Arnold's Very Special Election

By Jan Frel, AlterNet. Posted October 24, 2005.

[Editor's Note: Jan Frel's analysis of today's special election originally ran on October 24, but we're reposting it in time for the election.]

Eight initiatives. Hundreds of millions of dollars corralled by interest groups for ad buys to move the voters. And a 77-page voter guide mailed to each California citizen that, while obscure and incomprehensible, communicates in a crisp, bold font that the political process is safely out of their hands.

The November 8 special election in California has been presented by Arnold Schwarzenegger as a way for voters to join him in his revolution for the Golden State; something the Democratic-controlled State Legislature wanted absolutely nothing to do with since he showed up in Sacramento in 2003. So it's now up to the voters. If they reject the proposals Arnold has backed to the hilt, then it's a sudden end to a rather unspectacular political career.

The four big ones on which Schwarzenegger has staked his political career are, as Bill Bradley described in L.A. Weekly, a "shrunken agenda of toughening teacher tenure rules (Proposition 74), weakening public-employee unions (Prop. 75), gaining new budget powers (Prop. 76), and taking redistricting out of the Legislature's hands (Prop. 77)."

Gosh, and you wonder why the Democrats in the Assembly don't want anything to do with Arnold.

One way of looking at this is that since Schwarzenegger failed to destroy his opposition in the normal political process, he outsourced the battle to the established clique of Republican funders in California. Bob Mulholland, a strategist for the California Democratic Party, told me that "Schwarzenegger is backing initiatives that he and his supporters could never pass in the Legislature." We'll see if the people want to have anything to do with Arnold.

There are two progressive initiatives on the ballot as well: 79, which would help folks get discounts on their pharmaceuticals and allows big Pharma to be sued by anyone for profiteering; and 80, which would, to blur its extraordinarily complicated proscription, make the energy market in California better for both consumers and the environment. Prop 79 is so progressive that drug companies created their own, pseudo-79 initiative, 78, which would make a discount process voluntary for the drug companies to partake in.

Finally, there's Prop 73, which would require teenage girls to get consent from their parents before they could have an abortion. The plan is that 73 will do for Schwarzenegger -- who is ostensibly pro-choice -- what the 18 gay marriage amendments on state ballots did for George Bush in 2004; function as a blooming, fragrant rose that beckons Christian conservative bees to come and vote their Leviticus as they pollinate his corporate agenda.

Breaking It Down

Here's a breakdown of the propositions, with ballot measure "summaries" from that vile 77-page voter guide, and background from research and interviews with activists and public interest groups.

Prop 73: This initiative would prohibit "abortion for unemancipated minors until 48 hours after physician notifies minor's parent/guardian, except in medical emergency or with parental waiver. Mandates reporting requirements. Authorizes monetary damages against physicians for violation."

The California Catholic Bishops' guiding light for their support of Prop 73 is that their "Catholic Catechism teaches that the family is the 'privileged community' wherein children are meant to grow in wisdom, stature and grace. We are also counseled to work with public authorities to ensure that the family's prerogatives are not usurped."

Good luck, girls, if you and your parents share different prerogatives.

The key argument "against" Prop 73 in the voter guide, co-authored by the president of the California Nurses Association, is summed up nicely in the last sentence: "Please join us in voting NO on Proposition 73."

Prop 74: "Increases probationary period for public school teachers from two to five years. Modifies the process by which school boards can dismiss a teaching employee who receives two consecutive unsatisfactory performance evaluations."

A misleader if there ever were. The fact is that all California teachers get no guarantee of anything after two years, except for a "right to a hearing before they are dismissed," as Barbara Kerr of the California Teachers Association puts it. After reading up on this proposition, it looks to me like this effort is an attempt to Wal-Martize the public school teaching profession and create a dispensable and "flexible" employment stream.

Schwarzenegger's "Join Arnold" campaign that pushes his four signature initiatives fails to conceal its true goal for 74, weakening the teachers' union: "Union bosses have blocked many education reforms and just want voters to throw more tax money at education with no reform!" Karla Jones, the 2004 California Educator of the Year, hailing from the worker's paradise of Orange County, is the shiny buckle on the belt that holds Schwarzenegger's pants up on Prop 74.

Jan Frel is an AlterNet staff writer.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »