Friday, 11/02/2007 4:17 pm

Governor Participates in Q & A with the Silicon Valley Leadership Group

GOVERNOR:  Thank you very much.  Wow, what a great welcome.  I love that.  I hope they all understand that you think this is kind of the Silicon Valley Leadership kind of luncheon, or something like this.  Itfs a fundraiser.  Anyway, just relax.  You donft have to give any money.  Itfs just a joke. 

MR. WRIGHT:  Well, Governor, this is not a joke, but I did want to say, on behalf of all the editorial page editors of the state, that we really want to thank you for ensuring that we had so many good things to write about this year.  Right?  Wefve had health care, water, prisons, the environment, all good public policy issues.  So we appreciate you keeping those alive.

GOVERNOR:  Thank you, thank you. 

MR. WRIGHT:  But before we get into some policy questions I wanted to ask you something about public safety.  First off, how many people in the room here know somebody who was impacted by the fires in southern California?  Now, how many people felt the earthquake Tuesday night?  Okay, I think you know where Ifm going with this.  Governor, you spent a lot of time on the ground in southern California during the fires.  You got to see local government, regional government, state government, and the federal government working together on a disaster.  What did you learn that should be done differently maybe to improve the response?  And is there anything from that, that would help in the case of an earthquake disaster?

GOVERNOR:  First of all, let me just say that it is wonderful to be back here in Silicon Valley; Ifve heard this is the tenth time now that Ifve been back here since Ifve come into office and became governor.  And I always enjoy coming back here, and I always like the support that Ifm getting here from Silicon Valley.  I also want to mention that I love my job—I love my job.  Itfs the greatest job Ifve ever had.  Ifm having fun from morning, to night, even though many times there are challenging moments and there are sad moments, and there are joyful moments and so on.  Itfs a rollercoaster ride.  But the bottom line is that when you enjoy what youfre doing, I tell you, it is just such a difference in the kind of work that you can accomplish.

And I was very fortunate in my whole life that I always enjoyed the things that I was doing, if it was bodybuilding, or if it was acting, or if it is now being governor.  And to get up every morning and to think about how we can make life better for the people of California brings me great joy, and to give something back to the state of California that has given me so many things, and given me all the opportunities to be successful in life.  So I really have a great time with this job, and I want to thank all of you for your great support that you have given me up until now. 

Now, when you talk about that, every so often I think that we get into a situation where I think quick response—especially when it comes to an emergency or a disaster, quick response is extremely important.  We have seen in the past of how much some states have failed with quick response, and the federal government has failed with action.  And I think what we have seen this last week was that California was without any doubt the No. 1 state with the quick response and with quick action. 

I was so proud to be governor of this great state and to see actually the locals and the state and the federal government, and all the agencies all worked together in the fastest possible way to provide relief and to help the people that have been affected by this disaster.  Within a two-day period almost a million people were evacuated down south, in the San Diego area.  That is staggering, if you think about it.  And you know something?  Everyone found a home.  The Qualcomm Center was there, Del Mar was there, and all those different centers that I visited. 

And we had called that afternoon the Grocer Association in California and said, gWe have no water down there for those evacuees, we have no food or diapers or baby formula, so all of those things we need.  Please help us.h No one ever asked about who is going to pay for that.  Within one hour after that phone call the trucks pulled up at Qualcomm Center with food and with water and with pizza and with all kinds of things, the baby formula and all the stuff that they needed.  It was really extraordinary.  And tens of thousands of volunteers jumped into action and were there helping.  And the way that the Fire Department and the OES and the National Forest Service and also law enforcement and all the different areas of law enforcement worked together to help those people with crowd control and to create of course public safety in those locations, was really extraordinary. 

So I tell you, all of you can be very proud of the agencies that work there, and to see that California is No. 1 in one more thing—in one more thing, when it comes to public safety and also to disaster situations like this, the quick response that we have seen amongst those agencies.  So I want to thank them.  We should give them actually a big hand for the great work they all have done.  (Applause)

MR. WRIGHT:  Well, let me ask you a more direct earthquake question.  When the earthquake hit on Tuesday night, many people reached for their cell phone and tried to call family.  How many people tried that Tuesday night, to use your cell phone?  Okay.  There was a big capacity problem by the cell phone carriers, because they couldnft handle that volume.  Do you think that the cell phone carriers ought to provide enough bandwidth to carry those numbers of calls for emergencies like that?

GOVERNOR:  Well, I think that one of the things that we are doing right now is—and that you have to do after a disaster like this, or following an earthquake like this—is you have got to look at it and say are we really prepared, from 1 to 10, a straight 10?  And anything, anywhere you fall short, youfve got to work on that.  And the same thing we are doing, for instance, with the fire.  I mean, there are some people that think that we didnft have enough aircraft up in the air at any given time, or some thought that we didnft have enough spotters, we didnft have enough this, enough that.  So we have to evaluate all of this.  And the same is, I think, with the broadband and with the cell phones.  Because, you know we have seen now that we had this fire disaster; this could have been followed up with a major disaster of a 7.9 in an earthquake, and that could have been followed with another disaster. 

So we really have to be prepared, because this is a state that has just about every disaster you can think of.  So I think that we all have it all here, believe me, unlike any other place.  I mean, in Austria, when I call home to Austria, and I call friends of mine, or return their calls when they call me and ask if there is anything they can do and so on, they donft even understand wildfires.  They donft understand earthquakes.  They maybe understand a flood, because thatfs what they have in Austria.  But all of the things that we have is really staggering.  And the threat of a terrorist attack at the same time; we have to guard for all of those things at all times.  So yes, we will evaluate and see if there is anything that we need to do in order to make sure that people can call, and that we can take that load.

MR. WRIGHT:  Okay, thank you.  Now onto a more general policy question.  I think it was just about a year ago that you, Senate President pro-Tem Don Perata, Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, were kind of the Pied Pipers of bipartisanship.  You declared that this would be the year of health care.  They said, gRight on!h But now many people are wondering whether health care reform is going to die on the operating table.  What do you think the odds will be that wefre going to get meaningful health care reform this year, and what specifically do you need to get an agreement?  I like the grin on this.

GOVERNOR:  I love it.  Such a great journalist.  (Laughter) I mean, gItfs going to die on the operating table.h How much more dramatic can you get, huh?  Isnft that amazing?  Ifm going to get you into the Friarfs Club.  But first of all, let me just say there are people that are saying is it dying, because it hasnft been done.  Well, we just have bridged over from October to November.  So when I look at my calendar, there are still two months left.  So we said in the year of 2007, thatfs the year of health care reform, and thatfs the year of creating water infrastructure so that we can promise the people of California that 30, 40 years from now, you will have enough water in this state.  And those things are being negotiated right now.  I think it is very important. 

I think that there are some that thought that we should go only after businesses, and ask businesses to pay for the health care reform, and put in 7.5 percent.  And I always said thatfs the wrong way to go, to go only after one group.  No, we should have really shared responsibility, and shared benefits.  I think thatfs the idea with health care reform, and thatfs the only way wefre going to do it, where everyone participated and gives something in order to benefit later on from health care reform. 

Because the whole idea is in health care reform is that we have everyone insured—because right now we have 6.7 million people that are uninsured in California.  To be a place like California, what we call the Golden State, and to have it be the No. 1 place in the world, and a rich place, you know, that the rest of the world is admiring us and they want to come here and be part of this.  But to have 6.7 million people uninsured is inexcusable.  We have the greatest doctors and the greatest medical care and machinery and equipment and technology, and all of those things, but the health care system is broken, and it needs reform.  And so I think to have everyone insured is my goal.  To have everyone insured, No. 1.  And No. 2, that no one gets turned away because of their age, or because of some medical history.  That is a very important part.  And No. 3, you want to make sure that health care costs come down so itfs affordable for everyone. 

So those are the kind of main elements that we want to go after.  Now, the way you bring health care costs down is of course by having prevention, because right now, we donft pay any attention, or very little attention, to prevention.  I mean, we want to make sure that people can get their screens, and they can go and get their tests done and all of those things that protect them so they can discover illnesses very early on, rather than when it too late, and when it costs a lot of money.  Health care insurance companies donft pay for those things today.  So what we want to do is change all that, and really pay much more attention to prevention. 

So I think that we are very close with the negotiations.  Wefre still, you know, some distance when it comes to the percentages.  Should it be 7.5 percent, or should it be what I proposed, 4 percent?  So it will be ending up somewhere in there.  But those are the negotiations that are going on.  And then, of course, also, we want to protect those that may not be able to afford it.  Itfs one thing to say to people you have to have health care insurance, and make it mandatory health care insurance.  But the other side of it, you have to make sure that itfs affordable, so you donft force someone that makes 70,000 dollars a year and is a family of four, and all of a sudden they have to pay 10,000 dollars for health care.  So we have to then find a way.  Should it be only 5 percent of their wages and no more?  Should we have subsidies, or tax incentives, or whatever?  What should it be?  So we are negotiating all of those things. 

MR. WRIGHT:  And so it sounds like, No. 1, youfre optimistic.  And that when it comes to the percentages, you think therefs going to some room for negotiation to maybe fall in the middle?

GOVERNOR:  Yes.  I think that we are negotiating, and the negotiations are going well.  And like I said, you know, one side sees labor pulling, and the other side you see businesses pulling.  So, you know, we have to just find a way, rather than going the traditional way, by saying that business and labor are fighting, and thatfs the way itfs always going to be.  I donft accept that.  I think that we can find a way where labor and business come together for the better of the people, for all Californians, and to something where they can do something together that benefits everyone.  And so thatfs what wefre working on, and we are getting closer and closer.  And the trick with all of this is just to find the sweet spot. You know, like in golf or in tennis, to find that sweet spot. Therefs one particular area, in one place, where it can work.  And we just have to all search.  And thatfs what it is all about, is to negotiate and negotiate and negotiate until you find that sweet spot.  And I think that the people of California deserve the best health care system, they deserve to be insured, that everyone is insured, and to make it affordable, and that no one ever can get turned away again by an insurance company because of age or because of some medical history.  (Applause)

MR. WRIGHT:  Okay.  In addition to the health care reform, as you mentioned, you stated this summer that California really needs a comprehensive plan for water, and for the fact there will be about 50 million people in California over the next 25 years.  The Silicon Valley Leadership Group approves of your plan.  The Mercury News supports more focus on conservation and more efficient use of existing conservation efforts, especially in the farm regions.  Quickly outline your plan, if you will, and what you think you can do when, again—and this is becoming a theme—therefs a divided leadership issue in the legislature? 

GOVERNOR:  Well, first of all, it doesnft mean of what you just said, that you are believing one thing, and the Silicon Valley Leadership believes in something else, because I think everyone here believes very strongly in conservation.  Wefve got to conserve, and wefve got to stop wasting water.  I think thatfs very important.  And even when it gets down to the smaller level, in your house—I have forbidden my children to take showers that are longer than 5 minutes.  I time them.  I stand outside.  I stand outside, and then the hand reaches in and turns off the water.  Or, the hand reaches in and turns it very hot, and you see how fast the kids respond to that.  Because you have to.  Thatfs what my mother did with us—because in Austria, I of course was a post-Second World War baby—so everyone conserved, if it had to do with food, if it had to do with electricity, with water, conservation was always the No. 1 goal, because there wasnft much around at that time, after the Second World War.  Here in America they never had that kind of a history.  So here kids think that there is an endless amount of water there, and people think therefs an endless amount of water, or an endless amount of energy, endless amount of everything.  But thatfs not the case.  I think we have to teach our children to conserve, and I think that conservation is a very important thing, and recycling, and conserving energy, and water, and all of those things.  And I think that it starts at home, and then it broadens out from there. 

I think that you cannot go and create more water, or have water for 50 million or 60 million people by the year 2050 just by conserving your way out of that problem that wefre in.  Our water infrastructure was built specifically for around 18 to 20 million people.  At that time, as you remember, 30, 35 years ago, thatfs what we had.  Now we have in the meantime 37 million people, but we havenft built a dam, we havenft built any reservoirs, we havenft built anything, no water infrastructure, for the last 30-some years.  So therefore we are getting into a big problem now.  We have the water, we have the runoffs, we have the rains.  We have everything, but we donft capture the water so that we can have enough when there is a drought.  So right now the reservoirs are half empty, or 75 percent empty, and so on, so we have a major problem. 

So I feel that as governor I have the responsibility to be able to look at people in the eye and say:  I guarantee you that by the year 2050 you will have enough water.  Well, in order to do that—because right now we donft have that guarantee.  We donft even have a guarantee that we have in the next 10 years enough water.  What we have to do is, like with everything in California, to recognize the fact that we havenft done anything for 30 years, that people didnft build anything—no transportation, not enough schools or universities, our levees were not fixed—and we donft have any water infrastructure.  Wefve got to do it.  That is the important thing, and this is why I think that last year the people of California committed themselves to 37 billion dollars plus 5 for water projects, 42 billion dollars in infrastructure.  And that was a great move by the people, very courageous. 

And now this year what we want to do is add on and have enough water storage, and fix the Delta, fix the ecosystem, and fix all of the things so that the state of California has enough water by the year 2050.  Thatfs it.  It will take 20 years to build.  Whatever we have planned, it takes 20 years to build.  And this is why I say for 60 million people, because then it takes another 20 years before anyone can ever go back and say letfs go and build new infrastructure for water, because for 20 years you canft go back, after you have built, for 20 years.  So that takes us to 2050, and by that time we have 60 million people, which everyone knows. 

So I am a visionary.  I think always of the bigger picture, and not just to go and keep putting the rug over those problems.  Those are problems that have existed for decades, and politicians have not addressed those problems because theyfre politically risky.  Well, I donft care if theyfre politically risky.  I want to get the job done.  Thatfs what I promised the people of California.  (Applause)

MR. WRIGHT:  And just a short follow up.  Does that mean that you expect to have an answer within the next two months?

GOVERNOR:  We are working on that, and I think that we have a very good chance of getting it done; getting health care done and getting water done, because Democrats and Republicans, both parties, they are interested in helping the people of California.  They want to do the best job.  They know that Californians, the voters, are looking at them very closely.  Right now the voters are not happy with the legislators, because they feel like they havenft done enough for them this year, they have fallen short.  Every newspaper article, if you see the reviews anywhere in the state, it doesnft matter if theyfre left-leaning or right-leaning paper, will tell you that the legislators so far have failed the people of California. 

So I think that the way they can pick themselves up and get high approval ratings is by showing to the California people once again—like they did last year and the year before and the year before—is by showing that we are fighting for the people of California, and get it done.  Get health care reform done, and get the water infrastructure done, and you will see their approval rating shooting up through the roof. 

MR. WRIGHT:  Okay, thank you.  Now, obviously youfve received worldwide attention when it comes to the bipartisan efforts in AB 32, which of course is the Global Warming Solutions Act, and which curbs greenhouse gases in California to 1990 levels by 2020.  The Air Resources Board, under the leadership of Mary Nichols, has started moving forward with some immediate action steps.  What are the big hurdles ahead, and how will you clear them?  And as a follow up, is nuclear power on the solution table?

GOVERNOR:  Wefre not talking about, first of all, nuclear power at this point.  I think what is important for us is to be part of a movement that fights global warming.  Wefve got to recognize that this is a manmade creation, that we are responsible for global warming.  I think that we have to do everything in our power to fight it and to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions.  We have seen European countries that have joined the Kyoto Treaty, they have now already rolled back their greenhouse gases to the 1990 level or even beyond that. 

So this is why AB 32 was very important, that we join and we also make a commitment and say we are making a commitment to go and roll back our greenhouse gas emissions to the 1990 level by the year 2020, and then an additional 80 percent by the year 2050.  And so we have just signed a pact with the European nations, with 25 of the European nations, and with additional states in the United States, and provinces in Canada, and with Australia and so on.  It is a pact that actually the United States should have signed when they were over at the last G-8 meeting, but they didnft.  So we, as California, have stepped forward and said, gWefll sign it with your countries.  We want to participate, and we want to participate with the cap and trade so that we are part of this huge global movement to fight global warming.h

And we have been very successful with that.  We are now—you know, the whole world looks at us as an example of what can be done, and we are basically just saying, you know, we are not waiting for Washington for action.  We are going to create the action here in California, because California has been No. 1 in so many things, we can also be No. 1 in fighting global warming, and really show leadership.  (Applause)

And I just want to add that, of course when you do something new like that it is going to be a big challenge.  As you know, that in order to reduce the greenhouse gases a lot of things have to happen.  But the greatest thing that is happening is that it is, because we are known for innovation, we have seen that the green technology, clean technology, has been booming in these last few years, and this has been really huge, because venture capital is being poured in—more than a billion dollars last year alone—and I think that we will see increases in venture capital that is being put into clean technology by at least 20 to 30 percent a year for the next 10 years.  So this is a whole new way of creating jobs and creating revenues for our state, and Ifm really looking forward to that, to show that California can be a real true leader in that area.

MR. WRIGHT:  Thank you.  But just as a follow up question, because we get letters to the editor all the time from people saying, gWhy not nuclear?h Why is that not on the table for you right now?

GOVERNOR:  Well, Ifll tell you.  I think nuclear will be on the table.  But as I have always said, that as long as we are struggling with the waste, nuclear waste, it doesnft make any sense to do something nuclear, or something at all, and protect the environment on one side, and then do something thatfs very damaging to the environment on another side.  If technology develops—and it could easily, in the next 5 years or so—that we know what to do with that nuclear waste, maybe to use it as a source of power again, as we are doing now with greenhouse gases, I think then we can look at nuclear power.  I would be the first one to go for it.  I think that other people would be too, because if you think about that, in France they create their energy, 82 percent of their energy comes from nuclear power.  And so I think that itfs probably going in that direction. 

MR. WRIGHT:  Okay, thank you.  Another top concern, especially in Silicon Valley, is the state of public education.  And of course youfre not shy about taking on the big issues, and youfve already said that next year is going to be the year of education.  Is this still going to be your plan, given whatfs transpired with health care reform and the struggle with the water issue?  Or will you approach the year of education in a different way than you did health care and water?

GOVERNOR:  Well, you canft approach it differently.  You have to go and—there are some people that think that we should do things in an incremental way.  You know, take one step at a time.  Well, if you can live for 1,000 years, then we can do that.  But thatfs not the case.  I have another three years left, and not that Ifm going to die in three years, but Ifm going to go, Ifm in office for three years.  So itfs just one of those things.  Do you want to go, like with health care reform, to do one year just children, then the next year anyone that is employed, and then the next year anyone that is part-time employed, and the next time the homeless, and the next time the rest?  You know, youfve got to go and—I think thatfs not the way to approach it, because one thing has to do with the other.  So I think you have to have a big vision and youfve got to say wefve got to insure everyone; letfs go for the big shot.  And thatfs what I do. 

And the same is with education.  I think that we have had a bipartisan group go out and study our education, Democrats and Republicans, really the No. 1 experts in the state, that have studied this now for two years, and we know what needs to be done.  So the question is, shouldnft we put that plan up there and say:  Letfs now figure out, bring all the stakeholders together, and letfs figure out a way of how we can do that.  How can go and—maybe it needs more funding, maybe it needs restructuring.  One thing we know for sure, that we are not delivering the best service to our kids, because our education has not been functioning well.  Our kidsf tests, when you look at it, we are barely in the top 40.  Itfs just really pitiful when you see that in the education community, you see people fighting more about whatfs best for the adults rather than what is best for the children.  And I think that whole system needs to be changed so we put more money into the classroom rather than always worrying about how can we get more money for the adults, rather than the children. 

And so I think therefs a lot of work that needs to be done.  And also to pay much more attention to career-tech education, because so far we always just, you know, send our kids from high school off to universities.  But not every kid wants to go to the university.  I know that there are so many children out there that want to become mechanics, or a computer technician, or a chef, or a hairdresser, or a plumber, or a carpenter, or any of those great, great professions that make a lot of money, where you can make a lot of money.  So I think that thatfs what we should do, is we should give our children a chance to make a decision.  Do you want to go to career-tech education, or do you want to higher education, or which direction do you want to go?  Right now we donft have those possibilities, and those opportunities.  We want to create those opportunities for our kids in the future. 

MR. WRIGHT:  Thank you.  Let me ask you a quick question, because I do think everybody agrees—(Applause)—that we need some restructuring in public education, and that theyfll probably also going to need some extra money.  How would you address finding extra money when next year therefs a projected deficit of what, 8 billion dollars?

GOVERNOR:  Well, first of all, I think that we have to—if extra money is needed, which is something we have to look at—I think we have to have an open mind, and say to ourselves:  Okay, first we have to change the structure and make education much more efficient.  Then we have to look at if we still money.  Because I think there are billions of dollars in there that we can gain if we make it more efficient.  But then it may still need more money, and then I think we should go to the people and just say to the people, do you want to put more money into education?  And let the people vote on that.  Present the case to the people and I think the people then have a chance to vote on it.  Yes, do we want to go and put more money in, or not?  And I think thatfs the direction we have to go then.  But I think the first and most important thing is to change it so that it becomes more efficient, because the people of California, I donft think ever will go for that you just first say letfs put more money in it, because right now we have a big disaster on our hands, and we just try to then create a bigger disaster by putting more money in it.  So I think we have to first change the structure and really fix education and then put more money in it if it needs it.

MR. WRIGHT:  Okay, thank you.  And now, speaking of money, I have a money question related to the extension of BART.  Some of you probably saw Carl come up and hand me something, and what a surprise that a BART question follows right after that.  But as you know, the voters in Santa Clara County voted with nearly 71 percent to tax themselves for the next 30 years to help fund the BART extension.  The State is committed to providing about 20 percent of the capital construction costs, which are about 760 million dollars.  More than 500 million of that has already been allocated.  So the question is, are you still committed to the extension of BART to Santa Clara County?  And if yes, when will you bring the 260 million dollars the State still has committed into the county?  Did you bring it with you?  Do you have a check, a money order?

GOVERNOR:  Absolutely. 

MR. WRIGHT:  Your American Express card?

GOVERNOR:  I have to have it co-signed by my wife.  (Laughter) But let me just first of all say that yes, Ifm a big believer, that I think we need more public transportation, we need those kinds of ways, because it solves the housing problem also in many ways, and it is a cleaner way of traveling.  But I think that locally you still have some problems with the funding, so I think you donft have all the money together, and also from the federal government.  But we are always there ready to go, to be the partners, and you know that, because we are big believers in that.  (Applause)

MR. WRIGHT:  Carl, a little more work to do on the local level.  Thank you.

GOVERNOR:  Now, is Carl going to use BART?  Good.  Thatfs very good to hear.

MR. WRIGHT:  I think thatfs going to be the new mantra everywhere; bond, bond, bond.  Governor, a final question before we take some questions from the audience:  It is a little more personal.  You often speak about the impact that your mother-in-law, Eunice Shriver, has had on your life.  Tell us about that relationship a little bit, and the special bond you seem to have with her work and the disabled in the Special Olympics.

GOVERNOR:  Well, I think that Eunice Kennedy Shriver has had a great, great vision, because in the e60s she started with Special Olympics when everyone talked about that it is the worst thing you could do, is to take people that are intellectually challenged, to take them out of institutions.  They felt that—and these were the experts, the top experts—said that if you take them out of institutions they will hurt themselves, they will hurt each other, to do sports is a bad idea, and so on. 

But my mother-in-law wouldnft take no for an answer, so she developed Special Olympics and had in 1968 the first Games.  They were small Games, and Mayor Daley, she asked to be the host in Chicago.  And Mayor Daley said to her after the 1968 Games, he said, gI think the world will never be the same after these games.h And he was right.  She continued on, and even though people said no, it would not happen, and you shouldnft do it, now 40 years later, look at this.  We just came back from China, and there were the International World Special Olympic Games.  The opening ceremony was in a stadium that was packed with 100,000 people.  China had a history; we all know what they did with people with mental disabilities just a few decades ago.  Now the President of China was there saying every person ought to have the same and equal rights in our country.  That is all because of Special Olympics.  To be now in 165 nations worldwide and to participate in Special Olympics, and to have regular sports programs for people with mental disabilities, I think thatfs huge.  And to fight for tolerance, for medical care, dental care, and that people like this can have jobs and can live anywhere they want and so on. 

So I admire this tremendously, and this is why I have been involved for 30 years as the national and international coach for Special Olympians, and their torchbearer and ambassador.  And Ifve been going around the world promoting it because I think itfs just so great to help people that have so many things going against them.  And if you at all believe in equal opportunities—I mean, that is the place where you can start. 

MR. WRIGHT:  Right.

GOVERNOR:  Yeah. 

MR. WRIGHT:  Thank you very much.  (Applause) Okay, herefs an audience question.  Since the Constitution bars you from being president, what are your thoughts on a Maria Shriver candidacy for president?  (Laugher)

GOVERNOR:  First of all, let me tell you that my wife would make a great president.  But I donft think she has any interest in that at all, even though she comes from a political family.  She comes from a political family, but you have to understand that my wife was very much against me running for governor.  She was, as a matter of fact, I think very depressed about me deciding that Ifm going to run for governor, because she grew up and was a victim, as a kid, to be thrown into this political family where youfre always the photo op and youfve been dragged around to the various different events, and then on Sunday nights you have always 100 people over at the house and talk about policies and get dressed up and all this stuff.  And then therefs the campaign, and the father ran for vice-president, then for president, and she had to be out there at 5:00 in the morning in front of the factory telling people, gVote for my Daddy, vote for my Daddy,h and all of those things. 

So she felt very strongly, when she was 21 years old, that shefs going to go and find a man that has absolutely nothing to do with politics.  (Laughter) And she bumped into this Austrian farm boy that was a bodybuilder, and he was only concerned about oiling up and being with the little posing trunks up on stage, and showing how studly he is.  (Laughter) You get it.  Ifm talking about myself.  (Laughter) And so she thought, well, this guy is interesting because hefs a bodybuilding champion and he wants to go to Hollywood and be a movie star.  That will take us as far away from politics, from Washington or any of this stuff, as possible.  Great, Ifm going to go with this guy. 

Only to have, 30 years later, turn the whole thing and make it full circle, and then all of a sudden me saying to her, gMariah—we were sitting in the Jacuzzi—I said, gMaria, herefs an idea.  What do you think about this?  Me running for governor.h I said, gTherefs a recall, and there is only a two-month campaign, it wouldnft be that much,h I said, gAnd I think we can work our way through these two months.  And then Ifm governor, isnft that great?h And Maria started—I saw her, and in all seriousness, she had tears coming down from her eyes.  Thatfs how she responded to it.  She was very upset.  So I had to work on her for 14 days.  Thatfs where I learned negotiating, how to bring Democrats and Republicans together, right in the Jacuzzi. 

And I worked on her mother, my mother-in-law.  And her mother, of course, comes from the tradition of the Kennedy family.  The tradition is, donft get in the way of the man.  You know, if they have something in their tummy, in their stomach, that they wanted to do, and if itfs deep in their heart, then donft stop them.  And so with that in mind, Eunice told Maria, she said, gDonft stop him.  I think thatfs great he wants to be a public servant.  I think itfs great that he wants to give back to the state.h And so this is what happened.  Eunice said to Maria, she said, gLet him run.h And Maria came to me and said, gYou know, I will be your partner whatever you want to do.  Ifm going to go and campaign with you, and I want you to run.h And so we did that together, and so it was really terrific.  And so Maria deserves, actually, to be president of the United States, because shefs definitely smart enough to do it, and has all the experience in the world, trust me.  (Applause)

MR. WRIGHT:  And then I guess one quick suggestion is, maybe you do away with the smoke tent in Sacramento, and maybe bring in a big Jacuzzi, huh?

GOVERNOR:  No, no.  I like that smoke tent.  I like that smoking tent, I love it.  Everyone wants to take it away, but I love it.  And let me also just—I just want to add one more thing about the Constitution.  People ask me a lot of times, gDoesnft it make you mad that here is this land of opportunity, and you cannot go all the way?h and all this.  I donft think that way, to be honest with you, because I think only about the things that I was able to do.  I mean, there is so much that we are able to do in this country, there are so many opportunities, endless amount of opportunities.  I wouldnft have even had 10 percent of a career if I wouldnft have come to California, if I wouldnft have come to America.  So why would I think about the one thing that I canft do?  Why would I dwell on that?  I only think about the things that I was able to do, only because of America.  (Applause)

MR. WRIGHT:  And before I turn it back over to Carl:  So, are you going to run for the U.S. Senate, or L.A. mayor? 

GOVERNOR:  I have no interest in either one.  But, you know, if it makes people happy to talk about it.  And if it makes Barbara Boxer happy to talk about it, because this way she can raise more money, when she says:  That Schwarzenschnitzel, hefs after me.  Hefs after me.  Oh my God, wefve got to raise a lot of money.  (Laughter) You know thatfs what this is all about.  So no, I have really no interest in that at all.  (Applause)

>>:  Steven Wright, Governor Schwarzenegger, thank you for a wonderful, engaging dialogue.  (Applause)

GOVERNOR:  Thank you very much.  Thank you. 

>>:  Governor, three years ago in this room First Lady Maria Shriver joined us to be honored by an AmeriCorps program called City Year San Jose/Silicon Valley with their Lifetime of Service Award.  We wanted to recognize your lifetime of service, volunteerism to our communities through Special Olympics, through the After School Program, and all that you do, and also to make sure that when you and Maria are going out to dinner you have a matching wardrobe.  We have asked two representatives of City Year San Jose/Silicon Valley to join us on stage; Felicia Alusa and Michael Parades (Phonetic), to present you with the gift, as we presented to the First Lady, a coveted City Year San Jose-Silicon Valley jacket.  (Applause)

GOVERNOR:  Thank you very much.  It was a great, great pleasure to be interviewed here.  And youfre the best.  Itfs unbelievable.  Letfs give a big hand to the great, great questions that I have gotten here today.  Thank you very much.  Thank you, all of you, for listening. 

And I want to thank my wife also, because I wouldnft be here today if it wouldnft have been for the extraordinary help that shefs given me the last 30 years.  We met 30 years ago.  We just celebrated our 30th anniversary, even though wefve only been married for 21 years, but we have actually known each other for 30 years.  In every step of the way she has been very, very helpful, and a true partner.  I think every man should have a wife like that.  I tell you, shefs the best in the world.  So thank you very much.  Thank you.