[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers
Daily Email Summary


View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
 
Web Calitics
Event Calendar
February 2010
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* 01 02 03 04 05 06
07 08 09 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 * * * * * *
<< (add event) >>

Wire Services
Advertise Liberally

MBA Member

Blue CA Ad Network
Join Our eMail List
Email:

Photobucket

Hostage Crisis At Capitol; Governor Executes Several Hostages

by: Robert Cruickshank

Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 15:13:06 PM PDT


Crossposted to Daily Kos

Think that headline is over the top? Think again. Arnold Schwarzenegger has decided to turn the normal legislative process, intended at one point in our state's apparently distant past to be a deliberative process aimed at producing legislation for the public good, into a hostage crisis. The governor has demanded that either he gets a water bill by the end of the day today, or he's going to just randomly start vetoing bills, even bills designed to do things like help pregnant women get health care.

Credit E.J. Schultz and John Myers for introducing the "hostage" frame into the coverage of the political crisis in Sacramento. Apparently Arnold has decided about 500 bills are to be held hostage, but already about 100 bills have been vetoed. 100 more are going to be signed, in what Myers calls a "let a few hostages go" move apparently designed to show the sane people outside the barricaded room (which would include all 36 million of us as well as the legislators who have so far rightly refused to accept a craptacular water deal) that the governor really is willing to deal.

Do we need any greater sign of how totally state government has collapsed? Our governor, who usually plays the Hollywood hero who rescues the hostages from the bad guys, has now himself become one of the bad guys holding the people of this state hostage to his wild demands.

What are those demands? It's difficult to tell exactly, but the overall scope appears to be a demand that the people of California take water from those who already have rights to it (Delta farmers, fishermen, wildlife, SF Bay) and give it to those whose water rights are "junior" (i.e. they're last in line) - and that taxpayers must hand over money to pay for new dams and potentially a Peripheral Canal to benefit a small handful of users (primarily growers in Kern County and new suburbs in the LA Metropolitan Water District's domain, the aforementioned "junior" water rights holders).

John Laird gives a truly excellent overview that explains that the only other dam built by state government, the Oroville Dam which is a key part of the State Water Project, had 97% of its cost paid for by the actual users of the system, with the other 3% coming from taxpayers in the form of financial support (low-interest loans, for example). Yet the current demand is that taxpayers pay as much as 50% of the cost of a new dam, despite the fact that many Californians will never see any benefit from that dam, a dam which likely won't be built for a decade or more and which will, because it is likely to be built at low elevation, will not catch much water and will essentially be useless.

Other aspects of the water standoff include the Delta counties, who want to ensure that their water rights are not stolen, and that any deal impacting the Delta should pay for the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) and help repair the earthquake-prone Delta levees that have been described as a possible California version of Hurricane Katrina should they fail.

The counties wrote a letter to Sen. Darrell Steinberg voicing their concern that Delta reps have been shut out of the process and that they are about to be sold out, along with the rest of the state, to benefit a small number of politically connected water users who want to cut in line, and hand everyone the bill, to continue unsustainable water uses.

As the hostage standoff continues, let's hope there's a California legislative version of John McClane holed up in the Capitol looking to save everyone from the bad guys who, despite all their bluster, are really just after our money.

UPDATE by Robert: See the full list of 94 vetoed bills. Among the dead hostages includes the aforementioned AB 98, putting California's governor on record as endorsing discrimination against women. His veto message:

Maternity coverage is offered and available in today's individual insurance market. Consumers can choose whether they want to purchase this type of coverage, and the pricing is reflective of that choice. While the perfect world would allow for all health conditions to be covered, including maternity, I cannot allow the perfect to become the enemy of the good.

This is, as I noted back in March, is untrue:

When Wendy Root Askew of Monterey started looking for a doctor she hoped would be her gynecologist as well as deliver her future children, she was shocked to discover her health insurance policy didn't include a single OB/GYN in her county.

The 31-year-old considered changing health plans. But then she learned that while 85 percent of the plans available in Monterey County offered maternity coverage five years ago, just 15 percent offer it now.

She found only two individual policies that included maternity, but they were three to five times as much as the policy she already had and came with annual deductibles of up to $15,000.

Wendy is a very good friend of mine. And now she, like women across the state, have fallen victim to Arnold Schwarzenegger's misogyny and greed. Someone needs to let him know we elected him to govern the state, not to play Hans Gruber.

Robert Cruickshank :: Hostage Crisis At Capitol; Governor Executes Several Hostages
Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Governor sides with insurers, vetoes minimum coverage benefit standards (0.00 / 0)
In the first batch, Governor @Schwarzenegger just vetoed the maternity coverage mandate mentioned above, as well as several others: mental health, breast feeding counseling, mammographies, specific cancer screenings and treatments, etc.

Still awaiting other news from deadline day and what bills the Governor keeps as "hostage," and posting the fate of health consumer bill at the Health Access blog.


Thanks for that update (0.00 / 0)
We have a thug occupying the horseshoe. Maybe Bruce Willis can come up and try and drag him out of there before he hurts any more innocent people?

Or maybe, just maybe, the Democrats themselves will play that role. AB 98 is a perfect candidate for a veto override. Will this finally get Dems off their ass and hold a veto override session?

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


[ Parent ]
Bruce Willis (0.00 / 0)
I thought he was a small-government right-wing Republican?

[ Parent ]
AP bumps the hostage numbers up to 200 (0.00 / 0)
According to the report I just read, he signed 200, vetoed 200, and held back 200 to the end of the night. These are supposed to be ones he had not made up his mind about, according to his spokesperson.

However, AP quotes GOP leader Hollingsworth as saying he doubts they can do a deal by the end of the day. Bass is more upbeat. That leaves the fate of these 200 hostages in doubt. And AP has nothing to say about the contents of the "secret" deal the big 5 is working on. They do note the potential difficulty of getting the rest of the legislators to agree to any deal.

We have, of course, seen this issue play out before. Which makes all these threats just downright silly. Schwarzenegger can't get Republican legislators to sign on to his deals. He hasn't been able to in the past, and he can't guarantee he can this time either. So all this frantic negotiating is likely to be for nothing because the spending part of all this will require 2/3 approval. And we all know how hard that is to get.

Which leads me to ask, What is Arnold playing at? Trying to establish his bona fides with the big ag interests? Creating a tense plot line to garner media attention? Planning to run this scenario again with the full Assembly who just saw all their work for the last session go down the canal? Practicing for the Parsky recommendations? It just doesn't make sense.


reading through the vetoes and his explanations (4.67 / 3)
i am beginning to think this is a lot simpler than people are making it.

arnold is vetoing anything that conflicts with his right-wing ideological agenda. period. while he might also be trying to wring a water deal out of this as well as a sort of two-birds-with-one-stone tactic, it is important not to let him off the hook. he's not dong this out of pique, he's not doing this because he doesn't care about governance, he's doing this because he is a right wing governor faced with a center-left legislature, and because he was put into place by his fundraisers to do just that.


surf putah, your friendly neighborhood central valley samizdat


Yeah (6.50 / 2)
As I read the second round of vetoes that became clear to me as well. I still think the hostage framing is useful, because that IS a method by which he thinks he can leverage policy, but that is indeed the frame that holds the inner truth that is a fundamentally right-wing governor.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

[ Parent ]
it is a great metaphor for all cogs in the GOP machine (5.00 / 1)
it is the strategy they too once it became clear that they were never going to win a majority in this state without completely junking their ideology and political coalition and starting from scratch. it will, in time, become the national GOP strategy as well unless conservative democrats decide to cross the aisle in coming decades and stave off the inevitable. getting a handle on it and naming it for what it is is very important.

but inherent in the frame - as with the "idiot controlled by puppetmasters" meme that people often fell reflexively into w/ bush- is a hidden pitfall of obscuring people like schwarzeneggar's agency. he has governed like a right-wing CA republican pretty consistently, with a fairly smart use of imagery to appear more moderate than his actions have been. by claiming that he's just vetoing stuff out of pique or just to get that one bill, the truth that he's carefully junking bills that help everyday people defend themselves against the powerful sinks out of sight.

in the end, there's no conflict between the two - he's vetoing stuff to veto it, as well as trying to sucker dems into giving him the water bill as well.

surf putah, your friendly neighborhood central valley samizdat


[ Parent ]
kinda what I was thinking (0.00 / 0)
But the one thing that makes me question is, I'm a member of the NRA, and they have been raising a huge stink over AB962 (records for ammunition sales) and SB585 (kicking gun shows out of the Cow Palace), sending all sorts of emails and calling up to tell me to tell Arnold to veto it. They'd never robocalled on an issue since I joined (they called 3 times pitching Trutanich for LA City Attorney), so this seems pretty key to them.

So for Arnold to issue mass vetoes to please conservative issue groups and NOT have either of those bills be on the list seems a little strange.

Disclosure: I'm awesome.


[ Parent ]
schwarzeneggar might just not give a shit about the NRA faction (0.00 / 0)
everyone's got their eccentricities.

surf putah, your friendly neighborhood central valley samizdat

[ Parent ]
they just emailed to say that he vetoed SB585 and signed AB962, so thats that then. gun shows seem to be getting staked out as the new hot angle.

Disclosure: I'm awesome.

[ Parent ]
Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads
Photobucket


Support Calitics:

Shop on Amazon.com

Advertisers

California Friends
Shared Communities
Resources
California News
Progressive Organizations
The Big BlogRoll

Referrals
Technorati
Google Blogsearch
Powered by: SoapBlox