California: Governor seeks "referendum proof" illegal alien driver license bill

KFI AM640, Los Angeles, John and Ken Show | March 8, 2004

[Southack]

"Let him put this story to rest. Let him declare that SB 1160 with an urgency clause is DOA. Until then, he is suspect."

Please see post #139.

[CWOJackson]

Spoiler!

Sarcasm aside, thank for posting some truth and not tabloid speculation.

[lonewacko_dot_com]

I didn't post that as a defense of Arnold. I think he is working with Cedillo, and he is willing to sign such a bill. That's just what I was told. What I was told may have no relation to what's actually going on. See the newspaper articles posted earlier about Arnold working with Cedillo, "we can get this done," etc. etc.

[CWOJackson]

It didn't matter to me whether you were defending the Governor or not really, what I applaud is that you were willing to actually look for the truth yourself and post real information rather than making it up from here say.

It could well be that the Governor will take a dive, or he could hold firm on some elements...or anything in between.

[Sabertooth]

I called and was told that Schwarzenegger isn't "working with" Cedillo, he's just watching what proposals he's coming up with and providing comments.

Distinction without a difference.

This does, however, confirm that Schwarzenegger hasn't unequivocally rejected the idea of giving CDLs to Illegals.

I was told that Schwarzenegger can't comment on something until it's a real bill.

SB 1160 is already a real bill.

Posting for the third time on this thread:

SB 1160 Senate Bill - INTRODUCED

BILL NUMBER: SB 1160 INTRODUCED
BILL TEXT

INTRODUCED BY Senator Cedillo

FEBRUARY 2, 2004

An act relating to drivers, and declaring the urgency thereof, to take effect immediately.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

SB 1160, as introduced, Cedillo. Highways: drivers. Existing law makes it unlawful for a person to drive a motor vehicle upon a highway unless that person holds a valid driver's license issued under the Vehicle Code, and provides proof of financial responsibility.

This bill would express the intent of the Legislature to enact appropriate legislation that improves the safety of all California residents while operating motor vehicles upon our highways by ensuring that all drivers of motor vehicles are properly licensed, tested, and maintain proof of financial responsibility.

The bill would declare that it takes effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Vote: 2/3. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State-mandated local program: no.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. It is the intent of the Legislature to enact appropriate legislation that improves the safety of all California residents while operating motor vehicles on our highways by ensuring that all drivers of motor vehicles are properly licensed, tested, and maintain proof of financial responsibility.

SEC. 2. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within the meaning of Article IV of the Constitution and shall go into immediate effect. The facts constituting the necessity are:

In order to reduce the number of unlicensed drivers on our highways, who account for 20 percent of all accidents and, thereby, compromise public safety, it is necessary that this act take effect immediately.
http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_1151-1200/sb_1160_bill_20040202_introduced.html

The spokesman confirmed the essence of Ron Prince's statements regarding the effect of the urgency clause vis-a-vis when it goes into law and how we'd have to get rid of it.

Schwarzenegger can't comment on SB 1160 until it's "real bill," but this person in Schwarzenegger's office has committed to the need to get rid of the urgency clause?

Does this person have a name?

Wasn't one of the complaints with Ron Prince's source that it was nameless?

Are nameless Scharzenegger aides answering phones more credible than nameless Schwarzenegger aides holding meetings?

He also stated that mine was among many other calls they've received on this.

So it sounds like he's had some practice with his responses.

Let Schwarzenegger speak unequivocally against SB 1160's urgency clause. His own words and actions have made him suspect on this matter. He needs to clear it up himself.

Let him reject CDLs for Illegals altogether, while he's at it.

[CWOJackson]

LOL!

You picked a very good name. The sabertooth became extinct when it was unable to evole also.

[Sabertooth]

this is the governor who REPEALED Gray Davis' illegal alien license bill,

More on that:

Dan Savage, chief of staff for state Sen. Gilbert Cedillo, who authored SB 60, explains that Cedillo did not stand in the way of the new governor's promise to repeal the hard-fought-for bill, "because if Cedillo had, the matter would have ended up on March ballot"--a statement that hints at the fear of a backlash against the measure among California voters.

Instead, the matter is back in the hands of the legislature, as Cedillo and others work to come up with solutions that are acceptable to the governor, who claims to have his finger on the people's pulse.

And while some fear President Bush's recent proposals to reform immigration laws are nothing but empty promises to woo Latino voters in an election year, Savage reports that after they were announced, "Gilbert [Cedillo] got a call from Schwarzenegger to say that if the president is saying we've got to acknowledge that these workers are here and give them some legal status, then that has to help politically to get this legislation through."
Unlicensed to Drive
From the February 4-11, 2004 issue of Metro Santa Cruz.
(FR link)

[Sabertooth]

You picked a very good name. The sabertooth became extinct when it was unable to evole also.

Anyway, how do you explain that you were critical of the the article at the top of this thread because "It's pretty hard to counter the "evidence" provided by an anonymous aide," or "Rumor, or what someone said that someone said, is more then sufficient to "prove" their point," or "You seem to be doing an outstanding job with the innuendo and rumors from anonymous aides," yet you describe a later post more to your liking from an unnamed source as "the truth" and "real information?"

[CWOJackson]

Well, lets see if I can explain it so you understand:

- The original post that lead to this charge of the lite brigade was based off of information from an anonymous source on a radio talk show.

Then I praised someone who didn't rely on innuendo and anonymous callers to a talk show but who said they actually sought out real facts: I called and was told that Schwarzenegger isn't "working with" Cedillo, he's just watching what proposals he's coming up with and providing comments. I was told that Schwarzenegger can't comment on something until it's a real bill. The spokesman confirmed the essence of Ron Prince's statements regarding the effect of the urgency clause vis-a-vis when it goes into law and how we'd have to get rid of it. He also stated that mine was among many other calls they've received on this."

That may be a distinction that you find difficult to grasp but work at it a while and it might come to you.

[Sabertooth]

- The original post that lead to this charge of the lite brigade was based off of information from an anonymous source on a radio talk show.

No knock againstg lonewacko.com, but you have no more info on his unnamed source than you do on Ron Prince's source.

Then I praised someone who didn't rely on innuendo and anonymous callers to a talk show but who said they actually sought out real facts: I called and was told that Schwarzenegger isn't "working with" Cedillo, he's just watching what proposals he's coming up with and providing comments. I was told that Schwarzenegger can't comment on something until it's a real bill. The spokesman confirmed the essence of Ron Prince's statements regarding the effect of the urgency clause vis-a-vis when it goes into law and how we'd have to get rid of it. He also stated that mine was among many other calls they've received on this."

That may be a distinction that you find difficult to grasp but work at it a while and it might come to you.

I recognize a distinction without a difference when I see one.

I also recognize the petard you're on: your own.

You're selectively critical of unnamed sources. You've brought no new information to this thread to provide context to various anonymous sources, you just like one better than another.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but you can't pretend you haven't cherry-picked what you want to believe in the absence of any substantive reason why.

I showed that there were not only internal contradictions in the statement by the Schwarzenegger aide to lonewacko_dot_com, but also contradictions with published facts.

Contradictions which you deftly avoided addressing by posting "LOL!"

[CWOJackson]

"You're certainly entitled to your opinion..."

Of course Sylvester...and you and the rest of the lite brigade are entitled to charge off on the flimsiest excuses you can fabricate.

[Sabertooth]

Of course Sylvester...and you and the rest of the lite brigade are entitled to charge off on the flimsiest excuses you can fabricate.

Still no substance from you.

Still not surprised.

You ignored everything posted on this thread in favor of a self-contradictory, partially non-factual statement by an anonymous Schwarzenegger aide to an anonymous Freeper, about which the Freeper himself is somewhat skeptical.

And everyone else is fabricating flimsy excuses?

[CWOJackson]

"Still no substance from you."

LOL! I'm flattered that you would compare me to this thread but I'm affraid I have to decline that honor.

No, I'll leave the lack of substance up to the lite brigade.

Oh, cute cartoon kitty there.

[calcowgirl]

The spokesman confirmed the essence of Ron Prince's statements regarding the effect of the urgency clause vis-a-vis when it goes into law and how we'd have to get rid of it.

Thanks for the input. Can you clarify the last phrase? Who is "we". Is the Governor in favor of the urgency clause, or was Schwarzenegger included in the "we" category?

[Admin Moderator]

Knock it off

[CWOJackson]

Not trying to revive an old Cheech and Chong joke but Joe hasn't been here since yesterday.

[lonewacko_dot_com]

Arguing or trying to entrap the guy who answered the phone didn't seem like either wise or useful. Even John and Ken (KFI Los Angeles) can't get an official statement on this. I simply asked a few questions and then said I was opposed to any bills giving DLs to IAs.

As for the "we," that means those opposed to any such bills. Whether Arnold is a member of "we" or not remains to be seen. Also on the John and Ken show today, Tom McClintock suggested giving Schwarzenegger the benefit of the doubt.

My mind was made up before calling Arnold's office; based on newspaper reports, Arnold appears to be willing to sign a bill like this. That may prove to be incorrect but being safe is better than being sorry.

[truthkeeper]

I'm sure you also heard John and Ken mention that they've been trying for two days to get Arnold's office to answer the simple question of whether or not he'd sign this bill with the urgency clause. They're not getting an answer, and are having nunofit.