Getting deeper into the recall

S.J. CAHN

There are two central, compelling reasons to be interested in, even

love, politics. The first is that politicians, like them or not, make

decisions that so greatly affect our lives. Politics matters, even

when it feels remote.

The second, and really the one that’s more enjoyable and fun, is

the combination of rhetoric, races and battles played out daily in

the political arena. (Any reporter can make this part of politics

dramatic. It’s the great ones who can rivet readers with tales of

committee hearings.)

The California recall election is overflowing with both. Our

state’s economy is in deep trouble, which in turn is hurting

education, health care and other services the state provides (not to

mention making tax increases loom large). And the 135 candidates are

a cornucopia of politicking.

The political rhetoric has been terrific at times. Not so much

Arnold Schwarzenegger’s tired repeats of his own catch phrases, but

more Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante’s Danny DeVito reference to Arnold and

the movie “Twins.”

Former Assemblyman Gil Ferguson had one of his own when I finally

tracked him down after he’d been out of town. The main difference

between Arnold and the man Ferguson’s supporting, state Sen. Tom

McClintock, Ferguson said, is:

“Experience. Arnold is a movie star, McClintock is a statesman. If

your family’s economic future was tied up in the next Terminator

movie, would you risk casting Sen. Tom McClintock in the lead role?

Of course not. Being a politician in this state, especially governor,

is even more complicated than playing the Terminator.”

I also asked Ferguson why voters in Newport-Mesa should support

McClintock over Arnold.

“Our voters here in Newport-Mesa should support Tom because he is

the best hope we have of turning around the California economy,” he

said. “It’s the fifth or sixth largest in the world and we here,

especially, benefit from it. And California is in deep serious

trouble.”

McClintock has the smarts to pull the economy out of the present

quagmire, Ferguson added.

“Tom has been the smartest man in the state Legislature on finance

and the budget for over 20 years. Ask Willie Brown, ask the state’s

finance people. He understands what we must do to return to the

golden years of California.”

Of course, McClintock is trailing in the polls. The last Los

Angeles Times poll had Bustamante at 35%, with Arnold at 22%,

McClintock at 12% and Laguna Beach’s Peter Ueberroth at 7% (Ferguson

suggested Ueberroth should have run in 1988 or the early ‘90s).

Arnold, not surprisingly, is Ferguson’s pick over Bustamante.

“I want Tom to win for the sake of California, but I would not be

despondent should Arnold win,” he said. “I would just know we, the

people just lost a great opportunity.

“Of course Arnold would be better than Bustamante, but Davis would

be better than Bustamante,” he said. “I would be better than

Bustamante, even if I refused to go to Sacramento.”

No mincing of words.

Ferguson also paints a promising picture for the state Republican

Party, no matter which way the recall goes.

“If it fails, it will help Bush in 2004 election and eventually

the state GOP,” he said. “Why? Because things will get much worse and

quickly. Same if Bustamante wins; the GOP will look better every day.

If Arnold wins, he might just be the right person (a celebrity) to

communicate the need for the needed changes to the public, but that

supposes that he agrees that those changes are needed. It Tom wins,

he will make the right decisions but will have a more difficult job

communicating those changes, since he is not a celebrity.”

The one caveat Ferguson includes: “It’s a 50-50 chance that the

situation is so bad that it can’t be fixed and the GOP would be

blamed.”

Finally, I’ll let Ferguson get in one final plug for McClintock.

It’s definitely a good piece of political hyperbole:

“I admire Tom more than any politician I’ve ever met, and that is

a lot of pols.”

* S.J. CAHN is the managing editor. He can be reached at (949)

574-4233 or by e-mail at [email protected].