Fabian Nunez and the governor
traded barbs yesterday over gubernatorial strategist
Mike Murphy's hints that the governor was prepared to help pass a ballot measure limiting use of union dues for political campaigns.
"'We've questioned him all along,' Nuņez told reporters in a hastily called news conference. "People that are very close to the governor have been raising money for [the union dues initiative]. And we said, 'Governor, do you have anything to do with this? Do you have any ties to this?' And he totally distanced himself from it, saying he had nothing to do with it.'"
"'
He should knock off his Howard Dean histrionics and come to the table to do what is in the best interests of California,' [governor's spokesperson Margita Thompson] said."
To which, of course, we can only say
"Yeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaah!" (No, we never
do get tired of that joke.)
In a sit-down with the Bee's editorial board, the governor clarified that while he is supportive of the union dues measure,
he would like to see a compromise. "'They have all this money they can raise from members, and I alone have to go out there by myself raising $20 million, like I've just done,' [the governor] said. 'And now raising an extra $30 million, and we're going to do it. There's no two ways about it.'"
Not to put too fine a point on it, but since the initiative is headed for the ballot anyway, isn't the governor implying that he can, with the snap of his fingers,
turn off the spigots of cash for the paycheck protection initiative? If not, then what is there to negotiate? And if so, isn't the governor in essence already controlling the measure?
Earlier in the day, the governor auditioned political commercial lines during a visit to a Rocklin school, responding to the education community's criticism that he broke a promise to restore $2 billion in schools funding this year. "'I did not break a promise like they keep saying,' Schwarzenegger said of the CTA, which has been running television ads for months that accuse him of breaking his word. '
I borrowed $2 billion, and now I'm supposed to give it back this year? This is wrong. It's a right-out lie,' he went on."
The governor and the rest of the Republican message team have also begun telling reporters, and anyone else who gets paid to listen, that they are
"fully funding Prop. 98" this year. We heard this from three different Republicans during the course of our reporting yesterday, so obviously, the talking points memo was circulated far and wide.
The Merc News has the
response from CTA: "'He's gone from 'I'm not going to keep the promise' to 'I never made the promise,' countered
Barbara Kerr, president of the 335,000-member CTA. 'He said if revenues went up, he would pay us back. He's changing his story, and frankly people are very tired of it.'"
Here's the deal, which is still on the governor's web site.
The governor also encouraged Democrats to place a tax increase on the potential special election ballot this November. The Times reports "'
If the legislators can't make the decision, let the voters make the decision,' Schwarzenegger said during an appearance at a Placer County elementary school. 'I wish him good luck with that. I personally am against increasing taxes.'"
So, maybe punting until November is the way out after all.
Dan Walters
agrees with the strategy, "Given the starkness of the conflict, an idea advanced by Bee columnist Dan Weintraub makes a lot of sense: Since we're likely to have an election in November anyway,
why not place the two competing fiscal visions on the ballot? Schwarzenegger semi-endorsed that concept Tuesday, challenging Democrats to put their tax proposals before voters."
OK, but if we rely on the people to make budget decisions, will someone remind us why we have a Legislature?
Meanwhile in the comfy confines of the Sacramento Press Club luncheon, Secretary of State
Bruce McPherson made some waves, saying that
new legislative districts could not be in place by 2006, and probably not even by 2008. McPherson said that "logistical problems, questions about the accuracy of population figures that would be used for a mid-decade redistricting and a flood of lawsuits would hold up implementing the new districts. McPherson said new districts could probably be in place by 2010. But doing it then would raise questions about timing, since the panel of ex-judges would have new population figures to work with from the 2010 census if they waited until 2011 to act."
Ouch.
When asked if the governor knew about McPherson's position on the redistricting initiative, one reporter blurted out, "he does now!"
Margita Thompson said the governor is "more optimistic" than McPherson that new districts can be in place quicker. But redistricting advocate
Bill Mundell said the secretary's comments "undermine the people's voice." If by the people's voice he means the governor's leverage on the redistricting initiative, he's absolutely right.
One of the favorite pieces of budgetary duct tape isn't working up to expectations, so the administration
will no longer score savings from "strategic sourcing" until the savings are actually achieved. "'We've been saying that strategic sourcing was not generating the savings they were claiming, and now they're admitting it," said state Sen.
Joseph Dunn, D-Santa Ana. '
Strategic sourcing is a wonderful theory on a blackboard in a classroom, but these programs do not save the kind of money their proponents claim,' Dunn added."
And if you're having problems driving on Pacific Coast Highway this morning, it's probably from that
Antonio Villaraigosa landslide last night. Villaraigosa, who
the rest of the world informs us is Latino,
beat Mayor Jim Hahn like a raw egg last night, earning 58.6% of the vote. Is it too early to start thinking about the 2010 gubernatorial race?
