“The governor promises to veto hundreds of bills unless he gets his water plan.  Good hardball politics? Or does this cross the line of legality?”

 

The Governor is his own branch of government.  Live with it, legislators.  He has his priorities, they have theirs. If legislators won’t compromise on water, they shouldn’t complain if their bills get vetoed.


He ought to veto most of them, anyway.


This is a Hail Mary play by the governor, a desperate attempt for a legacy. But instead of bullying lawmakers he should roll up his sleeves and work with them.


Sounds more like the Governor is playing dodge ball than hardball.


It flatly makes no sense....


If governors over the last twenty years had vetoed hundreds of bills every year, we would be a lot better off.


Forget the bills. This is an assault on the fundamental checks and balances of the American three-branch system of democracy. This ham-handed extortion makes Dick Cheney’s power grabs look subtle and nuanced. The governor and his advisors should spend less time watching the Sopranos and more time learning the basic principles of democracy.


It’s hard to think of a worse way to taint the waters before diving into a special session.


Good question that prompts responses from the head and one from the gut. The gut says go for it, the veto threat is his only leverage over a do-nothing Legislature that is largely incapable of resolving important issues – without a political gun pointed at its longevity.

The head says this is too close to the illegal line of quid pro quo. Final results: make your demands for reform vague enough to avoid the legal question and veto the bills if the Legislature fails to act. And what about the reaction from an already recalcitrant Legislature? Simply, so what.


An absentee Governor for months on end, and then at the last second demands action or threatens legislators.  It is time to say “hasta la vista, baby” to this strategy and try collaboration.