Experience as it Relates to 'Prop 93'
Posted by Eric Hogue on January 27, 2008 at 11:17 AM
Here is a simple consideration as we ponder ‘Prop 93’ today.
Who would you rather have as Speaker of the Assembly; The current Speaker, Fabian Nunez or Los Angeles Assemblywoman Karen Bass?
Who would you rather have as the Republican Leader for the State Senate, current leader Dick Ackerman (although I personaly like, and respect, Senator Ackerman – but he is termed out) or the solid conservative ideaology of veteran State Senator George Runner?
Who would you rather have as the next Senate President Pro Tem, the current Senator Don Perata, or Sacramento resident (and a personal friend, workable guy – yes, liberal), and State Senator Darrell Steinberg?
For the Republican Leadership in the Assembly, nothing would change with the passing, or failing of Prop 93, as it relates to GOP Leader of the Assembly, Mike Villines. Villines is the guy no matter the result.
So, a “YES” vote for “Prop 93” keeps Nunez, Perata, Ackerman and Villines in their positions over this budget crisis.
A “NO” vote forces “changes” with Runner, Bass and Steinberg, in addition to the current Villines in the GOP Assembly.
This is easy; say “NO” to 93 and make Mike Villines the most senior leader inside of the “Big 5” with the governor, and force the Democrats to choose “new blood” with the likes of Darrell Steinberg and Karen Bass up against our George Runner and Mike Villines.
Vote “NO” on 93, advantage GOP!
Something to consider when you hear the PR message about experience in the legislature as it relates to Prop 93 passing.
I’ll take my chances (let’s call it an opportunity) with “the experience” of Villines and Runner over Steinberg and Bass for the next couple of years of budget battles.
It’s sophomoric to think that supporting 93 brings “immediate experience” to the state legistalture!
Folks, we need immediate budget attention and Prop 93 does not bring an immediate remedy for the current fiscal problem in Sacramento – it actually solidifies (rewards) those who have overseen the problem.
If it is too much to comprehend, then “take my word on it”, vote “NO” on Prop 93. Don’t reward bad accountability with more oversight.
Comments
There is 1 comment on this post. Post yours →
When I first got into politics in California the Speaker of the State Assembly was none other than Willie Brown. While he is actually a really nice guy in person (Tim Leslie introduced me to Willie and I didn’t want to shake his hand but didn’t want to embarrass Tim either) his politics views and topics were horrible for California. There were numerous charges of corruption and he was Speaker for over 30 years. No one, and I mean NO ONE should be in power in the United States for that long. It’s bad for democracy and it’s bad for the tax payers. We cannot afford to let those in power have more power and voting for Prop 93 will only serve those in office. Willie Brown might still be in office today if it weren’t for the people passing term limits over a decade ago. Prop 93 will hurt California tax payers and it will hurt our conservative principles. It’s a typical proposition put together by the power hungry tax and spend Liberals who currently control our State Legislature. It confuses the voters into thinking it’s a term limit change for the better but it only serves those in power. We cannot afford to have this proposition pass. We cannot afford more of the status quo. We CANNOT afford his horrible proposition period. We need to protect California tax payers so we need to vote NO on Prop 93!
Post a comment
Required fields in bold.