Schwarzenegger

As Arnold Schwarzenegger makes final preparations to take office as governor on Monday, the California political establishment is scrambling to adjust to the abrupt shift of power from Democrats to Republicans.

The inauguration of the Republican governor before thousands of spectators outside the domed Capitol in Sacramento will end five years of near-total Democratic Party control of state government.

Even if Schwarzenegger is not the ideological match of the Capitol’s conservative Republicans, his takeover of the governor’s U-shaped office suite ensures a radical change in the political dynamics of Sacramento.

Elected in a historic voter revolt against his Democratic predecessor, Schwarzenegger will take power with “a mandate directly from the people to come and change the way business is being done here — and what is being done,” said Schwarzenegger communications director Rob Stutzman. “It’s a mandate to step forward and lead.”

In large part, the fate of Schwarzenegger’s agenda depends on Democrats who still dominate both houses of the Legislature and hold every other statewide elected office. By and large, they are unsure of what to expect as he arrives in the capital he portrayed during the recall race as a sinister pit of unscrupulous politicians. At this point, Schwarzenegger elicits a mix of hope, wariness and fear.

“I don’t think anyone now is saying, ‘Let’s go to battle with him,’ ” said Steve Barkan, a campaign strategist for Democrats. “Folks are trying to figure out how to work with him.”

To set a congenial tone, Schwarzenegger has paid visits to the capital’s leading Democratic officeholders, including Senate leader John Burton of San Francisco and Assembly Speaker Herb Wesson of Culver City. He has also made discreet stops at the offices of two labor leaders: Bob Balgenorth of the State Building and Construction Trades Council and Dean Tipps of the Service Employees International Union. Given the millions of dollars that labor spent to keep its ally Gov. Gray Davis in office, union leaders had expected hostility from Schwarzenegger.

“My fears were diminished somewhat by the meeting,” Balgenorth said. “It was quite a show of humility, quite an olive branch.”

But labor leaders, like Democratic lawmakers, wonder whether Schwarzenegger’s symbolic gestures portend any genuine change in the combative partisanship of Sacramento.

“The question is: Does anything ever flow out of it?” said John Hein, government relations chief at the California Teachers Assn. “Is he going to keep those conversations going and keep those people involved?”

Within the Legislature, the most immediate consequence of Schwarzenegger’s arrival is the sudden empowerment of the Republican minority. Democrats outnumber Republicans, 48 to 32 in the Senate and 25 to 15 in the Assembly.

Under Davis, Republicans were unable to stop Democrats from passing hundreds of laws they opposed, most notably those resisted by business leaders. Among them were measures imposing health-coverage mandates on employers and strict new pollution controls on auto makers. The Republicans’ only significant role was to block Democrats from raising taxes by keeping them from mustering the required two-thirds vote.

But now, one of Schwarzenegger’s main tools for setting the state’s agenda will be the power to veto legislation passed by Democrats, and he is counting on fellow Republicans to protect him against veto overrides, which also need a two-thirds vote.

Republican legislators, in turn, are apt to influence his administration in a way that was impossible under a Democratic governor. Their conservative voter base is nearly the same as Schwarzenegger’s. So is their pool of campaign donors. Like Schwarzenegger, Republican legislators are strong advocates of business and have chilly relations with labor.

“They are no longer shut out of the game,” said Darry Sragow, a key campaign strategist for Assembly Democrats.

For Schwarzenegger, the first big challenge is to find a way out of the same severe fiscal troubles that hastened the downfall of Davis. His pledge not to raise taxes vastly complicates the task.

On Monday, Schwarzenegger will make it even more difficult: He plans to sign an executive order to rescind the tripling of the so-called car tax. The rollback will please millions of motorists and fulfill a key campaign promise. But if he also makes good on a pledge to make whole the local governments that receive the car tax revenue, it will widen the projected $10-billion budget hole next year to $14 billion.

To close the gap, Schwarzenegger faces tough choices. If he relies on spending cuts alone, the severity of the hits to higher education, health care and other programs would spark an uproar among Democrats and, most likely, a public outcry.

If he backs a mix of program cuts and tax hikes — as Davis did — he not only would face resistance from GOP lawmakers but also would risk erosion of his own political base. Schwarzenegger’s call for fiscal restraint was his main appeal to conservative voters put off by his liberal views on social issues.

To break from the political bind, Schwarzenegger aides have floated a plan to borrow as much as $20 billion to balance the books. The proposed debt, along with a state spending cap long sought by Republicans, would be put before voters in March. Schwarzenegger could frame the ensuing campaign as a choice between borrowing or tax hikes, then claim a voter mandate for either one, depending on the results.

The proposal would be a gamble for Schwarzenegger. On its face, it appears to contradict his pledge during the recall campaign to “teach politicians in Sacramento that they can’t spend money we don’t have.” Repayment of the debt, with interest, could drain nearly $40 billion from the state treasury — and away from public services — over perhaps three decades.

Still, over the last three years, Davis and the Legislature relied heavily on borrowing to break budget deadlocks. The bond plan would again spare the Legislature — and Schwarzenegger — from the political pain of tax hikes and draconian spending cuts. Republicans have already welcomed the plan.

“All we’re doing is cleaning up the final mess of Davis,” said Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield, the newly named Assembly GOP leader.

The proposal would offer an early test of Schwarzenegger’s clout because it requires a quick deal with the Legislature. Lawmakers would have to approve it by Dec. 5 to qualify it for the March ballot, exposing Schwarzenegger to a major vote of confidence by Democrats less than three weeks after he takes office.

But many Democrats oppose a spending cap, and their initial reaction to the debt plan has been lukewarm.

“I’m just not confident at this point that that’s the right way to go,” Wesson said. “That’s a lot of dough to be responsible for.”

State Treasurer Phil Angelides, a Democrat preparing to run for governor in 2006, has been most outspoken against the plan.

He said Friday it would be “a huge mistake” for Schwarzenegger to “follow a reckless path of massive deficit borrowing, and to masquerade such borrowing as ‘the answer’ to California’s budget crisis.”

So far, though, few Democrats have challenged the new governor, who draws immense media attention to Sacramento at a time when legislators suffer from dismal poll ratings. The recall election exposed a deep vein of voter anger that jolted incumbents of both parties, and in that context, few appear eager to take on Schwarzenegger.

“For anybody to be obstructionist would be going against what Californians want to have happen,” Wesson said.

Some Democrats worry that voters could next lash out against them. Despite a political map that keeps a solid majority of legislative seats safe for Democrats, a top party operative in the capital said some “very nervous members are fearful that a well-known popular movie star is going to go out and do active campaigning and fund-raising against them, and that’s got them all freaked out.”

It remains to be seen whether Schwarzenegger will use his fame to campaign against those who cross him. But his power to raise money was on display Saturday at an Indian Wells desert resort, where he was the star attraction at a sold-out fund-raiser for Republican legislative campaigns.

*(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

Inauguration broadcasts

Several Southern California television stations will air special programs and provide live coverage of the inauguration of Arnold Schwarzenegger as governor on Monday. The swearing-in ceremony is scheduled to take place on the Capitol steps in Sacramento at 11 a.m.

KCBS-TV Channel 2: Live coverage, 11 a.m.

KNBC-TV Channel 4: Special news coverage, 10 a.m.; Live coverage, 11 a.m.

KABC-TV Channel 7: Special news coverage, 10 a.m.; Live coverage, 11 a.m.

KCAL-TV Channel 9: Live coverage, 11 a.m.

Los Angeles Times

Pity poor California.

It’s not just the eye-watering price of gasoline, the absurd cost of housing, the rising price of utilities and groceries, the Trump-led assault on the state’s immigrant population and his attack on California’s long-cherished values of tolerance and diversity.

No, on top of all that voters have been subjected to — the horror! — a dull and drab gubernatorial campaign, burdened by a surfeit of C- and D-list candidates with all the electricity and elan of a tepid bath.

Where are the A-listers? Where are the lights? The cameras? The action?

That, anyway, is the perspective one gets reading a certain genre of campaign dispatch, written from the perspective that all of California, Land of Reagan and Schwarzenegger, home to Hollywood and Silicon Valley, incubator of the Next Big Thing, is a stage. Woe unto those who fail to entertain, animate or amuse.

The fact that those dreary assessments have very little to do with the actual wants and needs of the vast majority of Californians — not to mention the state’s history of electing mostly dull and drab governors — should give their authors pause.

It hasn’t.

Contra all the stifled yawns and thinly veiled condescension, the contest — now in its final stretch — is the most compelling California gubernatorial campaign in decades. And not just because one of the leading contestants torched himself and his political livelihood in a bonfire of hubris and stupidity.

Come November, voters could elect the first female governor in state history, or possibly the first Latino governor in more than 150 years. (They might also install California’s first billionaire governor, a considerably less uplifting and monumental achievement, but historic nonetheless.)

Depending on the result, the election could also solidify a notable shift in California’s political power balance, from the long-reigning San Francisco Bay Area (think Govs. Jerry Brown, Gavin Newsom and U.S. Sens. Alan Cranston, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer) to Southern California (think Sens. Adam Schiff, Alex Padilla and, possibly, Gov. Xavier Becerra or Katie Porter.)

True, there’s no pyrotechnic personality in the expansive field of gubernatorial hopefuls. But this is no group of slouches.

“Look at the resumes of these people. There’s nothing embarrassing,” said Jim Newton, a UCLA historian who’s written a shelf-load of biographies of Californians as disparate as Earl Warren and Jerry Garcia. The contenders, he noted, include a former state attorney general and Biden Cabinet member, a high-profile ex-congresswoman, the aforementioned hedge-fund billionaire and men with experience running two of the state’s most populous cities. “That’s a pretty good range of backgrounds in candidates for governor.”

With no glitz, no glamour, what’s a star-seeking, celebrity-hungry voter to do? If you believe the stereotype, Californians take their political cues more from Variety and In Touch magazine than, say, their voter guide or the flood of TV ads and campaign mailers that inundate the state every two years.

In truth, the Hollywood stars elevated to the governorship, Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger, have been the exception — spaced nearly four decades apart — and far from the norm. Both political insurgents were elected under extraordinary circumstances. Reagan amid the tumult and tectonic fracturing of the 1960s Civil Rights and Free Speech movements. Schwarzenegger in an unprecedented, rapid-fire recall of an enormously unpopular governor.

Far more typical are the likes of George Deukmejian, Pete Wilson and Gray Davis. Each was a career politician who spent decades laboriously climbing the government rungs before being elected governor. Collectively, they were featured on the cover of People magazine precisely zero times.

The three were, to use Newton’s description, “mainstream, politically tested, not flashy.” Which also happens to describe several of those currently aspiring to be governor.

Drab, but true.

Boring as it may seem, most Californians want someone who’ll focus on their workaday concerns, not jollification. For all the talk of the “attention economy” — the hearts and minds won by jokey memes, viral videos and other snackable morsels on social media — voters are much more focused on the real economy, which is to say putting food on their table, maintaining a roof over their head and keeping their car fueled and home at a bearable temperature.

“It’s not virtual reality,” said Mike Madrid, a longtime California Republican strategist and one of the state’s most astute political observers. “It’s reality reality.”

“That may not be interesting to the punditry and the East Coast,” Madrid went on, “but it still matters. Reality still matters. The performative nature that has dominated our discourse for 10 years in the Trump era is fading away.”

Imagine, for a moment, if former Vice President Kamala Harris had jumped into the governor’s race, as contemplated. The contest, for all intents, would have ended then and there, save for months of airy speculation on which Democrat or Republican would make the November runoff en route to eventual defeat. That would have been boring.

In Harris’ absence, the sprawling field of candidates has been a good and healthy thing, yielding the most competitive California gubernatorial contest in a quarter century. Fears of a Democratic shutout in June’s top-two primary and a fluky Republican being elected — which were always overwrought — have faded dramatically. Even if they hadn’t, would it really be better for politicians in Sacramento and Washington to anoint the Democratic favorite and cut voters out of the equation?

(While we’re busting myths, another is the fanciful notion that the state party or Democratic grandees like Nancy Pelosi, Gavin Newsom, Jerry or Willie Brown could have cleared the field with just a phone call or two.)

This wide-open fight for governor may not be boffo entertainment or dazzling to those looking in from the outside, but it’s absorbing nonetheless. It’s destined to be remembered as one of the most volatile and surprising political contests modern-day California has ever seen.

Reporting from Sacramento — Susan Kennedy, the former top aide to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, has agreed to pay $32,500 in fines for shadow lobbying, or advocating for clients before a state agency without registering as a lobbyist, according to documents released Monday.

The state Fair Political Practices Commission’s enforcement staff says Kennedy failed to register though she attempted to influence the California Public Utilities Commission from 2012 through 2014 on behalf of her clients, Lyft Inc. and San Gabriel Valley Water Co. Kennedy was paid $201,000 for the lobbying work.

Kennedy served on the California Public Utilities Commission from 2003 to 2006. She was chief of staff to Schwarzenegger from 2007 to 2011 before she became a consultant.

She signed an agreement with the FPPC enforcement staff admitting to the violations of the state Political Reform Act.

“In this case, the violations were serious since the public and other interested parties were not informed of Kennedy’s lobbying activity,” the agreement says. “While Kennedy maintains she did not intend to qualify as a lobbyist, given her experience and sophistication, she should have been aware at the time that her activity qualified as lobbying.”

The agreement and fines are expected to be approved by the Fair Political Practices Commission on Feb. 15.

The panel has been investigating shadow lobbying for years at the state Capitol and has fined others who have tried to secretly influence state government.

The state defines a lobbyist as someone who receives $2,000 or more in a calendar month to communicate directly, or through an agent, with state officials for the purpose of influencing legislative or administrative action. Such people must register as lobbyists with the state and periodically report who is paying them, how much and for what purpose.

Kennedy failed to register and disclose her payments, resulting in eight violations of the Political Reform Act. In 2012, Lyft Inc. gave Kennedy a $15,000-a-month contract to help “strategic management” of Lyft’s public policy interests, the report said.

Lyft and other ride-hailing firms including Uber were under the scrutiny of the PUC for operating without its approval at the time, and Lyft agreed to pay a fine of $20,000 for operating without the agency’s authority.

After being retained by Lyft, Kennedy contacted CPUC President Michael Peevey, Executive Director Paul Clanon and other staff to convince them that the state should work with the ride-hailing firms, not shut them down.

At Kennedy’s prodding, the California Public Utilities Commission decided to adopt rules on the new industry regarding liability insurance, driver licensing and background checks, driver training programs and vehicle inspections.

James C. Harrison, an attorney for Kennedy, said she “moved immediately once the discrepancy was identified to provide the necessary information requested by the FPPC. Integrity and character are hallmark principles in how Kennedy conducts herself in business, which is why she is acting swiftly and looks forward to its resolution.”

Updates from Sacramento »

patrick.mcgreevy@latimes.com

Twitter: @mcgreevy99

UPDATES:

3:15 p.m.: This article was updated to provide total amount of fines and a comment from Kennedy’s attorney, James C. Harrison.

This article was originally posted at 2:20 p.m.