The State of the State Address is just about over, and so now is a chance to share some initial thoughts.
There are other places to get the gist of the policy proposals in the Governor’s speech, although for your perusal I am attaching a summary (though it was prepared by proponents of the proposals, so take that into account when reading it).
The way the system works is that the print and televised media have a briefing from the Governor’s staff hours before the actual speech. There is a practice called "embargoing" where the media folks understand that they information they are being given cannot be released until after the speech is over. This allows them to craft their stories, or at least the informational part of it, ahead of time. Then some wire services will release "quick and dirty" summaries right at the conclusion of the speech. Other reporters will go out after the address and gather comments from the host of politicians gathered in the Assembly chambers.
Before the speech, I was invited to a meeting in the Governor’s office (the "horseshoe" as it is called because of the u-shape of the office suites) to talk to three senior staff members about the specifics in the Governor’s address. I brought along FR San Diego Correspondent Barry Jantz along with me. It was great to be able to talk directly with these knowledgeable folks, which we both appreciated. So let me say that your meeting with us was not in vein. You shared a lot of important points about the Governor’s goals and line-of-reasoning behind some of the proposals. There really isn’t time to go into all of that now.
I will give right now the immediate reactions that I have to this speech. I think that the Governor is sincere in his desire to see Californians prosper, and the Golden State do well. But he has decided to take a HUGE TURN IN HIS PRIORITIES AND HIS DIRECTION. The Arnold Schwarzenegger who was elected in the recall was elected by voters who want to see fiscal reform. The Governor clearly understood this, and pursued this mandate with vigor. Now he seems to have interpreted the election results this last November as a statement from the electorate that we want to spend, spend, spend.
There are a number of more minor proposals in the State of the State (see the attachment), but the big-grand daddy proposal called a "Strategic Growth Plan" for California. Which is fancy name for a proposal to produce a bond package of upwards of $68,000,000,000 (that’s 68 BILLION) over the next ten years. This is a huge amount of money. Now, there is no doubt that there are infrastructure needs for California. But these are huge numbers, and this is BEFORE the state legislature (you know, the institution controlled by the liberal Democrats) monkeys around with it.
I believe that as bond measures go, the plan that Governor wants to propose has as many safeguards built in as possible, and maybe a few needed-reforms tied into the fine details — but the size of this borrowing – the magnitude is — well, overwhelming.
That this extreme proposal would come from a Governor who was telling us all the importance of "living within our means" just a few months ago.
(I hear the Governor in the background, and every other line is — "I say build it." "Build it." "Build it." "Build it." Was Schwarzenegger in the movie Field of Dreams?)
The Governor did recognize that there are structural problems in the budgetary process. He did ask the legislature to come to him with responsible proposals. But it is so hard to take this credibly
(The Governor just called for a one dollar increase in the minimum wage. Let me state this clearly: This is exactly what California does not need. California’s businesses are already overburdened with regulations from Sacramento – but then two minutes later, same speech, he says "Let the free markets work." How schizophrenic.)
The real issue here is that the Governor doesn’t seem to be governing with a firm ideological consistency. It feels like he makes broad interpretations of election results, and then charges in new directions.
The problem is one of credibility. As a Republican, and a conservative, I am astounded, confused and demoralized that the Governor I elected on a platform of fiscal responsibility and reform wants to now be the ‘build it’ Governor. I’m not saying that infrastructure investment isn’t important. But right now, with this massive borrowing scheme, the likely result will be a big disconnect occuring between the Governor and the grassroots Republicans who elected him to office.
I will work on more analysis for tomorrow and the days to come, but the speech was pretty good, but there was no depth to the speech. The extreme shift from "blowing up boxes" in last year’s speech to this "build it" speech of massive borrowing stretches any credibility.
Frankly, this speech was so vague that when you put in the massive spending without any detail of how to pay for it, the speech could have been given by a Gray Davis (who was in the audience).
That’s my first take.
Jon