tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post1020755396133729600..comments2023-10-16T07:13:12.123-05:00Comments on A plain blog about politics: The Curse of Pat Brown? of Richard Nixon?Jonathan Bernsteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-17320401810587175022010-06-12T08:17:18.046-05:002010-06-12T08:17:18.046-05:00Surprised you don't discuss Arnold in this pos...Surprised you don't discuss Arnold in this post.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-59256039241806283012010-06-08T20:41:04.992-05:002010-06-08T20:41:04.992-05:00Try West Virginia (where I have to admit, things h...Try West Virginia (where I have to admit, things have gotten better), which at one time had three ex-govs in jail for taking bribes (as I recall, all to award highway construction contracts). The string was broken when the voters elected someone almost guaranteed not to take a bribe (John David Rockefeller IV; I say nothing about whether he was a good governor, or has been a good senator--I've been out of the state since 1974).Don Coffinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07198988872512792834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-15019134150662317792010-06-08T19:30:17.424-05:002010-06-08T19:30:17.424-05:00@Matt:
Ah. I see. Yes, very good points. Well, th...@Matt:<br /><br />Ah. I see. Yes, very good points. Well, the SoS I think is a good elected office -- most states have them, I think, and I believe it's a legit elected office most notably charged with enforcing election law, yes? I like my SoS to be accountable to the electorate instead of appointed by the Governor, just as I like the AG to be an elected office. I don't argue about the other offices, however. <br /><br />Quackenbush -- wasn't he a one-off Insurance Commissioner resigning in disgrace for corruption and packing off to Hawaii? Or is he making a comeback while I haven't been paying attention?<br /><br />I don't argue your political placeholder points, but I contend that the root of the evil is not so much an "overly-plural" executive, but the term limit initiative back in the early 1990s. But that's just a difference of focus, probably.<br /><br />Cheers.Jamesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-68186787127455352802010-06-08T18:01:14.605-05:002010-06-08T18:01:14.605-05:00James,
What I meant by the "overly-plural&quo...James,<br />What I meant by the "overly-plural" executive is that we elect people to all kinds of jobs in the executive branch that really shouldn't be elected. In CA, the LG essentially does nothing, but we still have one. We elect both a controller AND a treasurer for reasons that I think escape everyone, and we elect an insurance commissioner (thanks again to those wonderful props). We elect a secretary of state, whose office does some real fine work, but I'm really unsure if the office-holders have been instrumental in that or not. Now, Attorney General is a real job with real politics, and I'm less willing to lump it in with the others. But your Poizners, your Fongs, your Bustamantes, your Quackenbushes, your Davis', your Angelides', etc., have all been able to hang around in these jobs, biding their time for a later try at a real prize like Gov or Senator. Sometimes they win those offices, if the election gods favor them, but I wouldn't chalk it up to any skills they have as pols. In a system with fewer places to wait, I wonder if elections would have served the purpose of weeding them out sooner.Matt Jarvisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-7536192432280833922010-06-08T17:32:35.533-05:002010-06-08T17:32:35.533-05:00I'm trying to figure out exactly what Mr. Jarv...I'm trying to figure out exactly what Mr. Jarvis means by an "overly-plural" executive. It's true that Cali is wanting for some truly outstanding, charismatic politicians. There's been a lot written about the fatally dysfunctional government, all of it true, especially with regard to the initiative process -- which in my opinion is the root of all California political evils. <br /><br /><br />But let's not discount the terribly destructive consequences of term limits, a sacred cow in California politics much like Prop 13. Here you have a parade of people limited to 4 years in the seat, so the minute they take office they are already eyeing their next job. Four years is not long enough to develop a staff, learn how to write good legislation, form alliances, negotiate in good faith, all those essential skills that good legislators develop over the years in office. <br /><br />And too, there is virtually no constituent service obligation for these elected officials. These politicians don't serve their constituents and they don't HAVE TO serve their constituents because they'll be gone in a short enough time. They have to serve their loyal contributors, though, to assure election to their NEXT elected office. And you can see how irrelevant the small citizen contribution can be in this scheme -- that contributing citizen won't be a constituent in the next office, will he? But the big money -- that's what really counts. See how that works?<br /><br /><br /> There is no accountability for passing bad legislation, or failing to pass good legislation: they've all been replaced before the full impact of their "crime" is felt, e.g., the deregulation of energy. <br /><br />It's a revolving door that has served to throw out the baby with the bathwater, and it's an abdication of the voters' responsibility to throw out the rascals. The voters themselves don't pay attention because they don't have to pay attention. So there is no obligation and no incentive to become a GOOD politician. If you look at the careers of many of these pols (federal officeholders excepted) they have probably held two or five or ten different elected positions before they get to their comfortably safe federal office position.<br /><br />So there's that.Jamesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-6921190186683909942010-06-08T16:28:17.301-05:002010-06-08T16:28:17.301-05:00You forgot Rowland in CT and Siegelman in Alabama....You forgot Rowland in CT and Siegelman in Alabama. And that's just off the top of <i>my</i> head. California is looking better and better.Ace-Khttp://alexanderkobulnicky.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-25229165921447322022010-06-08T16:05:44.868-05:002010-06-08T16:05:44.868-05:00IL beats AZ easy, with 4 governors in jail (counti...IL beats AZ easy, with 4 governors in jail (counting Blago) alone out of their last 8 govs.<br /><br />That's right: a 50% conviction rate.<br /><br />I wonder if the overly-plural executive is partly to blame? Politicians that, in other states, would have been pushed into the private sector or into being bad congresspeople get an opportunity to run for a job to keep them warm while they wait out the opportunity to run for the big show.<br /><br />Take Gavin Newsom (please). Without the plural executive, he would have been facing Jerr-Bear today, or he would have had to find something else to do. Instead, he gets a free pass to run for LG, and will win or lose depending on how well Dems do in general in November. Poizner? Sure, he's going to lose to Whitman, but he wouldn't even be in that race if we didn't elect him insurance commissioner 4 years ago simply because his opponent was Cruz Bustamante, who, himself, was a bad pol as LG. The once-and-future governor Jerry Brown also would have likely faded into obscurity without the AG seat to keep warm these last few years. <br /><br />I wonder if I'm actually on to something, or if I'm just blowing smoke?Matt Jarvisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-14819817145082116192010-06-08T15:54:09.357-05:002010-06-08T15:54:09.357-05:00Over the past fifty years? Sure. Go to Rod Blagoje...Over the past fifty years? Sure. Go to Rod Blagojevich's Wikipedia page and just keep clicking the name at "Preceded by" in the Governor block until you get to Otto Kerner, Jr., reading just the blurb above the Contents for each of them. If a scandal isn't mentioned there, assume it doesn't exist. By my count, that's four of the last eight over about fifty years.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com