October 15, 2005 - Special election result could set 2006 agenda

Special election result could set 2006 agenda

News Article/IVDB

By Edward Barrera, Staff Writer
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin

October 15, 2005

Two different stories came out of this past state legislative session.

One story tells of a Democrat-led Legislature that stopped necessary legislation and repeatedly stymied major government reform, forcing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to bypass it and put his agenda in front of voters in a November special election.

The other story tells of major issues, including public pension benefits, transportation and education, that were ignored not because there wasn't the political will but because the governor sidestepped the legislative process completely.

Most Inland Empire legislators, depending on their affiliation, hewed the party line -- Republicans saying the special election is a turning point for a do-nothing state government and Democrats saying the governor allowed his hubris to dictate public policy.

"The special election question is: Do we change the way California government works?" said state Sen. Roy Ashburn, R-Bakersfield, who introduced a number of bills to reform the state's public employee pension program, and quickly killed.

"These reforms are not perfect, but they are a step in the right direction, which is why I support them," he said. "If they are defeated then forget it. The real issues won't be fixed, and it means business as usual until the eye can see. This is a turning point for the state."

Area Democrats dismiss accusations they are standing in the way of reform and not tackling real problems. They pointed to July's state budget and last year's worker's compensation reform as examples of bipartisanship.

They also say they accomplished work this past session, but the governor refused to compromise on the larger issues.

"We are in a democracy not a dictatorship. You have to work with people," said Assemblyman Joe Baca Jr., D-San Bernardino, who said he believes the governor missed an opportunity for educational reform. "He needs to work with the rest of us. We might not agree with all the issues, but we can find a way to do what is best for the people of California. If he says something is broke, let's fix it. That's what leaders do. They lead. They don't dictate."

The governor called for the Nov. 8 special election to push four initiatives: Proposition 74, which increases the years it takes for teachers to obtain tenure; Proposition 75, which forces unions to get permission from members to use dues for political purposes; Proposition 76, which installs a spending cap and gives the governor more power over budgetary decisions; and Proposition 77, which gives the power to redraw legislative districts to a panel of retired judges.

The special election will needlessly drain funds that could have been used to shore up needed programs, said state Sen. Nell Soto, D-Ontario.

"We have seriously worked for the benefit of our district, and I don't think he should be using taxpayer money to put his agenda on a special election because he didn't get his way," Soto said. "I think the Legislature has done things for the benefit of their districts and constituents. Look at the expense of a special election, and we could be putting that money into education."

The cost of the special election is pegged at approximately $45 million statewide, according to the state.

Area Democrats said despite the governor's actions, they were able to pass important legislation including increasing benefits to certain military personnel called to active duty, authorizing state officials to coordinate disaster plans and increasing inmate testing to stem hepatitis C infections. Assemblywoman Gloria Negrete McLeod, D-Montclair, also noted that the state's budget approved in July was basically what the governor wanted.

"I think if the governor had been willing to work with us, we could have fixed things without hurting people. There were some Democrats who were willing, but it fell to the wayside," she said. "The people elected us and will decide that they want their Legislature, including the governor, to do their job."

It's a job some Republicans believe the Democrats have failed to do.

Assemblywoman Sharon Runner, R-Lancaster, and her husband, state Sen. George Runner, R-Lancaster, have pushed similar bills to deal with sex offenders over the past few years that have stalled in both houses.

The frustration pushed them, along with the governor, to start obtaining signatures for a comprehensive sex-offender initiative to go on next year's ballot.

Both said this was an example of overcoming the state's dysfunctional government.

"Bills like this couldn't even get out of committee," Sharon Runner said. "Two dozen like this have been killed and have not been allowed to be voted on by either (house). The only way to do it is to go to an initiative."

The measure, called Jessica's Law, would include forcing all paroled and newly registered sex offenders to wear locator bracelets.

The Runners admit the elections and initiatives could lead to voter fatigue, but both say it gives the people a direct say in how their government is run.

"I hope that it gets them actively involved," Sharon Runner said. "(Voters) will look to see who can't get it done and throw the bums out."

Local Republicans said they were able to get some needed legislation through, including stronger protection against stalkers, charter school reform, expansion of bio-diesel fuel use and easing the burden on a beleaguered nursing industry.

Assemblyman Bill Emmerson, R-Rancho Cucamonga, and state Sen. Bob Margett, R-Glendora, said while they support the governor's reform agenda, they believe that continuing to bypass the legislative process may not be the best way to deal with long-term problems.

"I think if you really want to address public policy issues, it takes some spine to grind out a good piece of legislation and it seems there is not the overall will to address these issues, including (among) Republicans," Margett said.

"You can't keep slamming the Legislature and saying that we don't do anything. It shouldn't be about what's good for the legislators -- Republicans or Democrats -- but what's good for the people of California. Will everybody get what they want? No. But it moves it forward."

###



Special election result could set 2006 agenda


News Article/IVDB By Edward Barrera, Staff Writer Inland Valley Daily Bulletin October 15, 2005 Two different stories came out of this past state legislative session. One story tells of a Democrat-led Legislature that stopped necessary legislation and repeatedly stymied major government reform, forcing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to bypass it and put his agenda in front of voters in a November special election. The other story tells of major issues, including public pension benefits, transportation and education, that were ignored not because there wasn't the political will but because the governor sidestepped the legislative process completely. Most Inland Empire legislators, depending on their affiliation, hewed the party line -- Republicans saying the special election is a turning point for a do-nothing state government and Democrats saying the governor allowed his hubris to dictate public policy. "The special election question is: Do we change the way California government works?" said state Sen. Roy Ashburn, R-Bakersfield, who introduced a number of bills to reform the state's public employee pension program, and quickly killed. "These reforms are not perfect, but they are a step in the right direction, which is why I support them," he said. "If they are defeated then forget it. The real issues won't be fixed, and it means business as usual until the eye can see. This is a turning point for the state." Area Democrats dismiss accusations they are standing in the way of reform and not tackling real problems. They pointed to July's state budget and last year's worker's compensation reform as examples of bipartisanship. They also say they accomplished work this past session, but the governor refused to compromise on the larger issues. "We are in a democracy not a dictatorship. You have to work with people," said Assemblyman Joe Baca Jr., D-San Bernardino, who said he believes the governor missed an opportunity for educational reform. "He needs to work with the rest of us. We might not agree with all the issues, but we can find a way to do what is best for the people of California. If he says something is broke, let's fix it. That's what leaders do. They lead. They don't dictate." The governor called for the Nov. 8 special election to push four initiatives: Proposition 74, which increases the years it takes for teachers to obtain tenure; Proposition 75, which forces unions to get permission from members to use dues for political purposes; Proposition 76, which installs a spending cap and gives the governor more power over budgetary decisions; and Proposition 77, which gives the power to redraw legislative districts to a panel of retired judges. The special election will needlessly drain funds that could have been used to shore up needed programs, said state Sen. Nell Soto, D-Ontario. "We have seriously worked for the benefit of our district, and I don't think he should be using taxpayer money to put his agenda on a special election because he didn't get his way," Soto said. "I think the Legislature has done things for the benefit of their districts and constituents. Look at the expense of a special election, and we could be putting that money into education." The cost of the special election is pegged at approximately $45 million statewide, according to the state. Area Democrats said despite the governor's actions, they were able to pass important legislation including increasing benefits to certain military personnel called to active duty, authorizing state officials to coordinate disaster plans and increasing inmate testing to stem hepatitis C infections. Assemblywoman Gloria Negrete McLeod, D-Montclair, also noted that the state's budget approved in July was basically what the governor wanted. "I think if the governor had been willing to work with us, we could have fixed things without hurting people. There were some Democrats who were willing, but it fell to the wayside," she said. "The people elected us and will decide that they want their Legislature, including the governor, to do their job." It's a job some Republicans believe the Democrats have failed to do. Assemblywoman Sharon Runner, R-Lancaster, and her husband, state Sen. George Runner, R-Lancaster, have pushed similar bills to deal with sex offenders over the past few years that have stalled in both houses. The frustration pushed them, along with the governor, to start obtaining signatures for a comprehensive sex-offender initiative to go on next year's ballot. Both said this was an example of overcoming the state's dysfunctional government. "Bills like this couldn't even get out of committee," Sharon Runner said. "Two dozen like this have been killed and have not been allowed to be voted on by either (house). The only way to do it is to go to an initiative." The measure, called Jessica's Law, would include forcing all paroled and newly registered sex offenders to wear locator bracelets. The Runners admit the elections and initiatives could lead to voter fatigue, but both say it gives the people a direct say in how their government is run. "I hope that it gets them actively involved," Sharon Runner said. "(Voters) will look to see who can't get it done and throw the bums out." Local Republicans said they were able to get some needed legislation through, including stronger protection against stalkers, charter school reform, expansion of bio-diesel fuel use and easing the burden on a beleaguered nursing industry. Assemblyman Bill Emmerson, R-Rancho Cucamonga, and state Sen. Bob Margett, R-Glendora, said while they support the governor's reform agenda, they believe that continuing to bypass the legislative process may not be the best way to deal with long-term problems. "I think if you really want to address public policy issues, it takes some spine to grind out a good piece of legislation and it seems there is not the overall will to address these issues, including (among) Republicans," Margett said. "You can't keep slamming the Legislature and saying that we don't do anything. It shouldn't be about what's good for the legislators -- Republicans or Democrats -- but what's good for the people of California. Will everybody get what they want? No. But it moves it forward."
###