Posted on 11/14/2004 8:14:09 PM PST by NormsRevenge
LOS ANGELES (AP) - As a candidate, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger promised to illuminate the inner workings of Sacramento the way klieg lights bring sunshine to a movie set. No more back-room handshakes and whispers, no more money-for-favors legislating.
"I will work to reform government by bringing openness and full disclosure to public business," the governor said on his inauguration day.
As the former Hollywood actor marks his first 12 months in office Wednesday, his plan to usher in a new era of transparency at the statehouse remains a work in progress, even by the account of his staff.
While Schwarzenegger agreed last week to comply with a media request to make public his appointment calendar, others see him as something less than the open-government governor he portrayed on the campaign trail. Sacramento remains a place, they say, with many secrets.
The research and drafting of the governor's California Performance Review, a sweeping study on government reform, was conducted behind closed doors and staff and consultants who worked on it were required to sign confidentiality agreements that could lead to prosecution if they talk about it.
In cultivating the Schwarzenegger image, his administration has been characterized by tight control over information, and even as the governor talks about open government he frequently ducks reporters. He made news last month by meeting with members of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association at a time when his appearances in Sacramento had been rare.
"In general he's as open as (former Gov.) Gray Davis. ... That was not intended as a compliment," said Terry Francke, general counsel for Californians Aware, a nonprofit organization that promotes open government and the First Amendment.
Has Schwarzenegger broken the tradition of closed-door dealmaking he promised to end?
"We have yet to see that," said Elizabeth Garrett, director of the Center for the Study of Law and Politics at the University of Southern California-California Institute of Technology.
"In terms of the day-to-day operation of government, it doesn't look that much different from what we've seen before," Garrett said.
Schwarzenegger drew praise last week when he promised to comply with a request from a media organization to see his personal appointment calendar after voters approved Proposition 59 on Nov. 2.
The initiative amended the state Constitution to require that meetings of government bodies and writings of public officials and agencies be open to public scrutiny.
At the end of his trade mission to Japan last week, Schwarzenegger told a group of reporters that he decided to open his appointment logs and meeting schedules after reading newspaper reports about the request by the California First Amendment Coalition.
If he does so, he would be the first California governor to fully disclose his day-to-day activities in office.
"I have no secrets," Schwarzenegger said.
Peter Scheer, the coalition's executive director, said he was delighted that Schwarzenegger agreed to comply with the group's request.
Struggles over access to government information are hardly new. In one high-profile example, a lawsuit by environmental groups tried to force the White House to release the names of the people who met with Vice President Dick Cheney on an energy task force.
At the same time, Schwarzenegger has had only a year to fulfill his promise to upend a Sacramento culture where he said "contributions go in, the favors go out."
The governor has "established a trust with Californians ... and he has been open," said his spokeswoman, Margita Thompson. "Does he think more needs to be done? Absolutely, and he intends to do more next year."
Schwarzenegger's celebrity poses obvious problems with privacy, given the intense public appetite for information on just about every facet of his life. But the governor will inevitably be held to a high standard for government openness because he made it a touchstone issue in his campaign.
In a word, he promised to do things differently.
Thus far, Schwarzenegger has favored closed-door negotiations to hammer out major legislation, often meeting with lawmakers in his private smoking tent on the Capitol grounds.
During the writing of his California Performance Review, ChevronTexaco Corp. and Microsoft, among other companies, privately lobbied the review team while environmental activists and public-interest groups grumbled that they were locked out.
California's most public face can sometimes be a shadow. From time to time, Schwarzenegger pulls a vanishing act, to destinations known and not.
"Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has left the state," his office said in a cryptic statement on Oct. 15. "Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has returned to the state," was the terse report two days later. It turned out he was in Idaho, at his vacation home.
"'I'll be back' is one of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's signature lines. It's also about the only thing he tells the media when he leaves the state," the Los Angeles Times said in an editorial in October.
Meanwhile, the governor's jobs commission - a group that includes numerous corporate heavyweights and Schwarzenegger allies - has been fighting state regulators over financial disclosure and conflict of interest policies routinely applied to state employees.
Although the commission was formed by Schwarzenegger to advise him on economic issues, it told the Fair Political Practices Commission that it is a private group with little connection to the governor or public policy. Therefore, the group said, it's exempt from adopting conflict of interest policies or requiring its members to file investment disclosures.
And although Schwarzenegger promised to break the relationship between legislation and campaign donations that can often create at least the appearance of conflicts of interest, he has proved to be a prolific fund-raiser who has raised millions of dollars behind closed doors from corporate and other special interests.
One Schwarzenegger political fund was created as a tax-exempt corporation to push his interests. Its special status has allowed it to not disclose its contributors or how it spends its money.
"There are always going to be situations where government and elected officials need to act in some privacy," said Tim Hodson, director of the Center for California Studies at California State University, Sacramento.
"The test is not whether every single action of every single official is transparent. The test is whether the public can have access to important, relevant information," Hodson said.
While he said it's too soon to make a judgment on Schwarzenegger, he added, "There is a difference between campaign rhetoric and the day-to-day reality of governing."
The California Performance Review recommendations are an exercise in opacity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.