Category Archives: Arnold Schwarzenegger

Oh to be a fly on the Big 5 Wall As Hollingsworth Brought Out His Ransom Note

Gov. Schwarzenegger’s previous career had him as a man of action, who blew stuff up first and asked questions later. He didn’t frequently negotiate detantes, save for settling a dispute or two in Kindergarten Cop. It’s Not a Tumor!

So, perhaps that’s why he isn’t really that good at actually doing the job of being the Governor. On occasion it is important that you actually have the ability to talk the parties back off the ledge. But as the Governor is usually the one playing the brinksman’s games, you can understand that negotiation isn’t a skill he’s refined too well.

And apparently Arnold was once again not up to the task yesterday as the Big 5 Meeting blew up when Sen. Hollingsworth brought out his ransom note.

A private meeting of legislative leaders and Gov. Schwarzenegger ended abruptly Tuesday amid bad blood between Senate Leader Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, and his GOP counterpart, Sen. Dennis Hollingsworth of Murrieta.

*** *** ***

Earlier, Hollingsworth said he would not put up votes for the bills until Democrats agreed to a list of demands that were laid out by Russell Lowery, Hollingsworth’s chief of staff, in an e-mail to senior Democratic staff on the morning of Sept. 11, the last day of the legislative session.

“Senator Hollingsworth and others were party to conversations where it was agreed that Ready Return and the homeowner’s tax credit issues would be completed before the end of session,” Lowery wrote in an e-mail to Steinberg’s senior staff on the morning of the final day of the legislative year. “It is my hope that we might get some movement early on these issues in order to avoid a train wreck on some important two-thirds legislation at the end of session.”  Lowery also mentioned pending legislation providing home buyers with a  tax credit.(CapWeekly 10/06/09)

Maybe he was just yelling at everybody to shut up, but he really should have learned his lesson on that particular method from the movies.

By the way, the words “Ready Return would be completed” doesn’t mean that this solid program would be permanently funded or otherwise enacted into law, nope, this meant that Ready Return would be killed so that Intuit could make a few more bucks off of poor people.  Intuit’s role is California politics in the last few years has quite frankly, been disgusting.  They have spread cash over politicians like Southern Pacific in the Hiram Johnson days, and held up the budget all to kill ReadyReturn, a program that would simplify tax returns for lower to middle class Californians with simple taxes. Of course, the hypocrisy of this coming from the Republicans, who claim to support tax simplification, would be funny had it not endangered the lives of many Californians.  But I guess campaign cash is a more important value to these Republicans.

And Hollingsworth claimed to have had some agreement with Steinberg that these issues would be handled, a deal that Steinberg said never happen. Some would call that illegal vote trading.  And, according to the article, apparently Speaker Bass suggested that his ransom note actually had nothing to do with the bills at issue.

Meanwhile, Arnold is still being Arnold, demanding a water deal by Friday or he’ll veto all the bills. The deadline for his veto is Sunday, or the bills will automatically become law.

This, my friends, is a dysfunctional government.

Impeach Arnold?

Could it be that enough Democrats in the Assembly have finally had enough with the culture of blackmail and are ready to exact some real consequences?

In the Assembly, Democrats are employing tactics that seem designed to pressure the governor into signing bills. Assembly Majority Leader Alberto Torrico, D-Newark, sent a letter to Attorney General Jerry Brown asking him to investigate whether the governor’s strategy is illegal. He cited a part of the state constitution that says it is a felony to seek to influence a legislative vote by means of “bribery, promise of reward, intimidation or other dishonest means.”

“While politicians are certainly allowed to express their disagreements in any way they find productive, they are not allowed to refuse to perform their sworn duties in order to force the legislature to accept policy positions,” Torrico wrote. “And public officials are specifically prohibited from the kind of direct ‘horse trading’ in which a government official agrees to take, or not take, a certain action in exchange for a specific vote.”

Assembly sources said some Assembly Democrats even suggested on a conference call last week that the lower house should impeach the governor if he imposes a mass veto. The constitution says the Assembly has the “sole power of impeachment” and that it can pursue it on a majority vote for unspecified “misconduct in office.” The Senate would then conduct a trial.

The idea seems to crop up every time lawmakers are frustrated with the governor, said Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco. It appears to be mostly talk for now.

“I know some members have mentioned the possibility of impeaching the governor,” Torrico said, adding, “There’s certainly a growing number of members who consider the governor’s extortion tactics to be illegal and a dereliction of duty. But (impeachment) has not been discussed formally in the caucus as an option.”

This sounds like a bluff on all counts, although the Governor’s actions certainly violate the spirit and (depending on your reading) the letter of the law about using “bribery, promise of reward, intimidation or other dishonest means” to influence a legislative vote.  I don’t expect Jerry Brown to act on it, however, because he’d probably welcome the ability to threaten the legislature in this manner were he the Governor.

And yet, if the Governor were to veto the entire legislative session because he couldn’t get his way on water (and doesn’t that represent a failure of HIS leadership, not the legislature’s?), I would say a case could be made that using extortion and running the state like a Hollywood negotiation is grounds for removal.  What’s more, while a two-thirds vote for removal in the Senate would be unlikely (though, given Schwarzenegger’s standing in the Republican Party, not completely out of the question), just saddling him with the legacy of impeachment would be a crushing blow to his ego, not to mention his efforts at putting a happy face on his astonishingly awful leadership.

I don’t think this is much more than a parlor game.  But just so we know the rules, a Governor can be impeached for “misconduct in office” by a simple majority in the Assembly.  According to Article 5 of the Constitution, it seems that during impeachment – not removal but impeachment – the Lieutenant Governor becomes Governor. (“The Lieutenant Governor shall act as Governor during the impeachment, absence from the State, or other temporary disability of the Governor or of a Governor-elect who fails to take office.”)  Given that John Garamendi could be elected to Congress in four weeks, the line of succession appears to show that the President Pro Tem of the Senate would be next in line.  So if the unthinkable happens, by November 3 we could be looking at Governor Darrell Steinberg.

The Two-Faces of Arnold Schwarzenegger

PhotobucketAs I scroll through my inbox, I’m looking at a series of emails from legislators and their various staff members. Lots of them.  Every one tells me a story of a pretty good bill. I’ll pluck a few out randomly: Nancy Skinner’s AB 758 is a win-win with both labor and business supporting it. It would facilitate the greening of California’s businesses.  And Asm. Evans’ AB 154 would conform California’s foster care system to some relatively minor federal requirements for matching dollars.  The bill could result in $50 mil in federal dollars by 2018.

Why do I bring this up? Because Arnold hasn’t signed any of the bills yet. Dan Walters thinks it might have something to do with a lack of a deal on water, but at this point it is all just reading tea leaves. He hasn’t said that he’s going to veto everything, as he frequently does when he’s throwing a temper tantrum.

But the lack of bill signings doesn’t really have to do with a lack of time on his hands.  He has time enough to play on the national field by releasing a statement saying that he generally supports the concept of health care reform.  While it might be useful for prominent Republicans to say these sorts of things for the health care debate, that isn’t his job. (Fmr. Sen. Majority Leader Frist and Former SecHHS/Gov. Tommy Thompson have also indicated support for the milquetoast health care reform bill from the Finance Committee.)

But this is Arnold’s MO.  Come out in the national press for the Mom and apple pie, and then proceed to slam the apple pie in the face of mommy dearest when he gets back to Sacramento.

So, perhaps the Mr. Freeze character wasn’t the right one for Arnold in the Batman story. It seems he would have been perfect for Harvey Dent.

Arnold Supports Health Care Reform – Just Not In California

One of the enduring takeaways of the Schwarzenegger era is just how much latitude he is given on the national level as some kind of transformative post-partisan leader, when those same reporters know that California is crumbling into dust under, and in many cases because of, his leadership.  We witnessed this again today as national media types heaped praise on the Governor issuing a letter about the Obama health care reform plan:

“As Governor, I have made significant efforts to advance health reform in California. As the Obama Administration was launching the current debate on health care reform, I hosted a bipartisan forum in our state because I believe in the vital importance of this issue, and that it should be addressed through bipartisan cooperation.

“Our principal goals, slowing the growth in costs, enhancing the quality of care delivered, improving the lives of individuals, and helping to ensure a strong economic recovery, are the same goals that the president is trying to achieve. I appreciate his partnership with the states and encourage our colleagues on both sides of the political aisle at the national level to move forward and accomplish these vital goals for the American people.”

I love the phrase “significant efforts,” by the way.  Others might call them “failed efforts,” but YMMV.

But this “praise” for health care reform is just a piece of paper.  One would think that the national media would seek to know the actions of the Governor on health care – one would be wrong, but one would still think that.  And it would take about 10 seconds of Googling to figure out that the Governor has vetoed key elements of the legislation working through Congress.  Last year he vetoed AB1945, which would have banned rescission, the insurance industry practice of dumping sick customers for technical violations on their applications like typos the moment that they try to use their policies for treatment.  He vetoed SB840, the universal health care bill, on multiple occasions in the past.  He vetoed SB1440, which would have mandated that insurance companies spend 85% of premiums on medical care.  He vetoed SB973, which would have created a public insurance option by linking local and regional measures.  He vetoed AB2, expanding the state’s high-risk pool for people with pre-existing conditions.

He basically has vetoed many of the same provisions to be found in the current health care bill.  And he is threatening to veto every bill on his desk this year, including another bill to ban rescissions so that customers who have paid insurance premiums for years aren’t left to die when they want to use their policies.  Anthony Wright notes some of the other bills:

* AB 119 (Jones): GENDER RATING, to prohibit insurers from charging different premium rates based on gender.

* AB 2 (De La Torre): INDEPENDENT REVIEW, to create an independent review process when an insurer wishes to rescind a consumer’s health policy, create new standards and requirements for medical underwriting, and requires state review before plan approval. Also raises the standard in existing law so that coverage can only be rescinded if a consumer willfully misrepresents his health history.

* AB 98 (De La Torre): MATERNITY COVERAGE, to require all individual insurance policies to cover maternity services.

* AB 244 (Beall): MENTAL HEALTH PARITY, to require most health plans to provide coverage for all diagnosable mental illnesses.

Dan Walters calls these bills “nothing of cosmic importance”.  Well sure, he’s not going to have a kid, and women are charged more than men by insurance companies anyway!  To an entitled white man with a good-paying job, he doesn’t have to worry about losing his policy or not getting comprehensive medical coverage.  But to a woman who can’t afford to lose her job to have a baby, or someone with a mental health problem who can’t get relief for his suffering, or someone with an individual policy living constantly in fear that his or her insurance will get revoked precisely when they need it, these are issues of “cosmic importance.”  Anyone saying otherwise is ignorant.

And yet the Governor will have no problem holding these bills, and these people, hostage.  His buddies at the Chamber of Commerce probably don’t want him to sign them at all.  So he writes a pretty letter supporting health care reform, while denying the very same measures to his own constituents.  And national media types call him a “bold leader.”

Culture Of Blackmail

One reason why I didn’t particularly care for the Guardian’s Failifornia article was that it was really a human interest piece masquerading as a serious argument.   It’s not because its data was flawed or its tone insincere – though there’s some of that; the long section on Mendota neglects to mention that the city hinges entirely on agriculture and features 30% unemployment or more ANYTIME there’s a drought, unconnected to the larger structural problems in the state – but because it didn’t even try to assess the root causes of the crisis or the steps for resolution.

For example, it would be beneficial to take a look at the culture of blackmail we have here in state government (as an aside, did the writer even visit Sacramento?).  Politicians have learned over 30-plus years of dealing with onerous budget requirements that threatening blackmail is really the best way to get anything done.  Witness Arnold Schwarzenegger, threatening to veto nearly 700 bills that have passed both houses of the Legislature unless he gets his way on a water bill.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, apparently standing by a threat to veto hundreds of bills on his desk unless a deal can be reached on the state’s water problems, has suggested to Senate leader Darrell Steinberg that all legislation before the governor should be withdrawn to avoid a veto. About 700 bills are awaiting action.

Schwarzenegger did not formally request that the bills be yanked, but that was the implicit suggestion in his proposal, Capitol sources said.

The communications between Steinberg and the governor were referenced in an e-mail sent from Steinberg to Senate Democrats this week. In the internal e-mail, which was reviewed by Capitol Weekly, Steinberg said Schwarzenegger “even mentioned coming back this week to withdraw bills from his desk and hold them until after water is done.”

Arnold is absolutely ballsy enough to do this.  He has only signed 3 bills in the past four weeks since the Legislature adjourned September 11, and with six days to go and the Legislature not scheduled to return until after the deadline on October 11, I’m convinced of his sincerity to basically flush the entire legislative session down the toilet.

You just don’t see headlines like this in other states.  And that’s because the process here rewards blackmail.  Arnold knows that there are no repercussions for vetoing 700 bills.  There’s no media willing to call him out, there’s no possibility of a veto override because of some unwritten rule whereby that function doesn’t exist anymore, and there’s a high possibility of legislative Democrats simply capitulating to whatever shrieking Republican demands in order to appear “reasonable” or just move along the machinery of government.  Arnold’s just using good tactical sense because the system is set up to reward the most outlandish actions.   So he’ll probably get what amounts to a bailout of wealthy agribusiness interests at the expense of the environment and the working class.

This is truly the portrait of failure in California.  Right-wing interests have learned how to hijack so well you’d think they attended one of those Al Qaeda training camps where they practice on the monkey bars.  And the entire political class walks around as if this is perfectly normal.  It’s actually appalling.

If you want to drill down to why California is in crisis, it’s because we routinely see political leaders walk into the capital strapped with dynamite across their chests, only to be given the key to the city and a milkshake as a reward for such behavior.

The Merced Sun-Star editorialized on this today, bashing the Governor for his inflexibility and willingness to toss out important bills on mortgage reform and health care for his own personal vanity, but also saying, “Lawmakers rarely reach closure on state budgets and complex, controversial policies unless they have a gun pointed at their heads.”  Yes, and that’s the PROBLEM, not a one-off sentence to be seen as an inexorable truism.

Moby Doing More To Stop Murder In California Than Arnold Schwarzenegger

Musical artist Moby has decided to donate 100% of the proceeds of three upcoming concerts in California, totaling anywhere from $75,000 to $100,000, to help out domestic violence shelters who saw their state funding cut by Governor Schwarzenegger back in July.

Six shelters that temporarily house victims and their families have closed since Schwarzenegger used his line-item veto to eliminate their funding in July. Advocates say dozens more of the 94 agencies that received a total of $20.4 million in state money last year have scaled back services and cuts hours and staff.

“In the grand scheme of things, it’s not a lot of money,” Moby said about the cuts during a phone interview from Chicago. “But it’s going to directly harm the women who benefit from these programs.”

Moby, whose real name is Richard Melville Hall, said he hopes to generate $75,000 to $100,000 from dates in San Diego, Los Angeles and San Francisco from Oct. 12 through 15 to give to the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence.

“My mother was in a long relationship with a guy who was very, very abusive and at one point I had to stop him from stabbing her to death,” Moby said.

The money will go to the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence.

Domestic violence shelters are nothing more than homicide prevention units.  Schwarzenegger’s cuts – made by blue pencil after the Legislature passed a budget agreement – caused a huge threat to public safety that could cost more in court and law enforcement money in the long run.  Republicans like him probably think that, as long as charitable donations have stepped into the breach, the state can be absolved for their efforts to threaten women’s lives.  But the $100,000, while extremely generous, is just a small fraction of the money that was cut.

Maybe some other celebrity could hold events with the proceeds going to domestic violence shelters.  Maybe someone who had a long movie career and has a legion of adoring fans.  Or maybe we can fund government properly and we wouldn’t have to hold fundraisers to save women from being beaten or killed.

Disability Advocates Sue Over IHSS Cuts

Even before they are instituted, the IHSS cuts have been a debacle and are really proving to be a disaster.  And, with that being the case, senior and disabled groups really had no choice but to sue, alleging that the cuts violate federal disability laws.

Alleging violations of federal disability rights laws, the organizations are challenging how California state welfare directors have decided to select who will be dropped from services because of state budget cuts. The groups are asking for a hearing before a judge as soon as next week to seek a preliminary injunction before the state starts mailing notices in mid-October to IHSS recipients informing them that they will be affected by cuts. (SacBee 10/01/09)

Of course, the IHSS cuts are really only one of very many cuts that are at once both tragic and possibly violating the letter and/or the spirit of federal requirements.

Jerry Brown Winning Hearts And Minds By Playing Into Republican Fear Tactics

Just days after forming an exploratory committee to enter the race for Governor, Jerry Brown has decided to follow the likes of Andrew Breitbart and Arnold Schwarzenegger by opening an investigation into ACORN:

In a letter to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger dated Sept. 25, Chief Deputy Attorney General James M. Humes said the office has “opened an investigation of both ACORN and the circumstances under which ACORN employees were videotaped.” The governor had asked Brown two weeks ago to look into the incidents.

The probe was sparked by a series of hidden-camera videos in which a couple posing as a pimp and a prostitute are advised on how to set up a prostitution business by people identified as workers for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. The videos were taken in Washington D.C., San Diego, San Bernardino and cities in several other states.

There’s at least a nod to the possibility that the videotapes were obtained illegally, although I’m not sure California law mirrors the state of Maryland, where the filmmakers clearly violated the law.  But the tendency for Brown to follow Governor Headline and chase the popular story is pretty lame.  Remember that the Governor specifically called on Brown to investigate ACORN because of the San Bernardino tape, which is full of holes:

Most critically, it is clear that Fox News has made virtually no attempt to verify the authenticity of the tapes before broadcasting them — something no self-respecting journalistic organization would dare do. Consider the case of the San Bernardino ACORN office, which was featured in the most recent video to be released. The words of ACORN employee Tresa Kaelke appear to be damning. Not only does she offer assistance to Giles and O’Keefe, but she claims that she murdered her former husband following a period of domestic abuse […]

The problem, of course, is that Kaelke was deliberately lying. The San Bernardino Police Department itself has now confirmed that her claim regarding her husband was untrue. A department statement released on September 15 reads: “The San Bernardino Police Department is investigating the claims made regarding the homicide. From the initial investigation conducted, the claims do not appear to be factual. Investigators have been in contact with the involved party’s known former husbands, who are alive and well.”

Furthermore, Kaelke has claimed that when she made the statement, she was seeking to mislead the undercover videographers, whom she was suspicious of. “They were not believable,” Kaelke is quoted as saying in an ACORN press release. “Somewhat entertaining, but they weren’t even good actors. I didn’t know what to make of them. They were clearly playing with me. I decided to shock them as much as they were shocking me.”

But none of these simple facts stopped anyone at Fox from running with the story. Any cub reporter would have thought to actually call the San Bernardino police before effectively alleging that ACORN was staffed by murderers. But such an act never occurred to people like Beck, Hannity, or Carlson. (In her defense, Carlson later added that the husband was still alive, “according to ACORN,” but ignored the police report.)

Let’s be honest.  Fearmongering about ACORN is a cover for a racially tinged agenda by ideological extremists.  If the actions of a couple employees provokes a state Attorney General investigation of entire companies, I eagerly await the investigations into every company in California.  But we don’t have that.  Instead, Jerry Brown has decided to follow the fearmongering, and legitimize it.  Sad.

Too Bold? How About “Too Absurd”?

At first I thought that the headline writer was confused.  “California tax reform plan much too bold for Capitol,” it said above George Skelton’s column today.  “Too bold” could maybe have more than one meaning.  Surely Skelton wasn’t throwing in with the idea that massively shifting the tax burden to the lowest income levels in society was too good an idea.  But I think that is, in fact, what he’s saying.

“I would sign it immediately” if it were a bill, Schwarzenegger told reporters. “Without any doubt.”

Of course, this is a governor who constantly seeks out things new and bold. And the tax proposal was all of that — much too new and bold for most Capitol denizens, especially those representing special interests.

As Genest told me: “It shouldn’t come as any surprise that lobbyists in Sacramento are in favor of maintaining the status quo unless they are confident that the change will serve their interests. That’s why they’re called ‘special interests.’ “

Nowhere in Skelton’s article does he quote any figures or statistics citing the practical effect of the Parsky Commission’s plans.  He doesn’t mention that, under the plan, taxpayers making over $1 million dollars a year would save $109,000 annually on average, while taxpayers making between $40,000 and $50,000 would save four bucks.  He doesn’t mention that the proposal would result in a net loss of revenue to the state, causing wider budget deficits.  He does manage to mention critiques of the business net receipt tax from the side of business and industry, but offers no critiques from the opposite end, a la Jean Ross’ statement that “You could not say, ‘We’re going to tax child care so we can lower the income tax on millionaires.’ But that’s what this does.”  The fact that the BNRT would hit business payrolls and disproportionately tax companies in the knowledge economy rather than the service economy also doesn’t make it in.  Skelton never mentions that, by taxing all businesses in the state, the BNRT would effectively tax rents.

He just says it’s “too bold.”

The Parsky Commission was practically designed to shift wealth upward.  It should surprise nobody that this is what it ended up doing.  That is bold, but not in the way that Skelton means it, I don’t think.

He does give voice to where Karen Bass may steer the debate:

Bass was holding her tongue, trying not to express disappointment in the commission. When she first proposed its creation, the speaker envisioned the panel proposing something more practical and simple: reducing the sales tax rate and spreading it to currently untaxed services.

She promised a “thorough and objective public review” of the panel’s recommendations.

Good idea, but don’t stop there.

“My biggest message to dysfunctional Sacramento is to get something done,” Parsky says. “If you’ve got a better idea, get it done.”

There’s no question that flattening and broadening the sales tax base is a decent enough idea.  Under the constraints of minority rule, it may be the best one lawmakers can get, and it would prove popular if enacted.  We’ll see if the Parksy Commission report is dumped in favor of that.

Labor Smudges the Governor’s Legacy

Tomorrow, Governor Schwarzenegger is hosting his second Climate Summit.  He’d like you to remember him for all his incredible greenwashing projects. But you and I, and, well, about 65 percent of the state understand that his legacy is more about wrecking the state.

A large coalition of labor and Democratic activists will be protesting outside of the climate change summit tomorrow at 12:30. If you are in the neighborhood, definitely stop by.

Where:  HYATT REGENCY CENTURY PLAZA (outside, in front of hotel), 2025 Avenue of the Stars, Los Angeles, CA 90067 US

When: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 @ 12:30pm