Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Californians soundly reject Governors reforms (power grab)

  1. Nov 9, 2005 #1
    If this is any indication of the nations current sentiments it is good news for 2006. Schwarzenegger, following in the footsteps of Bushco, has failed in his attempt to concentrate power into the executive branch of the State government.

    Now he has to do what he should have done 9 months and $50 million or so tax-payers dollars ago and work with the legislature, instead of calling them names and trying to circumvent the system.

    http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/11/09/MNG6IFLAMF1.DTL
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 9, 2005 #2

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    What measure other than possibly 76 constituted a power grab and why?
     
  4. Nov 9, 2005 #3
    No what he was trying to do was break the power of the liberal dictatorship that gave themselves rule for life when they redistricted the state into safe non-competitive districts.

    The legislature is a bunch of traitors and should be shot for treason. Not worked or compromised with.

    Further that article misrepresents almost every initiative. 75 would not curb union poltical spending at all. It would have required that union leaders have the support of union members to spend money, thus making unions actually democratic, rather than the more fascist way the unions are run now where they screw their members as much as help them. Remember the grocery worker's strike? Fat lot of good union leaders did their members then. 77 was about taking away the power of legislators to pick their constituents in a way that gauranteed them safe seats for life, which is clear political corruption. 76 was about requiring a balanced budget. But the morons in this state were against even that.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2005
  5. Nov 9, 2005 #4
    I guess the voters in California just don't see it in the same light as you do.

    Union members already have a voice in what their dues can be used for.

    Why did he only target unions?

    Because they opposed him?

    Why did he attack teachers and nurses?

    Because they opposed him.

    The bottom line is, he thought he could circumvent the legislature and grab power through a special election that Californians didn't want. I know a lot of people who voted against everything he supported out of anger for the way he was going about it.

    We had to pay for the election. Now the governor is going to pay.
     
  6. Nov 9, 2005 #5

    Art

    User Avatar

    Past leaders in the world have had themselves voted dictatorial powers for the 'betterment of their constituents' with dire consequences and so it seems the majority of the electorate remember this hence the no vote.

    It guess he'll just have to do things the old-fashioned way and go out and persuade people and congress of the benefits of the changes he wants and get them implemented that way rather than wield the power himself.
     
  7. Nov 9, 2005 #6

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Skyhunter... you live in California, the bay area even... and this was a defeat for conservatism? So a state that has never even been considered a possible red state nearly voting in favor (within a few %) of anti-union corruption measures and anti-teacher corruption measures is good news for you? With the blind leftwing loonatics in the BA and LA, i was amazed at how these propositions weren't whiped off the face of the earth.

    Plus every liberal proposition got shot down as well

    Why do you ignore the prescription drug discount that failed horribly?

    Why do you ignore the prescription drug benefit proposition that failed horribly?

    Why do you ignore the re-regulation proposition that failed horribly?

    This was a loss for everyone and a loss for California. Back to the $50billion or so deficit I suppose....
     
  8. Nov 9, 2005 #7

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    So much for his Presidential bid. It's truly amazing what a difference a year can make.
     
  9. Nov 9, 2005 #8

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    and the whole... constitution forbidding it thing.... ya know....

    I'm truely amazed that Californias are pretty much immune to the fact that our credit rating is down the toilet. I mean if peoples personal credits were down the toilet, hell they never go out, they start taking public transportation, talk with counselors... but eh, if its the states debt, who cares.

    Too bad the legislature chose not to work with teh governor and instead decided to waste money on bashing him continuously.
     
  10. Nov 9, 2005 #9
    I hope having his ego bruised is a wake-up call to him.

    You can get away with name calling in an election, especially when you have others to it for you. But to call those opposed to your policies, male and female, "girlie men".

    I have never seen an election that was resented as much as this one was, that resentment was reflected in the results.

    I personally found all 8 propositions to be inadequate and disjointed in their approach to solving problems. Of course the voter initiative process is probably not the best way to develop comprehensive solutions to complex problems.
     
  11. Nov 9, 2005 #10

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Don't even get me started. Another abomination barely avoided.
     
  12. Nov 9, 2005 #11

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    They would never get that through Congress. Or at least they better not be able to. Arnolds a good guy... good actor... pretty cool to meet in person... but we don't need to be moving heaven and earth to try to keep him around in politics.

    I'm still pretty confused as to how we're going to pay off this enormous debt. Who here is ready for a 15% sales tax? Or how bout we tax those hollywood snobs... oh wait, they declare residences in low-tax states or out of country.
     
  13. Nov 9, 2005 #12
    There were liberal propositions on the ballot?

    All I saw was a halfhearted attempt to increase energy utility regulation and a knee jerk reaction to oppose the pharmaceutical lobby.

    Schwarzenegger was given a chance and he alienated those that were willing to work with him by the arrogant, dictatorial, way he used his popularity. Now hopefully he has been humbled and will engage the other elected officials in the State to solve the problems facing the State.
     
  14. Nov 9, 2005 #13

    SOS2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    And is not affected by redistricting, right?
    I forget the amount reported on the news, but it's an expensive cost to the taxpayers.

    The circumvention of the legislature makes me think of the threat of the “nuclear option” to circumvent the filibuster. When those in power want to change the system to pursue their agendas, they forget that when they are no longer in power, the table will turn and it will be them who will suffer from lack of checks and balances.
     
  15. Nov 9, 2005 #14
    No, morons generally don't

    He didn't target teachers and nurses. He targeted union leaders because of the way they govern unions which is HURTING their union members. again, I point to the grocery workers strike. I point to the treasonous state legislature that serves Mexican citizens over californian citizens, thus HURTING those union members whose dues are supporting this legislature.

    The legislature should be circumvented. They are guilty of treason. Or did you forget about Jackie Goldberg in a meeting accidently broadcast over speaker phone in the capitol building saying how they were going to punish the people for the recall election?

    You know a lot of morons.

    You know how much the election cost in comparison to how much this broken democracy-turned-democratic party dictatorship is gonna cost?

    And you can be called Presidential material by the democratic party, and then be thrown out of the governor's office a few years later for incompetence.

    What he should have been calling the legislators is what they are. Traitors.

    The voter initiative is the only way. Its the only thing keeping the state even partially democratic anymore with the democratic-dictatorship for life.

    The state is run by the same kind of people who wasted public road money on public BICYCLE transportation (the bikes promptly disappeared into the hands of thieves) because they believe people shouldn't drive cars. How's that for the government serving the people?

    So that said how do you think they're gonna pay it off? They won't. People who complain about fiscal incompetence had the national level don't even know how bad its been here under democratic party dictatorship. Arnold is the ONLY elected republican in a statewide office. Before the recall election when Davis was forcibly fired, there was not a single one. And you know what they did with a majority in both houses of the congress and every statewide official? They ran the state into the ground with a $36 billion dollar deficit. Thats more than the GDP of a lot of countries. And this is for a STATE. You think republicans at the national level are fiscally irresponsible (and they are)? You haven't seen anything yet. These people are traitors to their constituents plain and simple.
     
  16. Nov 9, 2005 #15

    Except you have it entirely backwards. The initiative process is the recourse of the PEOPLE against the government when it no longer serves their interests, which the california government does not. The initiative process is about restoring democracy, keeping power in the hands of the PEOPLE where it belongs, not in the hand of legislators who redraw their districts to make themselves rulers for life with no competition.
     
  17. Nov 9, 2005 #16
    So when did the legislature tell the governor to hold a special election because they didn't want to work with him?

    And who's money were they wasting bashing him?

    When did they spend it?

    Before or after he decided to have the State of California fund a special election?

    Spending money on dead ends is not sound fiscal policy.

    If Arnold can't work with the legislature, and he can't get the voters to grant him more executive power and otherwise to reshape the States political landscape then he is through politically. His and our best interests will be best served if he will work with the legislature.

    Voters gave him that $50 billion the last election now he needs to make it pay off. Not waste it on special elections.

    California does have a single A credit rating, which is the lowest of all rated states.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Californians soundly reject Governors reforms (power grab)
  1. Reform or Revolution? (Replies: 18)

  2. Congressional Reform (Replies: 110)

  3. REAL election reform (Replies: 70)

  4. Economic/Market Reform (Replies: 9)

Loading...