The Young Insider

Post-Partisan Perata?

2007-03-13T19:16:00.000-07:00

So much for post-partisanship as far as Don Perata is concerned. He can't even listen to dissenting opinions in his own party without retaliation.

So is this how he expects to convince voters to approve term limits "reform" to give him another term?

Union Goes Weekly

2007-03-08T19:18:00.000-08:00

As reported by CBS 13 The Sacramento Union will be changing its circlulation to weekly beginning next month. This will allow the paper, to which I am a proud contributor, to provide more news, features, and conservative opinion to the Sacramento region.

My role in the new venture is not certain at this point, however I am looking forward to being a part of the Union's continued expansion and development.

And by the way, those who haven't been already (and shame on you!!) you can read the Union by subscribing, downloading it online, or picking up a copy at one of these fine establishments. A new issue is released tommorow.

In Defense of Robbie Waters

2007-02-28T23:01:00.000-08:00

Full Disclosure: Councilman Waters appointed me to my post on the Sacramento Youth Commission.

City Council member Robbie Waters (pictured here with District Director Pat Clark, another youth commissioner, and myself) has been accused in recent days of illegally spending campaign funds to embellish his business, Pocket Custom Framing. Waters claims he is running a district office inside the store.

Now, I am not a campaign finance expert. But I can say that this story is being blown way out of context.

As involved constituents know, ever since he was elected in 1994 Councilman Waters has had an open door policy at his business, at that time a full-fledged hardware store. Citizens were welcome to stop on by and discuss city business at any time, even if they did not buy anything. As a small child, I remember my parents going into the store on numerous occasions for this very reason.

This open door policy has continued with the Councilman’s new framing business. Constituents are still welcome to come by and talk with their representative in city government. Anyone is welcome. It is the closest you can get to a district office without the city physically owning the property.

While I’ve never seen the backroom that apparently is the actual district office, it does not matter. Councilman Water’s hospitality at his business should allow him to claim it as a legitimate office that serves the needs of the people he serves.

Sorry He Isn't Here

2007-02-26T15:46:00.000-08:00

The US Supreme Court today refused the appeal of an Arizona man sentanced to 200 years in prison for the possession of 20 pieces of child pornography.

I'm not here to defend or support the sentance, but the man should be sorry he does not live in California under a proposal introduced by legislative Democrats last year. In that case, he would only have been charged with a misdemeaner.

Dem Leader Explains why she Opposes Redistricting Reform

2007-02-26T15:12:00.000-08:00

Don't you just love it when politicians are honest about their reasons for opposing reform proposals:

California could threaten the slim Democratic majority by giving up the ability to draw districts advantageous to Democrats, said Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose), chairwoman of California's Democratic delegation.

"We're finally about to deal with the Iraq war issue, we're finally taking on global climate change, energy independence — things we've been stonewalled on for a dozen years — and there's great interest that these efforts not be short-circuited," Lofgren said.

I think Zoe speaks for a lot of Democrats who oppose redistricting reform, so she wins the intellectually honest liberal of the day award.

Aaron Park is Back!

2007-02-14T22:40:00.000-08:00

It is with great enthusiasm that I announce that Aaron Park, formerly the Roseville Conservative, is back in the blogosphere, flamethrower at the ready. Find him at http://aaronfpark.townhall.com/

Condoms at the CRP

2007-02-14T22:35:00.000-08:00

This story relating to last weekend's Republican convention is just funny:

On Saturday morning, Feb. 10, a prolonged confrontation occurred at the exhibit table of the pro-abortion California Republican League. Pro-life activists discovered that the pro-abortion California Republican League had pro-abortion NARAL Pro-Choice California staff, political paraphernalia, “Vote Pro-Choice” buttons, pens, post cards, posters, and newsletters -- and even condoms -- for distribution at their exhibit table adjacent to the Convention Center’s main meeting hall.

NARAL originally was an acronym for National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws, and then became the National Abortion Rights Action League. NARAL’s abortion advocacy newsletter even boasted of their efforts to defeat Proposition 85, the Parents’ Right to Know and Child Protection initiative, which was endorsed and supported by the California Republican Party and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s reelection campaign.

A loud confrontation lasted for about an hour and a half, as pro-life Republicans protested that the NARAL staff members were really pro-abortion Democratic Party operatives, and had no right to distribute their propaganda at a California Republican Party convention.

California Republican Party staff became involved in the effort to have the NARAL staff, paraphernalia, and condoms removed from the convention. NARAL had not contracted for exhibit space, but had come in under cover of the California Republican League. NARAL staff rudely refused to remove their materials and leave -- and even threatened legal action if they were removed.

California Republican Party legal counsel Chuck Bell did not back up staff and party members’ demands that NARAL remove their pro-abortion paraphernalia, propaganda, and condoms and leave.

As a minor concession, NARAL staff did remove their condoms from the table.

I saw this table over the weekend, though apparently I was too late for the confrontation and condoms as they were already removed. All I did notice is that the table was littered with literature about “Stop the extremist judges” and other liberal causes. The table, unlike most in the hall, was rarely visited, and when it was generally it was by a person looking to argue. I saw no supporters.

But, I would suggest that this is not a negative thing. Ever hour that a NARAL volunteer puts in at a Republican convention and every piece of literature they distribute is one that they are not putting towards furthering their pro-abortion message or indoctrinating vulnerable teens. They are wasting their time and resources with the only goal of making pro-life advocates angry, so as far as I am concerned, they should be welcomed back at every opportunity.

So come on back NARAL!

Minimum Wage Increase Hurts Teens

2007-02-11T15:39:00.000-08:00

Think the argument that minimum wage increases lead to more people out of work is a bunch of conservative hogwash? Think again.

Republican Convention Review

2007-02-10T19:19:00.000-08:00

I have spent the bulk of the past two days at the California Republican Party Convention here in Sacramento. While I’ll save most of my observations for a commentary in the Union, here are a few observations:

1. Governor Schwarzenegger was met with a tepid response from the delegates. While he did get a few periods of loud applause, especially when talking about transferring prisoners to out of state without their consent (did the victims consent to having a crime committed against them?), there were long sections of the speech when talking about the recent infrastructure bonds and the health care plan where the only sound that could be heard was the clanking of forks and knives. This clearly was not a “post partisan” crowd; one of the biggest applauses came when the Governor mentioned that as a result of a recent special election, Republicans now control every seat on the Orange Country Board of Supervisors.

2. Mayor Giuliani was given a very warm reception. He was interrupted numerous times by applause and standing ovations. However, this does not translate into a groundswell of support for his Presidential bid. From what I observed, many delegates merely wanted to see the man that led New York through the 9/11 disaster and has been a celebrity ever since. But as some told me before the event, they will not support his 2008 bid. And of course, this doesn't even count the CRP members who didn't buy a ticket. In fact, I would say the number of Giuliani stickers on the shirts of delegates during the events not related to his appearance only slightly outnumbered the number of Romney and Duncan Hunter stickers. The attendees were there to honor the man, but not necessarily his future aspirations.

3. Tom McClintock, as usual, was extremely popular. His announcement of his new website and organization was standing room only, with perhaps around 200 people in attendance. Given that the event occurred at 5:00 this evening, hours after the major events of the day had concluded, this was quite a crowd.

4. Finally, thanks to the Sacramento Union for allowing me to obtain press credentials (I’ll elaborate more on this in my commentary for them, but it was quite an experience and privledge) and to the press room staff of the CRP. They made myself and the other members of the press very comfortable and offered free food and drinks, as well as helpful information.

Bee Double Standard on Parade

2007-02-04T12:14:00.000-08:00

John Hughes of the Bee complains below that I overlooked the fact the piece was an "editorial notebook" written by a single member of the Bee's editorial staff, in this case Ginger Rutland. He is correct. However, it still does not change the fact that I am sure Ms. Rutland along with the majoirty of her editorial staff would be all over a Republican had they made the same remarks.

The hypocrisy of the Bee shines through again in this editorial about Joe Biden’s recent gaffe:

In response to a question from a reporter, Biden called the Illinois Democrat and fellow presidential candidate "the first mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy."

Although Biden's remarks show his unfortunate tendency to open his mouth without engaging his brain, they surely were not intended to offend. But, this being presidential politics and the subject being race, of course they did.

In response to a question from a reporter, Biden called the Illinois Democrat and fellow presidential candidate "the first mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy."

Although Biden's remarks show his unfortunate tendency to open his mouth without engaging his brain, they surely were not intended to offend. But, this being presidential politics and the subject being race, of course they did.

Biden implied that previous black candidates for president -- the Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and Shirley Chisholm, Carol Moseley-Braun and Alan Keyes -- were unclean, inarticulate, not bright and ugly, or some combination of the above.

I don't think that's what he meant, and I believe fair-minded people, including, I suspect, the vast majority of black Americans don't either.

I'm black. I don't pretend to speak for all black people. But speaking for myself, I would appreciate some straight talk about race from presidential candidates, something more than the "gotcha" garbage that flows every time a candidate forgets to install his PC filter when race comes up.

Now, can anyone imagine the Bee publishing this editorial if instead of Joe Biden, it had been Rudy Guiliani or Mitt Romney? No. The paper would be all over a Republican to apologize for the “racist” comments. Just like with Trent Lott, there would be no peace until Republican X resigned, dropped out of the race, or otherwise was severely punished for his or her words.

But when a Democrat like Biden says something that might be offensive, he is praised for “straight talk about race.” Double standard on parade from the Bee.

California Should Get Out of Iran

2007-02-01T21:18:00.000-08:00

A GOP legislator has introduced a piece of legislation that would require the state of California to divest from the nation of Iran. Specifically, state retirement pensions would be cleansed of any connections.

This is a common sense bill. Just as last year the legislature divested from Sudan, it needs to do the same for Iran. So now the question is, will the Democrats pass this immediately to get California's investments out of nations that loathe us, or will they allow the state to continue to hold $24 Billion in funds connected to a country whose leader believes the holocaust never happened and that Israel should be wiped off the map?

John Edward's New Home

2007-01-31T20:06:00.000-08:00

The Great Protector of the Enviornment

2007-01-29T23:16:00.000-08:00

Sorry for the lack of posts the last few days. I have had finals and then have been under the weather for the past few days. I will be back to normal within a couple of days

New Sac Union Available Online and On Racks

2007-01-25T22:04:00.000-08:00

You can find the newest edition of the Sac Union online here. My piece appears on page 9.

Iraq Terrorists Plan US Strike

2007-01-22T13:26:00.000-08:00

ABC News is reporting that documents found in Iraq reveal that insurgents are or were planning to attack within the United States.

This should be a wake up call to all Americans. These terrorists obviously are not just motivated by a desire to "liberate" Iraq from its United States "oppressors." No, they are willing to come into this country and committ evil acts of terror on our soil. If we surrender and retreat, they will follow. This report proves that.

2008 Primary Move-Up a Political Game

2007-01-21T23:28:00.000-08:00

It seems likely that California will become one of the first primaries in the nation next year. Governor Schwarzenegger and the legislature appear to be close to striking a deal to move the presidential primary election from June to February, putting it just a few weeks after the first caucuses and primaries.

First off all, I am excited about the possibilities this might bring. We would certainly see more candidates coming to California to interact with the voters, instead of just for quick cash. The state’s issues will get a national hearing, and even more, once in office the elected President may be more receptive to California’s concerns if the state was crucial in securing he or she the nomination.

However, I am not sure this is a good thing for California’s political process.
Part of the deal that appears to be developing is that the February election will only include the presidential primary and ballot measures. Legislative and congressional primaries would still be held in June.

What is the reason for this? Does the separation of powers dictated in the constitution between the legislative and executive branches require their primary elections be held on different dates? Of course not.

Like most rules that incumbent politicians draw up dealing with electoral processes, this is intended to benefit current legislators. See, if noting is done, in 2008 many members of the legislature, including Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez and Senate Pro Tem Don Perata, will be termed out of the legislature by voter approved limits.

So their last ditch plan to save their jobs is to place a term limits revision measure on the February ballot. If it passes (which is unlikely; voters don’t like power grabs, but that’s a different piece) they could file to run for re-election to their seats in the June legislative primary. I believe the governor is sincere in his effort to give California more clout, but for the legislature this is by far their driving motive for the early primary.

Regardless of whether term limits revision is a good idea, this Hail Mary to save legislators’ jobs would be dangerous to the health of California’s elections. The easily fatigued California electorate would be subject to three statewide elections within the span of just nine months. Voter turnout for the June legislative primary would be extremely low, as only legislative, congressional, and any ballot measures that didn’t make it in time for the February election would be voted upon. Since legislative districts are so catered to one party or another, in most cases members of the 2009/10 legislature would be determined by an extremely small portion of the electorate. This is certainly not conducive to a healthy republic.

So if California needs more say in the Presidential nomination process, move up the primary. But move up all the primaries. Don’t play politics to try to save your job.

Meet Your New Mommy

2007-01-19T22:02:00.000-08:00

Say it with me: "Ma-ma"

Some liberals in the California State legislature now want to ban spanking a child under the age of 3. Violators, aka a substantial portion of the parents in the state, would now be criminals and could go to jail.

Things like this clearly show the intent of some of these legislators. They see themselves as the true guardians of all children in the state. Parents get to have day to day control and supervision, but ultimately it is the state that will decide what parents should do or teach their children.

BTW, this isn’t an insignificant member of the Assembly. Sally Lieber, the author, was elected Speaker Pro Tem. So we can assume that she generally shares the view of most Democrats in the chamber. So folks, this is the type of thing you get when you vote for a liberal.

Tancredo in the Race

2007-01-16T21:24:00.000-08:00

Tom Tancredo announced his presidential bid today. This, of course, will go no where. Tancredo is our Kusinich. But it could serve as a starting point for Sen. Wayne Allard's soon to be open US Senate seat.

On the positive side, he could also open up discussion on President Bush's amnesty proposal during the campaign. Tancredo has a strong following among anti-illegal immigration activists. Other candidates will have to address the issue even more now.

Angelides on Arnold: "More taxes than ever popped in my head"

2007-01-14T16:47:00.000-08:00

Phil Angelides on the governor's health care proposal:

"The governor ended up dreaming up more taxes than ever popped in my head," Angelides said. "It's unfortunate the governor used that in campaign season to attack me on what he has now admitted is a good idea."

I think Phil says it all...

Morgan Fires Back

2007-01-12T22:51:00.000-08:00

Melanie Morgan and her fellow hosts at KSFO have been attacked by various bloggers who have been taking their on-air comments in many cases terribly out of context and using it to accuse the station of 'hate speech.' Today the fine hosts at KSFO fired back in a special 3 hour program. Download the audio at the KSFO website.

Republicans Block Schwarzenegger Appointee

2007-01-11T22:25:00.000-08:00

State Senate Republicans have blocked the confirmation of one of the Governor's appointees, Joe Nunez, to the state Board of Education. Nunez has worked with unions against Republicans, including Schwarzenegger himself in 2005, for many years. He should never have been appointed by a Republican governor.

Hopefully this is a sign of things to come from legislative GOPers; they won't bow down to Arnold.

Carter Alienates Advisors

2007-01-11T22:03:00.000-08:00

14 Carter advisors quit over his new book

State of the State

2007-01-09T21:57:00.000-08:00

Just like our coverage of yesterday’s health care announcement, here are the good and bad pieces of the Governor’s State of the State address.

Good:

Providing Online, User-Friendly School Information. The governor wants to put vital statistics about every public school on the internet for all parents to use while considering where to send their child. Good measure to hold schools accountable

Political Reform. In other words, redistricting. The current system is a big conflict of interest that leads to legislators drawing district boundaries to protect themselves. It needs to be changed.

Bad:
Implementing the Global Warming Solutions Act. The implementation of AB 32 from last year will burden state businesses while doing little to solve the problem of global warming, even if it is caused by man.

Strategic Growth Plan. This is a new $43.3 billion series of infrastructure bonds. Combined with those passed by voters last year, California will have borrowed $80.6 billion if this passes. Infrastructure is important, but that is too much to burden future generations. Instead of this, the legislature should devote a certain percentage of the state budget to infrastructure development.

Legislative Republicans need to hold firm against this one. The other proposals on this “bad” list will cause harm, but none so much as this proposal. This will burden the state for years and very likely lead to higher taxes in the future.

Health Care Reform. We covered this yesturday. While the goal and a few of the proposals are admirable, the devil is in the details.

I have to say, I was very disappointed overall. While there were a few good things (see above) most of the Governor’s proposals sounded like they were coming from the mouth of a Democrat. In fact, if I did not know any better, I would have thought this speech was given by a Democrat.

No mention of streamlining California’s massive government bureaucracy and ending out of control spending, the main issues that elected the governor in 2003. Instead, new programs that will add to both.

On a lighter note, to prove that this blog is bi-partisan (though perhaps not "post-partisan") the funniest line of the event award goes to Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi. After State Senate pro-tem Don Perata (the day-to-day leader of the chamber) introduced him by claiming his introduction of Governor Schwarzenegger is “the most important thing he will ever do as Lieutenant Governor,” Garamendi retorted by announcing, “Perhaps you’ve forgotten, Don, but I am the President of the Senate.” He put Perata in his proper place.

Steve Poizner Takes Oath!

2007-01-08T22:33:00.000-08:00

The Flash Report covers the instillation of California's new Insurance Commissioner, Steve Poizner. Steve is a very successful businessman who will look out for California consumers and crack down on fruad. As the only GOP downballot winner, he is probably also the frontrunner for the 2010 Republican Gubernatorial nomination (although, to be clear, this is not an endorcement by any means. We will deal with that in a few years).

Welcome to Sacramento, Steve!

Healthcare and Welfare

2007-01-08T21:24:00.000-08:00

Governor Schwarzenegger released his health care plan today. Here are my first impressions:

Good:

Everyone must have health care coverage. The state will help those who are not insured to obtain coverage. This is acceptable. Those who can afford insurance and choose not to obtain it should not be allowed to force the rest of us to pay for them when they have health problems.

The end goal. Emergency room costs do indeed cost the state and taxpayers billions each year. Finding a fiscally responsible way to ensure every legal resident has health care coverage will save money and improve the lives of those who do not currently have it.

Bad:

By federal law, undocumented immigrants cannot be denied medical care. The state wants to shift their use of hospital emergency room care to using doctors by making personal insurance more affordable. The governor is trying to spin this issue by claiming the federal government requires it. That is only half true. The federal government requires illegals to receive emergency medical care, but giving them health insurance paid for by state taxpayers leads us down a very slippery slope. As Jennifer Nelson points out, this will undermine state efforts to force the federal government to enforce immigration law and clear the way for other rights to undocumented immigrants.

Require that 85 percent of insurance premiums go to patient care, not into the coffers of insurers, health maintenance organizations and hospitals. Generally, bad things happen when a state makes arbitrary proclamations such as this. This will lower the competitiveness of California’s business climate and make insurers think twice before expanding into the state. Barry Jantz has a look at what health care related mandates have already done to the cost of care.

So some things to love and some things to hate in this proposal. We will see if any of it will actually become law.

On another somewhat related note, the Governor receives praise today for proposing welfare reform to ensure those on it are actively working or seeking employment. This is good; for far too many, welfare is essentially their career. They live off of it for most of their lives. That needs to end. It hurts them and their families (not to mention the taxpayers) because they will never work up to self-reliance and a comfortable quality of life. If they are forced to work while on welfare, they can begin that climb up the ladder.

Sadly, the plan won’t pass Democratic muster anytime in this century, but this is the type of leadership we need to see from Governor Schwarzenegger.

Governor needs to Address Tough Issues

2007-01-06T20:05:00.000-08:00

Dan Walters, the usually moderate and realistic Sacramento Bee columnist, has a great piece today about the need for the Governor to tackle tough issues raised by both sides of the aisle. Here is an excerpt:

Were partisan or ideological differences inside the Capitol the most powerful impediments to restoring governance to California, one might characterize them as realistically hopeful words. But the sort of dealmaking that Schwarzenegger extracted from the Legislature last year -- and that he touts as a model for the future -- must be viewed through a narrow prism.

The Republican governor's deals with Democratic legislators were on issues that they held dear -- such as global warming, borrowing more money for public works and raising the minimum wage -- and anything broadly controversial -- such as building more reservoirs -- was bypassed because he was eager to build a re-election record.

No conservative issues, such as reducing business regulation or reforming public employee pensions, were allowed on the table, and Republican lawmakers were largely excluded from the process. Thus, what happened in 2006 was scarcely a model of bipartisan policymaking, much less the "post-partisanship" that the governor now embraces.

If Arnold wants to be a historic governor, he is going to have to tackle the big issues of his day. He cannot stick to global warming, minimum wage, and things like that. He is going to have to address some of the issues the Democratic legislature doesn't want to, like budget reform, redistricting reform, and prisons.

Great leaders aren't made by compromising. They are made by leading.

CAIR Bickers with Boxer

2007-01-06T17:03:00.000-08:00

This is a dream come true for any conservative (not the death threats, but the bickering). Two extreme liberals go after each other.

Full Text - Governor's Address

2007-01-05T12:31:00.000-08:00

Here is the text of the Governor’s Inaugural Address. My comments can be found at the end.

Today, the Governor's 2007 Inaugural Committee released the following prepared text of Governor Schwarzenegger's Second Inaugural Address embargoed for use until it is delivered by the Governor:

Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.

My fellow Californians, three years ago you elected me as your governor. These three years have been the most fulfilling of my life. Every day has been an adventure. My escapes have been more hair-raising than anything I did in the movies.

And throughout it all, it has been an absolute joy to serve you—the people of California . Thank you, I am grateful beyond words for your continued faith and hope.

Faith and hope are two qualities that are in short supply in the world right now. When I was a boy in history class in Austria , we learned about the Fertile Crescent , that region of the Near and Middle East where agriculture first flourished.

Today, the region is fertile with bloodshed and hate. Further south in Africa is a place of genocide called Darfur . Imagine the terror of running for your life, but not knowing where to run to escape the killing, the disease, the hunger. There are such deep divisions in our human family.
And yet here in this nation-state of California , people from all over the world live in harmony. I call California a nation-state because of the diversity of our people, the power of our economy and the reach of our dream. Every race, every culture, every religion has been drawn to California . The commerce and trade of the nations of the earth pass through our ports. The world knows our name. We are a good and global commonwealth. Yes, we have problems that must be solved. But, it remains true . . . what a prosperous, peaceful, golden state in which we live and work and raise our families. We should never forget the joys and blessings of being Californians.

As governor, I feel a responsibility to conduct the public business in a way that furthers these blessings . . . so that our people continue to live in harmony and prosperity. How we do that is what I’d like to talk to you about today.

Three years ago when I was sworn in, I said that the recall election was not about replacing one man or one party. It was about changing the entire political climate of the state. It was about creating a new culture in Sacramento . It was about fulfilling the will of the people.
In the 2005 special election, I took the wrong approach in trying to do these things. But in my failure, I rediscovered my original purpose. Like Paul on the road to Damascus , I had an experience that opened my eyes. And what was it that I saw? I saw that people, not just in California , but across the nation, were hungry for a new kind of politics, a politics that looks beyond the old labels, the old ways, the old arguments.

The California historian Kevin Starr says that we must think of ourselves as belonging not just to the Republican Party or the Democratic Party . . . but to the Party of California . . . because California is a collective ideal worth preserving. The Party of California is beyond ideology and one to which all of us belong.

There are growing numbers of independent voters in this state. In fact, if the current trend continues, they will outnumber each of the major parties in 20 years. They like some Republican ideas. They like some Democratic ideas. They think some Republican ideas are too far right. They think some Democratic ideas are too far left. And they rightly know that if you stick to just one party’s proposals you miss half the good ideas.

Some pundits said that I won reelection because I co-opted the Democratic agenda. Some said that the Democratic Legislature, by working with me to increase the minimum wage or reform prescription drug costs, abandoned the Democratic nominee for governor. This is the kind of partisan thinking that frustrates the voters and diminishes our democracy. The people are disgusted with a mindset that would rather get nothing done than accomplish something through compromise. I want to thank the Legislature for taking action this past year on behalf of the people, not politics. I thank them for taking that risk.

The question is not what are the needs of Republicans or Democrats? The real question is what are the needs of our people? We don’t need Republican roads or Democratic roads. We need roads. We don’t need Republican health care or Democratic health care. We need health care. We don’t need Republican clean air or Democratic clean air. We all breathe the same air. When California ’s leaders have worked together, we have accomplished good things.

Consider the danger of global warming. Imagine your child is sick with a rising fever. If 98 out of 100 doctors said the child needed immediate treatment . . . and two doctors said the child was just fine . . . who would you listen to? The 98 or the 2? Should we do nothing about global warming on the slim-chance a few skeptics who deny its existence may be right? No, we should not.

So this last year California passed the world’s most comprehensive plan to reduce greenhouse gases. Why? One. Because it’s the environmentally moral thing to do. Two. Because, although the United States represents only 5% of the world’s population, we emit 25% of the greenhouse gases. And three. Because California genuinely has the power to influence the rest of the nation, even the world.

Now, capping emissions—the government stick approach—by itself could harm our economy, so we created a free-market system to trade emissions. By turning carbon into a commodity and trading it as a financial derivative, we have harnessed the self-interest of capitalism to heal the environment. And with the power of California ’s trillion dollar economy behind us, we have set something else in motion. We become the best place in the world to invest in new, green technologies. In time, this will further strengthen the foundation of California ’s technological economy.

Ladies and gentlemen, we face important issues that should unite us. I believe we have the opportunity to move past partisanship . . . past bi-partisanship . . . to post-partisanship. Post-partisanship is not simply Republicans and Democrats each bringing their proposals to the table and working out differences. Post-partisanship is Republicans and Democrats actively giving birth to new ideas together. I believe it would promote a new centrism and a new trust in our political system. And I believe we have a window to do it right now.

At one time, the greatest public policy innovations came from liberals, such as during the New Deal. Then the most innovative ideas came from conservatives, such as Ronald Reagan. It is time we combined the best of both ideologies into a new creative center. This is a dynamic center that is not held captive by either the left or the right or the past.

Centrist does not mean weak. It does not mean watered down or warmed over. It means well-balanced and well-grounded. The American people are instinctively centrist . . . so should be our government. America ’s political parties should return to the center. They should return to the center where the people are.

No one ideology can solve prison reform or immigration reform or any of the other challenges facing us. It will take the best ideas of everyone. It will take creative thinking. It will take negotiations. It will take letting go of the past.

And what will be the result of our working together? Let me tell you my vision of California twenty years from now. It is a big vision. In reply, some may say, “ Arnold , it’s just a dream.” Well, yes, it is a dream, but how can we grow into something greater, something better, something more meaningful without a dream to guide us?

What would such a California look like? Well . . . our people, no matter their culture or religion, still live in peace. Their health is strong because of the air they breathe, the care they receive, the lifestyles they lead. Their children are educated in schools that open the doors to a productive and fulfilling life.

Because we rebuilt our infrastructure, we have the schools, the roads, the ports, the water, the levees, the communications to grow with prosperity. Because we committed ourselves to the environment, we lead the world in the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy, and, as a result, a clean-tech industry has sprung up creating jobs for our people. Because we were leaders in stem cell research, California ’s bio-tech industry has boomed, offering new cures for spinal cord injuries, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and other diseases. Because we took action to correct our fiscal crisis, state government will have learned, once and for all, to live within its means. And because we strengthened and reformed representative government, our state’s elected officials now reflect the views of the mainstream, not the fringes. In return, our citizens once again have trust and respect in their government.
I ask you, why can’t California be this dream? The United States needs us to be this. The world needs us to be this.

For billions of people around the world, California itself is a dream. They ache to have what we so often take for granted. If they simply could live here, work here, raise their families here, their dreams would be fulfilled. So, to the cynics, I say do not dismiss dreams as idle visions.
Ladies and gentlemen, my dream is that California , the nation-state, the harmonious state, the prosperous state, the cutting-edge state, becomes a model, not just for 21st century American society, but for the larger world.

It’s been said that most places are united by their pasts . . . but California is united by its future. Other places are united by what was . . . but we are united by what can be.

As I begin this new term as your governor, I make this simple pledge to the people of California . I will look to the future. I will look to the center. I will look to the dreams of the people.
Thank you very much.

Now, I am not one to criticize Inaugural addresses. They are just meant as introductions. However, I do find it interesting the specific causes Governor Schwarzenegger mentioned.
Why so much time on Global warming? I can take him being liberal to an extent on environmental issues, but why is it the only issue mentioned in detail? The state’s fiscal and prison problems are much more urgent.
Hopefully the address is not a reflection of where his governorship will go.

Released Excepts of Governor's Inaugural Address

2007-01-05T01:04:00.000-08:00

This was just unembargoed a few minutes ago by the Governor's Inaugural Committee:

Today, the Governor's 2007 Inaugural Committee released the following excerpts (as prepared) from Governor Schwarzenegger's Second Inaugural Address embargoed for use until 12:01 a.m. on January 5, 2007.

We must think of ourselves as belonging not just to the Republican Party or the Democratic Party . . . but to the Party of California . . . because California is a collective ideal worth preserving.

Some pundits said that I won reelection because I co-opted the Democratic agenda. Some said that the Democratic legislature, by working with me to increase the minimum wage or reform prescription drug costs, abandoned the Democratic nominee for governor. This is the kind of partisan thinking that frustrates the voters and diminishes our democracy. The people are disgusted with a mindset that would rather get nothing done than accomplish something through compromise.

Centrist does not mean weak. It does not mean watered down or warmed over. It means well-balanced and well-grounded. The American people are instinctively centrist . . . so should be our government. No one ideology can solve prison reform or immigration reform or any of the other challenges facing us. It will take the best ideas of everyone. It will take creative thinking. It will take negotiations. It will take letting go of the past.

What would such a California look like? Well . . . our people, no matter their culture or religion, still live in peace. Their health is strong because of the air they breathe, the care they receive, the lifestyles they lead. Their children are educated in schools that open the doors to a productive and fulfilling life. Because we rebuilt our infrastructure, we have the schools, the roads, the ports, the water, the levees, the communications to grow with prosperity. Because we committed ourselves to the environment, we lead the world in the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy, and, as a result, a clean-tech industry has sprung up creating jobs for our people. Because we were leaders in stem cell research, California ’s bio-tech industry has boomed, offering new cures for spinal cord injuries, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and other diseases. Because we took action to correct our fiscal crisis, state government will have learned, once and for all, to live within its means. And because we strengthened and reformed representative government, our state’s elected officials now reflect the views of the mainstream, not the fringes. In return, our citizens once again have trust and respect in their government.

Chronicle Slaps Pelosi for Strong-arm Tactics

2007-01-04T19:23:00.000-08:00

The SF Chronicle, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's hometown liberal newspaper, commented today on her denial of a chance for Republican imput on bills coming before the House in the first 100 hours of her speakership:

Pelosi and her leadership team made a strategic decision to streamline their first-100-hours agenda by short-circuiting the committee process and precluding opportunities for the Republicans to offer amendments or alternatives. Their rationale, aside from expediency, is that all of these issues have already been thoroughly vetted. Still, the strong-arm process smacks of the autocratic excess that Democrats complained about under GOP rule. Pelosi should be sensitive to such appearances and make an 11th-hour accommodation for the Republicans to at least get roll-call votes on their alternatives.

Ab and George

2007-01-04T00:48:00.000-08:00

Katelyn Sills has a post reminding us that it is far too soon to attempt to determine George W. Bush's place in history. It is a very good read, so go check it out and read my comments at the bottom of the article.

Guilliani Camp Loses Battle Plans

2007-01-02T15:53:00.000-08:00

Somebody is going to be in trouble:

It's clearly laid out in 140 pages of printed text, handwriting and spreadsheets: The top-secret plan for Rudy Giuliani's bid for the White House.

The remarkably detailed dossier sets out the budgets, schedules and fund-raising plans that will underpin the former New York mayor's presidential campaign - as well as his aides' worries that personal and political baggage could scuttle his run.

At the center of his efforts: a massive fund-raising push to bring in at least $100 million this year, with a scramble for at least $25 million in the next three months alone.

The loss of the battle plan is a remarkable breach in the high-stakes game of presidential politics and a potentially disastrous blunder for Giuliani in the early stages of his campaign.

The document was obtained by the Daily News from a source sympathetic to one of Giuliani's rivals for the White House. The source said it was left behind in one of the cities Giuliani visited as he campaigned for dozens of Republican candidates in the weeks leading up to the November 2006 elections.

If he can't keep track of this, how is he going to keep track of the nuclear code 'football' as President? (mild sarcasm)

Republicans Shut out of Lawmaking in New Congress

2007-01-02T15:50:00.000-08:00

So much for a bipartisan congress:

As they prepare to take control of Congress this week and face up to campaign pledges to restore bipartisanship and openness, Democrats are planning to largely sideline Republicans from the first burst of lawmaking.

House Democrats intend to pass a raft of popular measures as part of their well-publicized plan for the first 100 hours. They include tightening ethics rules for lawmakers, raising the minimum wage, allowing more research on stem cells and cutting interest rates on student loans.

But instead of allowing Republicans to fully participate in deliberations, as promised after the Democratic victory in the Nov. 7 midterm elections, Democrats now say they will use House rules to prevent the opposition from offering alternative measures, assuring speedy passage of the bills and allowing their party to trumpet early victories.

Apparently all GOP ideas are useless and should not even be discussed.

The Crystal Ball

2007-01-02T15:00:00.000-08:00

Here are my predictions, in no particular order for the 2007/2008 political cycle, proffered on the premise that I will not be held to them or laughed at if they turn out to be very wrong. :)

1. Iraq will decide the course of this cycle. The American people need to view the situation in the region much more favorably than they do now. If Iraq is the same two years from now as it is today, 2008 will be another bad year for Republicans. If Iraq appears as if it getting better, Republicans will do better. So it is very important for his party’s electoral chances that the President begin to effectively communicate to Americans about our successes in the War on Terror and the steps we are taking to secure the peace.

2. John Edwards will win the Democratic nomination for President. He is charismatic, comes from the South, and has turned strongly against the war, making him a prime contender. Barrack Obama’s candidacy will fizzle after the reality of a real national campaign hits him (remember, his 2004 Senate election was essentially a given. His opponent didn’t even live in the state). Hillary Clinton will be Edward’s main opposition. But her divisiveness and tepid support of the anti-war cause will cost her.

3. Mitt Romney will emerge as the Republican presidential candidate. He is also charismatic, a proven businessman, and can satisfy conservatives while at the same time woo moderates with his efforts as governor of Massachusetts to ensure health care for all. John McCain will be the runner up as conservatives will perceive him too liberal, although if the image of Iraq does not improve he may be nominated as the only Republican with a chance. Rudy Giuliani will fizzle, much like Obama, as his 9/11 popularity wears off and the public hears of all the dirt on him.

4. The course of the general election will follow prediction number one. If Iraq still looks bad, the Democratic nominee will almost certainly win, unless the Republican nominee is McCain, who might have slightly better prospects as a maverick. If the war gets better, the Republican nominee will have more of a chance.

5. The race for congress will follow much the same path as the general election. If Iraq is bad, Republicans can expect to lose even more seats. If it gets better, they should have a good chance of picking up many of those lost last year as a result of scandals. The Senate will be an uphill battle in any case at 21 Republican seats are up for election in 2008 with only 12 Democratic seats.

6. In California, Governor Schwarzenegger will have a “falling out” with the legislature. They will spar over competing plans to cover the uninsured. The legislature will attempt to implement a single payer system, while the governor will propose a market-based system. Neither will pass. A redistricting/term limits package will be placed on the 2008 ballot but voters, smelling a power grab by lawmakers, will defeat it.

Those are my predictions. How about yours?

Welcome!

2007-01-01T20:30:00.000-08:00

Welcome to my new blog. This is a continuation of my old website, California High School Conservative, which operated from February 2005 to September 2006. For those of you unfamiliar with me, an autobiography (which will be updated and rewritten soon) can be found here.

So am I really an “insider?” Probably not. The extent of my experience is basically an internship for a political consulting form, work on a few campaigns, an appointed position on the Sacramento City Youth Commission, and contacts with some who really are insiders.

But what the name really means is the depth to which California and American politics will be covered on this site. Except on rare occasions when I have a lot of other things to do, I spend at least an hour a day scanning sites such as The Flash Report, California Political News, Free Republic, Real Clear Politics, among others for the latest political news. So when you visit this site, you can expect to find well informed analysis and opinions about political news (and perhaps a few other things, when I feel like it).

So now you are probably wondering why I am abandoning my old blog and switching to this one. Well, first of all, I’m not really abandoning it quite yet. I will cross-post most content for at least a few months to keep the Google hits as well as the various blogrolls that I am on. But the main reason for the switch is that I realized I would have to ditch the name “California High School Conservative” in 17 months anyway (or be laughed at nearly every day in college), so I might as well change now while I am coming off a long break.

The content of the blog will be pretty much the same: Whatever is on my mind. I am planning to focus on more punditry and analysis of political events, but rest assured I will have many posts that are pure opinion.

So please bookmark this new site and I hope you enjoy!