Who will be the next Gov of Calif?

[kittynh]

This is especially for you California dwellers. But everyone can vote! I have no clue who is runnning, so forgive the unscientific style of this poll.....

But I think we all should have a chance to vote!

[Malachi151]

Do we really need any more evidence that the state of politics in America is pathetic? :(

[Clancie]

Posted by kittynh

I have no clue who is runnning
You're right, kittynh, it's a lot better that way.

I'm surprised more names aren't on the (official) ballot yet. Only $3500 and 65 signatures needed to have the fun of saying you ran for Governor of California? :eek: Not bad!

And, say, "Girl6"! Good idea! There's still time!!!! You certainly seem better than the candidates I know about so far. (And I have a feeling you wouldn't have to quote movie lines when talking about the serious financial problems of California. :rolleyes: )

[zakur]

You forgot Gallagher. Nothing prepares you for gubernatorial duties like smashing melons with a giant hammer.

[renata]

200 hundred candidates so far, I believe.

But it doesn't matter who the governor will be, because the slighted party will have another recall...and another... and another. We will be a state of perpetual elections.

[Yahweh]

Arnold. He has the most name and face recognition, he has the title of "Mr. Universe", he was the Terminator and "the Running Man".

Go Arnold!

[Clancie]

Oh, didn't see renata after Girl6..and of course there's davefoc...or RC...Honestly, I think any JREF-er in California would be a better governor than Schwartzenegger. I can't imagine why he feels qualified.
Posted by renata

200 hundred candidates so far, I believe.
Maybe two hundred have already declared, but according to Reuters, they're expecting 500 candidates and so far only 13 have completed the paperwork.

[peptoabysmal]

I live in California and I'm voting for Ahnold!

[PygmyPlaidGiraffe]

You know, funny thing is

California is being used as a model of success by a couple of provinces in Canada (Alberta and Ontario) to guide policies. Odd, very odd.

[Bjorn]

Arnold.

Just because I've met quite a few people who think that would be cool.

What are his thoughts about homeless people? About the budget? About education? They have no idea. :confused:

But they still think it would be cool. :c2:

[davefoc]

Despite Clancie's kind words I have decided not to run for governor of CA this year,

I notice that kittyn doesn't even have Davis on the list. Are we now at the point where people are seeing Davis as a dead duck and the only issue left is who is going to replace him?

I sure hope so. In the various topics posted on this so far the closest to a defense of the guy put forth is that Republicans do bad things too. That's sort of the way the stop the recall web site reads too. Yah he's made some mistakes and stuff hasn't worked out all that well and he might have done better here or there but look how terrible this recall is because it's costing Californians all this money. It looks like it's going to cost a buck or so per Californian. This could be the best money the state has ever spent.

[Yahweh]

I cant believe Renata is being beaten by a fictional planetary body and a smut peddler.

I'm changing my from Arnold over to BILL CLINTON! Go Clinton!

[Underemployed]

It can only be Arnie.

He is certainly the worst candidate, apart from all the others.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Malachi151
Do we really need any more evidence that the state of politics in America is pathetic? Taking into account that America is the worlds single economic and political super power and since we have been politically stable for over 200 years it is an irrtional statement to call our (American's) state of politics pathetic.

Your statement speaks more of your own visceral response, your ideology and your inability to consider ALL evidence and objectively question your own held beliefs.

Gray Davis along with many mistakes,

1.) lied to Californians assuring us there were no serious problems with the budget before the election.

2.) He signed budgets that increased spending 150% over revenue. When revenue increased at a rate greater than inflation and immigration combined.

3.) He refused to take a leadership role and solve the workers comp problem that is currently shutting down businesses throughout california.

Californians including both Democrats and moderate Republicans feel that what Davis has done rises to the level of recall. So, in a Democratic election we are going to decide if the guy should be recalled.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by renata
200 hundred candidates so far, I believe.

But it doesn't matter who the governor will be, because the slighted party will have another recall...and another... and another. We will be a state of perpetual elections. With all due respect Renata this is simply not a partisan issue. The polls showed that in the last election Democrats wanted to elect someone other than Davis they just couldn't vote for Bill Simon. Had Riordin won the primary Davis would not be governor now.

Many Democrats took up petitions to recall Davis. Bear in mind that California is predominately Democrat. If this were partisan politics Davis would have little to fear because the Democrats who hold the majority would come to his defense. They won't because Davis has been such a pathetic leader and made so many mistakes allowing us to squander billions of dollars in surplus and take on a huge deficit at a time when revenue was significantly more than sufficient to meet our needs. Ignoring the #1 problem facing California (workers comp) Davis has proven himself incapable of leading the 6th largest economy in the world
.

[renata]

Randfan,

There is no love lost for Davis. He is in the pocket of plaintiff bar and the unions. He has mishandled one crisis after another. However, as I understand it, those issues should have been dealt with at the election- they were not. And I think recall has now become a weapon of political opposition- and will continue to be. Given the relatively low threshhold needed to initiate a recall, (12% of people who voted in prior election, I believe) and, in this case paid signature gatherers, I think future recalls are inevitable.

What do you think the results will be at this one? Will he be recalled, and if yes, who will replace him?

[davefoc]

Renata, I think you are right and that there is the potential for future abuse of the recall procedure. Although note that it has been in existence since 1911 and at most there has been one attempted and failed recall in that time.

My sense of it is that the people are not idiots and that the recall procedure will not be overused in the future, but if I am wrong and there are abuses then modifications will be made to it.

None of this, I think, should prevent the use of the procedure now. California is teetering on the edge of crisis. Workers comp rates for routine factory work are around 25%, rates for anything risky are approaching 50%. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that there will be a mass migration of business out of CA is something isn't done immediately about this. Davis, even if he wanted to, has become powerless to fix anything now because of his past ineptitude.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by renata
Randfan,

There is no love lost for Davis. He is in the pocket of plaintiff bar and the unions. He has mishandled one crisis after another. However, as I understand it, those issues should have been dealt with at the election- they were not. And I think recall has now become a weapon of political opposition- and will continue to be. Given the relatively low threshhold needed to initiate a recall, (12% of people who voted in prior election, I believe) and, in this case paid signature gatherers, I think future recalls are inevitable.

What do you think the results will be at this one? Will he be recalled, and if yes, who will replace him? Renata,

I can see how the process could be subject to abuse but I think it unlikely. Many experts didn't give this recall much of a chance even with Issa's money. Later those same experts realized the recall effort had hit a nerve. The money was significant but if people don't want to sign a recall then the money is of little value.

There is a window of opportunity to get the petitions signed and the signatures must be valid. Just because you spend 1 - 2 million dollars is no guarantee that you will be successful.

This recall has been successful because voters, both democrat and republican want Davis out.

It has happened and none of our argument can change that or the future. If the system will be abused then it will be and you will be proven correct. We will see.

Perhaps the next governor will think twice before he plays games with the peoples money and lies to them before the election.

Perhaps governors will be more attentive to the will of the people rather than special interests like Davis.

[Clancie]

Posted by RandFan

Perhaps the next governor will think twice before he plays games with the peoples money and lies to them before the election.

Perhaps governors will be more attentive to the will of the people rather than special interests like Davis.
Well, let's not forget the contrived energy crisis and subsequent price gouging by Bush cronies who chose to supply California with electricity at exhorbitant rates (a totally unethical price gouging which we will be paying off for decades to come).

Or the total apathy of the Bush administration to California's energy problems and the long-lasting financial problems that they created. (And I still remember Cheney's "let them eat cake" kind of advice to just get elderly people "a generator of their own, like my family and I got for my mother"), in case the power went out and deprived them of electricity for things they required for their health care needs.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Clancie
Well, let's not forget the contrived energy crisis and subsequent price gouging by Bush cronies who chose to supply California with electricity at exhorbitant rates (a totally unethical price gouging which we will be paying off for decades to come). Riiight, it's all Bush's fault. BTW, a federal court found no such price fixing that would allow California out of it's obligations. I don't know for certain that there wasn't price gouging but this is not Bush's fault and there is nothing more clear than Davis' mishandling of the whole event.

Or the total apathy of the Bush administration to California's energy problems and the long-lasting financial problems that they created. The Bush administration did not create this problem. Energy was deregulated while Pete Wilson and Bill Clinton were in office.

Did Davis 'Fiddle' Amid Fuel Crisis? (http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/utilities/nw/nw001796.php3) A good read that lays a signigicant part of the blame on the Republicans. However, It says NOTHING bout Bush and Cheney except,

"I think the governor has been damn good at manipulating perceptions," Sweeney added.

"He made it look like (the energy crisis) was Bush's fault, when really the problem lies in California. It's our fault." Damn straight.

Buying into broad policies favoring deregulation, former Gov. Pete Wilson, under pressure from large industrial power users paying 50 percent more for energy than peers in other states, launched what was coined as energy deregulation in California with full bipartisan support.

Deregulation kicked in on April Fools' Day 1998 and worked - for a while.

Bills were slashed 10 percent for ratepayers of Southern California Edison and other investor-owned utilities. The utilities, forced to sell off their natural gas plants, in turn profited from cheap wholesale power sold at higher fixed rates to their customers.

Once the utilities had recouped millions in bad nuclear power investments and other "stranded costs," they were supposed to slash bills even further as competitive forces lowered prices.

But in June 2000, energy rates rose precipitously. Customers of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., which had just paid off its bad investments, suddenly faced rate hikes of 140 percent.

[Clancie]

RandFan,

You've linked to an op/ed piece in a conservative paper. Here is a news article from Associated Press.

http://www.thedesertsun.com/news/stories/national/1048725813.shtml

Some highlights:


Federal energy regulators, cataloging widespread manipulation of Western markets, said Wednesday they probably will require about $3.3 billion in refunds, a third of what California says it’s owed.

...In a lengthy report, FERC investigators outlined a broad array of manipulation of natural gas and electricity prices that aggravated electricity supply problems in the West, causing prices to soar in late 2000 and early 2001.

"Price gouging abounded," said Commissioner William Massey, the only commissioner who favors renegotiating the contracts. Massey is a Democrat; FERC Chairman Pat Wood is a Republican, as is Commissioner Nora Brownell.

...The staff report concluded that key to the electricity price run-up in California and later the Pacific Northwest was the manipulation of natural gas prices by energy companies through false reporting of prices and other techniques that misled traders.

....Along with seven Enron subsidiaries, five other companies were singled out in the report as having engaged in marketing activities that warrant disciplinary action.

...The 2000-01 Western energy crisis cost California as much as $45 billion in higher electricity bills, lost business due to blackouts and a slowdown in economic growth, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Clancie
RandFan,

You've linked to an op/ed piece in a conservative paper. Here is a news article from Associated Press.

http://www.thedesertsun.com/news/stories/national/1048725813.shtml

Some highlights: The problem that you ignore and the fatal flaw in the claim as noted in my "conservative" paper is that in the end FERC found that the overcharges were not the level that Davis claimed.

Davis repeatedly has threatened to sue FERC, which has found the state is only due 10 cents on the dollar of its overcharge claims, and his aides insist early rate hikes were politically impossible

More importantly your link does not establish that Bush had anything to do with the mess.

[Clancie]

Posted by RandFan

More importantly your link does not establish that Bush had anything to do with the mess.

Well, that link was to show that Davis is not totally to blame for the state's economic problems (despite what Republicans like Anne Coulter and others would like to claim).

As for the Bush connection, here's one:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/enrn25.shtml

WASHINGTON -- One of the biggest beneficiaries of the California power crisis is a Texas energy conglomerate that more than any other single company has helped bankroll President Bush's political career.

...The new president's rejection of price controls to hold down soaring electricity costs in the Golden State reflects the views of Enron, the largest wholesaler of electricity and largest owner of natural gas pipelines in North America.

...Enron and its employees gave $113,800 to Bush's presidential campaign, his 10th most generous contributor; $250,000 to the Republican National Convention host committee; and $300,000 to the Presidential Inauguration Committee.

[kittynh]

Yes, but seriously, who is running that you think would best be able to "fix" things in California?

And why would Arnold even want this mess?

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Clancie
Well, that link was to show that Davis is not totally to blame for the state's economic problems (despite what Republicans like Anne Coulter and others would like to claim). Fine but that is not the contention that I have made and not the subject that got us to this point.

What is clear is that Davis screwed up big time.

And for that mater the article that you dismissed simply because it was conservative supports that contention.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/enrn25.shtml It is entirely possible that Bush chose not to act because of links to Haliburton. Of course there is a history of a hands of policy when it comes to state made problems. More relevant was Clinton’s refusal to reimburse the costs of California's immigration expenses incurred as a result of federally mandated programs. It should be noted that Bush has taken the same stance.

FERC places over-charge at 10% and it is demonstrable that the situation was caused by state legislatures (Democrat and Republican), Pete Wilson and exasperated by Davis.

After all is said and done the Bush oil links are red herrings. If it gives you comfort to imagine machinations and conspiracies then fine but it won't excuse the appalling and pathetic behavior of Davis.

[Clancie]

Posted by RandFan

Fine but that is not the contention that I have made and not the subject that got us to this point.

What is clear is that Davis screwed up big time.

And for that mater the article that you dismissed simply because it was conservative supports that contention.
No, I "dismissed" it because it was an opinion piece, not a news source. News articles show that Davis is NOT responsible for all California's economic problems--and that the Bush energy cronies (and campaign contributers) bear a significant part of the responsibility for the mess we're in.

[Clancie]

Posted by kittynh

Yes, but seriously, who is running that you think would best be able to "fix" things in California?

And why would Arnold even want this mess?
Good question, kittynh, and personally I don't think anyone's going to be able to fix it in a way we'd all like (i.e. with no increased costs to California's taxpayers).

Part of me doesn't even mind if a Republican wins, because they're going to be saddled with a basically insoluable problem.

On the other hand, I haven't heard any Republicans present any compelling ideas so far (does Schwartzeneggers' "I'm going to pump up Sacramento" count? :rolleyes: ).

Unless one of them impresses me by October, I'll probably be the good Democrat and vote "No" on impeachment and "Yes" on the only Dem running, our Lieutenant Governor, Cruz Bustamonte. (I don't know why he wants it either....)

[Supercharts]

Jesse Ventura, a former Navy Seal, Actor, Wrestling 'performer', mayor of a small town was elected gov of Minnisota.
Ahnold is a former Mr. Universe, current actor, married to a Kennedy clan person, and has a lot of $'s.

So the real answer is to have a cage fight between Ventura and Ahnold. If The Ahnold wins then he's a viable candidate for gov.
"Webster" could referee. The porno person could prance around the ring holding up the signs indicating the round. Gallagher could be Ahnolds manager and throw melons into the ring.

See? There's room enough in this circus for everybody.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Clancie
No, I "dismissed" it because it was an opinion piece, not a news source. Cannot change the facts it cites.

News articles show that Davis is NOT responsible for all California's economic problems-- How many times do I have to site the FACTS.

1.) Davis approved budgets that spent 150% of revenue.

2.) Califronia Revenue increased more than inflation and immigration combined. (we had enough money to meet our needs)

3.) Davis had an opportunity to do something about the very real and very serious problem of workers compensation and chose not to. Davis' inaction is causing businesses to leave California. And Davis has ties to the trial lawyers association who benifit from the status quo.

and that the Bush energy cronies (and campaign contributers) bear a significant part of the responsibility for the mess we're in. BULLS**T!!! (see above, and see all of the threads that deal with this problem)

The blame squarely beongs on the sholders of Davis.

Your "news" article can't get around the fact that FERC only places overcharges at 10%. Your "news" articles can't change the fact that the "mess" was state made. Your "news" article can't change the fact that Davis' bungled the situation. Your "news" article can't change the fact that the problem existed before Bush.

Again, if you chose to ignore the facts that is fine but the rest of us don't have to ignore them. And what ever you think of the article won't change the facts that are mentioned in it.

Why won't you attack the facts in the article and stop the fallacious dismisal of it? And by the way, have the cajones to admit that FTCR attacks republicans including Pete Wilson for the mess so they are hardly Conservative lap dogs.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Clancie
Part of me doesn't even mind if a Republican wins, because they're going to be saddled with a basically insoluable problem. This is nonsense. It assumes that the problems are not self inflicted and are outside the control of California. This is demonstrably wrong.

There are two major problems

1.) We are spending far more than we make in spite of the fact that revenues have outpaced inflation and immigration.

2.) Unprecedented increases in workers compensation is forcing businesses to close or leave the state.

Whoever is governor is going to have to demand that future budgets have real spending cuts and not this bulls**t cut in the increase to spending.

The governor is going to have to take his case to the people and demand that workers compensation be reformed and that regulations that are unfriendly to businesses by changed.

It's really not all that difficult. It will take a leader who is not beholden to the trial lawyers, unions and other special interests. Why do you think the unions have spent so much to keep Davis?

I don’t know if Arnold is capable of that kind of leadership. I’m certain he can do a far better job than Davis even cares to do.

[davefoc]

Clancie,
It is hard for me to understand how you can not hold Davis nearly totally responsible for California's budget problems. If you can't blame the Governor for something like this who can you blame?

The power crisis fiasco barely plays into the budget issues because that fiasco was payed off with bonds that will be payed back by the electric rate payers.

I can see a little bit more of where you are coming from on the broken worker's comp system and the power crisis fiasco.

I personally blame Davis for the worker's comp mess because it's been brewing for several years and he has done nothing to move in the direction of a solution.

Many people share your view that Davis is not responsible for the power crisis and there are certainly arguments to support that idea. I am one though that thinks that Davis is far and away the most responsible individual for the disaster.

This is a link to an article supporting that view:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/5/16/160145.shtml

Reasonably, you might reject the article because of its biased source. But here is a paragraph from the book written by a Stanford professor that the article is about:
Difficult challenges require wise political leadership. Such challenges require strong, courageous political leaders willing to make difficult and potentially politically unpopular choices. But that
type of leadership never emerged in California. Rather than solving the challenge by taking appropriate steps, California’s governor failed to act and then, once he started to act, overreacted. That failure of political leadership transformed the difficult challenge into California’s energy crisis.

source: http://www.hoover.org/publications/books/electricity.html

I have not read the book but my own list of the Davis missteps associated with the power crisis is this:


1. Failure to approve new power plants in timely way.
2. Failure to raise rates when demand began to outstrip supply.
3. Failure to arrange long term contracts for electricity so state became hugely vulnerable to short term price volatility
4. Failure to allow brown outs as short term solution to some supply problems.
5. Panicked buying of radically overpriced electricity contracts after he had created crisis.

At least some of these issues might have been a direct result of the industry insiders that were his principle advisers on the power crisis.

The fact is that several other states have introduced power deregulation plans somewhat similar to Calironia's and no other states had problems anything like California's.

A little off the topic, is this anti-Davis editorial from of all places the San Francisco Chronicle. This guy takes aim at the slimy way that Davis secured the defeat of Riordan by supporting his more conservative opponent.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/06/22/IN227179.DTL

[reprise]

Now if only Nancy Leider would nominate...

[Ove]

I seem to remember a scene from "Demolition Man" about "The Arnold Schwartzernegger Library". Those writers must have been psycics.:D :D :D

[PygmyPlaidGiraffe]

Leno Invite (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56047-2003Aug13.html)

135 candidates on the ballot.

Are 134 running against Arnold for Gov, or is this headline wrong?
I suspect that there are 135 candidates running for all positions no, such as in a primary election? Or is only the Governorship up for grabs?

Will a sucessful recall result in a primary election?

State election officials late Wednesday announced that 135 candidates, including Schwarzenegger, have officially qualified for the ballot. -from MSNBC

[jj]

I'm hoping for Don Novello (Lazlo J. Toth, Father Guido Sarducci) myself.

Check out the "lazlo letters" if you haven't.

[LibraryFox]

Originally posted by PygmyPlaidGiraffe
Leno Invite (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56047-2003Aug13.html)

135 candidates on the ballot.

Are 134 running against Arnold for Gov, or is this headline wrong?
I suspect that there are 135 candidates running for all positions no, such as in a primary election? Or is only the Governorship up for grabs?

Will a sucessful recall result in a primary election?

-from MSNBC
Nope. It's 135 differnt candidates to replace Davis as Governor. The only things on the special ballot are going to be whether to kick davis out, and who to replace him with.
-LF

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by RandFan
Taking into account that America is the worlds single economic and political super power and since we have been politically stable for over 200 years it is an irrtional statement to call our (American's) state of politics pathetic.

Your statement speaks more of your own visceral response, your ideology and your inability to consider ALL evidence and objectively question your own held beliefs.

Gray Davis along with many mistakes,

1.) lied to Californians assuring us there were no serious problems with the budget before the election.

2.) He signed budgets that increased spending 150% over revenue. When revenue increased at a rate greater than inflation and immigration combined.

3.) He refused to take a leadership role and solve the workers comp problem that is currently shutting down businesses throughout california.

Californians including both Democrats and moderate Republicans feel that what Davis has done rises to the level of recall. So, in a Democratic election we are going to decide if the guy should be recalled.

The fact is, that there is nothing wrong with the Californian budget. California can quite easily afford to run such a deficit for a few years and not flinch. The money that has been made in California dwarfs the deficit.

The only problem with the deficit is that, having become the richest state in the world, Californians are too damm greedy to pay back just a bit of that wealth to maintain political and social stability.*

Grays only weakness was not telling Californians what a bunch of winging, greedy, self interested dolts they really are. Arnie. His success will cause incredible tensions in the Conservative ranks as he is

a) Not a politician
b) Is socially a liberal
c) Knows there is a world outside the USA
d) Has no policies or networks of influence.

* Not all Californians, of course, but it looks like the majority will make it clear that they are.

[davefoc]

AUP, your post saddened me.

You don't live here, you are isolated from the local news and you are in no position to suffer when jobs leave California for neighboring states.

Almost everyday, I hear a story of the failed government of California. I was at lunch with a policeman a few days ago whose pension was controlled by the state of CA. The state had just granted a $400,000 increase in the size of his pension after five hours of bargaining with the union. He thought Davis was an idiot but he was looking forward to spending the money in his retirement.

Yesterday my brother who owns a furniture factory was telling me about his troubles with the Calfiornia environmental protection agency. The agency has decided that all furniture factories need to go to either water based coatings or install very expensive containment procedures that involve the burning of large amounts of natural gas to treat the exhaust. The problem is that the water based coatings don't work well (the few companies that have tried them have had disastrous results including a bankruptcy) and the containment procedures for non water based coatings are so expensive that my brother won't be able to install them.

With the use of low emission coatings that my brother;s factory now uses his factory is emitting less than about five clean cars worth of pollution a year. The reaction of the EPA representative that he was talking to was essentially tough s**t. Unfortunately this scenario is being repeated all over.

About three days ago I was talking to a roofer, his worker's comp rate was about to rise to forty five cents per dollar of his wage costs. This will be the end for him. He will no longer be able to compete with the cash based black market companies that don't pay worker's comp or probably taxes at all.

Compainies all over the state are just packing up their bags and moving to nearby states or Mexico where they find lower electric bills, lower taxes, reasonable environmental regulation and most importantly of all worker's comp programs that are not destroying the fabric of business.

California is teetering on the precipice of a major economic collapse in my opinion, we have been given a unique opportunity to do something to head it off and I sure hope we take it.

I think if we don't there are a lot of companies that are waiting for a sign of how things are going to go and leaving Davis in power will be just the signal they need to make their decision to get the hell out before stuff really gets bad.

[kittynh]

davefoc, I think your post shows the human side to this. The media is playing it up like, "WOuldn't it be cool if Arnold won?" I have to admit, I was thinking it would be interesting.

But California has serious problems. Real problems, and I don't think it will be easy for anyone who takes office.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by davefoc
AUP, your post saddened me.



I am sorry if it had that effect, it was not intended, hence the disclaimer at the bottom. I am sure there are many such as you who do try to think about things a little more deeper than how cool it would be to vote for Arnie. However, if he wins, and it looks like he will, it doesn't say much for the majority of voters.



You don't live here, you are isolated from the local news and you are in no position to suffer when jobs leave California for neighboring states.

Almost everyday, I hear a story of the failed government of California. I was at lunch with a policeman a few days ago whose pension was controlled by the state of CA. The state had just granted a $400,000 increase in the size of his pension after five hours of bargaining with the union. He thought Davis was an idiot but he was looking forward to spending the money in his retirement.



I think this is a good example of just what I was getting at, the urge to get something for nothing that sent everyone mad in the dot bomb boom. The cop is quite happy to get the money, but still thinks the governor is an idiot. Cynicism is running rampant.



Yesterday my brother who owns a furniture factory was telling me about his troubles with the Calfiornia environmental protection agency. The agency has decided that all furniture factories need to go to either water based coatings or install very expensive containment procedures that involve the burning of large amounts of natural gas to treat the exhaust. The problem is that the water based coatings don't work well (the few companies that have tried them have had disastrous results including a bankruptcy) and the containment procedures for non water based coatings are so expensive that my brother won't be able to install them.



To say that this may send him broke may be true, but you have to ask why this is being imposed. Pollution is a big issue in such a wealthy area. Once again, people want to have their cake and eat it too. They want clear, blue skys and no rain, but plenty of water for green lawns and no pollution. They want furniture that is tough and hardy, but using a process that causes no pollution to those skies, and they want it to cost as little as possible.

I am sure there are many people such as you, and others on this forum from that area, who do want to consider such issues more deeply. That, however, does not appear to be the majority.



With the use of low emission coatings that my brother;s factory now uses his factory is emitting less than about five clean cars worth of pollution a year. The reaction of the EPA representative that he was talking to was essentially tough s**t. Unfortunately this scenario is being repeated all over.



The EPA is a government agency, why is the governmental process failing. People are not recalling Gray because of issues such as this, but because they want a better life that costs less, and want someone to blame for the any interruptions to that process.

Don't forget that California is also a victim of it's own success. Success attracts people. More, perhaps, than California can cope with.

Also, the Dot com boomb caused massive distortions to the economic system. I read about poorer factory workers having to spend 2 hours driving to work because they could not afford to live near their place of work. Teachers and policemen could not afford to live in areas that they worked in.

Once again Gray is not the guy to blame for this success, or the fact that, given these distortions, it now makes more sense to move manufacturing to an area where the economic system works more rationally. That is, you can get workers who live nearby and won't leave the first chance they get to move to a job closer to home, or don't demand higher wages to cope with higher rents and travel costs.



About three days ago I was talking to a roofer, his worker's comp rate was about to rise to forty five cents per dollar of his wage costs. This will be the end for him. He will no longer be able to compete with the cash based black market companies that don't pay worker's comp or probably taxes at all.



Once again, how is Gray to blame for this. As soon as there are any moves to crack down on the black market economy, politicians sniff the wind and back off. Don't expect Arnie to deal with this issue any better than anyone else. So, how does the problem get solved? Californians want the cheap, black market labour in which they don't have to give a damm if someone injures themselves working in unsafe conditions.



Compainies all over the state are just packing up their bags and moving to nearby states or Mexico where they find lower electric bills, lower taxes, reasonable environmental regulation and most importantly of all worker's comp programs that are not destroying the fabric of business.



Workers comp is a big issue everywhere.

So, why are the businesses moving?

Lower wages. People need to earn a fortune to live there.

Lower costs. The cost of having the wealthiest state in the world is going to be high.

Lower taxes. Ditto.

Less Environmental regulation. Lets just look at Mexico city for an example of what lack of environmental regulation gets you. Also consider, the people in California don't want any pollution there, they want their car and their blue skies.

Less workers comp. My brother in law has just had a few day off on workers comp because of a workplace accident that was not his fault. It was more than likely the fault of the place he was working in that was not safe. He was then asked to do welding in an unsafe workspace, that is with no ventilation or breating apparatus. Once again, cost shifting. Put the worker in danger, and not expect to pay for it. The problem is not that workers comp costs so much as that people do not care if there is a safe place for workers. The other problem is the legal disaster that sees people suing all and sundry for massive amounts. Try to take on the legal profession and see where you get.

California is teetering on the precipice of a major economic collapse in my opinion, we have been given a unique opportunity to do something to head it off and I sure hope we take it.



I think if we don't there are a lot of companies that are waiting for a sign of how things are going to go and leaving Davis in power will be just the signal they need to make their decision to get the hell out before stuff really gets bad.

Don't expect Arnie to change anything. If he relaxes the environmental laws, he annoys the people who want the blue skies. If wants to build more power plants, he annoys the people near the power plant. If he tries to control workers comp costs, he annoys the legal profession and labour. If he tries to balance the budget, he raises taxes or he cuts services and infrastructure.

All Arnie will do is patch up a few of the most glaring problems, and hope the underlying causes fix themselves, like the other politicians before him. This approach hasn't worked before, and it won't work now.

California is not the only place with these problems, as the recent power outage in the North East has shown. One brave politician pointed out you can't run a first world country on a third world power system.

[RandFan]

AUP,

Actually many states including Arizona have faced the workers comp problem head on and dealt with it. A number of states have placed caps on subjective soft tissue claims and other such otherwise difficult to regulate injuries.

Davis HAD an opportunity to do the same! The legislature gave him a bill that only exasperated the problem. He could have had a backbone like Arizona's governor and demanded a bill with such fixes. He didn't. He simply signed the bill.

The rate of increase of Workers Comp in California is not some made up boogey man to scare citizens. It is rising so fast that businesses can't continue to make a profit and pay ever-increasing rates.

The "all states are suffering to" argument does not wash. We were dead last in fiscal management. DEAD LAST!

The biggest problem with Davis is he doesn't know how to say no to the legislature. They are Democrats and so is he. He always vetos a bill once or twice but eventually signs the thing into law. It's a game with serious consequences for California.

None of your minimizing will solve our very unique and serious situation, a 38 Billion-dollar deficit.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


I am sorry if it had that effect, it was not intended, hence the disclaimer at the bottom. I am sure there are many such as you who do try to think about things a little more deeper than how cool it would be to vote for Arnie. However, if he wins, and it looks like he will, it doesn't say much for the majority of voters.



Actually, I could have been misled by the hype. Arnie is actually behind in the polls of the next Democrat candidate.

[davefoc]

AUP, thank you for your thoughtful response.

I feel though that you are under the impression that this recall campaign is the more or less typical battle between the Democrats and the Republicans for political control in the US.

I think you are fundamentally wrong about that, although that is how Democratic Party officials are trying to sell this.

If indeed that was what this recall was about there would be no recall. The state is heavily Democratic and many people that vote Republican are fundamentally opposed to recalls for other than very serious reasons. So unless something was very seriously wrong a recall would have no chance of success. In fact, I have heard that polls taken in the other 49 states show a majority of the citizens would not vote to recall their governor.

You asked how Gray Davis is responsible for the worker's comp crisis. RandFan provided a nice answer, but I'd like to say a little more.

The workers comp crisis is CA is no surprise, my brother testified in Sacramento about the problems a few years ago. There have been articles in the business pages about the problems for several years. The Republicans in California have prepared bills to attack the problem that are immediately eviscerated or killed outright by the Democrats. Why? because in California the trial lawyers, medical providers and even chiropractors are more important to the legislature than the welfare of California.

So you say how is that Gray Davis's fault. The legislature is corrupt. It's their fault. Fine, except that legislatures are always corrupt, they are driven by local and special interests. Accountability is so distributed that there is no accountability. The only thing that makes a representative democracy work is a competent leader that controls the excesses of the legislature. Davis has completely failed in that role and that is a large part of what this recall is about. This is not a Democratic or a Republican issue. This is an issue of incompetence and perhaps corruption versus competence.

Here's a link to a column by a writer that covers the California legislature that talks in considerable detail about what might have been some of the motivating factors behind Davis's inept handling of the state's problems.

http://www.jillstewart.net/issue0710.html

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by RandFan
AUP,

Actually many states including Arizona have faced the workers comp problem head on and dealt with it. A number of states have placed caps on subjective soft tissue claims and other such otherwise difficult to regulate injuries.

Davis HAD an opportunity to do the same! The legislature gave him a bill that only exasperated the problem. He could have had a backbone like Arizona's governor and demanded a bill with such fixes. He didn't. He simply signed the bill.

The rate of increase of Workers Comp in California is not some made up boogey man to scare citizens. It is rising so fast that businesses can't continue to make a profit and pay ever-increasing rates.

The "all states are suffering to" argument does not wash. We were dead last in fiscal management. DEAD LAST!

The biggest problem with Davis is he doesn't know how to say no to the legislature. They are Democrats and so is he. He always vetos a bill once or twice but eventually signs the thing into law. It's a game with serious consequences for California.



The question has to be asked, is this simply limiting injuries to workers who have been injured, or is it limiting the amounts to what is reasonable. A lot of the problem is that in the past, injured workers have just been written off. Medical treatments are also much better now, hence, much more expsensive.

People make fraudulent claims, but they have always done so. You also have to wonder about people trawling for massive payouts, but the fact is, when a person gets injured, it can cause horrific injuries, you can't just write off their pain and suffering. Like I said, my brother in law was just injured. He fell off a ladder that was supposed to have been secured by a co-worker, and just missed dashing his head on a hand basin, which could have left him a quadraplegic.



None of your minimizing will solve our very unique and serious situation, a 38 Billion-dollar deficit.

Once again, believe it or not, that is not a disastrous deficit when you consider the massive amount of wealth that was generated in California over the past 20 years. A simple tax rise would solve it very quickly, or just roll it over till the next boom.

[reprise]

How much is California an "indicator state" for the rest of the US?

And how much is California affected by federal policies? (IIRC, California has one of the largest 10 economies in the world, which would mean that federal policies which would have a minimal impact on smaller states could have catastrophic consequences in California).

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by davefoc
AUP, thank you for your thoughtful response.

I feel though that you are under the impression that this recall campaign is the more or less typical battle between the Democrats and the Republicans for political control in the US.

I think you are fundamentally wrong about that, although that is how Democratic Party officials are trying to sell this.

If indeed that was what this recall was about there would be no recall. The state is heavily Democratic and many people that vote Republican are fundamentally opposed to recalls for other than very serious reasons. So unless something was very seriously wrong a recall would have no chance of success. In fact, I have heard that polls taken in the other 49 states show a majority of the citizens would not vote to recall their governor.

You asked how Gray Davis is responsible for the worker's comp crisis. RandFan provided a nice answer, but I'd like to say a little more.

The workers crisis is CA is no surprise, my brother testified in Sacramento about the problems a few years ago. There have been articles in the business pages about the problems for several years. The Republicans in California have prepared bills to attack the problem that are immediately eviscerated or killed outright by the Democrats. Why? because in California the trial lawyers, medical providers and even chiropractors are more important to the legislature than the welfare of California.

So you say how is that Gray Davis's fault. The legislature is corrupt. It's their fault. Fine, except that legislatures are always corrupt, they are driven by local and special interests. Accountability is so distributed that there is no accountability. The only thing that makes a representative democracy work is a competent leader that controls the excesses of the legislature. Davis has completely failed in that role and that is a large part of what this recall is about. This is not a Democratic or a Republican issue. This is an issue of incompetence and perhaps corruption versus competence.

Here's a link to a column by a writer that covers the California legislature that talks in considerable detail about what might have been some of the motivating factors behind Davis's inept handling of the state's problems.

http://www.jillstewart.net/issue0710.html


Hmm, we shall see. I don't doubt that the guy could be just a money man, just that I only see him as being one more guy in the parade.

The article quotes all the donations he has recieved from big business. In my experience, big business is quite happy to donate to both sides of politics.

It is interesting that Arnie says one of the things going for him is that he is so rich he won't be held hostage to those donating money to his campaign. Does this mean the day of the small guy running for high political office in the US is well and truly dead?

[davefoc]

AUP, I am not an expert in the worker's comp issues but I can talk a little bit about why California's worker comp situation is so bad, although I am a little shaky on some of the details that I talk about below:

In California, worker's injuries are paid for in a very different way then normal medical claims. Over the years PPO's and HMO's and insurance providers have become agressive in controlling payouts for services to medical providers. You might have some problems with this system, but without some mechanism for controlling the cost in third party payer systems disaster is a certainty.

The controls on the medical reimbursement for non-workers comp claims have been removed for the workers comp system so medical claims payments are much higher in the worker's comp system.

But this is not the end of it. Worker's comp also employs something called liberal inclusion I think. What this means is that if you hurt your finger and have a heart problem, the heart problem has a good chance of being covered by worker's comp if any connection whatsoever can be hypothesized between the finger problem and the heart problem. The medical providers have a very significant motivation to get things covered under workers comp rather than standard medical policies because of the much greater compensation available for worker's comp claims.

In ways that I don't quite understand, lawyers become quite involved in worker's comp issues and siphon a big chunk of the claim money also.

Of course there is the soft tissue issue. This is a standard ploy and nets many disgruntled alcoholics and other malcontent employees several thousand dollars on their way out. Basically the way it goes is that when one is laid off, one goes to a lawyer who makes a soft tissue damage claim that conveniently can only be diagnosed based on what the patient claims. The insurance company will often settle these by making a several thousand dollar payment rather than fight an expensive and possibly losing battle in court. So everybody involved makes a few bucks, the lawyer, the medical providers and the bogus patient.

Another nice touch is covering chiropractor care. Chiropratic care is now a larger dollar cost in workers comp than surgery. The nice thing about Chiropracty as a mechanism for milking the system is that it doesn't end until the patient and perhaps the chiropractor think the injury is healed which may be essentially never.

edited to add: There have been some restrictions on the soft tissue claims put in place. In particular I think there's something about restrictions on soft tissue claims near the time of termination but I don't know the details.

[peptoabysmal]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


Actually, I could have been misled by the hype. Arnie is actually behind in the polls of the next Democrat candidate.

There are polls on this being run daily, you might even expect Gary Coleman to come out as the leader in some of the polls. This thing is being hyped to death.

[peptoabysmal]

Originally posted by reprise
How much is California an "indicator state" for the rest of the US?
Very much so. Strict auto regulations started here as did anti-smoking laws. It is, after all, the spawning grounds for the hippies. When the Grateful Dead plays in Berkeley, it is something akin to the pilgrimage to Mecca.


And how much is California affected by federal policies? (IIRC, California has one of the largest 10 economies in the world, which would mean that federal policies which would have a minimal impact on smaller states could have catastrophic consequences in California).

This could be said of any state, really. It depends on what those federal policies affect. A semi-conductor tax or an agriculture quota could have disastrous effects on California. A tax on Lone Star Beer would have minimal effect. (bogus examples)

[RandFan]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The question has to be asked, is this simply limiting injuries to workers who have been injured, or is it limiting the amounts to what is reasonable. A lot of the problem is that in the past, injured workers have just been written off. Medical treatments are also much better now, hence, much more expsensive.

People make fraudulent claims, but they have always done so. You also have to wonder about people trawling for massive payouts, but the fact is, when a person gets injured, it can cause horrific injuries, you can't just write off their pain and suffering. Like I said, my brother in law was just injured. He fell off a ladder that was supposed to have been secured by a co-worker, and just missed dashing his head on a hand basin, which could have left him a quadraplegic. People are making fraudulent claims in unprecedented and ever increasing numbers. Again, your minimizing does nothing to solve a very real and serious problem that is killing jobs as we speak.

If someone has a legitimate claim then they should get WC. Unfortunately the current situation is rife with fraud.

Once again, believe it or not, that is not a disastrous deficit when you consider the massive amount of wealth that was generated in California over the past 20 years. A simple tax rise would solve it very quickly, or just roll it over till the next boom. Sorry but 38 billion IS a serious problem. More serious is the trend to spend more money at a rate that is greater than increased inflation and immigration combined.

While the current situation is troubling it is the trend that is of most concern. We can't continue to spend at ever higher rates than we take in.

Of what value is the next boom if we spend it before it even happens. I really don't think that you are getting this. Something tells me that you don't want to.

Denying that there is a real problem will not solve it. Electing Arnold might not solve it either but it will be of far more benefit than sitting back and saying that everything will work itself out eventually.

NO! The problem is real and we have to solve it. Again, we were dead last in fiscal management. We wasted tens of millions of dollars.