Arnold Schwarzenegger

A Gubernatorial Transcript That Wasn't 'Ballsy' Or Correct

Joe Mathews — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 14:27:00 -0400

Josh Gerstein -- the California-based national correspondent for the New York Sun and, for my money, the best reporter alive -- last night mentioned to me a discrepancy between what Gov. Schwarzenegger said Wednesday during a press briefing in Big Sur on the fires there and what the gubernatorial transcript said he said.

One word was different, but oh, what a word! That word is "ballsy."

Schwarzenegger, in response to a question, was describing the mindset of people who remain in their homes and defy evacuation orders.

According to Gerstein and what I hear on the recording distributed by the governor, Schwarzenegger said: "I am going to stay in my house and I am ballsy and all those things."

The transcript says: "I'm going to stay in my house and I'm boss and all those things."

As someone who has transcribed literally hundreds of hours of Arnold Schwarzenegger talking, I have sympathy for the transcription service. His syntax and accent is all his own, and not always easy to understand. But this sounds very clear to me. You be the judge: The video is available here.

Would Someone Please Tell The Governor Where The Budget Is?

Joe Mathews — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 13:28:00 -0400

The governor of California said an extraordinary thing Monday. July 1 is the beginning of the new fiscal year, so the budget is now officially late. There's a $15.2 billion shortfall. But when the governor was asked about why he wasn't pushing legislators for an on-time budget, Schwarzenegger replied, "Well, first of all, I don't know at what stage they are in at this time."

This ignorance is inexcusable. Yes, legislators pass budgets and governors sign them. Yes, Schwarzenegger has had success in the past leaving negotiations on key matters, including the budget, to lawmakers. Yes, he's been criticized publicly in the past (including my your blogger) for getting too deeply into the details of the budget. But managing the budget is arguably the most important gubernatorial duty. If it's not #1 in importance, it's in the top 3. And Schwarzenegger is the only official in the Capitol elected by all the people. Legislators represent their districts. He's supposed to represent the interests of all of us. If he doesn't know exactly what's going on in the budget process, how can he represent us?

What's more, this governor has campaigned around the state for a rainy-day fund and a lottery borrowing proposal as part of his budget plan. He should be closely monitoring the twists and turns of these talks to advance his budget reform plans.

Well, Maybe There's One Gov More Anti-Tax Than Arnold

Joe Mathews — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 20:55:00 -0400

Here's my attempt, at Fox and Hounds, to expand on a post from last week. It turns out there is one governor more opposed to tax increases than Arnold.

Dems Intimidate Dems Who Support Reapportionment

Joe Mathews — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:05:00 -0400

Surprise, surprise. Democratic supporters of the redistricting initiative backed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (a Republican) and former state controller Steve Wesly (a Democrat), are accusing Democratic regulars of trying to intimidate them. The party has come out against the redistricting measure.

Arnold's Political Team Shows Some Life On Budget Reform

Joe Mathews — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:42:00 -0400

It's not much, but there are stirrings of life that Gov. Schwarzenegger's political and ballot measure committee, the California Dream Team (which replaces the previous California Recovery Team, since the state has so obviously recovered), is preparing to fight for his budget reform plan. Lists have been emailed, and the team is asking voters to contact their legislators. This is an uphill fight, and while there are problems with Schwarzenegger's proposal, he is the only major actor who is pursuing his major budget reform this year. If he can sell this, Schwarzenegger can fulfill at least part of his promise from the recall to fix the budget and perhaps breathe new life into his governorship.

Arnold Digs at Jerry Brown

Joe Mathews — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:55:00 -0400

The current governor and the once (and future?) governor have had a warm relationship, campaigning together for municipal finance protections and against changes in the state's three strikes law. But Monday, during a long Schwarzeneggerian soliloquy at a Riverside event to promote his rainy day fund proposal, the governor took a shot at Brown in response to a question from a Southern California Gas official about the state's infrastructure problems. Here's the direct Arnold quote in the transcript, in full context:

"Well, California for 40 years has not really rebuilt our infrastructure in water, so we have now the stuff that was done under Governor Brown from the '60s. Not Jerry Brown, but Pat Brown, because Jerry Brown did not build infrastructure. They stopped building infrastructure when Reagan came in and so Pat Brown was the last one that built infrastructure. And so, since then our population has gone from 18 million to 38 million but we haven't built any new infrastructure. So, you still have the same water delivery system, we still have the same amount of reservoirs that are now between 50 and 75 percent down. We're running out of water, so there's a major problem."

Nunez Hearts Gov's Lottery Plan

Joe Mathews — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:32:00 -0400

Former speaker Fabian Nunez, a Democrat, shows up on today's Sacramento Bee editorial page to make the argument for Schwarzenegger's plan to borrow/securitize lottery revenues in order to reduce the deficit and fund a new rainy day fund. the lottery plan would require voter approval. Nunez continues to oppose the spending limitations in the governor's budget reform proposal.

The former speaker's take may explain the governor's recent behavior. He seems detached from the budget, leaving any talks to legislative players. He has sounded very confident publicly that lawmakers ultimately will have to adopt something like his plan. He speaks as a man who has looked at all the other options, and found none.

Elias: California No Better Off Because of 2003 Recall

Joe Mathews — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:02:00 -0400

Tom Elias is an independent columnist who was the first journalist to write about the possibility of a recall of then-California Gov. Gray Davis. He weighs in with a new column in which he says that for all the interest and excitement the recall and Davis' susccessor Arnold Schwarzenegger have sparked, the state is no better off than it would have been without the recall.

PPIC Poll: California Eminent Domain Measures Lack Majority

Joe Mathews — Thu, 22 May 2008 16:42:00 -0400

A new poll from the Public Policy Institute of California finds that the two competing eminent domain measures, Propositions 98 (backed by conservatives, anti-tax groups) and Prop 99 (backed by cities), have less than 50 percent support. Less than two weeks before an election, that often spells doom for both measures. As such, this would be a victory for the backers of Prop 99, who qualified the measure in order to beat Prop. 98. Qualifying your own measure to defeat one you don't like is a time-tested tactic. In most cases, both initiatives go down. Each initiaitve purports to restrict the ability of governments to take property for private purposes, though Prop 98's protections are stronger--so strong the initiative also would eliminate rent control.

In other findings, the poll shows that Gov. Schwarzenegger's lottery plan is unpopular with the public--and his back-up proposal, a one-cent sales tax increase, has support from a narrow majority.

An Interesting Exchange on Gay Marriage

Joe Mathews — Wed, 21 May 2008 16:43:00 -0400

Below is the transcript, courtesy of Gov. Schwarzenegger's office, of an exchange he had with a questioner during a press conference Tuesday at the Environmental Defense Fund in San Francisco. The press event was about the environment and energy, but press questions went in a different direction. Schwarzenegger explains his public position on the anti-gay marriage initiative that appears headed to the November ballot. This shows the straddle the governor is doing on the issue, and offers a smart argument that the campaign against the initiative (that is, the campaign to preserve the newly elaborated right for gay couples to marry) might adopt. He's essentially saying that even if your own personal position is against gay marriage, you may not want to enshrine that in the state constitution. And that people may need to consider that there's an equal protection problem in denying the right to marry to gay couples. Bottom line: it's more coercive to ban gay marriage than to permit it, even if you don't like it. I suspect that may just be a winning political argument in California. It's an adult, nuanced position, and a responsible way for someone who wants to represent all the people to talk about it.

GOVERNOR: Yes?

QUESTION: My name is Bill Wilson. My partner of 22 years and I have already made an appointment on June 16th for a wedding ceremony at San Francisco City Hall.

GOVERNOR: Congratulations.

QUESTION: Thank you. And you're invited. (Laughter)

GOVERNOR: Thank you.

QUESTION: My question is basically, could you tell us your position on the proposed ballot initiative, and explain (Inaudible) Thank you.

GOVERNOR: Well, first of all, I respect the court's opinion, which I think was very important, to not just look at it from a point, do I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman or not, but that it looks at the constitutionality of the whole issue. And constitutionally they said it was not right to tell people you can't do that. Everyone should be treated equally. I think this is a very good way of approaching it, and it's the fairest way of approaching it, and that's why I said I respect their opinion. And, you know, I'm wishing everyone good luck with their marriages, and I hope that California's economy is booming because everyone is going to come here and get married. (Applause) I think all of this is great.

And I think -- and I'm against changing the Constitution. I’m against the ballot initiative that some are trying to put on the ballot. (Applause) Because it's unnecessary. I think that we have rules in place and after the decision was made to then change the rules because you're not happy with the outcome, I don't believe that's the right way to go. So I think that -- and may I remind you, I have said in the past -- you know, I see a marriage between a man and a woman. But that's my opinion. I don't want to force that opinion on anyone. So I respect that opinion, and I think we should live with that and everyone should move forward in the right way.