I had been meaning to draw the attention of FlashReport readers to a post by FR friend Matt Rexroad over at the Cal-Races website. I thought it an interesting analysis couched in terms of Congressman Richard Pombo’s re-election challenge, but is really Matt’s assessment that those on the right who are attacking the Governor for his recent shift from a "Live Within Our Means" theme to a "Bond it, build it" theme.
Matt’s post begins like this:
As I read the different attacks on the Governor by the conservatives in the Republican Party I am amazed at how short-sighted they are. Nationally, unless something dramatic happens, Republicans are about to take a beating that has been in the works for about two years. The only person with a bullhorn that works in California with swing voters is the Governor.Now many of you are shaking your head and will point to Senator McClintock. Great conservative. Almost won this or that. The reality is that if he were half as good at raising money as he is at pointing out the problems of others he wouldn’t have lost for Congress, Governor, and Controller (2x). McClintock is not the candidate to build a ticket around any more than Dan Lungren was — unless winning isn’t the goal.
As a national tide hits California I believe the only one that can change it in the Governor. He has the resources and image that can make the difference. No other candidate or political player has the potential to do that. I’m not talking about views of public policy. This is just political reality.
You can read his entire post here.
That said, I think that the issue here is one of frustration, and the question truly becomes — if you help elect a Governor who runs on a platform of fiscal conservatism, and then he moves away from that position, what do you do? What can you do? Clearly the specter of a Governor Angelides or a Governor Westly will scare the living daylights out of any sane person. But that doesn’t erase frustration, concern, shock, dismay or demoralization. Volunteers motivate best when they are rallying in support of something or someone. Yes, they can be fired up to oppose something. But the latter route burns out volunteers, and creates an atmosphere of cynicism.
Trying to convince fiscally conservative Republicans that maxing out the state’s bond credit card is a good thing is too high a mountain to climb, I believe. The argument against passing piecemeal bonds should not to pass one big uber-bond, but rather figuring out how to stop the piecemeal bonds from passing.
Fortunately the Assembly Republicans, led by Kevin McCarthy, have introduced legislation to create a pay-as-you-go system of using a portion of general fund revenues annually to pay for infrastructure investment. That is something that the Governor could adopt, and then GOPers could proudly rally to that cause. Infrastructure with no debt.
If California had a lean budget, then borrowing for some infrastructure could make sense. But when the budget is fat – the general fund is close to $100,000,000,000 (that’s billions) – it means that taxpayers are already investing enough to run the state AND have infrastructure on a pay-as-you go basis.
So Matt has a good point at a strategic level, but the reaction from volunteers is more at a visceral level. The Governor is a great guy – genuinly liked by those who get to know him (including me). There is just frustration at the significant shift in his public policy agenda.