I admit – I’ve been lax in my FR posting. Life after term limits has been fun, rewarding and most of all very busy. I mostly apologize to Jon – it’s a
privilege he gives his bloggers to be able to post on FR at will, but he expects us to post. I’ll try to be better in the future.
What got me to post you may ask? Politics – what else. You may know from previous posts I’ve written or whatever you may know of my time in the legislature – I care deeply and I am focused on improving Republican representation in the wacky place we know as the California State Legislature.
Over the 14 years I served in the Assembly and then Senate I was intimately involved in Republican elections all over the state. I know all the challenges Republican leaders face when they are trying to keep seats or pick up seats in the legislature. I know all the pressures – I know all the secrets. And now that I’m a "former" member I have no obligation to keep those super secret secrets – so I’m going to share the biggest one of all…. and here it is:
The Republican Party does not have an unlimited supply of money at its disposal – in fact, the Democrats actually have more money than we do during the election cycles. Political money is a finite resource – and doesn’t grow on trees.
Shhhhh….. don’t tell anyone.
And why is this important? Because we (we being the Republicans, actually some activists, radio talk show hosts and other angry folks) might be about to embark on an effort that would eat up Republican money and ultimately cost us seats in 2010. (and I’ll get to the tragedy of that in a minute)
Suddenly, instead of focusing on winning seats, the talk is all about recalling Republican members of the legislature. So, instead of using the precious little money we have on fighting Democrats – we now are going to use it on fighting each other. Which means less money to pick up and defend seats in the future. Believe me, the Democrats are laughing at us – we’re eating our own. <again>
I know you’re mad. You feel betrayed. Your taxes are going up and you think it wasn’t a good deal. And worst of all, it took Republican votes to put it out. I’ve heard all that – I listen to talk radio too.
But I know a few things too –
1) Every dollar that the party (or the donors it relies on during the election year) spends to defend the "targeted" legislators against a recall effort, is a dollar the Republican leaders won’t have to pick up seats or defend seats we already have. Every dollar. The more money spent on the recall – the less money we have to win seats.
2) Every recall effort will fail. Yep, every single one. I’m sure that’s going to inspire a few comments on this post – but I’m not even a little bit hesitant in my prognostication.
I was there during the Horcher recall (and the Allen recall). I walked precincts. I donated. I worked it, and worked it hard. A LOT of effort was put behind getting rid of Horcher – A LOT. Huge money – huge volunteer effort – huge everything (kudos to Johnson-Clark). None of these recall efforts will have a bit of that energy or money behind them and they will have to fight the Assembly or Senate Republican Caucus – because they will ultimately defend their own (like it or not – that will happen). The recalls will fail.
3) In a representative Republic, elected officials get to vote their
conscious. Sometimes we love their vote – sometime we hate their vote – but we elected them to vote on our behalf. If the voters in any of the Republican legislator’s districts that voted for the budget feel strongly enough about their vote on the budget to toss them out, then it’s their right to do so when they are up for reelection. Let’s leave it to them. I know the perils of crossing your voters – I’ve been there.
4) I know that most every member that voted for the budget honestly thought it was the best thing to do – they made a vote they hated, but felt they had to do it. Now before you bite my head off (my CRA scorecard is 100% and in 14 years I never voted for a tax increase), I’m not defending their vote – I’m saying the member thought it was right at the moment. I am defending their right to make that unpopular vote.
I personally know every single Republican that voted for the budget. I’ve got
definite feelings about each. They all are very savvy
politicians and all knew the ramifications of voting the way they did.
Finally –
5) Not blowing my own horn – I know I’m right. Last year I held a very unpopular view on term limits. I posted not once, but twice, that if the term limit proposition failed it would cost us Republican seats. I heard from the same voices I hear now about recalls that I was wrong and that defeating term limits was the "Republican" thing to do. It passed and, by the way, we lost THREE seats in the Assembly – seats that were held by Republican incumbents that were termed out. But for the amazingly outstanding efforts of then-Republican Senate Leader Dave Cogdill we would have lost a Senate seat as well.
Spend a minute and read my posts – I talk about the advantage of incumbency and how we would lose it with the failure of Prop 93. And – you might want to read the comment back and forth because I (we) discuss how losing seats might mean its easier to raise taxes.
Let me conclude as I titled this post – these recall efforts are foolish. In the long run, it will only hurt the Republican leaders of the Assembly and Senate when they try to defend seats and pick up targets. The reason? They will have a whole lot less money – being that it was spent on defeating the recalls.
And, to all that may know something about me, I will not support taking out Republicans I may disagree with and I will fight against all of these recall efforts.
You may not like that view – but as I said in the beginning – I’m about winning seats for Republicans. This recall talk is totally counter-productive to that goal.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:00 am
The only thing the GOP in the senate and assembly can do is block bad budgets and tax hikes. When the GOP sits back and lets GOP senators and assemblymembers vote for bad budgets and high taxes, then the GOP becomes complacent…and removes the only reasons to vote for the GOP.
Having people like Adams and Cogdill on the ballot in 2010 will send a signal that the Democrats will be allowed to get their way.
With the tax and spend attitude in these troubled times, we *need* a party to stand up against fiscal insanity. If we don’t stand up against the tax and spend faction in our own party, then how can we be trusted to stand up against the tax and spend Democrats.
Sadly, it has already been shown that we couldn’t. The least we can do is stand up now against them and show they can’t get away with it.
This includes making sure they are not reelected. So what if the Dems pick up those seats — it’s not like we lost anything of value in the end.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:00 am
What we have here is a failure to communicate. Republicans mostly signed a no-tax pledge and then broke the pledge. Anthony Adams has been clear that the ones who voted for the budget were designated by leadership so that most Republicans would be safe from criticism.
Republicans, particularly the Governor, did not do the heavy lifting of identifying the waste and duplication in the budget. They did not go after the outragous salaries and benefits of state employees. They did not make any effor to reign in the bureaucracy.
Recall is reserved for the worst offenses, but in this case it is really a shared responsibility. We cannot recall all the legislators, but I’m not really sure if they grasp the serious nature of their complicity with the tax increases.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Actually Jim, voting for Republicans who raise taxes is foolish. I fully the support the recall of Anthony Adams and will devote some of my energy to help this movement along.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Senator, with all due respect, your post makes clear why the Republican caucus got into this mess. The Republican party exists to promote conservative principles of smaller government, reduced spending, and lower taxes. If it is not doing that, there is no reason for the Republican party. Putting party before the people is an approach that I, a lifelong Republican with a 100% voting propensity, frequent party donor, and a record of having never voted for a non-Republican, am sick of. Obviously, judging from the 15,000 plus who attended the John & Ken tax revolt rally today, there are plenty of others who feel like I do.
Your third point is just wrong. When you sign a pledge not to raise taxes, you are no longer free to “vote your conscience” on that issue. If you want to vote your conscience, don’t sign a pledge to obtain someone’s vote under false pretenses.
Recalls are expensive. But this party needs to learn a lesson that you need to keep your word, no matter what. The best thing for the Republican party to do now is to cut loose those who have violated their word, and then get behind this tax revolt. The party cannot waste resources defending these failed politicians. They broke their word and they must go. Let’s focus on defeating the propositions on the May 19 ballot, and then take back this state from the unions while we have the people behind us.
March 8th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Great job of cheerleading for the sell-out status quo, Senator.
Koo-Aid? No thanks, I’ll pass.
And if money is such a precious and finite resource, then tell me why the California Republican Party gave large sums of it to the Failinator’s Dream Team account to PASS Prop. 1A? It’s on the FPPC website.
Sometimes the best way for our party to learn it’s lesson is to take an absolute beating at the polls. Sadly, having the Democrats deal them out to us isn’t going to suffice. We have to do it to ourselves.
March 8th, 2009 at 12:00 am
” In a representative Republic, elected officials get to vote their conscious (sic).” I assume you mean “conscience”, Senator?
And if it is in my Republican representative’s “conscious” (sic) to take even more of my money to pay for the teachers’ unions et al, then I want that rep OUT OF THERE.
March 8th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Recalls are absolutely idiotic. They sure make us feel good because we are at least doing something, anything that holds the line against taxes. But to be clear, no one is more upset that quisling 6 voted for tax increases.
In addition to the senator’s arguments, recalls seriously hurt the party. The public thinks we are a schizophrenic group of confused ideologues. Our public perception is diminished. Also, by the time our recall is approved, if it will be, the subject’s term is probably almost over. Finally, if we focused our resources on electing solid republicans and achieved majorities, we would debate our agenda, spending cuts, and not tax increases. One or two peel offs would not matter.
Let’s elect some republicans.
March 8th, 2009 at 12:00 am
And we can have a focus. If you want to do something productive, Republicans can spend money to defeat Prop 1A-F. No wonder this party in this state is in such a mess.
March 8th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Senator Battin:
I am stunned that you would bring this up. In fact, I was debating about digging that old post up and “bumping it to the top” because it is quite clear you were wrong and I was spot on with the analysis.
In the second link to the second post you made, there is an interesting debate between you and I and I will repost some of the comments I made here:
———–
When the state government grows by billions and billions since Governor Gray Davis was recalled…and the current number of Republicans in the state legislature is unchanged…what does that mean?
I will tell you. It means the Democrats have a 2/3 majority already…they all just don’t have “D’s” next to their name.
You play up the impending doom that would catapult our state into the perverbial abyss if the Democrats get a 2/3 majority.
Please share with me and others why it is so important to hold on to those precious Republican seats when the budget has grown by billions and billions of dollars.
Your argument supposes that we will be worse off if Democrats acquire the 2/3 majority and imply that as long as we can keep that from happening, our valiant Republicans have and will continue to prevent increased taxes and bigger government.
Yet…the Democrats do not have a 2/3 majority and we have seen government grow by leaps and bounds.
Simply put Senator, our taxes have already gone up due to the irresponsible spending of the Democrats who have been aided and abetted by Republicans who lack the backbone, some would say “onions”, to beat back the rise of oppressive and expansive government.
————
Anthony Adams already admitted that if they needed four votes, they would have had four. If they needed five votes…they would have had five.
Your argument is one that an enabler of a drug addict would make. The best cure for this disease is to challenge EVERY republican in a primary.
Not until the voters transfer the pain of these tax hikes onto the elected leaders who steal our money will these rapacious politicos be put in check.
The GOP must be punished to be saved just a parent must punish a child to help him grow into a responsible man.
And the only way you punish the GOP is through money. You drain the coffers up the GOP up and down the state by makin primary challenges.
It will only be at that time that the GOP will finally get the message.
Right now…there aint a damn bit of difference between the Republicans and the Democrats in the California state legislature and if you try to tell me otherwise, I will puke.
This ain’t a blog read by the average John Doe citizen that has no clue what is going on up there.
With the way our districts are drawn there is only one vote that matters each year. That is the budget. And each year we are failed time and time again.
March 8th, 2009 at 12:00 am
In my anger, I forgot to post my closing line.
Senator, you obliviously write: “Why Hurt Our Targets?”
It is very simple, sir. Because they hurt us.
March 8th, 2009 at 12:00 am
I knew the post would enliven some response.
As I said, I’m not defending anyone’s vote. I spent 14 years voting how I believed was right and I respect my former colleagues right to do the same. I’m sure many times I disappointed some with how I voted – but I always had to answer to my constituents when I ran for reelection.
The point of the post – which several seemed to have missed or chose to ignore is this: Because Republican political money is finite, it is counter-productive to spend money on recalls because (1) the recalls will fail, and (2) that will mean there is less money available to defend our seats and to pick up Democrat held seats.
You may not like what I’m saying, but that doesn’t mean its not a dead certain fact. Because it is.
Finally – two last points:
1) Several of the members that voted for the budget had stellar conservative records for years up to this one vote. They were heroes to the movement. Yet they felt they had to make this ugly vote for whatever reason. How then by recalling them does it prevent their replacement from doing the same?
2) If you honestly think that there is no difference between what was finally passed and what would have happened if the Democrats had a 2/3 majority in each house, you are being naive.
The differences would be staggering.
If that ever happens, and you had any part of it through draining Republican resources through, say.., trying to recall Republicans – then what comes from it is on you.
March 8th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Senator Battin:
You would have been better off not following up with your last comment, as it does not help your case and it reveals a lot about how much of a politician you really are. If the sole point of your post was that recalls are a bad idea, it would have been a one paragraph post. You went into a lot more than that, including a defense of legislators’ rights to cast bad votes out of conscience. However, as was pointed out in this thread, they had, for the most part, signed pledges not to support tax increases. You ignored their lack of honor in violating those pledges in your response. Telling.
I agree with you that recalls are almost always dumb, especially as applied against two year legislators. But, when folks are angry, sometimes they act impulsively. Your point about money is wrong, however. Most of the money to finance the recall campaigns will come from folks who are not typical Republican donors. That money would not be coming to Republicans anyway. The problem will come if the Republican party really funds the defenses of those politicians being recalled, as you suggest. That will be a HUGE mistake, “politics as usual” of the most cynical kind. The party needs to let those who voted in violation of their word of honor fend for themselves. Let them go, or risk losing a lot of future Republican money from real party donors like myself.
As for your last point, I have no doubt that the deal we got was better than it would have been had the Democrats had 2/3 of each house. But it was still horrible. Republicans are sick of hearing that, even though we have the highest income taxes, business taxes, sales taxes, etc. in the country, “things could be worse”. What we see is that our legislators cave in every single time. I submit that if we stood tall and refused to negotiate away our one distinctive, just once, we would actually gain seats. It’s very hard to raise money and run campaigns with the slogan “if you elect Republicans things will be less horrible!” Not that stirring.
March 8th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Telling people that if the Democrats had 2/3 outright rather then a 2/3 vote with turncoat Republicans is just like telling someone on the 8th ring of Hell: “Ain’t you glad that because of us you aren’t on the 9th ring.”
March 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Don – it’s not the non-typical Republican donors FOR the recall – because that won’t be a lot of money, it’s the stalwart, always relied on, institutional Republicans donors that will spend money AGAINST any recall – and that’s real big money – that will be lost. And that will hurt our efforts to pick up seats and defend our vulnerable ones.
BTW – exactly what did Jeff Miller do that was so repulsive to you? His name was drawn out of a hat by Jon and Ken. Recall for what reason?
Daniel – you have no idea.
March 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Sen. Battin: Thank you for your reply. I understand your point that institutional Republican donors and, more specifically, the party itself, will defend these politicians. I acknowledged it above. But the wrongdoing in this case is on the part of the institutional Republican donors and the party. They need to let any politician who supported or enabled the passage of tax increases, after pledging not to do so in their respective campaigns, fend for themselves. We, as a party, need to turn the page and vow that our campaign promises are our bond, and that we can be relied upon to stick to our word.
As for Jeff Miller, I don’t support that particular recall. I would strongly support a recall of Adams, or Lou Correa. BUT, I can’t get too mad about the Miller recall, because he is in leadership in the assembly and he obviously supported Mike Villines and the deal he made. Chuck DeVore could not even get a second when he moved to remove Villines as the assembly caucus leader. Miller could have supplied that second.
March 9th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Jim – *you* have no idea.
By giving cover to the Democrats, the GOP will be blamed for everything that goes wrong. This means that we will have no credence when we say the Democrats were wrong.
This is exactly what is causing people to avoid the GOP across the country like a plague.
We want to give the people a choice — you want to give them an echo.