Former Schwarzenegger staffer: California should not dismiss the recall election as a joke

Prominent reporters and columnists have called the imminent California election to recall Gov. Gavin Newsom a “farce,” “sideshow,” “absurd” and “a big joke.” A top Democratic operative describes the Republican field of candidates — which includes a sitting member of the California Assembly, a former Congressman and a former mayor of California’s second-largest city — as a “bunch of clowns.”

A recall is no circus. It is serious business.

In 2003, California voters faced a decision: Whether to recall the incumbent, Gray Davis, and replace him with someone from a list of would-be governors, including one of the most famous individuals on the planet at the time, Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Opinion

Every twist and turn in the 2003 recall received saturation media coverage statewide and nationwide. Schwarzenegger events were off the hook, as when a massive weight was dropped from great heights onto a junked car, to dramatize how he planned to “crush the car tax.”

To some, it might have seemed like a circus.

Behind the scenes, however, it was a different story.

I ran Schwarzenegger’s 2003 policy shop. We worked around the clock to flesh out a platform of detailed, concrete proposals for what ailed California.

That effort later became known in some circles as “Schwarzenegger University,” which is a misnomer. About 150 people volunteered their expertise, but they didn’t think of themselves as faculty members trying to educate a student body of one. They thought of themselves not as teachers, but as teammates.

The team included Californians who wanted to help a state that was struggling. Some, like former Secretary of State George Shultz and former Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, lived here for decades. Others, like Warren Buffett and Eunice Shriver, lived elsewhere, but knew Arnold and said “yes” when he reached out.

I still have a binder of proposals we released on the economy, political reform, energy, workers compensation insurance (then in crisis), the state budget, education, the environment and public safety. On top of that, we answered a mountain of questionnaires. It was grueling work. But it had to be done, because voters were evaluating Arnold’s capacity for the governor’s job, and he had to prove he was up to it.

The compressed time frame for the 2021 recall — Newsom signed a state law effectively moving the election from mid-November to Sept. 14 — makes this policy work more challenging for the current field of candidates, which is unfortunate. But they will have more time than we did.

However unlikely it may seem today, given Newsom’s recovery in opinion polls, he may be recalled. One of Newsom’s challengers may take the oath of office from the west steps of the State Capitol, just as Schwarzenegger did on Nov. 17, 2003.

California has many serious problems, and candidates should put forth plans to address them. Kudos to the candidates who are already releasing plans to address homelessness, wildfires and other crises.

To the candidates who can’t be bothered: Shame on you.

To the journalists covering the recall, some suggestions:

▪ Drop the “circus” references.

▪ Pose thoughtful questions to the top candidates, and publish their responses.

▪ Schedule debates among top-tier candidates who have answered these questionnaires and issued detailed platforms.

▪ Profile the leading candidates in depth — including Newsom. There is much about Newsom’s record — as a supervisor and mayor of San Francisco, lieutenant governor and governor — that deserves another look.

Joe Rodota was director of policy for Arnold Schwarzenegger’s 2003 recall campaign and now runs a public affairs research firm in Sacramento