Get Your Blog Up

“This administration is populated by people who’ve spent their careers bashing government. They’re not just small-government conservatives—they’re Grover Norquist, strangle-it-in-the-bathtub conservatives. It’s a cognitive disconnect for them to be able to do something well in an arena that they have so derided and reviled all these years.”

Senator Hillary Clinton

Friday, October 14, 2005

Excuses, excuses

Spot the disconnect.

Thursday, Oct 13, 2005, from the AP:
"This initiative will give our state the strictest laws and the toughest penalties against sexual predators," the Republican governor said during a news conference at a Burbank hotel. "It's a shame our legislators didn't respond."


If enacted, the proposal would add unknown costs to the state budget, which is projected to have a $6 billion deficit next year and already is burdened with record debt obligations. Schwarzenegger acknowledged the potential heavy costs, which could include building more prisons to accommodate an increase in violators.

Monday Oct 10, 2005, from the AP:
Health care advocates said Saturday that they were left angry and disappointed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s veto of two bills designed to provide medical coverage for about 800,000 uninsured California children.

The vetoes were announced Friday night, hours after Schwarzenegger promised at a bill-signing ceremony on other legislation to “continue putting our children first.”


In his veto messages, Schwarzenegger said he supported health coverage for all children but questioned how to pay for the legislation.

“This bill would cost the state almost a half billion dollars a year without providing a funding source at a time when California has a $7.5 billion (budget) deficit,” he said in turning down the Chan bill.

You see it? In one instance, a new sexual predator bill, arnold disucsses his shame at the legislature for ignoring his ne pet bill, no matter what the potential cost. Three days ago, Arnold vetoed a bill that would provide health coverage for needy children because it would potentially cost too much. Quite the flip-flop.

I'm not here to argue that Arnold should have done one rather than the other (though I like the idea of health care for children quite a bit, as it lessens health care burdens later in life). It's just pathetic that the guy would chose to use the deficit as an excuse in one instance, and then ignore it the next. There's either a problem with massive uncontrolled spending on Arnold's part, or there's not.

I'm so looking forward to next year.