(Sacramento, Calif.) Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has never shied away from changing his mind. Lately, it seems that’s all he’s been doing, creating confusion in the capital as he tries to tackle an ambitious policy agenda before his time in office runs out.

Earlier this month, he threatened a mass veto if legislative leaders didn’t agree to a comprehensive water deal, then backed down at the last minute and signed two-thirds of the 707 bills before him – similar to his annual record on legislation. After twice rejecting bills to honor slain gay rights activist Harvey Milk, he signed a bill giving him a statewide day of recognition without explanation.

He mocked lawmakers over the summer for wasting time debating bills about cows’ tails, honey labeling and a blueberry commission, then approved all three.

Those are among recent examples of Schwarzenegger’s erratic style that have both puzzled and angered lawmakers and policy advocates in the capital. The Republican governor has said he likes to remain flexible, while others say he is just untrustworthy.

His recent flip-flops prompted Assembly Minority Leader Sam Blakeslee, a fellow Republican from San Luis Obispo, to warn his caucus that Schwarzenegger isn’t always good to his word. He cited the governor’s “shocking reversal of position” on a number of bills.

The governor’s flair for drama helped propel him to international stardom, first as a bodybuilder and later as a Hollywood action star. In politics, that style has sometimes been misused by Schwarzenegger or misread by those he is trying to influence, leaving lawmakers and interest groups wondering whether he is telling them what he believes or merely saying what he thinks is convenient.

The questions about Schwarzenegger’s reliability come at a time when he has called lawmakers into special sessions on water policy, education reform and an overhaul of California’s tax system – issues fraught with partisan differences that will require cooperation to solve.

Schwarzenegger has defended his reversals by saying there is nothing wrong with him changing his mind, telling ABC’s George Stephanopoulos last year that “flip-flopping is getting a bad rap.”

This week, he said he was not bothered if others get upset during negotiations, what matters in the end is whether he and lawmakers reach a deal.

“People sometimes get upset if you sign a certain bill that they don’t like – you know, the Harvey Milk bill or something like that. You know, he (Blakeslee) sees it and says, ‘Oh my God, this is outrageous.’ So you know, that’s his problem,” Schwarzenegger told reporters. But, he said, “We want everyone to work together to make sure that we have the water infrastructure, because … it will be a historic accomplishment.”

Questions about whether Schwarzenegger was a reliable negotiating partner arose shortly after he took office in 2003, when he lost the trust of a key political constituency, education lobbyists. They charged him with reneging on a promise made behind closed doors to repay billions of dollars he wanted to borrow from schools to balance the state budget.

Schwarzenegger denied making the promise, but the disagreement was resolved only after education groups filed a lawsuit. Now he has icy relations with the California Teachers Association, whose input will be crucial to his special session on education reform.

More recently, Schwarzenegger has upset the largest state employee union with what its leaders claim is a similar backpedal.

The Service Employees International Union Local 1000 said it spent nine months negotiating a contract for its 95,000 employees with the Schwarzenegger administration, only to see the governor pressure Republican lawmakers not to approve it.

“He has set in place the notion that you can negotiate with the governor of California and it really doesn’t mean anything,” said Yvonne Walker, president of the local.

Adam Mendelsohn, a political adviser and former communications director for Schwarzenegger, called the governor “absolutely trustworthy.”

He characterized Schwarzenegger’s actions as attempts to cajole lawmakers into agreeing on issues of statewide significance. Resorting to threats only shows the governor’s frustration with legislative gridlock and lawmakers’ inability to compromise, Mendelsohn said.

“One of his greatest frustrations is that he doesn’t understand why it’s so difficult to meet in the middle to address these issues,” Mendelsohn said.

Schwarzenegger also infuriated city and county leaders earlier this year by opting to borrow about $2 billion in tax revenue from local governments, requiring the suspension of a law he had championed to prevent such raids. Local governments responded by suing the state to get the money back.

In September, Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill to honor Vietnam veterans with a day of remembrance, saying lawmakers should have other priorities. When lawmakers rushed through an identical bill weeks later, Schwarzenegger not only signed it but held a photo-friendly ceremony at a Marine Corps base in Southern California to promote his action.

Jack Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College in Southern California, said Schwarzenegger’s recent mass veto threat may have done the governor more harm than good.

“Empty threats are worse than useless,” Pitney said. “They undermine credibility and make it harder to influence legislators.”