Californians: Is Schwarzenegger in trouble if the FTCR wants him to be?

[BurtWorm]

Schwarzenegger Asked To Explain Ken Lay Meeting
Schwarzenegger, Bush To Meet In California

http://www.thesandiegochannel.com/politics/2554124/detail.html

WASHINGTON -- California governor-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger must
explain the substance of his private May 2001 meeting with Enron chief
Ken Lay, the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights wrote in a
letter to Schwarzenegger Tuesday.

FTCR, which was the state's most vocal critic of Governor Gray Davis'
handling of the energy crisis, said that if the governor-elect did not
recount the meeting by the time of his inauguration, the group would ask state lawmakers to open an investigation to uncover the substance of the meeting, including any information that might further the state's efforts to return billions of dollars that taxpayers and consumers overpaid for electricity during the energy crisis.

"A meeting with the biggest corporate crook in recent memory, while he
and his firm were in the midst of ripping off the state, should not be
taken lightly," FTCR wrote. "As Governor, you must explain to
Californians what you were doing at that meeting, what information Ken
Lay shared with you and how the meeting has influenced your thinking on energy issues."


Does anyone believe Schwarzenegger feels compelled to explain himself because the FTCR asks him to? Is this something he should be nervous about? Or is this yet another public interest group about to be cold-shouldered by the Arnold admin and the California media?

[nbsmom]

1. This could get interesting...

But this is the first I've seen of it reported outside of Palast and Tom Paine websites.

Fingers crossed people...

[dfong63]

2. he'll probably ignore them - but the suspicions will fester

... and will come back with a vengeance should Arnie try to make a sweetheart deal with enron or other energy co's.

thus, FTCR's challenge is an effective tactic.

[BurtWorm]

4. This article says they were critical of Davis.

What was their criticism?

[proud patriot]

If we keep pestering him about it

what choice will he have ?

[Journeyman]

3. Too early to tell yet. . .

I read on an earlier thread that the local ABC news picked up this story, but whether it clicks with Californians, or inspires the Democratic-controlled legislature to investigate is, I believe, too early to tell. A lot will depend on how Schwarzenegger approaches his job, if he tries to quash the legal action to recover monies from the Energy Pirates, and what credibility the people choose to give him in the initial days of his administration.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

5. NO he is not in trouble

FTCR has weilded a bit of clout and was responsible for a very successful insurance initiative a while back. My problem with their critiques of Davis is that their remedies would have led to lawsuits the state would have most likely lost since they involved TAKING (seizing)property (something the USSC would have more likely than not ruled against)

It's noce to know they are making noise after the election....just proves they don't know the difference between the lesser of two evils.

[BurtWorm]

6. Are they "left" or "right"?

Advocating siezing property sounds left, but was that what their whole criticism of Davis was based on? That he wasn't enough of a bastard with the energy companies? Or did they blame him for the rolling blackouts?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

7. They are LEFT and here is their study on it

if you care to read it. It is about sixty pages long and is highly critical of Davis for locking in the long term contracts but unlike them he HAD to create STABILITY in the state and seizing property might not have held up in court. He then proceeded to petition the FERC where the state was BLOCKED at every turn (i.e. not letting evidence of fraud be submitted in certain challenges, not setting rates, and basically saying TOUGH SHIT after the state provided evidence of fraud....in other word the FERC when confronted with the facts that contracts were signed based on fraudulent representation said TOO BAD...this was last June, about the time Arnold began floating his campaign with focus groups...)
http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/utilities/rp/rp002193.pdf

While this study is broad it fails to consider that although Edison needs their ass kicked they are ALSO a large employer in the state and are a unionized plant...any pain and suffering hurled backed at Edison and PG and E too forcefully, (unlike ENRON) would have reulted in LAYOFFS since management never seems to absorb the pain.

So while the paper makes all the points of a Naderesque organization they don't factor in all consequences to their suggestions.

[BurtWorm]

8. How critical to Gray's defeat were they?

Did the Greens take up their position?

[BurtWorm]

9. kick