The solution to all the anger over Arnold Schwarzenegger’s new approach seems so obvious.
Rather than worrying about staff functionaries and advisors, the governor’s critics should instead demand that he divorce his wife and marry a woman with a more appropriate Republican pedigree. So how about a resolution that demands that Maria Shriver be replaced by Jenna Bush.
Yesterday’s Los Angeles Times reported efforts to repeal the California Republican Party’s endorsement of Schwarzenegger unless he fires his new chief of staff Susan Kennedy by March 15. On one hand, it’s perfectly reasonable for party loyalists to question whether or not the CRP should officially endorse Schwarzenegger, or allow Republican voters to decide for themselves whether a "Better than Angelides" re-election campaign is good enough for them. There’s nothing wrong with a debate over the Schwarzenegger’s policy priorities, particularly if they have changed since the endorsement was first offered.
The problem with this resolution is not that it demands a debate over the Schwarzenegger agenda, but rather that it focuses on his staff hirings rather than his policy decisions. Today’s Orange Country Register reports that other resolutions are being considered as well, including condemnations of the governor’s budget proposal, his infrastructure bond plan, his record of judicial nominations, and his intention to seek an increase in the state’s minimum wage. But at this point, none of those resolutions link a course reversal on these substantive policy matters by Schwarzenegger to the GOP’s continued endorsement of his candidacy. By the time Republicans gather for the convention next month, that situation may have changed. But at this point, it seems that the resolutions’ sponsors have their priorities backwards.
I don’t know Susan Kennedy and I have no idea whether she is responsible for the governor’s 2006 agenda. (My own instincts are that Schwarzenegger would have shifted course after the special election anyway, but I can’t pretend to say that with any degree of certainty.) Regardless, the biggest problem for many Republicans should not be the party registration of the governor’s staff, but rather the fact that he is proposing a budget that doesn’t balance. So authoring a resolution that would revoke the party’s endorsement if Schwarzenegger does not adopt a more fiscally responsible approach to governing would be more logical. It may or may not pass, but at least we Republicans would be debating the principles of economic conservatism rather than Susan Kennedy’s resume.
There is an argument that can be made that personnel decisions are a reliable indicator of policy direction (Jennifer Nelson has made that point articulately on this web site). But the problem with going after Kennedy is that it leads the debate into more difficult areas. For example, Schwarzeneger just hired one of President Bush’s top political advisors to take the position of chief strategist for his re-election campaign. But Matthew Dowd used to be a Democrat. In 1992, he worked out of the same San Francisco offices as Kennedy to help Bill Clinton carry California and become President. I don’t remember if the Texas Republican Party took after Governor George W. Bush when he hired Dowd, or when he hired Mark McKinnon (still a registered Democrat to this day) to oversee his campaign advertising. But I somehow doubt that they ever passed a "Fire McKinnon-or-else" resolution in Austin.
So is there a statute of limitations for lapsed Democrats? Are Democrats acceptable only if they’ve worked for the Bush-Cheney campaigns? If Kennedy changed her party registration, does she stay? If Schwarzenegger fires Kennedy but raises taxes, does he keep the CRP endorsement? How about if he keeps her but forwards a budget that is actually balanced? Is Kennedy’s appointment of more or less long-term import than two decades worth of bonding policy, or than the lifetime appointment that judges receive?
I don’t know the answer to any of these questions, but it would be a much, much better use of everyone’s time to move past them, and instead devote ourselves to debating what sort of public policy agenda deserves the support of GOP voters. Republicans should decide whether or not to endorse (or vote for) Arnold Schwarzenegger based on what he does in office, rather than the people from whom he seeks advice. Otherwise, it only makes sense for Maria’s status in the Schwarzenegger household to become a matter of debate at the next party convention as well.
While I’d personally rather have seen the governor hire a Republican for the job, whether Kennedy is a Democratic, a Green Party member, a Libertarian or a vegetarian is much less important to me than a state budget that is actually balanced sometime in the not-too-distant future. So bring me a resolution that requires a fiscally responsible budget and bond package in exchange for an endorsement: I might sign on to that one. But demanding that Arnold fire Susan Kennedy seems about as useful as a resolution that calls for Jenna to take over for Maria.