That paradox -- plenty of political cash, too little budget cash -- is a great way to describe the topics on this week's Capital Notes Podcast.

We examine the latest data on campaign cash in the race for governor, plus some of the polling from this week on this race and the contest for the U.S. Senate. Capitol Weekly's Anthony York and I also examine budget maneuvers this week both in the Capitol and in the courtroom.

For those, though, who want the headlines from tonight's Public Policy Institute of California poll, then here they are: Meg Whitman leads Steve Poizner by 50 points in the GOP gubernatorial primary and leads Jerry Brown in a theoretical November race by five points; and Carly Fiorina appears to have closed the gap in the GOP race for the U.S. Senate, leading Tom Campbell by a single percentage point (Chuck DeVore's support remains unchanged) with both GOP front-runners deadlocked with 18-year Democratic incumbent Barbara Boxer.

Now, on to our subplot.

In the Republican race for governor, current underdog Steve Poizner has embarked on a strategy that seems directly aimed at social conservatives in his party -- a get-tough stance on illegal immigration. Poizner, in comments several times over the last few weeks, maintains that the issue is centered on the state's budget crisis and, in response to a question I asked him at the GOP convention, said that he believes undocumented immigrants are costing the state $10 billion in services used.

But pushing the immigration issue comes with some potential risk, especially given the large number of people who believe the last GOP fight over illegal immigration, 1994's Proposition 187, drove a wedge between Latino voters in the state and the party, one that still exists today.

When asked about a potential fall contest between Democrat Jerry Brown and Republican Meg Whitman, Latino voters surveyed favor Brown, 45%-35%. But when asked about a race between Brown and Steve Poizner, Latinos shift dramatically away from the GOP... this time picking Brown by a resounding 57%-19%.

That's not only a 13-point swing in Brown's favor, but also at least 16-point swing of Latinos away from the Republican party should Poizner pull an upset on June 8.

It's hard to imagine anything other than his tough talk on illegal immigration driving that result, especially given how prominent the issue has become in the race. It also seems plausible to ask -- again, should the incumbent insurance commissioner win the primary -- whether Poizner could steer his public image back towards the political center and ask Latino voters for a second chance in a fall contest.

Photo: Getty Images

PPIC found that independents are the least happy group of voters about the choices they have in the Senate race, with almost four in ten saying that describes their mood. But when forced to choose, the results show Boxer's fate with swing voters improves the more conservative the GOP nominee seems to be.

In a Boxer-Campbell general election, independents queried by PPIC pick Campbell by 16-points, 48% to 32%. In a Boxer-Fiorina matchup, independents pick Fiorina 41%-35%... still not hot for the junior senator, but a 10-point upswing in her favor (and more indy voters also are undecided than with Campbell). However, should the November race be Boxer versus DeVore, this time the incumbent comes out on top, 41%-35%... a 22-point swing from how they feel about Campbell.

Are independents the single most important factor in the Senate race? Of course not... and neither are Latinos in the gubernatorial contest. And yes, another caveat, the poll only measures how voters feel now -- not how they're going to feel come election day in June or November.

But both subgroups of voters are important to understanding the narrative of the campaign, at least from a journalist's perspective. Latino voters offer a glimpse into the turbulent waters of race, class, and the changing face of California... waters that, as stated earlier, have been harder for Republicans to navigate in recent times. And with both major parties in weaker positions than they used to be, independent voters and their blend of pragmatism and ideology can wreak havoc on politicians perceived as unduly partisan.

It's shaping up to be an interesting election.

Photo: Getty Images

Arnold Schwarzenegger, we're breaking up with you.

Granted, the freshman congressman and former longtime state legislator threw his punch via video from Washington, D.C. and did so at the expense of one of the current gubernatorial wannabes.

But at least he said it; and when he did, the room erupted in applause. It probably helps when the guy isn't there -- which he wasn't.

More broadly, though, day two of the 2010 winter GOP confab was full of candidates proving their mettle -- either on the issues or in terms of electability. With the first day largely dominated by the media coming out party of Meg Whitman, Saturday was a whirlwind of candidates speaking to delegates and reporters, highlighted by the trio of Republicans vying to take on U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer in November and by gubernatorial candidate Steve Poizner's big speech to the party faithful.

Boxer was the favorite Democrat punching bag of the day; or maybe that should be a punching balloon -- as in a large, hot air balloon resembling the disembodied head of the state's junior senator in another eerie video from the campaign of Carly Fiorina.

The video mocks Boxer as having an "elitist self image" and flips halfway to a feel-good rags-to-riches story about Fiorina. Its debut was followed at lunchtime by Fiorina doing an Oprah, theater-in-the-round presentation that drew a lot of applause for its red meat Republican standards: cut government spending, keep Guantanamo Bay open, scrap the current health care bill, oppose abortion.

The GOP faithful received a lot of red meat today on issues like smaller government and dangerous Democrats; even the often courtly Tom Campbell joined in tonight by lamenting the current wave of what he called "soft socialism."

But it seemed that the politician most conspicuously absent was the most notable target of the day. In many cases, the dosage of anti-Schwarzenegger was small. Example: at the afternoon rally for supporters of the Tea Party Movement, California GOP chairman Ron Nehring said this: "It is never acceptable to raise taxes in a down economy, because it destroys jobs."

And who was the last top politician to sign a tax increase into law in California? Hmmm...

Later, in a press conference supporting Whitman, anti-tax advocate Jon Coupal got his own dig in at Schwarzenegger, the candidate he and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association actually vouched for in 2003 and again in 2006.

This time, though, Coupal compared Whitman's negotiating skills as a would-be chief executive to the incumbent with a reference to a particularly memorable Schwarzenegger moment: "I don't think you're ever going to hear Meg Whitman call anyone a 'girlie man'."

But the la pièce de résistance came from McClintock, who never seemed very good in his Sacramento days at masking his displeasure with the celebrity governor (a fundraiser buddy buddy moment in 2004 notwithstanding).

Perhaps with a nod the governor's famous plea to the state party to broaden its appeal, the conservative's conservative said, "I've heard some Republicans say we need to rebrand our party. We don't need to rebrand our principles. We need to return to them."

And, then, the swing at Whitman (McClintock has endorsed Poizner) that struck an Austrian oak: "We can't afford to offer California Arnold Schwarzenegger's third term."

The crowd roared its approval. Off with his head! Or something like that.

Photo: John Myers, KQED

Al Gore? Okay, Guv, you're out of the doghouse.

[NOTE: That does it for reports from GOPapalooza, as I'm heading back to Sacramento for a day off before Monday's GOP gubernatorial debate in Costa Mesa. Listen for a radio wrapup of the convention Monday morning on The California Report.]

And press conferences. And questions. Lots of them.

Photo: John Myers, KQED

None of the chit chats were on the schedule, but rather were "impromptu" affairs that featured the former eBay CEO apologizing for the Tuesday campaign miscue heard nationwide, attacking her rival Steve Poizner, and attempting to answer every policy and political question in between. The campaign team insisted the Q&As were always going to be part of the game plan at this point; regardless, it was a day that may have put an end to the characterization of a media shy business executive -- a story her rivals have playing to the hilt these last few days.

That's not to imply Whitman was the only one doing the talking. Fellow guv wannabe Poizner convened a news conference that easily lasted longer than any in recent memory. On the Senate side, candidate Tom Campbell did his own mea culpa to reporters on the subject of a controversial former Muslim supporter, while the other two Senate challengers each meet with the press tomorrow... once we've recovered from asking so many questions today.

In the contest for governor, it became clear that the real battle at this point is over what kind of conservatism matters... and who has it. State GOP confabs for years have been what some jokingly called circular firing squads -- where moderates and conservatives beat each others brains out all while the cameras rolled. But at this event, it's clear the conservatives have won. Let's face it, the state's moderate GOP governor is a no-show; party leaders dismissed the issue by saying Governor Schwarzenegger has all kinds of budget issues to busy himself with. But the Guv left the state earlier today.

Photo: John Myers, KQED

"It's time to change the rules," said Poizner. "This is about ending the madness, so that people don't come here in the first place." On the issue of welfare-to-work, Poizner endorsed the scrapping of all welfare assistance for children after two years.

Whitman later rejected Poizner's position on the issue of illegal immigrant children. "I am not in the business of punishing kids for the sins of their parents," she said, though she did endorse ways to crack down on illegal immigration. And on welfare, she again rejected an early reduction of assistance for kids, focusing instead on adults.

Instead, the former eBay chief focused her message on fiscal conservatism, an area that Poizner also believes he's in the right. So to speak. The insurance commissioner is calling for a larger tax cut than is Whitman, but Whitman touts her endorsement by the state's leading anti-tax group, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, as proof she's in the right. (Poizner, returning serve, touts his endorsement from the conservative California Republican Assembly.)

Whitman continued to push the point that Poizner's views on several issues have changed over the years, to which the incumbent insurance commissioner said: "She doesn't want people to focus on her controversial background."

And so it goes.

On a lighter note, both candidates got off some amusing one liners today. From Whitman, it came in her dinnertime speech to convention goers when she jabbed at presumptive Democratic nominee Jerry Brown: "Moonbeams are, after all, fleeting things, and disappear before they can be pinned down."

And from Poizner, after a reporter mentioned that Whitman says she voted for SP in his unsuccessful bid for a Silicon Valley Assembly seat in 2004: "I can predict this -- Meg Whitman is going to vote for me again in 2010."

More tomorrow on the brief sit-down interview I did with Whitman, and some of the state budget issues we talked about. In the meantime, here's a quick video clip of the day's final media availability with Whitman.

Photo: Getty Images

Those are some of the things being said about Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger as this election year kicks off... not by Democrats, but by his fellow Republicans. And it may be just the beginning.

A great case in point comes today with the first of what will likely be a lot of TV ads from GOP gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman, who is on her way to breaking all records for campaign spending in California.

Whitman's kickoff commercial is mostly a statement of principles about her leadership abilities. But embedded not too far below the surface are comments about the leadership qualities that have existed so far -- including, one would assume those of Schwarzenegger.

"People are scared to death that California cannot be fixed," Whitman says, then delivering this thinly veiled zinger: "The most important thing that the next governor of California has to do is actually deliver the goods."

As in... the current governor hasn't delivered the "goods"?

This isn't the first time the current GOP front runner has taken aim at the guy in the corner office. It began during last year's budget deficit debate and has continued from there, albeit fairly quietly. The most notable clash, so far, has come over Whitman's frequent calls to trim the state employee workforce.

For his part, Whitman gubernatorial rival Steve Poizner has been a little more opaque about the Schwarzenegger role in California's crisis. But not much.

In his December raison d’être web video, the insurance commissioner put it this way: "Weak leadership, and wrong-headed ideas have transformed California from the envy of the world into a ruthless job killer."

Weak leadership from... who?

And it's not just governor wannabes taking their shots. This week's oddball web video from U.S. Senate candidate Carly Fiorina was aimed at the record of opponent Tom Campbell. But the biggest target Campbell had on his back in the ad seemed to be from his time serving as Schwarzenegger's budget director in 2005.

The ominous narrator describes that budget... one with Schwarzenegger's signature on it, mind you, not Campbell's, thusly: "A budget so bloated with increased ongoing spending commitments and borrowing that it literally set the stage for the recent decline of California."

Yowza.

Of course, beating up the incumbent is nothing new. Schwarzenegger himself did an awfully good job at that in 2003. But these are Republicans taking shots at what, in most states, would be the Republican standard bearer (party activists don't see him as that, as you might know).

For their part, the Schwarzenegger camp isn't buying it.

"Voters are accustomed to politicians and aspiring politicians making generic statements," said Schwarzenegger political adviser Adam Mendelsohn. "They tune it out. I think they should tell voters about themselves before spending millions on generalities and platitudes."

It's worth noting that this is only February, and the campaigns are still finding their footing. But California's problems are hard to ignore, and blaming incumbents is almost second nature in politics. It will be interesting to see whether the Schwarzenegger attacks continue, and how the governor himself handles them as election day draws near.

Of course, those of us in the Golden State know a thing or two about free flowing money into "independent expenditure" groups. And so it seems -- once again -- as California goes, so goes the nation.

The big ruling in the case known as Citizens United v. FEC has implications for the entire national political system, and we won't repeat here what's being said in many other news reports.

But it is worth noting that the decision appears to create a national system that mirrors the one in existence here in California since voters approved Proposition 34 almost ten years ago -- a system where contributions made in support or opposition of a candidate, but independently of that candidate's campaign, aren't subject to any limits.

"Now the federal system is the same as California," said Jessica Levinson, political director of the Center for Governmental Studies. I interviewed Levinson for a radio story that airs tomorrow morning on The California Report (check this posting tomorrow for audio).

Levinson says the ruling from the Supremes is a "game changer" in the world of political money, and will no doubt lead to a "flood" of money from big corporations and labor unions into the 2010 election season.

(Before we go any further, an important note: the ruling has no impact on races in California for governor, legislative seats, or other state constitutional officers. It only applies to campaigns for federal contests like those for Congress, and only then to independent political organizations; it did not wipe out existing campaign contribution limits made directly to candidates.)

So what kind of change has the no holds barred money allowed under Prop 34 brought to California politics? Plenty, according to a report last year from the state's campaign watchdogs, the Fair Political Practices Commission.

In many ways, the world of independent expenditures, "IEs" in political parlance, has meant candidate controlled committees are no longer the main focus of California's campaign cash bonanza. And CGS' Levinson says that for any state with laws on the books mimicking the national McCain-Feingold law at the heart of Citizens United, it won't be long before they, too, become like the wild west of California politics.

U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer (Photo: Getty Images)

"Now, corporations or labor unions can tap into vast sums of money," said Levinson, "and directly make independent expenditures that either slam her or make her look like the greatest legislator in the world."

Boxer reported this week that she has $7.2 million in the bank for her race this year, but today's ruling may mean that's not going to be anywhere near enough to hold on to her job. And while the ruling may help any of her three potential GOP challengers -- Tom Campbell, Chuck DeVore, or Carly Fiorina -- it's Campbell and DeVore who lack personal funds to run a competitive race, and thus may be most happy with the ruling should either of them come out on top in the June primary.

The Court's ruling could also impact the handful of hot California races for the U.S. House of Representatives, as an interest group intent on tipping the outcome can do so with very few restrictions. Suppose, for example, state and national environmental groups want to ensure that their old nemesis, former congressman Richard Pombo doesn't win either the GOP primary for a different Central Valley seat in Congress or, failing that, the November general election? Now they've got a way to spend as much as they want to make that case.

It's worth noting that not everyone is either outraged by the SCOTUS ruling or thinks it's the end of campaign finance laws as we know them. And Levinson says it's important to remember that the Court left intact the donor disclosure laws that are on the books. But at the same time, the national politicos now face a much different campaign cash landscape... and they may want to look westward to see what lies ahead.

[Friday Update: Below you can listen to my extended Q&A with CGS' political director, Jessica Levinson. And a sincere apology to her, as both an earlier version of this posting and the radio report misidentifed her first name. --JM]

It's not that crazy a question, given the Public Policy Institute of California survey that shows Jerry Brown leading Meg Whitman in a potential matchup by just six points.

PPIC found that likely voters surveyed pick Brown over Whitman 43%-37%, with a full 20% still undecided. (The margin of error in the poll, which is here, is +/- 2%.)

Photo: Getty Images

One might also consider it a warning sign that so many of the voters surveyed by PPIC are undecided. Digging deeper into the questions, Brown's favorability came in at only 35% among all voters. And 29% of Democrats told the pollsters they "don't know enough to have an opinion."

Dems don't know enough about Jerry Brown? Huh?

Brown fared better in potential matchups with Republicans Tom Campbell and Steve Poizner (more on the GOP battle in a moment).

While he obviously has a high negative rating among Republicans (59%), perhaps most troubling for Brown supporters are the 39% of independent voters surveyed who say they have an unfavorable opinion of him. Remember, one in five California voters is now an independent ('decline to state'), members of the fastest growing part of the state electorate. Many independents supported the 2003 recall of Gray Davis and have long been the base support for Arnold Schwarzenegger. They are the real swing vote and should Team Whitman win in June and find a way to reach out to them, the still nascent Brown campaign could have some tough sledding come the fall of 2010.

Need more proof about Brown's trouble with independents (or, perhaps, Whitman's successes)? Only 32% told PPIC that experience in elected office is most important, while a whopping 50% favored experience "running a business."

But the scion of California politics has to first secure his base, and that's yet another story line that might be fueled by this poll. A full 41% of Democrats surveyed said they aren't satisfied with their choices -- er, choice -- in the June primary election. It's not the first time such a concern has been stated... but for now, there's no good measurement of what level of angst really exists among rank-and-file Dems. One final narrative you'd expect to continue, too: that Brown needs to engage with an actual campaign team, and soon.

Photo: Getty Images

Though most voters say they still don't know enough about her, 32% of those planning to vote in the June GOP primary told PPIC they support Whitman, compared to 12% for Tom Campbell and 8% for Steve Poizner. Interestingly enough, more men (37%) favor her than women (26%), with more women still undecided.

An important footnote, though: PPIC didn't just survey Republicans on this, and says that their numbers include the 15% of independents who say they'll vote a GOP ballot.

The poll will no doubt buoy the Whitman camp after a week that's been dominated by news of the ugly court case involving her former life as CEO of eBay and the company's biz relationship with Craigslist. And it probably won't draw scowls from backers of Tom Campbell, who comes out second in the survey and has been beating back suggestions that he might not stay in the contest.

It's not great news for Poizner (though I expect a press release to the contrary at any moment), after the much reported news this week that he's pledging to spend $15 million more of his own dough on the race.

And it's that personal money that gets us back to the possible lump of coal in the PPIC stocking for Whitman, or even Poizner for that matter. The survey asked voters which they preferred: a candidate raising money from supporters to run for office, or spending their own money? 49% of likely voters said raise cash the old-fashioned way, while only 39% said spend your own.

The group least supportive of self-funding candidates? Independents, where only 29% approved of the practice. Maybe this is the silver lining from the poll for Jerry Brown in a potential showdown with a wealthy Republican? If so, it's only the smallest glint of shine.

UPDATE: While most political watchers would expect Brown to the odds-on favorite in a general gubernatorial race, don't count his political team in that category. Brown spokesman Steve Glazer called to say that they "expect the race to be very, very competitive." (Again, Brown is not yet a formal candidate). And on PPIC's finding of a lot of seemingly unsatisfied Democrats with their choice, Glazer had this to say: "It's not in the DNA of a voter to be satisfied."

If you love politics, it's a great story.

Gavin Newsom's announcement that he is abandoning his race for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination came, like any political bombshell, on a Friday afternoon.

"With a young family and responsibilities at [SF] city hall," said hizzoner's emailed statement at 3:02 p.m., "I have found it impossible to commit the time required to complete this effort the way it needs to — and should be — done." Newsom, who became a first time dad a little more than a month ago, went on to thank his supporters and to pledge to keep fighting the good fight.

Was it surprising? Yes and no. No, in that the campaign had struggled to find the needed cash for such a huge race. Campaign finance reports through June 30 show the Newsom gubernatorial effort had raised $1.7 million but already spent almost $1.6 million; records since then, though incomplete, continued to paint an uphill climb in the battle for bucks. And yes, Newsom may be feeling the tug of family and his still demanding job running the city by the Bay.

Worth noting is what now seems to be a telling moment: Newsom's campaign guru, Garry South, was quoted yesterday by the Los Angeles Times as offering a seemingly full-throated endorsement for Republican candidate Tom Campbell. Did South know his horse was pulling out of the race?

Still, the news did come as a surprise given that the charismatic pol seemed to have thrown himself full tilt into the race; he now has more than 1.2 million followers on Twitter, and has used social networking aggressively in his courting of younger voters. And let's face it, those of us in the political press relished the generational guv storyline of Newsom battling the iconic Jerry Brown, the two-term governor/presidential candidate/Oakland mayor/attorney general.

For his part, Brown wasted no time in releasing his own statement, which said simply: "Mayor Newsom is a talented public official and I believe he has a bright future. I am sure this was not an easy decision."

Of course, Brown isn't technically a candidate for his old job. In the longest running cat-and-mouse game in recent political memory, the 71-year-old with a name ID maybe only second to Arnold Schwarzenegger (maybe higher!) refuses to yet call himself a candidate... going only so far as to create an "exploratory" campaign.

Newsom's decision leaves Jerry Brown in the driver's seat -- not just for the Democratic nomination but, according to the polling, for the whole enchilada. And, in a case of truly awkward timing, the Newsom story broke on the single worst day of the Brown-as-attorney-general era, as the AG's office scrambled to explain why a top aide was recording conversations with journalists without consent -- something even us journos know is illegal in California.

And now, a brief departure into the squishy gossip of this story... namely, that Newsom may be interested in running for lieutenant governor next year. The idea has been knocked down a thousand times by those close to the San Fran mayor, and by Newsom himself. "Spare the speculation," tweeted Newsom adviser Jason Kinney tonight. Fair enough, but consider this: if Brown should run and win, he would be 73 just three months after taking office. Would he really run for a second term at 77? Or might he step aside in 2014, leaving the job to... well... a seasoned and high-profile lieutenant governor?

And for that matter, what would a John Garamendi victory next Tuesday in his race for Congress do to this game? Governor Schwarzenegger would get to appoint an interim 'Lite Guv,' but Dems in the Legislature would have to give their blessing. Garamendi's chances look good; would the GOP guv appoint a placeholder? Would he appoint a Dem? If so, would that Dem want the job in next year's election? Would all of that finally silence the Newsom for LG chatter?

That's just a bit of the parlor game, mind you. But for political junkies, this story isn't going anyway anytime soon.

Meg-a Problem? Former eBay CEO Meg Whitman gave a somewhat lackluster speech to the state Republican convention Saturday afternoon. She touched on all her usual themes -- cutting taxes and regulation, staying tough on crime, etc. But one thing she didn't mention was her personal voting record.

In the past, she's acknowledged that she "missed a few elections" but this week's Sac Bee article reported that Whitman didn't register for 28 years and even missed some elections after registering in 2002.

Whitman faced the media mob after her luncheon remarks -- and it wasn't pretty. She tried sticking to the answer she's given before about her voting record. "It was wrong. I should have voted more often," etc. But she declined -- despite repeated questions -- to say why she hadn't bothered to vote. As the questioning went on Whitman became more agitated -- pointing a finger at a pesky reporter who pushed her to answer a question, saying "I will, just give me a chance, OK?"

Is this the case of another CEO realizing that in politics, you don't get to call all the shots without being questioned? Or just a political neophyte getting her sea legs?

CAMPBELL'S SOUP: Tom Campbell was billed as the featured speaker at Friday night's dinner at the GOP convention in Indian Wells. But Campbell, introduced by party chair Ron Nehring as "the nicest guy in California politics" -- paging Leo Durocher -- was left to cool his heels as three other speakers (including Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger) preceded him.

The odd part was who the party had speak before him. Bill Mundell, chairman of ZBB Energy, gave a quirky, rambling speech calling for "an economic revolution" centered around selling off public assets, including the DMV. Mundell rambled on for 30 minutes, leaving the audience checking their Blackberrys and giving each other looks of despair and disbelief.

By the time Campbell spoke, there were dozens of empty seats in the room and the energy had completely gone out of the dinner. Not the introduction he was looking for.

By the way, the stage where Governor Schwarzenegger spoke was decorated with no fewer than eight framed pictures of Ronald Reagan -- and none of Arnold. It's still the party of Reagan.

-- Scott Shafer

Until then, a few odds and ends related to the six proposition extravaganza are worth a mention...

* Tom and Steve. And That's It: There wasn't much news to report out of today's noontime 'debate' between GOP gubernatorial rivals Steve Poizner and Tom Campbell. The two appeared jointly at the monthly luncheon of the Sacramento Press Club to ostensibly talk about their differences of opinion on Proposition 1A, tomorrow's spending limit/reserve fund. Instead, it was more of a 'What I Would Do If I Were Governor' conversation.

The event was a result of Poizner's challenge to both Campbell and potential rival Meg Whitman to debate their proposition positions. Whitman declined, which led Poizner to spend the time since then accusing her of ducking a public discussion. Funny, then, how these little trinkets just happened to be handed out at today's event.

Once inside, attendees watched Poizner, the state's incumbent insurance commissioner, and Campbell, the former congressman/state lawmaker/budget director/business school dean, engage in a wonky hourlong discussion. Campbell used a whiteboard to sketch out some of the numbers in his just announced $15.4 billion deficit solution. Poizner then plopped down two large binders on the table which he said were a full printout of the February budget... asking if anyone even knew what was in it.

From there, it continued to wander away from Prop 1A (Campbell supports it; Poizner opposes it). Poizner came prepared to talk about his hopes to "streamline" state government, and gently jabbed at Governor Schwarzenegger and his now famous pledge to 'blow up' the boxes of bureaucracy. "This is not an action movie," he said.

But Poizner fended off reporter questions about what specifically he would cut, at one point saying it was "distasteful" to talk about cutting government without first using a "process" to identify the best places for cuts.

Campbell also took small jabs at his former boss, though a little more subtly. He said that if state spending had just stayed on course from the era of former guv Gray Davis, the state would be in a much less dire fiscal predicament. And he said governors need to wield the veto pen more forcefully than it's been used in recent decades.

But in the end, there was scant actual news, though some drama when Poizner said that GOP Sen. Abel Maldonado "sold his vote" during the budget process. Campbell said Poizner should retract the comment; Poizner refused.

* Mailing It In: Not that it will probably matter, but Governor Schwarzenegger will not be in the Golden State tomorrow as voters head to the polls. He'll be in Washington, DC. Gubernatorial spokesman Aaron McLear confirms the guv will be back east, with others reporting that the Obama administration is prepared to roll out a federal auto emissions standard that takes its cues from the California law. "It's important for the governor to go to this event," said McLear, who noted that Schwarzenegger will also be meeting with administration and congressional officials to make California's case for some assistance on the issue of budget cuts that might jeopardize federal stimulus dollars. McLear says the governor voted by mail today.

* Tea Time: Speaking of absentee ballots... if what's going on in Solano County is a way of 'reading the tea leaves' on tomorrow's election, it might not be pretty. Elections officials there report that some voters are mailing their ballot backs with tea bags included in the envelopes. Apparently these are folks who are too angry to wait for the next big rally against taxes and government spending. No word how much extra postage it takes to mail back a ballot stuffed with tea bags.