and a pony” thinking on education, 15% Doolittle, Paid-For Pombo, the impending Roach / Bilbray primary in CA-50, electoral and finance reform, and last, miscellany.

This roundup does not include any posts from yesterday, as I was at the CDP Convention. I’ll try to post a supplement and a Convention after-action later today.

• Marc Cooper has written a great article / blog post at LA Weekly concerning the schlerotic California Democratic Party and the extent to which the primary race for the Democratic gubernatorial candidacy is determined by ridiculous endorsement races, money tracking, all aided and abetted by the punditocracy and punditeriate more interested in color commentary on the horse race than actual issues.
• And speaking of horse race crapola, we have the Westly complaint against Angelides lodged with the Fair Political Practices Commission. I have a hard time taking seriously the Westly campaign mouth noises about positive campaigning (including Westly’s prepared speech for the CDP convention) when they’re pulling this kind of stuff.
• Frank Russo has a pretty good thumbnail of the recent PPIC poll on the most important issue for Californians: the state of our education system. Of particular interest, most likely voters want to increase funding for education, but they don’t really want to do what’s necessary to pay for it. And of course, Phil Angelides is willing to step up and challenge this “and a pony” kind of thinking that the Republicans exploit, for which he’ll no doubt be punished. See also Bill Bradley.
• Alliance for a Better California points us to a pair of SacBee articles comparing the recent Angelides & Westly ads.

CA-04, CA-11, CA-50

• Republican corruption: it’s the gift that keeps on giving. Does 15% Doolittle, family man, moral exemplar, feel any concern about his assocation with procurers? No? What about pimps?
• A small miscellany from Delta at Say No To Pombo. Also, Delta likes Steve Thomas as much as or more than either of the major candidates.
• Down With Tyranny comes out for Jerry McNerney and against both Paid-For Pombo and Rahm Emanuel.
• Words Have Power has been on fire for the last few days. First, he’s got George Will’s endorsement of Eric Roach in the CA-50 Republican primary. Sweet! And of course, one might question whether the megachurch fundamentalists in CA-50 will turn out for Mormon Roach.

Reform

• The Young Democrats have a guest post at Frank Russo’s place, laying out a new primary plan. Worth pondering. See also Mayor Sam’s Sister City on AB 2949, intended to make California’s presidential primary earliest.
• John Drzal likes AB 2948, which would throw California’s electoral votes to the popular vote winner.
• Public finance! Public Finance!

Miscellany

• One of my hobbyhorses: auto insurance companies don’t want to rate people according to their records, but extraneous personal factors.
• ABC has got this gem: Governor Schwarzenegger wants automatic increases for his own budget, even while he’s resisting cost-of-living increases in the minimum wage. Good for me, but not for thee, apparently.
• Lockyer takes on the oil companies. Go, Bill.
• Last, because it’s purty, Tom Hilton’s pictures of Mendocino.

The flood season is over, or so it seems:

Typically, flood season runs from the first of November through about mid- April, Hinojosa said; this year, heavy storms continued right up to Easter, and the threat along the San Joaquin River has lingered.

Now, however, the Sacramento River system is running well below the “monitor” and “flood” stages, with plenty of room to accommodate water from snow melting in the Sierra.
***
Sacramentals need not fear a flood from all the melting snow, Hinojosa said. Reservoirs and river channels in the Sacramento River system, which includes the American and Feather rivers, have plenty of space for conveying the oncoming water flows.(SacBee 4/28/06)

Now, the only remaining question is whether the state and federal governement will return to its ostrich-like stance on the levees (“Uhh…sure they’ll hold…let’s talk about my plan to ban E-D drugs from the prisons”).  They still need work so that we don’t have the “next New Orleans” on our hands.

Listening Governator Schwarzenegger?