Posted on 09/19/2005 7:49:00 PM PDT by SmithL
SACRAMENTO - Almost two years ago, Arnold Schwarzenegger made one of his most detailed policy speeches of the tumultuous 2003 recall election.
Standing inside the California State Railroad Museum -- a visual emblem of the special-interest politics that can dominate state politics -- the gubernatorial candidate laid out what he called a "sweeping political reform" agenda to restore public trust in Sacramento. It included a fund-raising blackout during budget season, redrawing political boundaries and a vow to veto bills that hadn't been fully vetted in the Legislature.
Now, as Schwarzenegger campaigns for a special election and a second term, most of his political reform pledges stand as unfinished promises, ideas that were pursued but have withered amid political reality.
"The governor continues his commitment to pursue those reforms," said Schwarzenegger strategist Rob Stutzman. "But it's becoming increasingly clear that the way you have to do that is at the ballot box, which would ironically require more fund raising."
To some political observers, the governor's plan for political reform is yet another example of how Schwarzenegger said one thing as a candidate and did another in office. Come November, it may feed into voter disenchantment about the man whom many Californians believed was not a regular politician, but perhaps is.
Schwarzenegger once famously said, "I don't need to take money from anybody. I have plenty of money myself," and then became a prodigious fund-raiser -- collecting more than $6 million for initiative campaigns in July and August alone.
He vowed that he would be more transparent and there would be "no more decisions in the dark," but he has learned the value of privately hammering out some major policy decisions in the amber cigar-smoking tent erected near his offices. He declined his state salary so as not to burden taxpayers, but accepted a $1 million-a-year contract with two muscle magazines (a contract he later ended after its details became public).
Issuing lofty public pronouncements is frequently easier than navigating actual policy: Many elected leaders start their terms with grand visions that peter into more modest accomplishments.
For Schwarzenegger, a look back at his campaign finance pledges is a window into the politics of the possible. It also shows how he adapts to political obstacles, accepting some and circumventing others.
Schwarzenegger earnestly wanted to create political reform, but has only made "tepid" stabs at doing so -- most notably by pursuing redistricting this year, said Bob Stern, executive director of the Center for Governmental Studies in Los Angeles. Many of his proposals have faced opposition from Democrats and Republicans alike.
The governor didn't pitch political reform "with his fingers crossed behind his back," said Stern, a former chairman of the state's Fair Political Practices Commission. "But political reality sets in. Circumstances change, and he's very changeable. In a certain sense, that's a good thing. ... But when you're flexible, you also have to contradict what you've said before."
In 2005, Schwarzenegger is pursuing a "year for reform" and it includes one of the goals he set out for himself two years ago -- having retired judges, not legislators, draw political districts.
On the other issues raised in 2003, Schwarzenegger has "zigged and zagged all over the place," said political scientist Bruce Cain, director of the University of California's Washington Center.
"To some degree," Cain said, "this election is a referendum on what people think about Arnold's concept of reform."
Two recent polls have shown that Schwarzenegger's approval rating is lodged in the 30s. Large groups think that the man who rails about special interest influence takes money from those interests. Many think he has not been "completely truthful" about the sources of his campaign contributions.
The reality is more nuanced.
Of the five political reform planks Schwarzenegger laid out in 2003, only a government openness measure has been enacted. The governor helped convince lawmakers to place Proposition 59 on last November's ballot and voters approved it.
A second concept -- a redistricting initiative -- is on this November's ballot. Schwarzenegger has championed the measure and this past week began actively campaigning for it, but it lags in early polling. The state Republican party has endorsed the measure, but congressmen of both parties are raising money to fight it.
"The irony of this is delicious, if it weren't so pathetic," said former San Jose Mayor Tom McEnery, a Democrat whom the governor has broached starting a bipartisan reform committee. "When do you see people in Washington and Sacramento close ranks and work in a bipartisan manner? Generally, when you try and do any kind of redistricting, any kind of restriction on fund raising."
The governor's three other goals are, at best, works in progress.
They included: A fund-raising ban during budget season, which typically stretches from January until summer or later; a push for better disclosure of campaign contributions and stiffer penalties for violators; and a vow not to sign bills that are rushed through without full legislative hearings -- an attempt to end a common legislative practice of slipping in controversial items with scant notice.
The governor has twice tried to pass a bill that would designate certain times of the year black-out times for fund raising, but the Legislature has balked. The governor has previously criticized end-of-legislative-session fund-raisers, but he held them this year as he tries to raise $50 million for the special election.
Until a ban affecting all lawmakers is passed, "there's no reason to unilaterally disarm," said Schwarzenegger Press Secretary Margita Thompson.
Last month, Schwarzenegger said he would try again next year to enact a fund-raising blackout. "I'm going to make sure that it will be introduced again. ... And I know the legislators don't like it, but I will keep pushing."
An attempt to change disclosure rules for campaign contributions and increase penalties also withered for lack of support.
"Despite the legislature's failure to take action on political reform, the governor remains committed to it," said Schwarzenegger spokeswoman Katherine McLane.
Schwarzenegger still looks askance at bills rushed through without full hearings, but does on occasion support and sign them -- most notably with changes to the workers' compensation insurance system last year. Aides say the governor's preference is to reject most "gut-and-amends," as the bills are known, and they believe the tactic is used less now because of Schwarzenegger's influence.
"It's clear that he has set a higher standard than has been possible for him to reasonably meet," said Kathay Feng, executive director of California Common Cause. "It's clear that he needs to work harder to fulfill those promises."
To Schwarzenegger's credit, political observers say, he has made other efforts at shaking up the influence of money and politics in, and bringing at least a little more openness to, Sacramento.
Twice, Schwarzenegger has endorsed an effort to crack down on political consultants who are also lobbyists. This would affect both Democratic consultants and some of his own top advisers. Twice, the effort has died.
He has opened up his calendar for public review. And he has set his own rules on acceptable contributors -- albeit an evolving one. The governor dropped a self-imposed ban on accepting donations from single-interest trade groups, such as the California Restaurant Association and the California Grocers Association, which have taken part in recent fund-raisers.
But he has held firm against accepting donations from native tribes and public employee unions, with which his office negotiates. The governor's fund-raising committees disclose more information than the law requires, said his chief fund-raiser, Marty Wilson.
Enacting reform "has to be done step-by-step," said Hoover Institution fellow Bill Whalen, the chief speech writer for former Republican Gov. Pete Wilson. "All these reforms, you can make good arguments for them, but there are bigger fish to fry as far as both parties are concerned."
---
It amazes me that so many people want to see the Governor's reforms but are willing to let the obstructionists in the Legislature get away with blocking all of his reforms.
I hear ya. The legislators approval ratings remained mired in the 20s..;-)
One should NEVER disarm. It will always work to the advantage of an unscrupulous enemy.
I think you need to orchestrate that into a symphonic overture!!! "Hi Ho Silverrrrrrrrrr... Away!!!"
It's ok California is about to be rescued by Warren Beatty.
Oh.
Joy unbounded.
After all, his wife is a Kennedy.
Its funny that the authors don't mention the governor's state of the state address at the beginning of the year. The legislature was given a chance and they didn't act.
So now it will be a special election in November.
I wasn't clear enough. There are enough Republicans in the legislature that the Dems can't pass a budget or override a veto without help, but Republicans get no say in passing laws.
Thank goodness for small favors, eh?
Which begs the question "Why not?".
A better question would be "If Schwarzengger doesn't trust the Republicans enough to allow them that privedledge through exercising his veto power why is it suspicioned by both Republicans and Democrats that he promoting is an agenda (Prop 76) that will increase their numbers in the legislture.
The answer is that he isn't. Prop 76 is designed to allow more moderate members of both parties to legilsate.
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.