Our view: Governor sometimes gets it partly right

We're often critical of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who's predictably disappointed nearly everyone. That's to be expected for a crowd-pleasing actor stepping onto the political stage.

Nevertheless, occasionally he gets it right, as least partly right. One of these occasions is buried in his latest convoluted proposals for creating, "jobs, jobs, jobs," as he put it.

Schwarzenegger wants to streamline government regulations "to make it easier for business to grow and expand." That's a great idea, as evidenced by the maddeningly opposite experience California businesses encounter every day.

To ease their burden, Schwarzenegger proposes granting the Business, Housing and Transportation Agency the "right to select a specified number of projects" for which environmental impact reviews have been done, and "deem those projects as approved and not subject to legal challenge." The plaintiff's bar must be aghast to hear such heresy.

The waivers would result in "expediting the ground-breaking of these projects and creating jobs," says the governor's office. But as with all things Schwarzenegger, the governor apparently doesn't see the inherent inequity and favoritism in giving government bureaucracies additional discretion to pick winners from the businesses losing profits and losing jobs because of unnecessary legal delays.

If the governor believed his own words that "jumpstarting construction projects creates jobs and boost local economies," he would see the undeniable benefit of granting waivers as a matter of course, rather than as exceptions. If he believed his own assertion that "projects are ready to break ground but become delayed due to unnecessary litigation" from environmental challenges, he would clear the way so ground could be broken and workers put on payrolls.

Instead, the governor concludes it's OK to grant some businesses some leeway while leaving others to suffer, and even then only if it's the government doing the granting. Unfortunately, Schwarzenegger's good intentions are undermined by his bad assumption that barriers created by government are necessary, even if not necessary for all businesses.

The inherent arbitrariness and discrimination in the government choosing which projects should be deemed "not subject to legal challenge" merely moves the bar for some, rather than removing it for all.