Governor's inconsistencies may overshadow his accomplishments/ Julia Gonzales

Has the self-proclaimed “great political negotiator,” California’s Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger known for his ability to strike an acceptable deal regarding policy most divisive issues, compromised his principles in the process? That’s the very question that many political pundits and policy makers are pondering. Will Governor Schwarzenegger’s legacy be affected by blurring the lines between being principled and overly “diplomatic” on policy? Here are the facts: While the Governor campaigned on the ills of special interest money, he later :“ became the biggest fundraiser in state history.” Moreover, while he promised budget deficit spending, vis-à-vis: “cutting up state credit cards,” he later “borrowed billions.” Similarly, while he promised “open government,” but then “let secret corporate donors pay for his travels abroad.”

Which begs an important question: are the Governor’s policy reversals politically motivated and—thus an inevitable bi-product of life as a policy maker in a highly polarized state legislature? Or does the Governor’s policy reversals suggest a more benign approach namely—that the core principles of a political novice at best--will naturally shift as he navigates the often times complicated and politically charged polarized landscape. To that end, will this “shifting nature” which will inevitably leave the Governor with for better or worse--has left him with “a record of self-contradiction and a reputation among California's polarized constituencies as a leader whose bold pronouncements may quickly be forgotten.” At the end of the day, perhaps the larger issue is not at all about the “legacy” question rather—the real issue lies with the people of California—and their anxiety and uncertainty in the Governor’s stance on the state’s most pressing issues—issues that may potentially have a strong bearing on their overall quality of life.

Link: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-arnold28mar28,1,3952869.story