
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA), who ousted Democratic Gov. Gray Davis in a stunning 2003 recall election, has now suffered all the natural consequences of actually being governor of California -- in fact, he's so unpopular that voters might actually prefer having Gray Davis back. But beyond that, the state's systemic problems that have ruined the both of them are here to stay.
The new survey by Public Policy Polling (D) gives Arnold an approval rating of only 19%, with a whopping 71% disapproval. By contrast, Gray Davis's personal favorable rating is a much healthier (but still awful) 32%, with an unfavorable rating of 44%. Respondents were asked: "Who would you rather have as Governor now, Arnold Schwarzenegger or Gray Davis?" The answer turned out to be Davis 44%, Schwarzenegger 38%. The survey of registered voters has a ±3.95% margin of error.
This same batch of polling also gave Democratic former Governor and current state Attorney General Jerry Brown a 46%-40% lead over Republican former eBay CEO Meg Whitman -- the same six-point margin between Davis and Schwarzenegger. PPP's Tom Jensen writes: "The Davis/Schwarzenegger breakdown is actually a pretty good proxy for this year's Governor's race. Voters in the state don't like Jerry Brown (or Davis) but they like Whitman (or Schwarzenegger) even less and that drives a Democratic lead."
Unfortunately, the poll also finds that California is in no hurry to get rid of one of the main causes of the woes that people have usually blamed on Davis and Arnold: The ballot initiative process. California's constitution promotes gridlock by requiring high social spending on programs that have been mandated through piecemeal referenda, limiting tax options, and also requiring a two-thirds supermajority in order to pass a budget. Naturally, the actual tasks of governance become quite difficult.
The poll asked: "Do you think Californians should keep the right to vote on ballot propositions, or should props be eliminated from the California ballot?"
The answer: Keep propositions 74%, eliminate them 13%.
So good luck in 2011, Gov. Brown/Whitman. You'll need it.
Roma Victors
July 29, 2010 1:30 PM
Throwing an untested politician into this swamp just seems counter-intuitive to me. For all his quirks, Jerry Brown is a seasoned, capable guy who gets things done. He's not averse to making deals, and he knows how to operate the levers of power. Choosing Meg Whitman would be like tossing darts at a dartboard to pick stocks. She might like to think operating a state bureaucracy is like running eBay, but it's not.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcc
July 29, 2010 2:02 PM in reply to Roma Victors
It's not even really much of a question what would happen. We've already seen what happens if you take a moderate Republican businessperson and throw them into the Governor's mansion-- that was what Arnold was. It didn't work.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 29, 2010 2:40 PM in reply to mcc
When did Meg Whitman become a moderate?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Winston Smith
July 29, 2010 2:29 PM in reply to Roma Victors
You seem to think there is some rationality to these elections other than richest person wins.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
July 29, 2010 3:45 PM in reply to Roma Victors
Jerry will win this election hands down and so will Barbara Boxer. I am not surprised at the responses on the ballot initiative because most people just don't get it and why that is - I just don't understand myself because it has mostly negatively affected us here
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Riesz Fischer
July 29, 2010 4:18 PM in reply to chameleon
I've always had a smug contempt for Californians. I know there are a lot of smart people there-- Cal Tech and Stanford, etc. But ya gotta admit most of them are dumber than a short stick with shit on it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
July 29, 2010 4:25 PM in reply to Riesz Fischer
Why contempt? I don't get that at all.
I really don't think Californians are any dumber than the rest of the country. I would say that the average person doesn't pay attention to the politics of their state until election time unless they are political junkies. Like most folks they are busy working, commuting through traffic and worrying about their individual lives and trying to survive. We also we have so many more things to distract us here like beautiful beaches, a gorgeous state with so many things to do here and beautiful weather 300 days out of the year.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sstanford7
July 29, 2010 5:16 PM in reply to Riesz Fischer
Being a Californian, I have to agree with you. I know seemingly smart people that do not understand the initiatives that they vote for. They listen to stupid ads to make a decision. I just found out that a dear freind of mine voted to oust Davis because she fell for the bs. Californians SHOULD have to take a literacy test to vote for anything...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dave Adams
July 29, 2010 7:59 PM in reply to Riesz Fischer
Oh yeah??
Well I'll have you know that we Californians prefer to directly vote for stupid stuff, as opposed to most states where they pay corrupt elected offials who are in turn bribed into voting for stupid stuff.
I mean, not only is it more democratic, but we voters get to screw ourselves for free.
So there.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Signalman
July 30, 2010 9:07 AM in reply to Dave Adams
FTW
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcc
July 29, 2010 1:49 PM
It seems to me like there is a LOT of middle ground between "the initiative system should bind the state like a python and trump everything including the judicial system, to the point where it is far easier to take away a fundamental constitutional right than it is to pass a yearly budget" and "there should be no initiative system at all". I don't think this poll chose its question well.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
July 29, 2010 2:17 PM in reply to mcc
GMTA. I just posted a message with a paragraph making the same point.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
1audiofile
July 29, 2010 1:59 PM
Simply state, he could not get elected as Dog Catcher at this point.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SeattleJoe
July 29, 2010 2:02 PM
The way that poll question is worded is incredibly prejudicial. It starts with "Do you think Californians should keep the right to vote.."
Duh.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
July 29, 2010 2:15 PM
I'm no great Schwarzenegger fan, but he deserves better than a 71% disapproval rating. On the whole, it seems to me he has been a pretty good governor -- for a Republican. I agree with you, Eric, that the real problem is that California's system of government is badly broken. A very liberal ballot initiative provision combined with the requirement that a supermajority in the legislature must approve any tax increase (but nothing else that impinges on the budget) is a recipe for meltdown.
I fault PPP's poll for it's either/or approach to the ballot initiative question. It doesn't have to be a choice between an anything goes approach to the initiative and complete elimination of it. You can retain an allowance for ballot initiatives while at the same time putting some limitations on the process to restore some sanity to the system. In Massachusetts, for example, initiatives pertaining to certain specified subjects (religion, judges, the courts, particular localities, specific appropriations, and certain provisions of the state constitution’s Declaration of Rights) are not permitted. The frequency with which failed initiatives can be re-introduced is limited, and any initiative is subject to either repeal or amendment by the state legislature after it has passed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Winston Smith
July 29, 2010 2:32 PM
Arnold wouldn't have won a second term if he and his Wall Street buddies hadn't come up with a bond swindle that was supposed to fix the budget while lining Wall Street coffers. At least the latter part worked. Nice work, Arnold, fucking asshole.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Blueline99
July 29, 2010 2:46 PM
It's unfortunate that Arnold gets hammered so badly, it's not totally his fault the state is in the mess its in.
To his credit, he refused to institute the massive tax increases that the State Senate proposed. The state is in a malaise already, but sales tax/income tax increase would have really hurt the economy.
And to his credit, he denounced Prop 8 and supported Gay marriage. Along with a slew of environmental and social issues that the religious right hate.
So, he has become the poster child of the liberal Republican or conservative Democrat, and now those on the right are going to the extremes of their party because that's where their base of support is.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PJEvans
July 29, 2010 3:14 PM in reply to Blueline99
You forget that the entire recall was based on the end of the car registration fee rollback - which the Republicans agreed to in the first place. Their decision to keep the rollback was what they used to fuel the @#$%^&*() recall, and brought us Ahnold and his general ncompetence.
I also blame the Rs for a lot of the sandbox stalemates: Tom McClintock proudly used as part of his campaign the fact that he hadn't voted afor a state budget since Deukmejian was governor. He's the most open about it, but none of the Rs really want government to work, at any level.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Blueline99
July 29, 2010 4:45 PM in reply to PJEvans
I totally agree, there's plenty of blame to go around... I'm the most liberal person I know and although I don't agree with everything Arnold did, I didn't find him repugnant as I do most Repubs...
The moderate middle is where this nation is but their voices are being drowned out by the extreme right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tytester
July 29, 2010 5:43 PM in reply to Blueline99
You don't find Arnie repugnant because he stopped being a Repub after the special election in 2005(?) when he lost ALL of his ballot initiatives. After that election he became a Kennedy Blue Dog (thanks to Maria Shriver, of course).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Shrubbit
July 29, 2010 2:58 PM
While maybe not the best gov nor smartest pol in the world, Gray was totally set up for the big fall by the assholes at Enron.
Go watch Smartest Men in the Room if you haven't already (about the Enron rise and dramatic collapse).
Essential viewing. It's been on CNBC pretty frequently these days. But also, if you buy the DVD or get it from netflix, make sure to check out the bonus content and extra footage. There is a feature where you can watch the movie with the producer commenting over top about how and why he used certain elements in the film, and that is almost as enlightening as the movie itself.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Shrubbit
July 29, 2010 2:59 PM in reply to Shrubbit
Edit: title of the movie is "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
July 29, 2010 3:50 PM in reply to Shrubbit
Yes he was and wrongfully blamed for many issues - Again it was that slimeball Issa who started the whole process thinking he was going to get the nomination until the Terminator came along and wooed the la la land folks. It was like a fricking circus with everybody and their brother running for Governor (even Ariana Huffington) who made a pure fool of herself. No matter how much crap came out about Arnold, the better he did in the polls. It was a pathetic sight really and we got screwed royally in the process.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TJF
July 29, 2010 4:36 PM in reply to chameleon
"everybody and their brother running for Governor (even Ariana Huffington)"
And don't forget Gary Coleman!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
July 29, 2010 4:58 PM in reply to TJF
Forgive me for being so remiss.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Grokenstein
July 29, 2010 3:57 PM
Davis had a working plan, but it wasn't the Max Power Way*, so at great expense we had a recall and held a special election which was swarmed by freaks, including a giant goon with a penchant for calling anyone he disagrees with "girly man" and snapping giant-prop credit cards in two. Anything, we said. Anything, so long as you don't reinstate the car registration tax or reverse Prop 13, no no no.
I live in a state/country in which well-off people rage over the possibility of paying an extra ten or twenty bucks A YEAR, while schools are being shut down around us.
We got exactly what we deserve. Except the kids. They don't deserve this.
*Homer: "There's the right way, the wrong way, and the Max Power way!"
Lisa: "Isn't that just the wrong way?"
Homer: "Yeah, but faster!!"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
stillidealistic
July 29, 2010 4:37 PM
I don't know why anyone would want to be governor of CA anymore than I know why anyone would want to be pres of the U.S.
It's nothing but a kick me sign. The state is dysfunctional. We want to have our cake and eat it, too. We want services, but we don't want to pay for them.
Maybe if the marijuana initiative passes we'll get the money we need. Short of that, no governor, no matter how good his/her shtick will be effective.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Measure for Measure
July 29, 2010 5:12 PM
Ballot initiatives.
I have a radical proposal for California. I call it "Representative Democracy". Under my plan, the majority of the assembly can make tax and spending decisions as they see fit, subject to a possible veto by the governor.
California is ungovernable and will remain that way as long as three quarters of its residents support this cockamamie initiative process.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cal Damage
July 29, 2010 7:35 PM
As a Californian, I think a simple mod would bring the Initiative process under control: no one can be paid to collect signatures for a proposition. Citizens didn't go out to get signatures for Valero to overturn SB20's clean air schedule and requirements, Valero paid minimum-wagers to stand in parking lots.
As for overturning the 2/3's rule or getting legal marijuana on the ballot, both were done, or almost done, almost entirely on volunteer work. Initiatives as actually representative of citizen concerns.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Measure for Measure
July 29, 2010 8:37 PM in reply to Cal Damage
I suspect most Californians agree with Cal Damage. But c'mon: that does nothing about the 2/3 requirement to raised taxes in the legislature and millions of dollars of spending mandated by the CA constitution -- brought to you via majority votes in the initiative process.
That's right, a 1980 initiative that passes with 51% can mandate spending forever.
The term-limited assembly has precious little control over the gridlocked budget -- and less incentive to cut a deal as they are subject to term limits anyway. Oh, and forget about the "Citizen-legislator" concept: politicians can and do hop from elected job to elected job. They just can't accumulate any actual experience in any of them.
It's a circus.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Richard L. Adlof
July 29, 2010 11:32 PM
Now????? Always.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?