Give my regards..."Schwarzenegger
will address the United Nations at a 'high-level event' on global climate change [today] in New York, an appearance believed to be a first for a governor of any U.S. state," reports Kevin Yamamura in the Bee.
Who does this guy think he is, Angelina Jolie?
"Environmentalists said Schwarzenegger could be seen as upstaging President Bush because the United Nations is embracing the governor as an American leader on global warming while international leaders have looked askance at the Bush administration.
But we're guessing it wouldn't be too hard to upstage President Bush in an environmentalist's mind...
"The governor will appear at the invitation of U.N. Secretary-General
Ban Ki-moon, who envisions the daylong conference as a precursor to December talks to form a new greenhouse gas reduction treaty that sets mandatory limits after the Kyoto Protocol runs its course in 2012. An estimated 70 heads of state or government are expected to attend, according to the United Nations."
Meanwhile, the Bee's Judy Lin writes "Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger
is about to be tested on how far he's willing to go to keep his reputation green.
"Sitting on the governor's desk are three Democratic bills that would expand California's efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by requiring state, residential and certain commercial buildings to adopt environmentally responsible practices in design and construction.
"If Schwarzenegger signs the bills, California could begin requiring more efficient use of water in new homes as well as energy-efficient lighting in large office buildings, and more state workers could find themselves treading on recycled carpet.
"'If he's serious about reducing global warming, he needs to make buildings more efficient,' said Assemblyman
Ted Lieu, D-Torrance, co-author of Assembly Bills 888 and 1058, which deal, respectively, with commercial and residential buildings."
"Nine months after unveiling a sweeping plan to bring health care coverage to 6.8 million uninsured Californians, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger
is close to an agreement with legislative Democratic leadership on a compromise that lawmakers could consider in the coming weeks," reports Tom Chorneau in the Chron.
"As the talks enter a critical final stage, formal opposition to reforms already outlined by the two sides is almost nonexistent.
"Absent from the airwaves are the attack ads from insurance companies and doctor groups that many feared would have materialized by now. Massive protests from labor unions or consumer groups intended to push the talks one direction or another have also been largely put on hold.
And that complaining you hear is from the political consultants who make those attack ads, and of course, the political web sites that run them...
"Even traditional critics of health care reform have been careful not to speak too harshly or too publicly given the stakes involved.
"'I think there's determination and desire not to lose this opportunity,' said
Beth Capell, a lobbyist representing the Service Employees International Union. 'I have to give the administration and the legislative leaders credit for keeping the doors open and a flow of information going so that there are alternatives to open warfare.'
"
Steve Burd, chief executive of the Safeway grocery chain and a leader of a coalition of big employers who have been pushing for health care reform this year, said there's been a "sea change" among employers because of rising costs.
"'This is consuming so much of the gross domestic product that it runs the risk of us being uncompetitive,' he said."
While negotiations are progressing behind closed doors, Steve Wiegand notes that the
deal might have to await the return of jetsetting legislators.
"In fact, the most extraordinary thing has been the fact that 20 legislators -- that's 16.7 percent of the total, for those of you keeping score at home -- are off on trips around various parts of the world. Nine are on a 12-day trip to China that ends Thursday; seven are down in Argentina and Brazil (back in early October), and four are off to Germany and Azerbaijan (also back in early October). Relax, they're paying their own ways, quite possibly using money from their campaign funds, which is legal.
"But unless they're sending him really nice postcards, you gotta wonder if Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger isn't chafing just a bit about the small herds of wandering solons.
We doubt it, since these water and health care deals are leadership-driven. Not that the rest of the travelling folks are irrelevent, of course...
Jake Henshaw looks at
the art of the political junket"The overseas trips, lawmakers said, give them a chance to talk with foreign government and business leaders and learn about diverse issues on which they may vote and debate such as telecommunications, the wine industry, nuclear power and high-speed railroads.
"We have been funding it in the budget," [Sen.
Denise] Ducheny said of high-speed rail studies for California. "Seeing it on the ground gives you a better understanding so you can look at what we are proposing here and think about how it can adapt."
"The impact of votes we cast do resonate around the world, whether it be on global warming or looking at high-speed rail," Sen.
Jim]Battin added.
But who should pay for them?
If the trips benefit the state's official interests, then the state should pay, said Doug Heller of the nonprofit Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights."If California politicians need to leave the state to do their work, then the state taxpayers should pay for it," Heller said. "If politicians can't convince the public of the value of a trip, then they shouldn't be going on it."
"The guv, who's been periodically criticized for his own global jaunts while trouble was brewing at home, canceled a trip to England that had been scheduled for the end of this month and postponed a trade mission to India that was skedded for November, so he could deal with California issues."
"Despite state laws that require government officials to seek competitive bids on large purchases, internal documents reveal that
state officials held a series of private meetings with General Motors during which they agreed to buy "flex-fuel" vehicles from the automaker - a month before a bid for such vehicles was ever issued," writes Kimberly Kindy in the Merc News.
"Various e-mails, memos and documents obtained by the Mercury News show that the meetings took place over five months and culminated with state officials signing a Memorandum of Understanding with GM for what was then a small pilot project of 50 to 100 vehicles. No other automaker was offered a chance at the deal.
"Soon after, the state solicited bids to buy an entire fleet of flex-fuel vehicles designed to run on high-grade ethanol. General Motors dealerships won all of the contracts for what was ultimately 1,300 cars and trucks and $17 million in sales, because they were the only automaker that met the state's qualifications.
"Legal experts said the sequence of events - and especially the pre-bid agreement for the pilot program - appear to run afoul of state contract laws, which are designed to ensure fairness and that taxpayers get the best deal for their money."
Dan Walters
writes that Democrats are hypocritical in their outcry over the electoral reform initiative.
"Actually, it's a pretty straightforward, albeit partisan, maneuver, and may be nothing more than a feint to force Democrats to spend big money. It may even be unconstitutional, since the U.S. Constitution says that electors are to be chosen by a state "in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct" and it's possible that courts would not allow a ballot measure to usurp that authority.
"That said, if enacted, it would be fairer than the present winner-take-all system, although a better solution to the quadrennial electoral vote game would be to get rid of it and go to a straight popular vote. And it's more than a little hypocritical for California Democrats to complain about distorting the election process when they do it on a regular basis."
"The high price of college textbooks is a hot issue, not just among disgruntled students weary of spending more than $100 on an economics or a chemistry tome. In Sacramento political circles,
efforts to lower those costs have produced two pieces of legislation that are competing for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's signature," reports Larry Gordon in the Times.
"The main authors of both are Democrats, and the two legislators say they are trying, among other things, to get more advance information to college professors about the pricing of books and whether additional material in new editions is substantial enough to merit ordering them. Requiring new editions makes it tough for students to buy or trade cheaper secondhand copies.
"But the two bills vary enough that one has the support of the Assn. of American Publishers and the other is backed by the California Public Interest Research Group, which has sharply criticized the publishing industry.
"The Republican governor has until Oct. 12 to decide whether to sign one, both or neither of the bills. Schwarzenegger has not taken a position on the matter, according to his press office."
"
Inspections have dramatically increased and deaths have strikingly decreased since California's occupational safety agency embarked on a campaign two years ago to reduce on-the-job heat stress," writes Andy Furillo in the Bee.
"Through Sept. 17, the state Division of Occupational Safety and Health had conducted 355 heat-related job inspections this year, compared with 180 for all of last year and only 37 when the so-called heat regulations were rolled out on an emergency basis in 2005.
"Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger put them into effect after three farmworkers and one construction employee died two summers ago of the heat. His Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board made the regulations permanent in 2006.
"As the summer comes to a close, only one worker -- an out-of-state long-haul truck driver -- has died in California as a result of excessive heat, according to figures provided by the agency known as Cal-OSHA. The trucker's death compares with eight workers who died in the summer of 2006 and the 12 who perished during the course of two 2005 heat waves."
"When California Chief Justice
Ronald M. George intervened in the search process for a dean for the new law school at UC Irvine, critics questioned the court's involvement," writes Maura Dolan in the Times.
"But legal scholars said last week that it is neither unusual nor unethical for high court judges to weigh in on candidates for public law schools, particularly when their views are sought.
"The Times reported Sept. 15 that George provided a UC Irvine selection committee with a letter contending that candidate
Erwin Chemerinsky, a Duke University law professor, had made a glaring error in an opinion piece he wrote for The Times.
George called it 'a gross error.' Chemerinsky insisted that his work was accurate.
Tomato, Tomahto...
"'If the justices sent a letter to UC Irvine with the goal of influencing the dean process, that is inappropriate,' Chemerinsky said when told of the letter.
"'No, it is not inappropriate,' New York University law professor
Stephen Gillers, an expert on legal ethics, said last week when told of George's version of what had happened."
