No matter how loudly or how often he proclaimed himself a
reformer, there was one big problem that Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger’s failed
”
year of reform
”
ballot initiatives never overcame this fall: Most California
voters simply don’t believe he’s a reformer at all.
No matter how loudly or how often he proclaimed himself a reformer, there was one big problem that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s failed “year of reform” ballot initiatives never overcame this fall: Most California voters simply don’t believe he’s a reformer at all.
Rather, a reasonable translation of the election returns indicates most voters thought this governor is more interested in feathering his own nest and those of the corporations and corporate executives who have funded his campaigns to the tune of about $100 million over the last 27 months.
But there’s a way Schwarzenegger can change all that. All he has to do is make good on a promise made during his first unscripted “town hall” meeting of the campaign season.
When the meeting moderator asked him whether it might be unfair to force public employee labor unions to get permission from members each year before using their dues for politics, as Proposition 75 sought to require, while corporate shareholders got no voice in how management used their money, Schwarzenegger quickly said “If there’s an initiative on the ballot next year, I’ll support it.”
Petitions for just such a measure are making the rounds of shopping malls and supermarkets right now.
Schwarzenegger doesn’t even have to back this proposal in order at last to establish solid bona fides as a reformer and a promise keeper.
Rather, now that the plan to clamp down on public employee political activity has narrowly failed, he has the chance to act against both unions and corporations in an even–handed manner.
All he has to do is quickly commission the crafting of a new measure that would hit both unions and corporations equally. Restrain both these interests – each of which would like to control the state’s public policy agenda via constant donations to politicians and proposition campaigns – and he’ll go down in history as a real reformer.
Put restrictions on unions only and he’ll be remembered as a biased huckster who looked good at first but lost his luster when the voters learned a little more about him.
Of course, for Schwarzenegger to attempt anything that regulates corporate contributions in California politics would be a complete reversal of form. His campaigns so far have taken millions of dollars from car dealers, insurance companies, HMOs, developers, oil companies, utilities – just about any form of business whose interests can be affected by state law and policy.
“We predict this (his promise to back a requirement that corporations get permission from shareholders before making political donations) will be his next broken promise,” Charles Idleson of the California Nurses Assn. told a reporter just after Schwarzenegger made his statement.
And indeed, the governor said nothing further on the subject through the rest of the fall political season. The subject was notably absent from his brief Election Night speech.
One reason might have been the immediate opposition expressed by the California Chamber of Commerce, whose agenda Schwarzenegger has followed almost without exception since becoming governor.
“If that’s the governor’s position, we respectfully disagree,” said Sara Lee, the chamber spokeswoman. Most of the governor’s campaign money has come from members of that group.
And yet, there are those remarks Schwarzenegger made at the forum in Walnut Creek. “No one, if it’s a corporation or stockholder or union member, no one should have money taken out of their paycheck without permission and have it used for political purposes.”
The remark causes some squirming among his aides. “As long as there’s no poison pill in an initiative, that’s the position he’ll take,” his chief spokesman, Rob Stutzman, told a reporter.
Given the length and complexity of almost all initiative texts, there will always be something a politician like Schwarzenegger can use if he wants to weasel out.
But if this governor really does want to be a reformer, he won’t do that, no matter what kind of excuses his deputies might be able to craft. He could start by drafting his own measure, one without any so–called poison pills, and then ask the unions pushing the anti–corporate donation proposal to drop it and cooperate with him in the interests of clean government.
If they won’t do that, he could then persist on his own in the interests of lessening the influences of all special interests in this state, not just cutting one side and leaving the other unfettered.
If he does that, the betting here is that Schwarzenegger will both restore his own popularity and go down in history as a real reformer and not the hypocrite most voters now plainly perceive him to be.
Elias is author of the “The Burzynski Breakthrough: The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It.” E–mail him at [email protected].
