GOVERNOR & LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR SHOULD RUN AS TICKET
The California State Constitution provides for the electorate to vote on the offices of Governor and
Lieutenant Governor separately, each then being independently elected officials. Often times, this has led to our top two officeholders not only being from different political parties, but it has also resulted in their being virtually no professional relationship between these two top constitutional officeholders. Fresno Bee political writer and columnist John Ellis pens a column today illustrating the lack of relationship between Arnold Schwarzenegger and Cruz Bustamonte.
This is a tragic waste of what could be a key position in the state government. I often cite Florida as a state from which California could learn many things. In the Sunshine State, the candidate for Governor picks a Lieutenant Governor candidate and they run as a team. When voters go to the polls, they have both candidates tied together. It is very similar to the way we elect our President and Vice President – where voters in the last election voted for Bush/Cheney or Kerry/Edwards (yeah, technically they are elected separately by the electoral college, I know.)
What does this do? It allows for the Governor to truly have a #2 person that can be integrated and a
part of their administration. If we had this system, it would ensure that our Lieutenant Governor would be as integrated and prepared as possible to assume the mantle of leadership should something prevent the Governor from fulfilling his/her duties.
The only argument that I have heard in support of the current system is a ‘check-and-balances’ approach where the voters have the opportunity to elect someone who won’t be beholdin’ as the Liuetenant Governor. However, given that no authority has been granted to the office of the LG under the State Constitution to ‘check or balance’ anything the Governor does, this position becomes relagated to a few minor tasks and, of course, being on hand should something tragic befall our Governor.
If you like this idea, you should ask your state legislator to sponsor a constitutional amendment, and fix our system.
ROB REINER ACKNOWLEDGES MARKET IMPACTS, AND OPPOSES A TAX
The only way that Rob Reiner could oppose a tax is if it interferes with the potential revenue of a more favorite tax. There is an absurd article (in red on the FR main page) where Reiner, who is currently promoting an initiave for the ballot next year to raise taxes considerably to finance a government-run universal pre-school system), comes out against another liberal group’s efforts to significantly hike the tobacco tax. You see, Reiner previously sponsored a successful initiative that taxes cigarettes to pay for mental health. Reiner says that this other, new tax would cause there to be less cigarettes sold in California, and the revenues for HIS tax scheme would go down. Well, I guess we certainly agree on one thing – when you overtax goods, you create less demand for it. I wonder if Reiner would support the repeal of some taxes on goods and products so that more Californians will buy them? Nawww, let’s not go crazy!
Have a great day!
Jon