by Mark Silva
Meg Whitman, the billionaire former CEO of eBay running for governor of California as a Republican, says she is ready for a political fight: "It is rough-and-tumble, but I say what I mean and I mean what I say.''
But now she is being asked about a press report, if it's true that she hadn't voted since the first President George Bush's election.
"I've been very straight up that my voting record isn't perfect,'' Whitman told the FOX Business Network's Neil Cavuto today. "I did not consistently vote,'' she said. "Like many Americans, I've missed too many elections..''
So who was the last president for whom she voted?
"I voted in the 1984 election in California,'' she replied. "I remember it very clearly.''
And the last president?
"George Bush (the first)... and John McCain, obviously.'' (She was a co-chair of he Arizona senator's campaign for president last year.)
The Whitman campaign is attempting to clarify her voting record. In a letter to the Sacramento Bee on Monday that was also distributed broadly to the media and talk radio hosts, Whitman communications director Tucker Bounds said: "Meg clearly remembers voting on multiple occasions, including the 1984 and 1988 presidential elections."
Asked what her voting says about her political "passion,'' Whitman told Cavuto today: "As I said, my voting record is not perfect but this is about the future of California and getting California back on track... I became very engaged in politics and how the government interacted with business. At eBay, we represented millions of small business selling services to have there sales stymied by taxation and regulation, so now I am very engaged.
"With regard to the Sacramento Bee (report), my record is not perfect. but I want it represented fairly and accurately, so we have taken them to task for that and Ii believe we will see a more accurate picture. They said that I had not voted until I was 46 years old, which was blatantly untrue.''
(Former eBay chief executive Meg Whitman is pictured above at a news conference at the California Republican Convention in Indian Wells, Calif., on Sept. 26..(Photo by Francis Specker / AP)
On the national front, Whitman says this about health care: "Everybody is for reforming the health care system of what can be improved, but I am not for those public options out there. You have to focus on cost, quality, access and we have to get the cost under control than provide access.''
President Barack Obama contends that increasing competition, including a public option, will rein in costs.
"I disagree,'' Whitman says. "The best way is to open the borders of the different states to more insurance competition there is limited competition in each state. Let's open it up and do some of the things we know we can do to reduce costs.''
On the mood in California, Whitman says: "I would say they're very worried about what is going on nationally but they know you cannot spend more than you take and on a consistent basis. They're very worried about the deficit and the cost of the things what we have been doing. They're worried about the future of their state as well.''
She has opposed legislation curtailing greenhouse gas emissions in California: "What it does-- the bill that brings down the greenhouse gas emissions-- puts California at a disadvantage to the neighboring states. We're bleeding jobs to Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Texas -- they don't have any regulation.
"I want great environmental standards in California but we cannot continue to lose jobs to neighboring states because we have the fourth highest unemployment rate in the country,'' she says, noting that "2.2 million Californians are out of work. Let's take a pause to make sure we understand the situation in which we find ourselves which is far more dire than when the bill was started..''
Would she say the same to the president about national limits on greenhouse gases?
"We have known each other for a long time,'' she says. "I am a believer in focus with. Let's do three things 100 percent and not a lot of other things until we get the three things done. And for the state of California i feel very strongly about creating and keeping jobs in California, getting government spending under control and fixing the K-12 education system.''
Cavuto asks if that's not easier said than done - she speaks of cutting state spending by $15 billion, eliminating redundant agencies and laying off upwards of 40,000 state employees - actions that others have spoken of in the past.
"This time we have to because we have a government we can no longer afford,'' she says. "Everyone agrees on that... We have to. I know I can lead this effort -- people in California are fed up.''
In light of her own experience and California's problems, might she consider putting state assets up for auction on eBay?
"It s one small part of what we should do,'' Whitman says. "I don't know about e-bay... There are surplus properties that should be sold. We have to look at the core drivers of the cost of the government and first is the number of people that work for the government, programs that have never sunset, employ technology to lower cost.''









Comments
If you can operate a billion dollar business, you'll be able to run a state.
Look at obama's voting record while he was a state senator...voted present most of the time, until it came to his passion...arbortion.
As a U.S. Senator he voted against the surge and now,as president, he can't figure out what to do in Afghanistan.
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | October 7, 2009 12:23 PM
Um... eBay lost like 1.5 billion dollars on Whitman's Skype fiasco. There was a reason why they fired her you know. :)
What's with Republicans and women who suck at being CEOs?
Oh right, if they didn't suck, they would still be CEOs and not running for public office. Duh...
Posted by: Andrew | October 7, 2009 2:42 PM
Come on Paulo, you're going to make the baby obama cry. This story is not about the president or his voting record as a citizen or elected representative in Illinois.
This story (unbelievable as it is) is the most recent republican bashing Mark can sink his gums into. Oh my, this person didn't vote in every election? maybe because she didn't see ANYONE worth voting for? Now that's something isn't it! Holding your vote for a worth while candidate that you think won't totally screw up our government!
Thank God and the baby obama that not every US citizen feels it is their duty to vote no matter if there are any worth while candidates or not. Chicago, home of the great Democrat machine, only needs mindless voters to punch one hole in the ballot.
BRING TRANSPARENCY TO THE WHITE HOUSE AND CONGRESS NOW! TRUTHFUL AND WHOLE!
Posted by: springfield | October 7, 2009 3:00 PM
Meg, we're not bleeding science and engineering jobs -- you know, the ones who actually have to work to meet the environmental regulations -- to other states. That's like saying we're bleeding jobs to Vegas because stripping is legal there.
Posted by: kb | October 7, 2009 3:12 PM
The Sacremento Bee ran a blatantly unsourced hit-piece on Whitman that they tried to pass off as news.
Whitman and others called them on it. See http://www.hughhewitt.com/blog/ for one law professor's attempts to get the shoddy newspaper to reveal its sources.
No wonder there are only two kinds of newspapers--the Dead, and the Dying.
Posted by: Bruce | October 7, 2009 3:37 PM
kb - speaking from California? what jobs are being lost? does that 2.2 million Californians out of work include "illegals"? You seem to have some information that you are not sharing - from the Californian side that is.
We have the same problem here in Illinois. Chicago is one of the largest Sancturary cities in the USA, the illegal's carry some weight on the local, state, federal government systems here in Illinois. Costly, yet affordable to those who believe that there really are no illegal's in this country that could in any way, shape or form reflect on unemployment, government services and taxes collected to support those services.
Posted by: springfield | October 7, 2009 3:44 PM
As one poster pointed out, Whitman was not successful at eBay. She took a company with a lot of momentum, made bad decisions, and laid a lot of people off. She made millions while doing so. And didn't manage to vote (except for McCain, for whom she was campaigning) in the meantime?
She's a loser, a fraud, and dimwit who thinks that wealth and CEO-celebrity status qualifies her to lose yet more jobs.
If the GOP wants to win, they better get rid of her now.
Posted by: jt | October 7, 2009 5:47 PM
Not to worry. There are enough ebay members to insure that Meg Whitman will go down in flames. There are much better choices than another propped up, advisored up, phony.
Posted by: Gary | October 8, 2009 4:38 AM
Why should anyone vote in this country with so many districts gerry-mandered to keep the incumbents in?
Look at Chicago. Congressmen never lose. Why should I bother to vote when a Republican has no chance at all. Think Danny Davis is ever going to lose? This country has been divided by both parties to favor incumbents so there really is no contest in 92 percent of Congressional districts. Why waste my time? Don't fault Meg Whitman. Fault a system that makes a mockery of democracy.
Posted by: Daryl | October 8, 2009 10:56 AM
Not to worry. There are enough ebay members to insure that Meg Whitman will go down in flames. There are much better choices than another propped up, advisored up, phony.
Posted by: Gary | October 8, 2009 2:29 PM
She is running to change the direction of California which was destroyed by Arnold who is also a republican. When she was with ebay, she didn't have tech support for ebay sellers and a lot of the ebay sellers lost a lot of money because of scammers. Then later, they keep on increasing the fees on ebay and that's how a lot of businesses closed. I guess if she becomes the next governor of California, we can expect her track record from ebay. Doesn't know what she was doing when they started. and like arnold, probably will raise taxes again. They run under the banner of small government. But, they are really good at hiding the fact that they are raising taxes for the benefit of the corporations that contribute to their campaigns. I meet her at an ebay convention in February of 2006. Only the top 1% of ebay sellers were invited to that convention and we were paying $10-$20,000 a month on ebay fees. If she wanted to help out the sellers and help businesses grow, they could have cut down the cost of the listing price at least.
Posted by: Richard | October 9, 2009 3:55 AM