Will Steve Poizner's accusations that Meg Whitman's advisor attempted to force him out of the governor's race hurt his campaign or hers?
The week got off to a odd start when GOP gubernatorial hopeful Steve Poizner held a press conference to announce that a campaign strategist for Republican rival Meg Whitman had made "threats" designed to drive him out of the race. Poizner's campaign released a copy of an e-mail sent by Whitman advisor Mike Murphy that asks a Poizner consultant if the candidate would consider dropping out of the race. According to the e-mail, which Poizner also sent to the FBI, the U.S. Attorneys Office, state Attorney General Jerry Brown, and the Fair Political Practices Commission, Murphy says Whitman's campaign could spend $40 million "tearing up Steve if we must." Poizner called Murphy's tactics "highly improper and unethical."
Read more:
Poizner claims political extortion by gubernatorial rival Whitman, Sacramento Bee
Will Steve Poizner's accusations that Meg Whitman's advisor attempted to force him out of the governor's race hurt his campaign or hers?
Would you support a bond request to finance a new state water plan?
This week the state legislature and the governor found enough common ground to agree in principle on a group of long awaited and much negotiated water bills.
As important as that step was according to Dr. Peter Gleick of the non-partisan Pacific Institute, an Oakland-based think tank, there's still a long way to go. Dr. Gleick is a well-respected water expert. This is what he had to say on his SFGate blog:
"Despite the happy face being put on by some of the bill's supporters, including Governor Schwarzenegger, I doubt anyone is truly happy with the end result. Perhaps that's too much to expect for a topic as complex as California water and for a bill that tries to do so much at once. I'm certainly not happy, but I believe there was a (mostly) good faith effort on the part of the governor and the legislators and all the other water interest groups to try and produce something."
»Read Dr. Peter Gleick's full assessment of the plan including what issues remain unanswered with the package of bills. (at sfgate.com)
Based on Gleick's comments, and San Jose Mercury News reporter Paul Rogers' report on This Week, would you support an estimated eleven billion dollars in water bonds on next November's ballot to finance a new state water plan?
Is Jerry Brown using his job as Attorney General to further his political ambitions?
Attorney General Jerry Brown wants to be Governor of California, and while he has not formally declared his candidacy he has raised millions of dollars to finance such a run in the 2010 elections.
Meanwhile, Brown has been filing high profile lawsuits almost every week against some suspected wrong doer. Just in the last month he's sued a Beverly Hills investment advisor who had ties to Bernard Madoff, had a former healthcare clinic manager arrested in what he called a $2.2 million dollar medical rip-off, and sued six businesses and eight individuals for operating a scam targeted at small business. These filings, a legitimate part of his duties as Attorney General, have kept his name in the news, which is good for any candidate.
His chief rival San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom has no vehicle that provides him as much free media statewide.
On a CNBC business show Wednesday, Brown announced a lawsuit against Boston-based State Street Bank and Trust for allegedly overcharging California's two largest pension funds $56 million dollars. During Brown's much touted encounter with the show's anchors, CNBC's Michelle Caruso-Cabrera asked, "What do you say to people who look at this who say this is a perfect example of the demagoguery of attorneys general when they want to run for governor?"
Brown says he is only doing his job. "In my book, there's nothing quaint about corporate fraud. There's nothing quaint about ripping off pension funds. And, I — along with attorneys general from across the nation — will continue to bring these high-priced rip-off artists to justice."
Is Jerry Brown using his job as Attorney General to further his political ambitions?
Is it politics or the governing structure that has paralyzed California?
There is no shortage of places to have your voice heard on almost any topic, including this site. But even with all of the opportunities to create and comment, scientifically conducted polls continue to serve an important purpose. They are the best instrument we have to track the opinions of a diverse group of citizens on important issues.
This week the venerable Field Poll released three polls that measure our optimism about the direction of the state and the country, the job performance of the Governor and the Legislature, and whether we should change the way we govern ourselves.
Surprisingly, in the poll released Thursday about our optimism, 48 percent of the registered California voters in the Field sample think the country is moving in the right direction, with 41 percent believing the opposite. Those numbers are in stark contrast to where they were in July of 2008 when only 15 percent thought the country was headed in the right direction and 75 percent believed the opposite.
When we turn to California the picture is entirely different. Not surprising in a state with 12.2 percent unemployment and a governor and legislature that were locked in a budget impasse for months, finally resulting in draconian cuts to many cherished programs.
Only 15 percent felt the state was generally going in the right direction while 78 percent think things are seriously on the wrong track. You have to go back to March of 2007 to find a majority 52 percent who felt the state was heading in the right direction, with 38 percent believing the opposite.
So how did the leadership drift so far from the expectations of the people who elected them, even during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression?
That leaves us with the question — is it politics or the governing structure that has the state with a reputation for innovation stopped dead in it tracks?
The Field Polls provide some answers. http://www.field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/
What do you think?