Posted on 07/11/2002 4:02:12 PM PDT by John Jorsett
No pressure required- like I said on 7/1, I think this is a setup by the Dems for Grey to veto, so he can save the day for the "California family" and salvage his deeply troubled campaign.
Heck, I could write the commercial he'll create from this slick maneuver. "When the California legislature acted irresponsibly in passing anti-SUV legislation, Governor Grey Davis stepped in and promptly vetoed the measure to keep the SUV affordable for the California family. Grey Davis- protecting Californians."
Excuse me while I go BARF!
I'm afraid that's wishful thinking. Davis will sign it (in fact he's already announced that he will) because vetoing it would totally p!ss of his liberal base. He's already having problems keeping liberal Democrats lined up behind him. Green Party candidate Peter Camejo is pulling about 5% at this time. Big-time liberals and environmentalists and Hollywood stars pushed heavily for AB 1493. They made it a make-or-break litmus issue for Democrats, who still had to resort to desperate subterfuges to pass it with the minimum 41 votes in the Assembly.
Davis is boxed in good on this one. He must and will sign it, but the consequences could cost him his re-election.
If Davis vetoes this bill, the Liberal media will slaughter him, and rightly so. To give you an idea of the stakes as senn from the left, here's the Weekly's take on the issue. As you can see, they believe this is an initiative that could revolutionize California, just as the electric car mandate of a few years back did. (What? You say it didn't? This is the same kind of feel-good, no substance issue, and I strongly suspect it will enjoy the same fate even if we don't manage to have it reversed).
Schatze: I believe those ideas were written out of this bill in an effort to make it more attractive to moderates. Frankly, in the end, I think the bill is completely toothless and worthless, and will become a complete no-op by 2009 regardless of what happens. I have expressed this view several times in threads relating to the bill, and so far I have not heard anyone agree ... or disagree.
D
We ought to capture that article. I think what is a toothless bill the National Democratic Party can use to beat on the Republicans in 2002 and 2004. We need to defeat it even though it seems that it is so far off that it is of no consequence!
What this means is that either the price of cars will increase because manufacturers will comply with new rules and pass the cost of compliance on to the consumer, or there will be fewer automobile choices to consumers.
I'll need to look at the bill again -- I have read it -- because I'm sure that there's something else insidious in there, otherwise they wouldn't be pushing so hard for it when the public is obviously opposed to it.
They have been quite effective out here, They got 240,000 voters in Orange County,(CA.)to nominate a write-in candidate to run against a pedophile judge who was on his way to an un-contested election in our last primary.
They also did a remote from condidit's office and nearly got arrested, they love to raise h3ll with the political buffons in our target rich environment!
How did you get a peek at Simon's campaign strategy book???
Yep, that is the same John and Ken. So far, they have gotten a pedophile (alleged) judge unelected (though he was running unopposed on the ballot and most people had no awareness of his house arrest for molestation until they started their media campaign)and been the major force behind getting the Demos' stupid soda tax idea thrown into the garbage.
I was there for their sendoff yesterday: they took 50 SUVs, driving through the night from Orange County to Sacramento (8 hours of driving) to the Capitol steps in Sacramento for their show today. The SUVs, minivans, and trucks were all decorated with messages for Davis. The Assemblyman (R) and two state Senators (both R) who appeared on yesterday's show all thought this kind of stunt will REALLY GET to Gray. Let's hope they get lots of press for this.
My hypothesis is that the exact same thing would happen with these mandates. If they are too tough to make, they will be weakened. So my contention is that, even in 2009, this bill is a paper tiger.
He lit the firecracker in the statehouse; by the time the fuse is used up and the fires start, he's absent with leave.
So what do they gain from it? Well, the Greens think it's revolutionary, and even though they're wrong, this is bound to strengthen their hard-left base which really doesn't like Davis much.
"You can't like Davis' environmental record, and this bill probably has little to no concrete consequences, but at least he threw us a bone. Simon won't even do that!"
He should think twice. The Simon stand on offshore drilling, however misguided, is a pretty juicy bone.
D
They are the very ones. They were talking about this on their show yesterday, and were quite proud of it.
Maybe I'm giving the Dems too much credit? You must admit that it would, however, be politically brilliant to sacrifice this bill for Grey's reelection. I hope I am wrong, because this is the kind of thing that, despite all the cr@p he's pulled, could bring him through on election day and I think that deep down inside he knows it. That's the scary part. His career is over otherwise.
You're overly optimistic. It might be a nail (but not the nail) in Davis' coffin, if Simon knew how to use a hammer.
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.