March 3, 2004
THE COLOSSUS:
Governor wins his state battle of the bonds (Clea Benson, March 3, 2004, Sacrament Bee)
Proposition 57, the governor's bond measure, was leading 62 percent to 38 percent. Proposition 58, the balanced budget proposal, was ahead 71 percent to 29 percent. Proposition 56 was being soundly rejected, with 65 percent opposed and 35 percent in favor. [...]Schwarzenegger took office vowing to fix the state's finances without raising taxes, and Propositions 57 and 58 were part of his proposed solution. Getting the Legislature to put the measures on the ballot soon after he took office was the first big test of the governor's political strength.
At first, it seemed he might fail. Lawmakers in early December rejected his first proposal, which included a cap on state spending. But Schwarzenegger returned to the bargaining table and brokered a late-night compromise with Democrats. He didn't get the spending cap he wanted, but he got the balanced-budget provision instead.
That was just the first hurdle.
Schwarzenegger began campaigning throughout the state for the measures he dubbed the California Economic Recovery Act. Soon, Democratic leaders such as state Controller Steve Westly and U.S. Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein were also publicly supporting the bond measure.
At the start, polls showed voters opposed the $15 billion bond. But at the same time that he was trying to persuade Californians to approve his initiatives, Schwarzenegger also was raising millions of dollars to get his message out in television ads. That fund-raising included a controversial bigticket event in New York.
Soon after ads for Propositions 57 and 58 began airing in February, the polls showed a dramatic turnaround, almost unprecedented in a state where historically most ballot measures that started out with little public support have failed.
By taking the bond issue directly to the voters, Schwarzenegger sought to avoid legal challenges that have stopped past state borrowing attempts. The bonds from Proposition 57 will replace a $10.7 billion bond issue proposed as part of the current budget that is being disputed in court because it was not approved by voters.
He owns the joint. Posted by Orrin Judd at March 3, 2004 5:27 PM
Props 57 and 58 must be viewed together with Prop 56.
Prop 56 -- in California a 2/3 vote is needed to pass a budget (which might include tax increases). Prop 56 (funded by public employee unions and the usual suspects) sought to reduce that super-majority to 55% (it is mere coincidence that Democrats control - and have controlled for many years - roughly 59% of both houses of the legislature). The television ads against Prop 56 hammered one theme and one theme only -- a 'yes' vote will allow 'them' to raise your taxes.
Prop 57 -- a 'yes' vote authorized issuance of $15 billion in bonds to clean up the Democrats' deficit.
Prop 58 -- a 'yes' vote adopted a balanced budget amendment that essentially said (re Prop 57): never again.
Gov. Schwarzenegger reached a pre-election compromise with leading Democrats. He would not campaign in favor of Prop 56 if they (e.g. Senator Feinstein) agreed to appear in television ads favoring passage of Props 57 and 58.
Results:
Prop 56: shot down 66% to 33%
Prop 57: passed 66% to 33%
Prop 58: passed 70% to 30%
Think California might be in play with a tax cut campaign message?
Posted by: Fred Jacobsen (San Fran) at March 3, 2004 7:46 PMCorrection: Gov. Schwarzenegger agreed not to oppose Prop 56 in exchange for Dem leaders supporting Props 57 and 58.
Posted by: Fred Jacobsen (San Fran) at March 3, 2004 7:51 PMBetween this and the twin court rulings coming out of San Francisco over the past 10 days, is their anything specific California Democrats will be running on this fall, other than "Bush=Hitler therefor Jones=Mussolini" (or name your own Axis big-name celebrity).
Posted by: John at March 3, 2004 8:27 PMColour me impressed.
Posted by: M Ali Choudhury at March 4, 2004 6:57 AMArnold appeared on the Jay Leno show before the election.
The only thing he seemed interested in saying was encouraging voters to vote yes on props 57 and 58.
That is one determined guy.
Posted by: John J. Coupal at March 4, 2004 9:20 AM