Wednesday, June 17th, 2009...8:22 am
Desperation, It Hangs in the Wind…
Phil Lopes was quoted on KUAZ this morning echoing a sentiment I heard from a legislator I talked to last night. It doesn’t look like people think that the lawsuit the governor has filed to force the legislature to present the budget to the governor (for a likely veto) is going anywhere. The talk is that not only will she not get a ruling in her favor, but that the court will decide not to get involved at all.
At this point, the governor needs to force a presentation of the budget to prevent the legislature from springing it on her at 11:54 PM on June 30, leaving her the choice of signing it or shutting down the government the next morning. It is worth saying that she has already made the threat of a shut down. It would be risky for her to do so, though, since it is likely that voters would blame her as much as (or even instead of) the legislature.
She could get away with blaming the legislature, savvy and engaged executives have done it before. I haven’t seen much evidence that she is either one over the last few months.
What we are seeing here is a desperation move. It is roughly the equivalent of the St. Louis Browns putting Eddie Gaedel at the plate in the hopes of finally getting someone on base, even if it’s on a walk. She’s doing this because she’s looking over what she’s got to use and she’s got nothing left. One wonders what she could have done if she chose to fully engage the budget discussion way back in February or March, instead of offering half formed ideas and platitudes.
26 Comments
June 17th, 2009 at 10:39 am
Hmmm this is interesting. First, I agree that the court is unlikely to step in, given their overarching worries about attacks on the branch and its independence. Just look at the bills that typically go into the hopper that would erase merit selection, take away jurisdiction, and a host of other partisan efforts to “control” the court system….made largely by East Valley republicans.
That said, I think the effort of the Governor to sue and to “go public” was politically saavy. While it divides her party, and made Burns and crew look like fools, it exhibited strong leadership, a take no prisoners attitude, and she (despite the bad budget she is proffering) looks reasonable in comparison (who wouldn’t though). It also got her press which was good and them press that was bad.
What people should be saying is this (and by people I mean Democrats). They have complete and utter control over this government and they cannot do the job. They are incompetent and this fight demonstrates it. They control the House, Senate, Governor, all major legislative committees, Sec of State, Treasurer, and Superintendent of Schools…and despite their attempt to label Napolitano as the fault, they cannot do the job. They are worthless. They cannot even govern.
June 17th, 2009 at 11:19 am
krajmajales:
You are right on the mark.
We have a weak, unelected Governor and a legislature dominated by ideologues who also have axes to grind and look at this as their opportunity to do so.
When we had a strong Governor (Napolitano) she kept the far right in the legislature in check and forced them to play ball with her, but now that we have a weak one the legislature smells her fear, hesitation and weakness and they are moving in for the kill, just like they did when they were the school yard bullies you got to know and love as a kid.
But you are absolutely right, this is a Republican brawl. Democrats haven’t been consulted about this budget disaster at all and have been locked out of the whole process, so it is the Arizona GOP that owns the result, whatever ugly thing it turns out to be.
June 17th, 2009 at 11:50 am
Thanks Eli. This is the magic…this is the answer…and this is what it is going to take to take back the governor and more importantly gain a real foothold in the House and Senate.
The message just has to be reasonable and pragmatic. We also need to teach and stop our fear of touching a piece of metal in fear that it might be electrified.
First, focus on the role of government in a state. Not so far as arguing that govt is the answer to everything but that we have cut it back so far that it is harming our state and the ability of the private sector to do business here. The trick is that the answer is somewhere in the middle of “big government” and “no govt.”. Say and demonstrate what “no govt.” gets you. Your son or daughters teacher laid off, poor pay for our first responders, a business climate that pushes employers away, tuition hikes that outstrip the ability of people to pay. All for what? A “philosophy” (say philosophy…or theory) that cutting govt. to the bone will get you prosperity.
Then say, where is our prosperity?
Next, say over and over and over again that the Republicans have had an advantage in votes and that they control the entire system of government. Gov, legislature, Sec of State, Public Instruction, treasury. They have had years of implementing their “philosophy” and it JUST DOESNT WORK.
We need to do what WORKS. What works is not having a massive govt that does everything and it is not socialism, but what works is also not “no govt.”. We need to get to the middle like Texas, NC, Denver, Portland, where the strengths of the private and public sectors are acknowledged, where they work together to solve problems, and where economic development is the result.
June 17th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Why wouldn’t the Governor bring in the Democrats and cut a deal? Then she can take it back to get somewhat moderate Rs and then we are back to a similar structure as we had with Janet. The Dems and the moderates pass their budget and to hell with the other. In the Senate you can get the 2 or so and in the House you’d need around 5, right?
June 17th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Saw this on Blog for Arizona and thought it was a capital idea.
“Democrats should move to be dismissed as parties. They did not vote for this budget and played no role in its drafting. Democrats are to be held harmless. GOP legislators own this turkey of a budget and are the only responsible parties.”
June 17th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Hi Mantra,
They can easily do this by having their candidates go on the message I layed out above. One thing to add is this:
The GOP “philosophy” is lower taxes and less government spending equals prosperity. This “philosophy” doesn’t work.
The GOP budget did the following…
Lay out the disasterous proposal as well as Brewer’s more, so called, “moderate” budget and its ills.
Then show what the dems would have given instead.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
I believe this situation not be dire, we have got 10 workdays left. My suspicion is someone is going to recognize the opportunity and marathon this weekend to quote ’save the day’ and hope it pays off in good press and political capital. Lets hope it is a moderate/dem coalition that challenges what has not happened with an effective solution. Tedski…any place on the web for a published version of the minority budget? Maybe a Minority budget and a MOFM hybrid can be grinded out in the next few week. PS MOFM is Minority of the Majority, or the less idealogically impaired wing of the conserviative caucus.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
How to make a right wing ideologue look moderate? Compare her to the ‘wacko wing’ of the party. This all smells too much like positioning for next year — at the expense of state workers and the public at large. If this doesn’t upset voters, nothing will.
June 17th, 2009 at 11:17 pm
I would be surprised if some more lawsuits don’t come out of this budget. This budget will be full of bandaids that keep falling off, resulting in further significant budget whacking next fall and winter, I bet.
June 18th, 2009 at 8:40 am
I dunno Tedski. I did my usual test of seeing what a packed train of light rail downtown Phoenix workers thought and once the discussion got started, most people were blaming the legislature and not her. People respect standing strong for your beliefs and the Legislature just looks real petty here.
June 18th, 2009 at 9:39 am
Freedom is not a half-formed idea! Liberty is not a platitude!
If you liberals would just realize this, get out of our way, and let us run things, this sort of so-called “inpass” would never happen.
June 18th, 2009 at 9:48 am
hahahahahha
June 18th, 2009 at 9:52 am
What’s an “inpass?”
June 18th, 2009 at 10:16 am
kralmajales: “They cannot even govern.”
You miss the point. Republicans have NEVER been interested in governing. They are only interested in power. There is a significant difference.
June 18th, 2009 at 11:11 am
Of course they’re not interested in governing. Just look at the nature of the bills they pass through their committees, year after year: Guns, vouchers, gay bashing, immigrant bashing, and abortion restrictions. They are fixated on power and meddling in everyone’s personal lives. Sexual repression does that to people.
June 18th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
Andy and Donna,
I totally agree with you. There is not an interest among most up there in what “governance” is about.
That said, my overarching point is that many people who are not deeply issue focused could easily see this battle as a group of people with complete power, who cannot even function…and when the do function…are adhering to “philosophy” instead of pragmatic policy making that works and could get the job of fixing the economy done.
June 18th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
The Gov will totally win the political/media fight over who is to blame. All she has to do is memorize 5 or 6 bullet points and repeat them ad nauseam.
The Leg will have 90 people grabbing microphones and explaining the situation. In a crisis, clarity wins. The GOP will be in a civil war on the front page – no way do they look reasonable in that scenario.
Meanwhile, all the Dems have to do is memorize one point: “the GOP never let us participate in their budget process”.
June 18th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Shut ‘er down. It worked for Clinton and finished Newt.
June 18th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
Um, when the core of your philosophy is that government is always, unequivocally “the problem”, why even bother ATTEMPTING to govern?
The Governor is receiving plenty of platitudes and support from groups I’d never expect to see supporting her in an election. They are phonebanking on her behalf (or at least on behalf of her budget proposal). I guess they see it as a practical “lesser of two evils” approach to trying to get something signed by June 30, but I won’t be joining them. I can’t support the Brewer budget, no matter how much less bad it is. It’s still pretty awful.
Finally, I’m pretty cynical about any of this making any great difference in next November’s elections for legislative seats and the 9th Floor. I hope I’m wrong.
June 18th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Michael,
Good points. The university system and Board of Regents is one of those groups that you mention. Not sure about the phone banking, but they are supporting her plan for universities because its the only game in town and the one that hurts us the least, not helps us the most.
It is sad too…because as many have said, its not like her budget is going to help us. Its still more cuts on top of cuts which are on top of cuts. Its just that the legislative budget is GHASTLY in comparison.
We need Dem gov. desperately…but more than that…a narrower margin in the House and Senate. If that is not the priority this coming election, then I need to just pack my family and leave.
Goddard, Munger, Bradley, or whomever will only be a tourniquet. He will not be able to help without a legislature to boot.
June 18th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
RMantra: That might work with 1. a strong governor and 2. a few more GOP moderates, but this budget was passed with 16 GOP votes in the Senate (in a surprise vote at 3 AM, when they informed no Democrats and exactly the 16 R’s who they could trust that there even would be a vote) and 32 R’s in the house (they needed 31) so there aren’t enough GOP moderates, thanks to the results of the 2008 election.
Republitard: I’d be interesting to see how Democrats caused this impasse. I’d feel more confident if I even thought that Democrats COULD form this kind of result.
June 18th, 2009 at 8:36 pm
Donna–the sexually repressed theory is one of the genius genius post on this blog in modern time. My admiration goes out.
Then again, come to think of it
Well it worked for Cher in “Clueless”; maybe we can make a concerted effort to get some those dorkii (plural for dorkus) laid on a regular basis. Maybe we can call every May “sympathy f*** month for maniacally conservative”. Loosen ‘em up around budget time.
June 19th, 2009 at 9:10 am
rick, I realize you’re being tongue-in-cheek but it’s interesting how many people automatically think “straight guys needing to get laid” when the subject of sexual repression is raised. That’s a very male-centric and hetero-normative view and a big part of the whole dysfunction of society that causes people to become reactionary authoritarian conservatives in the first place. Being sexually repressed has little to nothing to do with your actual sex life and everything to do with whatever messages you’ve internalized about sex being “bad” and “dirty”. Throw in a sense of personal of entitlement and a hearty dose of cognitive dissonance and you get a Republican like Sen. John Ensign, who is a Puritanical prig in public while carrying on an extramarital affair in private.
So, again, I know you’re kidding but, no, arrogant entitled right wing arseholes DON’T need to have booty calls provided to them. It will NOT improve their attitudes one iota.
June 19th, 2009 at 11:52 am
So what are you thinking? couples therapy? I appreciate you pointing out the male-centric viewpoints…but taking ourselves a bit too serious are we? I am also going to disagree with you about Sexual Repression, it has more to do with being incapable of true intimacy, self image and belief systems. As much as I hate to admit it, their are plenty of Republican Men who are good Fathers, loyal to their wives and don’t need booty calls. Anyway…whatever, I am not sure I grasp what you are trying to say anyway
June 19th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
It’s always dangerous to draw any conclusions about the merits of a legal position when you’ve only read one side’s argument, but I actually think the Governor’s Petition is pretty compelling. (You can read it on the governor’s web site is you are so inclined.) Although the Constitution doesn’t provide expressly a deadline for the Legislature presenting passed bills by the Legislature, it’s appropriate to conclude that it must be done on some reasonably timely basis. Since the Constitution gives the Governor only five days to sign or veto bills once she gets them, it makes sense to conclude that waiting more than five days to present them is too long. I think she’s got a real shot. And I also agree that, regardless, it was a politically savvy move. When blame for the shutdown hits, she can say that she was so eager to avoid it that she actually sued to get the Legislature to cough up the budget.
June 20th, 2009 at 12:54 am
CDT—Donna’s take about sexual repression, (despite how a male may interpret it) is better than yours, but you totally get second place. The Governor’s move is shrewd, and worthy of leadership, but lest not forget. Girfriend maybe getting herself into a pickle she will not like. Cutting a deal with either side for her is possible political suicide, but I give this, if she comes out later on side or another, there is a reward of enormo political capital, howver, if the Government shuts down…..well your reap what you sow…..