Back when a gubernatorial recall election was just a gleam in
U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa
’s eye and an ongoing drain on his bank balance, we
editorialized against recalling Gov. Gray Davis. We urged readers
not to sign Issa’s petitions on the grounds that a recall would be
a waste of taxpayer money and just reflected political sour grapes
from the party that can’t seem to field an
electable gubernatorial candidate.
Back when a gubernatorial recall election was just a gleam in U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa’s eye and an ongoing drain on his bank balance, we editorialized against recalling Gov. Gray Davis. We urged readers not to sign Issa’s petitions on the grounds that a recall would be a waste of taxpayer money and just reflected political sour grapes from the party that can’t seem to field an electable gubernatorial candidate.
But now the recall election is a reality – whether it be Oct. 7 or next March, we believe it is important to revisit the issue. On Monday a federal appeals court postponed the election, ruling the historic vote cannot proceed because some votes – including those here in Santa Clara County – would be cast using outmoded punch-card ballot machines. Recall backers have vowed to appeal the ruling.
By the slimmest of margins, we now endorse a “yes” vote on the recall ballot.
Why the change? Because voting no won’t prevent the state from spending millions to hold the election, the more important issue becomes whether or not there is a better choice than Davis to lead California. We think there is.
Deciding which of the 133 candidates is the best choice was difficult. Like most Californians, if you believe the polls, we had little consensus on who is the best choice to replace Davis if he is recalled. We limited our discussion to the top five candidates, with much gnashing of teeth over the withdrawal of Republican Peter Ueberroth, a fiscally conservative, socially moderate candidate.
Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, a Democratic many describe as to the left of Davis, is basically more of the same, most of the editorial board agreed. And the same isn’t working. Bustamante’s fundraising tactics, while technically legal, are grossly reminiscent of Davis’ strongarm, pay-to-play politics, and his status as a longtime Sacramento politician means many hold him as responsible as Davis for the state’s problems.
What we need now is a fix for the major hemorrhage going on in California. It’s about the money – the jobs that are fleeing the state, the long-term energy contracts that Davis signed which are pickpocketing every Californian, the skyrocketing costs of workman’s compensation and the shrinking tax revenues causing cutback after cutback throughout the public sector. Sen. Tom McClintock, R-Thousand Oaks, is the fiscal conservative that California deseperately needs.
Though were concerned about some of McClintock’s conservative social views, we believe his no-tax-increase pledge and plans to cut state spending make him the best candidate.
Like California, our board split deeply. Bustamante is the choice of one editorial board member. Green Party candidate Peter Camejo and independent progressive candidate Arianna Huffington were considered seriously before being eliminated because with both candidates polling in the low single digits, it seems likely that a vote for Camejo or Huffington is a vote wasted.
Then there’s the Governator, Arnold Schwarzenegger. His initial appeal – a wealthy political outsider who doesn’t need to take money from special interests, who tells the people the truth – has been diluted by his reliance on Sacramento political handlers, refusal to attend the recent debate, shifting stories about his now-infamous Oui magazine interview, acceptance of money from businesses and individuals and confusion about businesses being special interests. Sadly, Arnie’s no Ronnie. Schwarzenegger, who would need the leadership and charisma of a Ronald Reagan to be effective in Sacramento, falls short.
Those who won’t vote for McClintock say that, like Bustamante, he is a longtime Sacramento politician who shares responsibility for the state’s energy and budget crises, and that his far-right social views make him unacceptable.
Some McClintock advocates counter that a liberal statewide electorate and a Democratic-controlled state Legislature will limit his ability to advance a conservative social agenda.
In this wide-open, frustrating and unprecedented race, McClintock garnered three of five votes on the editorial board. We recommend voters choose Tom McClintock to replace Gray Davis.
In a field of 133 candidates, garnering 20 percent of the vote in the Oct. 7 balloting might be enough for McClintock to pull it off. If he does, he just might right an economic ship that is floundering and restore the lustre which paved the way for California to be known as the Golden State.
Monday’s federal court ruling also delayed voting on two initiatives. One measure, Proposition 53, allocates state funding for schools and roads. The other, Proposition 54, prohibits California public governments and schools from tracking employees or students by race.
