Our continuing Republican circular firing squad has gained some powerful new gunmen as KFI’s "John and Ken" Show has seen the commercial value of Republicans picking on Republicans rather than Democrats, in their development of a political "lottery" system to dole out venom against the likes of freshman Assemblyman Jeff Miller, who is both a good and decent guy and a conservative star, who doesn’t deserve the abuse.
Miller’s heresy, according to John and Ken, is that he was one of 28 (of a total of 29) other Republican members of the Assembly who didn’t support a motion to axe the Republican Leader after the budget deal was made in Sacramento. Miller himself voted against the budget. But that doesn’t matter to John and Ken, they want him recalled, as a result of randomly picking his name out of a hat. The result has been a verbal Jihad against Miller over the airways, (inter-spiced with commercial announcements) and for what I (with due respect for the showmanship of John and Ken) think is a crime Miller has not committed: being a liberal.
Is all this recall talk of Republican Assemblymembers productive for conservatives and the Republican party? I don’t think so.
In 1992 Republicans actually captured 41 of the state’s 80 Assembly seats and were set to elect as Speaker the generally conservative former Assemblyman Jim Brulte. Brulte would have been the first Republican speaker since the early Reagan years as Governor. But Brulte and his caucus couldn’t quite accommodate fellow Republican Assemblyman Paul Horcher. Horcher once told me all he hoped for was to be Chairman of the Judiciary Committee under the new Republican leadership. Horcher, a lawyer, and a more liberal Republican, was already a member of that Committee, and liked by the trial lawyers. Most Republicans in the caucus were conservative, and close to the rival insurance industry. (I have often felt that the Horcher recall was just as much about trial lawyers and insurance lobbyists playing out their more selfish dramas as conservatives vs. liberals.) I really haven’t ever read Brulte’s "inside" story, if there is one out there. But Brulte failed to make a deal with Horcher, and in my opinion that was a huge political miscalculation for conservatives. The result was Horcher went over to the Democrats and perpetuated Willie Brown’s speakership for a few months with his one vote. The Republicans responded with a successful recall of Horcher, but then Republican Assemblymember Doris Allen went over to the Democrats to become Speaker. So the Republicans responded with a successful recall of her, and then it happened yet again with another Republican member. By the time Curt Pringle was able to take over the reins as a real Republican Speaker, he had only about one year left to do the job before the Democrats were back in control.
Yet, had Brulte and his caucus just been able to engage in the normal give-and-take attendant to parliamentary democracy by dealing with Horcher to let him run the Judiciary Committee, conservative Republicans would have had a full two years of their own Speaker in return, and maybe a shot at holding control of the Assembly past 1994 absent the ensuing circular firing squad routine. Think of the policy gains that could have been achieved, and were lost…..
I applaud our publisher for his ideas to call out Republicans in the Assembly who voted for the budget. Because politicians so often talk out of both sides of their mouths, I am fine with "naming names," because this helps establish personal responsibility and pull out of the politician where they really are on the issues. The result is intended to be a better informed electorate and a better appraised Republican caucus. Political consequences duly flow from this result. That is a good thing.
I also think recall can be a good idea, especially in those unfortunate cases of highly ethically challenged conservatives who just drag the rest of our movement down with them. But just because the device is in the Elections Code doesn’t always mean its the best way to hold a member to task. For example, there is a member of the Assembly I personally feel is particularly ethically challenged, but I’m not charging to the recall front on that one, because the effort isn’t necessary when just exposing the character flaws can get the word out. The political market can take care of the rest…….
But I can’t just sit by while a good guy like Jeff Miller gets hammered by John and Ken. Horcher was a liberal Republican by even his own description who voted for Willie Brown for Speaker. Yes, politically, that is a recallable offense in my book (and one that never should have happened in the first place because the Republican leadership botched the deal). Jeff Miller is a stand-up conservative who voted against the budget and lost a game of chance. By those standards, 28 of the 29 Republican members of the Assembly all qualify for recall. That just doesn’t cut it. I think conservatives need to start rising up and pushing back on this recall stuff against our good guys; and as a party, we Republicans would be much better off, now, after the budget battle is over, on focusing on beating the Democrats in 2010 rather than ourselves.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:00 am
The six socialist sellouts (AKA the Quisling Six) *should* be recalled.
The GOP in California will be dead otherwise.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Did Jeff Miller (or any other Assembly Republican for that matter) vote to put Prop. 1A (tax hikes) on the ballot. That’s the question many of us have.
Answer seems to be yes.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Alex, I will be writing about this next week. It’s convoluted. The language in Prop. 1A is a straight up cap (though a weak cap). The TAX INCREASE legislation passed a few days afterwards has the language that says that if 1A passes at the polls, then taxes in that legislation are extended for additional time.
The whole process of how this budget was passed was terrible.
Republican legislators should have insisted that the entire package be put in front of them — then insisted that they have to time to review all of the bills in context. While voting for 1A when they did was not, in and of itself a vote for tax increase, providing the votes to put anything on the ballot before seeing everything was an irresponsible way to approach the whole matter.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:00 am
John and Ken are not Republicans, so they don’t care that they are attacking Republicans. But I think they are doing us a huge public service in this case. It is pretty clear that the “fix” was in in the Assembly through this process, and that the Republicans in that chamber were completely complicit in passing this budget with its huge tax increases. John and Ken uncovered and have repeatedly played an interview of Anthony Adams on the Pat Morrison show where he talks about the Assembly caucus meetings, the strategy of putting up only the necessary three votes on the budget, and that he was promised the caucus’ complete support for providing one of those votes. No Assembly Republican has disavowed his comments, nor has a single one withdrawn their endorsement of him for re-election in 2010. All but three Assembly Republicans voted to put Prop. 1A on the ballot, knowing that this was part of the Big 5 budget deal and its passage was enabling passage of the budget. About half of the Assembly Republicans voted for the blanket primary proposition, knowing that this would enable MaldObama to vote for the budget. It is a sad and sordid tale of Republicans ONCE AGAIN letting us down and going back on their word concerning taxes. They need to be held accountable. And it’s clear that it is not just the “Quisling 3” in the Assembly, but practically the entire caucus, less Chuck DeVore, who were complicit in this travesty.
Additionally, John and Ken have the power to wake the people up concerning our government and its many failings. No other public media seems inclined to do that. A lot of good can come out of this in the long term. Here’s hoping for a popular tax revolt!
March 6th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Jon, thank you. This whole process from the secret negotiations to craft it to it’s final legislative approval has been a disaster. Just like the coming effect on taxpayers, employers, etc.
I’d still like someone in the caucus to step up and say something. I’d also like someone to explain the CRP’s contribution’s to the governor’s Dream Team committee to pass 1A. The total numbers on the FPPC site is $400,000. And that’s just through the end of January.
The silence is amazing.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:00 am
By sitting back quietly and refusing to call out the traders, the rest of Assembly essentially gave them cover. By the way, have any of these people formally and publicly withdrawn their endorsement of Anthony Adams? So Jeff Miller is the sacrificial lamb this time, maybe they will fight harder to keep the traders in line next time!
March 7th, 2009 at 12:00 am
I would like to see the CRP be banned from donating to the Dream Team committee.
The Dream Team committee did not donate or do crap to help get our ticket elected from liberal McPherson to Conservative Poochigian in 2006.
And Id like to see open negotiations where any member from the caucus could stop on in and observe so we would have more transparency.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Hey Jim, I think you mean 1994 and not 1992.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Paul, you are correct sir! The Reps. won 41 seats in the Assembly in Nov., 1994, and Curt Pringle served as Speaker from late 1995 till November, 1996. Thank for the correction, I was off by an election cycle.
March 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Mr. Lacy,
Boy, you sure have a different recollection of Paul Horcher than I do. I mean: I can’t recall ever believing anything Paul told me just once.
March 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am
I think Paul ended his public career being in charge of the meter maids in San Francisco under Willie Brown! Perhaps he is reading this and will make a comment! I found Paul amusing, and anyway I think he could have been an OK public servant if Brulte and Company didn’t just drop the ball on thending to this crucial majority vote. That is my point, regardless of ever believing Paul or not. Both sides have characters in their midst, my assessment is that for want of just a little bit of respect for Horcher, Brulte and Company caused way more pain and wasted campaign effort and dollars for the rest of us Republicans in the long run.
March 10th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Mr. Lacy,
It occurs to me that respect isn’t something acquired via quid pro quo. Paul made his own choice to trade his illusion of principles for Willie Brown’s “respect” when he cast his vote. Brulte neither made Paul choice in that matter nor cast Paul’s vote for him. My assessment is that if Paul had chosen diffently, he might actually have eventually earned enough respect to have been considered for he position you say he coveted. Personally, I can’t help but wonder if the ultimate cost of having such a duplicitous personality in a position of power such as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee would not ultimately have caused a great deal more pain and wasted more Republican Party assets than those you morn the loss of in your original posting. I guess we’ll never know, though. Will we? To which I, for one, say: Thank you, Mr. Brulte.