Cross-posted from the Courage Campaign’s Prop 8 Trial Tracker blog.

In their Opinion LA blog, the LA Times calls Governor Schwarzenegger “the gay friendly governator.”  Sure, he has recently been getting a lot of respect for declining, repeatedly, to get involved on behalf of Proposition 8.  But how much is that worth?  

Here’s the Times take on the issue:

Who could have called it in 2003: Arnold Schwarzenegger, the body-building terminator who originally showcased his brutish masculinity as a campaign centerpiece and once called Democrats “girlie men,” could go down in history as California’s most gay-friendly governor to date. Sure, Schwarzenegger’s done more for gay men and women when he’s done nothing: Though he vetoed then-Assemblyman Mark Leno’s bill to legalize same-sex marriage in 2005 (legislation that was almost certainly illegal under Proposition 22), he and Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown have refused to defend Proposition 8 in federal court.

This is in the context of a bill, AB 2199, that would delete from the state law books an official policy of curing homosexuality that recently passed out of the Legislature and is now heading for the Governor’s desk. He’ll likely sign the bill, as, truthfully, it isn’t all that controversial.  It sailed through both houses, with but one dissenting vote.  The one vote would be the anachronistic and bigoted Assemblyman from San Diego, Joel Anderson.

It is great that Arnold has been on our side in the last few years.  But, he has never been willing to put any of his own political capital on the line.  Instead, he’s content to wait it out.  He vetoed the Harvey Milk Day bill before signing it.  And with Mark Leno’s marriage bills, he ran for the hills. His rationale was that somebody, the judges, the people, anybody but him, should say something first.  Regardless of whether he thought Prop 22 was unconstitutional back in 2005 or not, he was not willing to take the lead by just signing the bill.  If marriage inequality was odious to the constitution 6 months ago, it was odious in 2005 as well.  Would it have stirred up some controversy? Most definitely.  But real leaders have a tendency to do that.

Or perhaps he could have expended a bit of energy in 2008 campaigning against Prop 8? He did make a token endorsement of Prop 8, but beyond that was out of the picture.

But, LGBT issues go beyond the single issue of marriage, and on transgender rights he hasn’t been quite so good, even of late:

On 12 October 2009, California Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, fell short of ensuring full protection of LGBTQ people in the California’s prison system. Choosing to veto  the LGBT Prisoner Safety Act (AB 382, Ammiano) and the Equal ID Act (AB 1185, Lieu), he has failed to cement two crucial policies into law. Needless to say, the LGBTQ community has been failed, and must now overturn the Governor’s cruel and unusual decision.

First and foremost, the Governor’s reasons for vetoing the LGBT Prisoner Safety Act (AB 382, Ammiano), was due to the fact that California’s prison system already takes gender identity and sexual orientation into account when housing prisoners. Whilst that is very likely the case, GLBTQ inmates shall remain vulnerable until this becomes actual law. Until then, human rights violations may continue.

As for the vetoing of the Equal ID Act (AB 1185, Lieu), the Governor’s reasons were similar. Thanks to a past landmark victory, Somers v. Superior Court, it had already been ruled unconstitutional to deny transgender inmates the right to petition a gender change. Despite this fact, the Transgender Law Center asserts that the “Equal ID Act would have alleviated any confusion in the statutory language itself.” (Examiner blogs)

These veto messages are hardly the stuff of civil rights heroes. You hope, you think gender identity is considered in jails and prisons?  Well, that might be nice in theory, but in reality the situation isn’t quite so smooth. Transgender prisoners face very difficult conditions in the prisons, and very little extra caution is given to them.

In the end, I find it difficult to call this Governor gay friendly. Real friends are there for you, good times or bad.  This one swoops in when the tide is clearly turning. At best, I would call him a frenemy.  

The California Supreme Court handed down a stay of the Alameda County court’s order blocking the furloughs.  Here’s the text of the order:

The petition for review is GRANTED. Because the issue whether the Governor has the authority to direct the unpaid furlough of state employees is pending before this court and is scheduled for oral argument on Wednesday, September 8, 2010, in the related case of Professional Engineers in California Government et al. v. Arnold Schwarzenegger et. al., S183411, and without expressing any view on the merits of that issue, we conclude that it is appropriate to grant review in this matter and defer further action pending our resolution of the currently pending proceeding. Pending further order of this court, further proceedings in the Alameda County Superior Court in case number RG10494800 (and in consolidated cases numbered RG10507922, RG10507081, RGI0503805, RGI0501997, RGI0516259, RGI0514694, and RG10528855), as well as the temporary restraining order of the Alameda County Superior Court issued on August 9, 2010, are stayed. Votes: George, C.J., Kennard, Baxter, Chin, Moreno, and Corrigan, JJ.

What this means for the time being is that the upcoming furloughs, as defined by the Governor will go ahead until further notice.  The Supreme Court will directly review the decision (bypassing the court of appeal) and render a decision, which you would assume would come in a fairly speedy manner.  

Stay tuned for more on this, but this is a big win for Arnold’s furloughs and will probably control through much of the budget fightin’ season.

In Rumsfeld-ian lingo, sometimes Arnold Schwarzenegger is a complete “known-unknown”. That is we know he is a wildcard.  He pulls shenanigans through his puppet Abel Maldonado (see the 2009 Budget Fight) and plays games of brinksmanship.  It’s annoying, but by now we have grown used to it.

On other topics and occasions, I can see Arnold coming from miles away.  And thus is the case with his recent stance on Prop 25, the majority vote budget measure (aka “the on-time budget act”).  Today, he essentially announced his opposition to the measure by saying how much he loves the supermajority.  But then, you have Prop 26 (2/3 on fees), where he even jumps the sketchy “logic” of Rumsfeld and becomes a category unto himself.  First, here’s what he said:

The Republican governor spoke during a “budget roundtable” he convened at the offices of the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce. In response to a question on ballot initiatives, he first said taxes and fees should not be increased by a majority vote, a restriction the California Chamber of Commerce  is attempting to strengthen in Proposition 26. He then said he’s not only against approving taxes and fees on a majority-vote basis, but also a state budget.

“Even doing the budget, I even don’t believe in doing the budget by a simple majority,” Schwarzenegger said. “Because if you do a budget by simple majority, again, there is one party that will make all the decisions. I think it needs the input of both of the parties because you can see the first thing (Democrats) did was come up with borrowing or a tax increase.”(SacBee)

Of course, we shouldn’t be surprised that he chose a Chamber forum, as his time in government has been almost entirely dictated by the whims of the business community generally and the dictates of the Chamber specifically.  The hundreds of millions of dollars that they have funnelled to the action hero has served them well. He has held the line while building a bulwark of supposed moderation that appears to create some sort of middle ground. In the end though, Arnold is really no different than the extreme right-wing that is represented in the Legislature’s GOP caucus.

But by signaling that he supports Prop 26’s goal of increasing the supermajority restrictions to cover fees, he is attacking a practice that he tried to use himself on a number of occasions. Sometimes successful, and sometimes not. Most notably, Arnold tried to tack on a fee for firefighting to all homeowner’s insurance policies.  

The fact is that if Prop 26 passes, the last avenue for the legislature to attempt to fund services for the state will be closed.  And the government-haters will have won.  Think the Legislature sucks? Then terrific, take away all their authority, and then see how well they do.  Ours is a system that was created to fail, and this is just one more step.

In today’s LA Times, I called John Chiang a nerd. It’s true!

“He’s just looks like a nerd, right?” said Brian Leubitz, founder of Calitics, a liberal blog.

But beneath the wonkish exterior, Chiang has displayed sharp political instincts that have made him a favorite of the politically potent labor unions that represent the state’s workforce and have contributed significantly to his campaigns. (LA Times)

To be honest, this was kind of a throwaway line in the interview.  I was saying that he doesn’t initially strike you as the guy who would stand up to The Terminator. But in his own quiet, unassuming way, he is.  My other quote is about how Chiang is now one of the few progressive leaders who has really impressed the base.

But Chiang, like Debra Bowen, has impressed through sheer merit.  He really understands his role, and his job.  And he leverages his power, when possible, to fight for progressive change.  At the same time, he is just very capable.  Take a look at one of the credit agency reports, and you’ll find them praising Chiang and his office for their excellent cash management during last year’s budget crisis.  He probably saved us a small fortune by helping to maintain (as much as that is possible) our credit rating. I won’t go in to how much of the credit rating is complete BS, as we’ve mentioned that in the past. But at least the agencies recognize competence.

In the end, isn’t it competence that we should be favoring for our fiscal position. Somebody who understands the complexities of sound cash flow management, and the consequences of the Governor’s reckless actions.  Prudence…it’s perhaps a quality that the Governor could get a real lesson from John Chiang.

Sure, if I wanted to blow up an alien vessel, I’d call Schwarzenegger. But stave off fiscal insolvency? Sacramento calls John Chiang.

Yesterday, Arnold Schwarzenegger sued for an injunction requiring Controller John Chiang to impliment his order to cut state worker salaries to the minimum wage.  Controller Chiang has a response:

State Controller John Chiang filed suit today in an attempt to block Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s order to reduce pay for most state workers to the federal minimum wage during the current budget impasse.

Chiang’s suit, filed in Sacramento Superior Court, complains that he is being forced to choose between violating Schwarzenegger’s order or violating various federal and state laws. Read the cross complaint here.(SacBee)

A hearing should be scheduled fairly shortly; we’ll keep you updated on this situation.  The response brings up a number of fairly important issues, such as how to account to corrections employees that are now under federal court receivership, tax implications,  and how to actually deal with the excluded class of six unions that have signed new deals.

The whole order is something of a mess, with Arnold not really considering the implications. Nothing new there.

The gloves are off between John Chiang and the Governor.  Today, Arnold filed for an injunction requiring Chiang to not issue the full paychecks to state workers:

The Schwarzenegger administration submitted a court petition Tuesday in Sacramento County Superior Court seeking an injunction to force state Controller John Chiang to slash the wages of roughly 200,000 state workers.

Schwarzenegger has ordered the wages of state employees cut to $7.25 an hour until a budget is signed. A state appeals court agreed that the governor had the authority to do so last week, but Chiang, a Democrat, has continued to fight the directive. (LA Times)

Chiang has been fighting this for a number of years now, but the Supreme Court has yet to way in decisively one way or the other. Chiang has been arguing for years that unless the computer system is upgraded the pay cut will wreak havoc upon the payroll system.

In the end, the cut simply isn’t necessary. It’s just Arnold playing games with the state’s workforce.  But, it seems anything goes with state workers these days. Name a method of attack, and it’s pretty much a lock that some Republican (or Democrat/Green) will try it.

On Thursday,I wondered what John Chiang’s response to the Governor would be.  Would he stand up to him like he did last year? Or comply with the minimum wage order.  The answer? A strong no:

In a strongly worded rebuke, state Controller John Chiang said Thursday that he would defy Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s order to slash the pay of state workers until “the courts hand down a final resolution.”

Chiang, a Democrat, said the pay cuts will “do nothing to solve the budget deficit” because state employees are entitled to their back pay once a budget is in place. “In the absence of the leadership needed to bring the Legislature to an agreement on his budget, the governor again resorts to political tricks,” Chiang said in a statement. …

“Again, absent a final court ruling, I will continue to protect the state’s finances and pay full wages earned by state employees,” Chiang declared. (LA Times)

Good for Chiang. This is a political stunt by the governor, and isn’t necessary for purposes of the state budget.  Honestly, there have been few batter allies for state workers than John Chiang. While maintaining a steady hand at the fiscal controls, he has managed to be a counterbalance to the Governor’s brinskmanship.

To the right, you’ll see a sketch of a spine. In the metaphorical sense, we’ve been getting ours ground down over the last few years.  Every year Arnold plays games with the budget, gradually eroding the social safety net.

If the social safety net is still alive in California, it is surely on life support. Let’s put this into simple terms.  Oh sure, we can steal more for K-12 education, that’s merely robbing from our future.  We can eliminate In-Home Support Services, those people are weak. According to Republicans, we need to “thin the herd” anyway.

I say it every time this fight rolls around, we must be willing to say no, and just shut it down.  The suffering will be immense, and the Republicans know that.  However, they have shown that they do not care.  They are playing this game knowing that we won’t go all the way.  And so, they have the advantage.  The only way to neutralize that is to find the spine (–>) to lose badly on teh day to day basis to win on the broader scale.

The Governor has made it perfectly clear that he’s going to pummel the state of California, and that he is for damn sure going to get his way.

No specifics are out yet on Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s revised plan to balance the state budget. But Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron McLear offered two salient details today: There will be no tax hikes and “absolutely terrible cuts.” (LAT)

He’s saying everything is on the table except that which would cause the least amount of damage.  It makes no sense outside of the political realm, but here we are. Stuck in the middle with Schwarzenegger. But he knows that, though it might take a while, the Democrats will eventually yield to his cuts, and we’ll take one more step towards the precipice to avoid the big jump down…for now.

Shouldn’t we be looking around for the bungie cord right about now?  It’s called revenue, and given our economic conditions, it makes sense now.