Why do some people dislike Gray Davis?

Any Californians here? Well I'm not and I'm just wondering what all the hoopla is about. There are alot of people who want his job. Why? What has he done? Please do tell. Thanks. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Timber Loftis]

Gray Davis did one of the few political no-no's. Seeing a strong Repug candidate in the opposition's primary pool, he threw HIS money at the other side's primary, initiating a muck-raking TV campaign against this certain Repug. Once the Repug lost the primary Gray Davis had the election pretty well shored-up.

Then, mere weeks after he won the election, he announced California's $48 billion deficet -- even though he'd known about it for much longer.

Now, as I've posted before, the whole ultra-democratic referendum system in California is MOSTLY to blame for CA's current economic crisis, as well as the state of idiocy of its legal system (including that asinine draconian three-strikes law). However, Gray Davis certainly made his own bed, and must now sleep in it. In short, he is every bit the sleazy little weanie he looks to be.

[Arvon]

Sorry TL, but not quite true. The problems with Grayout Davis and the Dem's is the loss of business. They passed a really bad worker compensation law, much higher taxes and regulations on business, much higher that national average minimum wage law, and a paid workers leave program. All of the were passed by the Dem's! not the referendum. Another thing was the mismanagement of the power crises. Many of the big power companies warned that the summer of '01 was comming and to but contracts before then, Grayout ignored the advice. No it's the total lack of leadership. Even in signing the lastes budget he didn't show any leadership and just signed. There's much more, but I'm gettinf bored with typing.

[Timber Loftis]

Arvon, I'm not saying those things didn't happen. However, given the combination of the power crisis AND the tanking of the IT world, CA's business was bound to fall of to a large degree at some point -- even absent the problematic measures you mention.

However, due to referendums passed in the past, the CA legislature has only a 10% wiggle-room in each year's fiscal budget. (E.g., the education referendum which forces 40% of the state's yearly budget into schools, no matter what.) With the referendums taking away the legislature's options, the legislature has no real way to act to correct things when there are budget crunches. Take the specific education-directive: had it not been present, CA could have taken a reasonable action and cut educational spending by 1/2 this year to divert funds to balancing the budget.

In fact, I was just reading in The Economist today the creative contracting and land-selling and other measures the legislature is being forced to take to address the budget crisis. And, because all of these measures are banking on other contingencies, some of which are unlikely to happen, CA's crisis in likely to only worsen.

So, I don't doubt the problems you cite -- but CA's real problem is the combined weight of dozens of referendums all passed in a vacuum, without having the voters ever look at the long-term effects of the combined referendums.

The fact that voters are incapable (due to real-life time constraints) of spending 80 hrs/wk analyzing long-term budget and governmental concerns is the EXACT reason we have a REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC, whereby we pay politicians to be the experts and keep these things working smoothly for us. A referendum system gums up the whole works -- AND gives the politicians a real and valid excuse when they fail -- and excuse they otherwise would not have.

[Sir Taliesin]

What I can't figure out for the life of me, is why on earth anyone would want the job. There is no way in hell they can fix the multitude of problems that exist in Califoria in two years! I figure there will be different Governor there come the election after this one.

[Sir Taliesin]

I also heard that Gray Davis wasn't real squimish about stabbing people in the back, if he made him look good, no matter who it was. I hear he has very few friends even in the Democratic Party.

wow! now i know. over in washington state there's this Gov. Gary Locke that some people dislike but not as much as Davis I'm guessing. Fortunate for his opposers that Locke will not run for re-election. Personally, I don't really care who the Gov is as long it's not a former WWF wrestler or a movie star. It gives me the "Oh No" attitude and a sense of uncertainty about my state. But then again, if they can prove to be a good governor, then they deserve to be the Gov. Let's just hope (and pray) that the Californian people are not voting "drunk" (and as a joke) but instead vote fully aware of the consequences of their choices.

[Arvon]

Yes TL the referendum thing did have a lot to do with the budget problems. There are those special interest groups that want to get into the taxpayer's pockets. But much of the over spending was done by the legislators with the Gov's help. The dem's in this state are more prone to use tax monies to keep there sorry butts in office than most states (the exception being the NE). Remember many if not most referendums are put on the ballot by the legislators or the Gov. It's very hard to qualify a ballot iniative by signatures. The school thing for example was a legislative thing, as I recall. The current proposal to reduce the passing percentage for schools is being put on the recall ballot by the state school administrator. (To reduce the required pass for bonds from 2/3 to 55%)