In this morning's LA Times one of the lead headlines reads - "Governor readies special election to attack legislature, unions."
Hmmm, let's see is there any other way to consider the issues the Governor is pursuing? Governor continues efforts to improve legislature cut outrageous pension costs? Or Governor seeks representative legislative and seeks to end union ripoffs. No that is not the way a reasonable person would try to convey the issue either.
This story is about a flawed process for redistricting. The current system creates uncompetitive districts. Is trying to make changes in that system an attack on the legislature? The second part of the story relates to whether unions should have the ability to extract political contributions from their members without their consent. The Beck decision (at the federal level) said no. But the California legislature said yes. But somehow the Times see that as an attack.
Or consider the pension issue - which the Governor also mounted. A couple of years ago the pension costs in California were a couple of hundred million dollars - this year they exceed $2 billion. Should there be changes in the way we offer public employee pensions? Are the stories about United and other unsustainable pension systems in the private system an attack on unions or simply an unsustainable out-dated system?
The Times is dropping like a stone. And that is not even a biased headline. No need to wonder why.