It was vintage Arnold Schwarzenegger today in Columbus Ohio, as the guv stumped for GOP presidential nominee John McCain. Two parts of his intro of McCain are worth noting, the first for its mocking humor.

"The next Arnold Classic [held in Columbus], I want to invite Senator Obama," said the governor, "because he needs to do something about those skinny legs."

The crowd roared. Schwarzenegger went on. "We're going to make him do some squats. And then we're going to go and give him some bicep curls to beef up those scrawny little arms."

Lest anyone think the guv didn't have a point about Barack Obama, he then said: "But if only we could do something about putting some meat on his ideas."

After then praising McCain for being "solid" and the man for the job, the governor of California took a jab at the Democratic nominee's fundraising prowess in the race for the White House.

"It is true that Senator Obama has raised massive amounts of campaign funds, more than anyone in history," he said. "If Senator Obama had taken all that money he spent on TV ads, he could've bailed out the banks, paid off everyone's mortgages, and saved taxpayers a ton of money. I think there will be a backlash against all of this lopsided spending."

The Ohioans roared... perhaps unaware that Schwarzenegger is no slouch himself when it comes to raising campaign cash. Lots of campaign cash.

In fact, it seems safe to say the incumbent governor will go down as the most prolific campaign fundraiser in California history.

A quick, but by no means exhaustive, analysis of state campaign records of his major campaign committees, from his 2002 afterschool initiative to today, concludes Schwarzenegger has raised more than $136.2 million as a political figure.

But that's a debate for back here at home... where given the state's fiscal problems, one might be able to use the same argument the governor did today -- that there's at least a worthy govenrment service ot two that could have benefitted from the money he's raised, too.

This is the last weekend of a very long campaign season across California, and so this edition of the Capital Notes Podcast dwells on the big races to watch come Tuesday.

From a few ballot measures with new polling data (just released Friday morning) to our overview of the big legislative races, Capitol Weekly editor Anthony York and I hash out who's up, who's down... and who we think might come out on top when the smoke clears come Wednesday morning.

A quick look at some of the big bucks on the statewide ballot measure front... based on amounts in play.

The combined campaign cash raised this year for these five measures alone: $155.2 million.

Proposition 8: The battle to ban same-sex marriage is again drawing huge amounts. As of midday, the campaign in support of Prop 8 looks to have raised about $34 million, while the main opposition committee has reported a slight bit more, about $34.6 million. It will be interesting to see just how high this one goes, compared to previous records for ballot measure spending in California.

Proposition 7: Supporters of the renewable energy initiative report no new donations since the last comprehensive filing with contributions of $7.4 million; opponents of Prop 7 have raised about $29.8 million.

Proposition 10: The bond measure to provide rebates for alternative fuel vehicles is spending big bucks. The pro-10 campaign reports about $22.5 million as of today, with almost all of the money coming from sources that can be traced back to oilman T. Boone Pickens; the opponents have yet to get to $200,000 in campaign cash.

Proposition 2: The battle over the confinement of farm animals has drawn $7.9 million in the campaign to relax current confinement standards, while opponents to Prop 2 have raised about $8.33 million.

Proposition 4: The proposal requires parental notification before a teenager seeks an abortion. Supporters have raised about $2.1 million, only about a quarter of the amount -- a little more than $8.4 million -- raised by opponents. A notable contribution in support of Prop 4 came just today from San Diego Chargers quarterback Philip Rivers.

An examination of the latest campaign finance data shows a handful of contested legislative races are racking up some big bucks, through both candidate controlled committees and those operating independently of the campaigns.

These nine races -- seven in the Assembly, two in the Senate -- account for more than $37 million in campaign contributions through mid-week. Of that total, about $8.6 million has been raised through independent expenditure (IE) committees. All but one of these are open seats, which is probably the best explanation for why so much money is on the table.

The races are burning up the fundraising circuit in the Assembly (again, totals are from all sources):

AD 80 between Manuel Perez (D) and Garry Jeandron (R) has attracted contributions of more than $5.8 million.

AD 30 between Fran Florez (D) and Danny Gilmore (R) has brought in more than $5.1 million.

AD 78 between Marty Block (D) and John McCann (R) has attracted contributions of almost $4.9 million.

Just behind AD 78 in the cash contest is AD 15 between Joan Buchanan (D) and Abram Wilson (R) at almost $4.8 million.

And rounding out the top 5: AD 10, where the contest between Alyson Huber (D) and Jack Sieglock (R) has drawn a total of more than $3.4 million.

Two other races, which political junkies are watching in the lower house, are worth noting: the contest in AD 26 (Democrat John Eisenhut vs. Republican Bill Berryhill) at just under $1.4 million, and the AD 37 race (Democrat Feral Masry vs. incumbent GOP Assemblymember Audra Strickland) is just over the combined $700,000 mark but has seen increased campaign cash in the last few days.

But tops in legislative campaign cash this season... drum roll, please... is the battle royale in the open 19th Senate district between Democrat Hannah Beth Jackson and Republican Tony Strickland. Campaign fundriasing plus IE cash here totals almost $8.5 million.

The runner-up in the upper house: SD 5, between Lois Wolk (D) and Greg Aghazarian (R), at $2.6 million.

[update: The danger in a posting like this so close to the election is that the numbers are almost immediately out of date. Add some more cash to the above totals, including many more big IE moves -- more than $520,000 in legislative races -- just yesterday.]

Governor Schwarzenegger just wrapped up a campaign event outside the Capitol in support of Proposition 11, but all the questions (damn pesky reporters) were about the state's ailing finances.

The questions come on the heels of a much talked about private meeting the guv held Tuesday with education lobbyists and advocates -- a meeting where he reportedly said things are bad, and public schools will bear part of the burden.

Schwarzenegger reiterated that message in public today.

"Since everyone has to take a haircut," said the governor, "it's natural that education has to take a hit."

The entire comment that was lifted from is below, where the guv goes on to talk about the need for "creative" solutions to what may now be a $10 billion... or more... shortfall.

As you might imagine, the education community takes issue with how much of a trim that schools might be getting in any budget cutting propopsal. They're calling talk of a $3 billion cut in education sectors a "catastrophe."

Expect such talk, and fighting, to dominate California political circles a week from now, when Schwarzenegger officially summons lame duck legislators back to Sacramento.

The Hapsburg Dynasty... Michael Phelps... and California legislators?

If you're confused, then you haven't been paying attention to Governor Schwarzenegger, the pitch man for Proposition 11 -- this fall's attempt to change the once-a-decade process of redistricting. This is Schwarzenegger's second political campaign to wrest control of political map drawing from the hands of the Legislature.

And maybe this time, the stars are aligned just right; after all, this summer's budget fiasco has only helped drive the Legislature's approval ratings towards their true nadir. It would seem simple enough to say that legislators can't trusted to draw political districts, given the 2001 redistricting deal that let numerous incumbents pick and choose the squiggly outlines of their home turf.

The government watchdog groups that wrote Prop 11 say the problem is that legislators have a conflict of interest in mapping out their own districts.

"Drawing super safe districts for legislators to run in is a very big problem," says Kathay Feng of Common Cause California, one of the authors of Prop 11. "We now have a state government that is no longer responsive to the voters."

But the pitch from the governor is different, with promises from Prop 11 that several redistricting experts say won't happen.

First, the issue of competitive districts. Schwarzenegger has long said that lack of competition between the two parties has helped create gridlock (hence the two references earlier, his joke about monarchy turnover and September's quip about what led swimmer Phelps to all those gold medals).

"There's a lack of competition there between Democrats and Republicans," said Schwarzenegger at an event in San Diego last week. "And we all know that if there is a lack of competition there is also a lack of performance."

On Tuesday morning's edition of The California Report (listen above), we took a look at a district that's competitive on paper... but so uncompetitive in reality that the Democratic candidate isn't even mentioned in a promotional booklet published by his party. We also checked in with a researcher who's recent report concluded that there's no strong correlation between competitively drawn districts and whether a legislator is actually a moderate open to compromise.

This morning on the program (listen above), the second part of our examination of redistricting focused on the specifics in Prop 11 -- the way the independent citizens commission would be picked, the concerns about whether it will truly be diverse and accountable, and the very real possibility that California might still end up with legislative districts that are squiggly, contorted shapes... because every criteria given to the new commission can only be applied after rules mandated by the United States Constitution.

"The problem with redistricting is you cannot meet everybody's goal," said Karin McDonald, director of the statewide redistricting database at UC Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies. "You cannot make everybody happy."

All of this means the voters can undoubtedly shake things up by approving Prop 11 on next week's ballot, but expectations must be realistic. The governor is a great salesman; but if the kinds of cooperation and esprit de corps he's promising will come from redistricting reform doesn't happen when new districts are drawn in 2011... will the voters who approved the new plan feel cheated?

Governor Schwarzenegger has finally weighed in on the 12 measures appearing on next week's statewide balance, and what might be most interesting are the ones on which he's decided to not take a position.

The list, courtesy of his political advisers, is as follows:

Prop 1A High Speed Rail Bonds: Yes
Prop 2 Farm Animal Confinement Standards: No
Prop 3 Children's Hospital Bond: Yes
Prop 4 Parental Notification of Abortion: Yes
Prop 5 Nonviolent Drug Offenses, Sentencing & Parole: No
Prop 6 Law Enforcement Funding, Gang Penalties: Neutral
Prop 7 Renewable Energy Standards: No
Prop 8 Same-Sex Marriage Ban: No
Prop 9 Victims' Rights & Parole: Neutral
Prop 10 Alternative Fuel Bonds: No
Prop 11 Redistricting: Yes
Prop 12 Veterans Bond Act: Yes

Many of these were already out there; others seem to conform to either Schwarzenegger's long track record on various issues or his known philosophy.

However, it's worth noting that Schwarzenegger is taking a pass on endorsing Propositions 6 and 9. The governor's been on board with almost every other "get tough on crime" measure in recent years, and many of these measures' supporters are ones he has stood with on those past issues.

So what's changed? Perhaps it's the fact that both of these measures come with a collective price tag to state government that could be in the billions of dollars... an issue for the governor to ponder given the news that the budget shortfall may now be approaching $10 billion. There's also the uncomfortable alliance with Henry Nicholas, the billionaire financial backer of both proposals who was indicted this past summer on drug, fraud, and conspiracy charges. Schwarzenegger stood alongside Nicholas in 2004 to defeat Proposition 66, amending the state's three strikes law, but perhaps isn't as keen to do so now.

The ballot positions of the governor didn't come with an explanation, so make of them what you will. But given the lack of a "neutral" box to check on the ballot next to these measures, it's safe to say next Tuesday, in the privacy of the voting booth, the governor will have to choose sides.

On this week's Capital Notes Podcast (okay, the second one this week), we examine everything from California's fiscal problems and the economic impact on the state's big pension fund to politicking in Ohio, new poll numbers, and beyond.

Capitol Weekly editor Anthony York and I also check in on the latest regarding a special session of the Legislature.

The leadoff event at today's Women's Conference hosted by California's first lady, featuring Governor Schwarzenegger and investor Warren Buffett, was an amusing chat sprinkled with only the slightest dusting of news.

The governor and Buffett, longtime friends forever linked in political history by an awkward few moments in the early days of the 2003 recall campaign, sat on stage in Long Beach to talk money, business savvy, and the power of women.

The annual event, in its current incarnation, is the brainchild of First Lady Maria Shriver and features a long list of VIPs speaking to a sellout crowd.

This morning's kickoff conversation between the Austrian Oak and the Oracle of Omaha was moderated by MSNBC political provocateur Chris Matthews, whose participation might have something to do with mending fences with women.

As said before, there was only a faint hint of news... and here it is: Schwarzenegger effectively aligned himself with the guy he's not supporting for president on the subject of the government buying back troubled mortgages.

The governor's pick in the race, Republican John McCain, has proposed using some of the $700 billion bailout package to buy up troubled mortgages. But his opponent, Democrat Barack Obama, has criticized the plan because it appears to call for buying those mortgages at face value, rather than the true market value -- thus costing the federal government more money than it ought to pay.

Today, Schwarzenegger parted ways with the GOP nominee on the issue, saying that the feds should buy the mortgages, but only at the "adjusted value."

Of course, the governor also made remarks more friendly to the McCain campaign, including a subtle dig discussions of "redistribution of wealth," a topic being hotly debated by the candidates.

But the best line of the morning came from Buffett, the iconic billionaire who's backing Obama.

In talking about his advice for building strong companies, Buffett said that a company should be "so good that an idiot can run it, because sooner or later, one will."

Without missing a beat, he then said: "We have a country like that."

Governor Schwarzenegger appears resolved to call current legislators back to Sacramento for a special session on the ever-growing state budget problem.

That's according to his press secretary, Aaron McLear.

"We don't believe we can wait until November 30," said McLear, referring to the idea that the newly elected Legislature will officially take office just after the calendar flips to December.

McLear made those remarks this morning during a weekly briefing on Schwarzenegger's upcoming schedule.

In a campaign event yesterday in San Diego, the governor made it clear he doesn't want to wait to shore up the already leaky deficit; current estimates are the shortfall is at least $3 billion.

"We are proposing a special session very soon where Democrats and Republicans will get together and try to solve the economic challenges that we are facing," said Schwarzenegger.

But as to when... well, stay tuned. The governor's advisers say that a better sense of both economic conditions and the depth of California's problems will be known as soon as the end of next week, after financial experts convene in a private meeting in Sacramento to assess the economy.

That doesn't mean, however, that anyone's picked a date to call everyone back. McLear said that's still to be determined. It does appear, however, that Schwarzenegger would also declare a fiscal emergency (under the powers approved by voters in 2004's Proposition 58), which requires both a formal evaluation of the problem and some sense of solutions.

Assuming the soon-to-be-history Legislature does come back, it remains to be seen what kind of political dynamics would exist; it will be interesting to see termed-out legislators being asked to come debate, and vote, on either spending cuts or tax increases... while their replacements are already moving boxes into Capitol offices.

There are 10 senators that are termed out as of December, and 24 members of the Assembly who are departing. It's doubtful any of them thought they'd be coming back to Sacramento. But now it appears they may want to check their calendars.