Looks like it's over for Arnold

[The Duke]

Forst of all, as Arnold shwoed in the stem cell debate, he is very much not a typical conservative on social issues.  He did reach out in that issue.  Further, his plan to reform Califonria's election system by having judges redistrict instead of the legislature drawing their own districts, shows that he has in fact stood up to special interests.  The fact that the deficit has been cut from $22 billion to $8 billion shows that he addressed the budget issue in a serious way, and he had to earn Democrat votes to get it done.  The fact that he reformed workman's comp laws shows that he can complete important reforms and fulfill his campaign promises.

I have to say, anyone who thinks Arnold isn't doing what he said he'd do isn't looking at the facts.

The reason Arnold has a low rating is threefold: The first reason is that California Governor's, including Pat Brown in 1961 and Pete Wilson in 1993, have low approval ratings a year before their re-election.  This is typical, and it doesn't last.  Both those men rebounded and defeated formidable opponents to get re-elected.

The second is foot in mouth disease.  Arnold has said some stupid things that reinforce the diea that he isn't serious.  His legislative record says otherwise, but people often don't look at the person's actual record out here until the election actually comes, they work off perception and the culture out here is very cynical.  But once the election comes around, Arnold's accomplishments combined with his charisma and warchest will carry the day easily.

The third, and most important reason, is that Arnold has sat on his money to dominate the airwaves during the Special election.  His opponents have been spending all their money right now on attack ads.  So his opponents are barely ahead having spent all this money attacking the Governor while the Governor is sitting on the largest warchest, almost entirely untapped until now, in the history of the state.  When that money is unleashed, the charisma and persuasiveness that won Arnold the Govenrorship will send home a clear and concise mesage to support Arnold's reforms in the special election and to re-elect the Governor one year from now.  Whose shoes would you really rather be in?  The side that's down a few points now but has all the money and time in the world, or the side that's barely squeeked ahead and has already played its best cards?

[The Duke]

A two-thirds majority should be required to appropriate any funds in the legislature.

A 2/3rds majority is required to raise taxes. That explains a lot a lot of our budget problems right there. Now are you in favor of 67 Senators required to confirm a nominee?

I said two-thirds majority to spend money. Given your budget situation, I think that would make sense.

Jfern is right--its the requirement of 2/3 to raise taxes that needs changing... you are right, however, in that it makes no sense to have the majorities required for spending and for taxes at different levels...

Raising the requirement for spending bills to 2/3, however, instead of reducing the amoung of money spent may actually increase it by increasing log-rolling as an increased number of legislatures need to have their spending priorities satisfied to pass a bill...

You are right to suggest that the initiative system needs reform.... its really absurd that Arnold has decided that instead of using the normal legislative process, he chooses to do almost everything by initiative...direct democracy sucks!

So does representative Democracy when one of the representatives is Fabian Nunez.

[The Duke]

Forst of all, as Arnold shwoed in the stem cell debate, he is very much not a typical conservative on social issues. He did reach out in that issue. Further, his plan to reform Califonria's election system by having judges redistrict instead of the legislature drawing their own districts, shows that he has in fact stood up to special interests. The fact that the deficit has been cut from $22 billion to $8 billion shows that he addressed the budget issue in a serious way, and he had to earn Democrat votes to get it done. The fact that he reformed workman's comp laws shows that he can complete important reforms and fulfill his campaign promises.

I have to say, anyone who thinks Arnold isn't doing what he said he'd do isn't looking at the facts.

The reason Arnold has a low rating is threefold: The first reason is that California Governor's, including Pat Brown in 1961 and Pete Wilson in 1993, have low approval ratings a year before their re-election. This is typical, and it doesn't last. Both those men rebounded and defeated formidable opponents to get re-elected.

The second is foot in mouth disease. Arnold has said some stupid things that reinforce the diea that he isn't serious. His legislative record says otherwise, but people often don't look at the person's actual record out here until the election actually comes, they work off perception and the culture out here is very cynical. But once the election comes around, Arnold's accomplishments combined with his charisma and warchest will carry the day easily.

The third, and most important reason, is that Arnold has sat on his money to dominate the airwaves during the Special election. His opponents have been spending all their money right now on attack ads. So his opponents are barely ahead having spent all this money attacking the Governor while the Governor is sitting on the largest warchest, almost entirely untapped until now, in the history of the state. When that money is unleashed, the charisma and persuasiveness that won Arnold the Govenrorship will send home a clear and concise mesage to support Arnold's reforms in the special election and to re-elect the Governor one year from now. Whose shoes would you really rather be in? The side that's down a few points now but has all the money and time in the world, or the side that's barely squeeked ahead and has already played its best cards?

Wow, so Arnold agrees with me like 15% of the time versus 0% for Bush because of issues like stem cell research? Sorry, that's not exactly going to save his ass. Arnold's approval ratings have dropped faster than even Davis' ratings.

Calling the state legislature girlie-men isn't getting sh**t done. Time to replace him with a grown-up.

Simply because you don't agree with him all the time doesn't mean he isn't moderate.  He's a moderate REPUBLICAN and you are a liberal Democrat.  If you agreed all the time, that would make him a liberal Democrat, wouldn't it?

[The Duke]

I'm probably not as familiar with state issues as I should be, but...

As far as I know Arnold hasn't done much to resolve our budget crisis.... the budget shortfall was resolved by (1) massive borrowing through props 15 &16 and (2) increased tax revenues from a thriving economy/booming housing market.

I think that that it is outrageous that our state has borrowed so much from our future...sure, you can make the argument we shouldn't have spent so much in the past few years, but, I'm sorry the money has been spent and it has to be paid for by people TODAY through real increases in revenue, i.e. taxes, not shouldered off on to young people and future generations.

Te economy is booming in large part because of Arnold's policies, like repealing the idiotic car tax increase and reform of workmen's comp laws.  The deficit was not affected by the ballot initiatives, that was simply a restructuring of the state debt, which is different than the deficit.  That restructuring plan itself was a great achievement, because it prevented the state from having to cut services drastically to stay viable.

The state government currently takes in a larger portion of the state's GDP in taxes than at any other point in the history of the state.  I simply cannot accept the charge that taxes are too low given that fact.