|
|
Enron Mail |
California gets cold shoulder in capital BUSH HIT LIST? Critics say president wants state to suffer for political, environmental actions. By David Whitney, Scripps-McClatchy Western Service WASHINGTON -- When Vice President Dick Cheney met with members of the Pacific Northwest congressional delegation to talk about the West Coast electricity crisis last month, Californians were kept out of the room. According to Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., Cheney wouldn't schedule a meeting if anyone from California was going to attend. "Cheney didn't personally tell me that, but his staff did," Inslee said later. "From Day One, the administration has tried to isolate California." It's not just the power controversy in which California finds itself on the outside. If it's Californians walking up the White House steps, these days the odds are high that no one will open the door. From insurance requirements on earthquake-prone federal buildings to proposals cutting support for alternative power sources, Democrats and even some Republicans are beginning to think that California is on Bush's hit list. "It's premature to say this new crew dislikes California," said Tim Ransdell, executive director of the California Institute for Federal Policy Research, a policy arm of the bipartisan, 52-member state congressional delegation. "But the early signals are that California is a lower priority than other states," Ransdell said. Consider the state's plea for better treatment on budget items. In February, when the White House released a broad blueprint of its 2002 budget, California lawmakers were stunned to see that it included $83 million in savings at the Federal Emergency Management Agency resulting from a requirement that public buildings be privately insured. On the surface, this seems like a reasonable request. But after dozens of insurance carriers declared bankruptcy under the weight of claims from the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake in Northern California, no one knows whether it's even possible for cities such as Los Angeles and San Francisco to buy coverage. The disaster insurance idea was suggested last year during the Clinton administration, and the entire California delegation rose up to stop it. All 52 members, from the most conservative Republican to the most liberal Democrat, signed onto a letter saying that that at the very least the government ought to study the wisdom of shifting public money from improving the earthquake integrity of buildings to buying insurance. When Bush revived the idea in February, California Republicans thought the new administration didn't understand. The Republicans balked at attacking the idea in a joint letter with Democratic lawmakers, and instead launched a campaign to educate the White House on why a bad idea under the Clinton administration remained a bad idea now. It didn't work. Last week's final budget submission to Congress included the provision, unchanged. On another budget issue, the White House slashed by $135 million federal support that states receive for incarcerating undocumented criminals. Because California typically receives more than 40 percent of that pot, that cut alone would cost the state nearly $60 million. Ransdell said the administration's attitude toward the state is putting enormous pressure on Republicans. "California Republicans don't want to be in a position of criticizing the president at the very beginning of the administration," he said. But he said that as these issues heat up, he expects Republicans will soon start to break with the administration over issues on which they have been denied a voice. "I think they will fight back when they need to fight back," Ransdell said. The common explanation on why California is getting such lousy treatment is its politics. The state voted strongly for Al Gore in the November elections. All but one of its constitutional offices are occupied by elected Democrats. The state Legislature and congressional delegations are firmly in the grip of Democrats. And Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat often mentioned as a possible challenger to Bush in 2004, is being hammered over the power crisis. Several sources also noted that the contrast may be more vivid because Clinton and Gore were closely allied with California entertainment and high-tech industries and often were in the state. "I think by this time in the Clinton-Gore administration, they had been here four or five times," said Bruce Cain, director of the Institute for Governmental Studies at the University of California-Berkeley. "This can be looked at in a number of ways," Cain said of the Bush administration. "The president may have decided that California is not essential to his re-election, and that he can win (in 2004) without the state," Cain said. "Also, he can use California as an object lesson to every other state that wants to go the route of environmentalism or openness to immigration: Let them suffer from their own policies." Leon Panetta, President Clinton's former chief of staff and a former California congressman, thinks the Bush administration's early treatment of the state is "very short-sighted." "The reality is that California is the sixth-largest economy in the world," he said. "To write it off for whatever reason just doesn't make a lot of sense." April 16, 2001
|