Blockbuster Democracy Blog

Is There A Gay Marriage Stimulus?

Joe Mathews — Sat, 17 May 2008 01:20:00 -0400

Here's a link to a short column I did for Fox & Hounds asking the question of whether California could benefit economically from being one of only two states to permit same-sex marriage. (Our businesses will have a recruiting advantage, people will want to move or vacation here, etc.). Anecdotal evidence: yesterday's Supreme Court ruling takes effect in 30 days. As it happens, that would be a Saturday in June, the most popular month for weddings. Speaking today with a Southern California wedding planner I know, she predicted that the date in question, June 14, will see the "largest American operation since D-Day."

California Supreme Court Overturns Gay Marriage Ban

Joe Mathews — Thu, 15 May 2008 18:22:00 -0400

The ruling is here. The AP story is here. I'll leave the legal analysis to the lawyers, and offer a political explanation. This ruling invalidates Prop 22, the 2000 ballot initiative that barred same-sex marriage in California. And it likely means that local officials around the state will permit gay and lesbian couples to marry. Such marriages will raise this issue's profile politically, both in California and in the presidential race. All eyes this fall should be on the November initiative in California to establish a state constitutional ban against gay marriage.

Alone

Joe Mathews — Thu, 15 May 2008 15:35:00 -0400

Your blogger had to spend yesterday afternoon and evening on some personal business. He woke up this morning to find himself almost alone among politicians and commentators in arguing that Gov. Schwarzenegger's May revise sets the stage for a breakneck push for budget reform. (Whether that reform is a good idea is another story. His proposal's focus on the spending side makes it incomplete).

But commentators have dismissed much of what he's proposed as gimmicks or borrowing. At the Sacramento Bee, Dan Weintraub writes that Schwarzenegger has surrendered in his attempts to balance the budget. His full funding of the Prop 98 education guarantee -- an essential strategic move if he wants to maintain enough popularity to convince voters to adopt any kind of budget reform -- is largely dismissed, and the resulting proposed cuts to health and human services programs are emphasized in responses from legislators (via Sac Bee). Others argue that the budget is not fiscally responsible -- true, but it's politically the right approach if you believe, as the governor appears to believe, that the only way for California to get a handle on its persistent budget problems is major structural reform of the process itself.

Many of the stories suggest Schwarzenegger is punting to voters as though it was evidence of a risk-adverse governor. It's the opposite--a high-risk manuever. If he doesn't deliver bugdet reform, it could be fork-sticking time for his governorship. (Fork sticking as in what you do with sausages when they're done).

Waiting for Gay Marriage Ruling at 10 A.M. Today

Joe Mathews — Thu, 15 May 2008 15:32:00 -0400

The California Supreme Court is expected to rule today at 10 a.m. California time on the question of whether gay couples have a constitutional right to marry. Whichever way it goes, the decision is likely to define this fall's campaign for and against a ballot initiative adding a ban on same-sex marriage to the state constitution.

Arnold Is "All In" On Budget Reform

Joe Mathews — Wed, 14 May 2008 18:32:00 -0400

This is also posted at Fox and Hounds Daily, a new news and commentary site focusing on California and business.

There is no longer any doubt about one thing in California politics: Gov. Schwarzenegger is willing to die on the cross of budget reform.

My conversations with people inside and outside the administration, and a review of news leaks in advance of the governor's revised budget proposal this afternoon, make it clear that he is doubling down on budget reform. For a man with a reputation for twisting with political winds, he is doing the opposite here, trying again to pursue reforms as he did in 2004 and 2005. He is so determined to get voters to adopt his budget reform (a spending-side proposal based on a rainy day fund and more power for governors to make mid-year cuts) that he is risking what's left of his governorship.

One piece of this approach is undeniable smart, As the Sacramento Bee reports, he's pulled back from his proposal to include education in spending cuts and is now proposing to meet the Prop 98 minimum on education. His cuts were fiscally responsible -- but they were politically poisonous to his project of budget reform. By dropping the unpopular cuts, he is making a strategic move that signals his top priority--budget reform or bust.

The "bust" in this case is the promise-breaking sales tax increase he's offering as a back-up to his budget reform plans. One note here: the LA Times today reports that if the governor is going to ask voters to approve a privatization of the lottery. If they don't, the back-up plan will be a one-cent sales tax increase. Two trusted sources tell me, however, that Schwarzenegger sees more than just the lottery going on the ballot; he wants his budget reform proposal there, too. The one-cent sales tax will be pitched as the back-up to the whole package.

The risk here is that by putting things on the ballot, he could effectively extend a difficult, contentious, popularity-sapping budget season all the way into November. His popularity is already falling; if things don't go well, he could be in George W. Bush - Richard Nixon territory by fall. And if his reform loses and he gets a tax, he'll likely lose what's left of his Republican base. But he's going forward anyway. With this approach, Schwarzenegger is giving California his most straightforward assessment: he think there's literally nothing more important (even his own political career) than changing the way the state manages its budget. It's classic Arnold: high-risk, big, and structure in a way to produce a lot of attention. His specific policy may be right or wrong, but either way, it will make a hell of a movie. Attention Californians: Your governor is jumping off a cliff without a parachute.

LA Chamber Endorses IRV

Joe Mathews — Wed, 14 May 2008 06:02:00 -0400

Now comes a big endorsement for Instant Runoff Voting in Los Angeles: the LA Area Chamber of Commerce.

Arnold Wants to Give Voters a Choice, LA Times Says

Joe Mathews — Wed, 14 May 2008 04:06:00 -0400

In California, tomorrow is the day for the May revise, when the governor offers a revision of his January budget. It's the launch of the budget season in most years. Leaks of the governor's proposals typically drip out in the days before. The LA Times is reporting on its web site that Schwarzenegger is going to take the delicate question of revenues to voters. He wants to give them the choice, in a November ballot measure: borrow against future lottery revenues, or see sales taxes raised to cover the budget deficit.

Prop 98 and 99

Joe Mathews — Tue, 13 May 2008 11:29:00 -0400

Here's a San Jose Mercury News look at the two measures. One thing that distinguishes Prop 98 from 99 is the former's elimination of rent control, which is why it's backed by owners of apartment buildings and trailer parks, including Tribune Company chairman Sam Zell.

Donor Fatigue for Arnold?

Joe Mathews — Mon, 12 May 2008 17:14:00 -0400

This piece in the Contra Costa Times asks whether there's "donor fatigue" as Gov. Schwarzenegger raises money for his redistricting initiative and perhaps, some sort of budget reform ballot measure (or measures) in November. It's a fair question. The problem may not be fatigue but donors' clear-eyed assessment of the political chances of redistricting and budget reform. Redistricting has a perfect record at the ballot over the last 15 years -- it's lost every time -- and budget reform proposals of all stripes (notably Prop. 56 in 2004--backed by Democrats and unions -- and Prop. 76 -- backed by Schwarzenegger and Republicans -- in 2005) have gone down to defeat. What is the point of spending good money on reform proposals that will go down to defeat, no matter their merits?

Connerly On To Arizona

Joe Mathews — Mon, 12 May 2008 16:34:00 -0400

Having failed to qualify his anti-affirmative action initiative in Oklahoma and Missouri, Ward Connerly's group gives $90,000 for signature gathering in Arizona; he's given $180,000 so far. That may sound like a lot, but it's not enough to qualify an initiative in the state. Keep an eye on this.