Skip to comments.Why Davis deserves to be recalled
Posted on 06/25/2003 9:34:21 AM PDT by Jimbaugh
Why Davis deserves to be recalled
Gray Davis is a dead man walking. The most unpopular governor in California history very well could become the first occupant of the state's highest office to be recalled by the voters.
Davis suggests that the recall campaign – which he previously dismissed as quixotic – is nothing more than a nefarious attempt by Republicans to overturn the result of California's last gubernatorial election.
" It's being organized and financed by a bunch of rich losers," Davis told The Orange County Register. "Nothing but a bunch of losers running around talking to one another.
His Grayness is particularly ticked off at Rep. Darrell Issa, the Vista Republican, the multimillionaire car-alarm magnate, the prospective gubernatorial candidate, who has ponied up more than $800,000 to gather signatures for the recall petition.
" He just wants to run for governor on the cheap," Davis sneered, in recent remarks to a San Francisco radio station.
But the Davis recall would not be headed to the California ballot – either this fall or next spring – were it supported exclusively by the state's Republican minority. No matter how many hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars Issa spent on signature gathering.
Indeed, recall drives have been waged against California governors on 31 previous occasions. All failed. In fact, not even one proposed recall made it all the way to the state ballot.
Davis faces the ignominy of actually facing a recall election, of becoming only the second governor in U.S. history to actually be recalled, because of his unfavorable standing among California residents across the board.
That was borne by a recent poll released by the Public Policy Institute of California, a San Francisco think tank. It found that the Democrat's approval rating has fallen to a historic low of 21 percent. It also found that most of the Golden State's likely voters can hardly wait to kick Davis to the curb, including not only an overwhelming majority of Republicans, but also half of independent voters and a third of the governor's fellow Democrats.
So why has his Grayness fallen into such broad and deep disfavor with the California electorate? Because he has grossly mismanaged the Golden State's affairs.
Indeed, in the space of roughly a year and a half, Davis turned a record $12 billion state budget surplus into a record $34.8 billion deficit. He insists that it was not his fault, that the state economy simply went bust.
But the fact is, under Davis' watch, the state government increased its spending a whopping 36 percent – far in excess of inflation, far outpacing growth in California's population. Had the governor resisted the urge to spend, to buy off special interests like California's powerful teachers union, the state would not now be facing the mother of all budget crises.
California would not be borrowing billions of dollars on Wall Street to pay its bills, downgrading its bond rating to one the nation's lowest. And the state's taxpayers would not be facing the prospect of surrendering even more of their paychecks to Sacramento to close the budget gap that Davis and the spendthrift legislature created.
Davis' mismanagement of the state's budget is matched only by his mishandling of the state's recent electricity crisis.
He did not cause the crisis, as he so often reminds. But his failure to lead when the crisis first reared itself cost California businesses and residents tens of billions of dollars in higher electricity prices.
Indeed, Davis got an early warning of looming trouble in the electricity market in the form of sharply rising wholesale power costs, as the Sacramento Bee's Dan Walters recounted this past spring.
" California utility executives begged Davis and state utility regulators to allow them to raise rates and sign long-term supply contracts," according to Walters, but they "delayed for six critical months, until the utilities had their financial backs to the wall."
Had Davis been a real leader, had he gotten the state's utility regulators to act sooner rather than later, California taxpayers wouldn't have gotten stuck with more than $40 billion worth of highly unfavorable long-term contracts with energy generators. And California residents wouldn't be facing higher electricity prices than consumers in almost every other state.
Opponents of the Davis recall, including not only the governor's hardcore Democratic loyalists, but also a few Republican pragmatists, say his ouster will plunge the state into political chaos. But the state already is in chaos, not the least because Davis lacks the leadership prowess to navigate California out of the fiscal abyss into which he steered it.
A new governor, lacking the albatross Gray Davis has draped around his neck, could hardly do any worse. And there's a good chance that his successor would do a considerably better job as California's chief executive.
Perhaps it's my limited attention (or limited media attention) but McClintock's points are the first time I've heard any california politician--conservatives included--suggest a path out of the crisis. Even so: the cuts will have to fall somewhere (even if they are 'cuts': non-increases--a dishonest use of the language that belongs in the liars hall of fame). I still am not hearing from anyone what programs should be cut. Guess that's business as usual, though.
Amazing isn't it? I'm as surprised as you. I think its because almost everyone else involved simply doesn't understand the situation. That is why I am so passionate when I've heard what he said that this is the guy who needs to be the next Gov. Not because he has an 'R' before his name, but because he knows how to fix the problem.
even if they are 'cuts': non-increases--a dishonest use of the language that belongs in the liars hall of fame
I couldn't agree more, one of my biggest pet peeves. I saw this on an earlier thread; "An additional $5.5 billion in so-called "cuts" are the result of the governor adding new spending that is not required by current law, then taking it out again."
I think our greatest asset in this is that Gray is SOO corrupt and spending SOO much on his cronies that other than a few cases their screams will be irrelvant.
He is a walking advertisement for liberal fiscal mismanagement and incompetance. Let California convulse on their choice of political leadership for the time being. Getting sick after eating something is an excellent motivator for crossing that particular item off one's menu in the future.
Huh? Help me out here because now I am really confused. California is entirely liberal, and we have addressed how we don't understand your brilliant causal relationships that are currently victimizing us; how are we going to get sick of eating whatever it is that you are talking about? The way I see it, they only thing I can do is cry about it, curse the ground and move to New Mexico. Say...that sounds familiar.
How Orwellian. Fantastic work, mabelkitty, keep it up the researching.
I might just borrow this in future fighting. This needs to be reposted for every arm chair CA GOP Chairman who's an anti-recaller pooping up FR with theories of how the DNC is secretly supporting the recall because it makes them more powerful if they are out of power, or something.
Your post kills bugs, dead.
It's probaly the head of the LA Dem Party and a chair of the SoCal chapter of a national "non-profit" org called the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association (URISA) which claims to specialize in using "Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and other information technologies to solve challenges in all state and local government agencies and departments" and promote "the effective and ethical use of spatial information and information technologies for the understanding and management of urban and regional systems." Whatever THAT means.
Need help confirming...I don't live in CA. Seems like it ought to be the same guy, spatially speaking, of course...IS it?
Oh, it's clear alright. I oftentimes wonder about people who are SO quick to jump on California as a whole, how they would respond the next time their state had a catastrophe (man-made or otherwise) if their fellow Freepers would rejoice in that fact.
I've also wondered how they would feel if we DID leave enmasse and take up residence in their state.
I find the whole concept very childish.
how are we going to get sick of eating whatever it is that you are talking about, if we...what was your useless correction?California as a political collective behaves decidedly liberal. So if we are that, and we, or at least I-the lone conservative- can't even understand your brilliant causal relationships, how in the WORLD do you expect these lesser Marxists to "get sick of this eating" after your arbitrary time period and establishment a causality to Democrates? You may be able to throw around insults, but the logic behind your bashing doesn't add up.
That is code for "anyone who doesn't live here and has a negative opinion about California is irrational".
That's not code, you still don't understand how offensive that is. To say those things about Californians as a whole is clearly irrational. To calously wish for our destruction in the manor you did is indeed spiteful.
A recall at this time, as pointed out by an earlier poster, could backfire and have disastrous effects for a meaningful Republican challenge for power when Davis's term runs its course Super, we're on issues again. Here's why the "let 'em sink" arguement is wrong. In leaving Davis in power, you have to realize that establishing a liberal orthodoxy might be more likely if we DO NOT recall Gray Davis. Currently, the debt is entirely abstract, dealing in "future" proposed spending. Better yet, read this. The DNC stratigy is to only cut spending on things "the people" will be upset about, Police, Fire, Roads, Schools to justify new taxes. They are already phrasing the debate that "cuts" means those cuts. We keep spending 41% more with every budget. They manage to call any reduction in these new spending proposals a "cut" image what they will do after they are law. In 2007, in order to get things back to the way they are now, spending would roughly have to be cut 82% to roll back what had been wasted. Precident has been set, it won't happen. More importantly it will be easy to shoot down conservative arguements to do that nasty of cutting, soooooo, in order to get anything "done" the GOP has to propose...da da da DA; tax increases of their own. From there, its easy for cynics to say "what's the difference anyways" and not vote, or vote for 3rd party losers. Indirectly, the innaction you are argueing for causes the Left to hold serve. Always remember, conservatism in its most basic form = optimism. Cynicism, in the form of poo-pooing the Recall, is always the ally of the Left.
The recall is going to happen, support us, its going to be a beautiful thing.
Well, don't forget that the GOP state senators have been holding true to "no tax increases" since Davis took over. They are the doorstop that has kept this state together and made the distinction between the Elephant and the Donkey obvious. Their stand will indirectly lead to GOP success in the recall. They can't hold out any longer given the media's "numbers" for raising the debt. Time is of the essence, if the recall doesn't go through, the GOP will be reduced to "me too"ism and lose all the newfound support you are hoping they would benefit from in 2007.
Notwithstanding the low likelihood of Davis' resignation because of his ego, chance of surviving the recall, and reported dislike of Bustamante, his resignation would not stop the recall election.
California Elections Code
11302. If a vacancy occurs in an office after a recall petition is filed against the vacating officer, the recall election shall nevertheless proceed. The vacancy shall be filled as provided by law, but any person appointed to fill the vacancy shall hold office only until a successor is selected ....