Calitics

I will be on KRXA 540 AM at 8 AM to discuss this and other California political issues

Today Darrell Steinberg is expected to finally be elected as Senate President Pro Tem, bringing the failed leadership of Don Perata to a welcome end. George Skelton welcomes him to office with a column the landmark smart growth bill that Steinberg has been pushing through the legislature. Although the bill won't pass this year, it has a big head of steam behind it, and faces good prospects in the 2009 session.

Steinberg's bill would link land use planning in California to the AB 32 global warming targets:

"One issue everyone has been afraid to touch is land use," Steinberg says. "Everyone understands about using alternative fuel. But land use has been the third rail. AB 32 changed the equation because now land use has to be part of the solution to global warming. You can't meet our goal just with alternative fuels. You have to reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled.

"If people are going to drive -- and they are going to drive -- we need to plan in ways to get them out of their cars faster. That means shrinking -- not the amount of housing, not economic development, not growth -- but shrinking the footprint on which that growth occurs."

Steinberg wants it to occur within a smaller circle around downtown.

Basically the bill would work like this: Each metropolitan region would adopt a "sustainable community strategy" to encourage compact development. They'd mesh it with greenhouse emissions targets set by the California Air Resources Board, which is charged with commanding the state's fight against global warming.

Also included are preferential funding for transportation projects that fit with the "sustainable community strategy" and an expedited permitting process for those developments that fit the law's and the community strategy's goals.

Tom Adams of the California League of Conservation Voters called the plan "the most important land-use bill in California since enactment of the Coastal Act three decades ago" and he's right to say it. But the plan does more than help the environment and reduce carbon emissions.

One year ago I called for "redefining the California dream" - restoring the economic security of California workers by abandoning sprawl and turning to urban density and mass transit. This is not just an environmental move, but it is absolutely necessary for job growth, affordable housing, and basic financial security.

California can no longer afford sprawl. The national housing bubble burst right here, in the exurbs of Stockton, Modesto, and Moreno Valley. As gas prices rise at a rate of 30% every year since 2002, sprawl becomes literally unaffordable for most Californians, with a devastating ripple effect throughout the economy.

Republicans will predictably be furious with Steinberg's plan, but that's because they represent the emergent "homeowner aristocracy" - certain (by no means all) households that bought their home prior to 1990 or so, those who want to preserve the conditions of the 20th century at all costs.

As Jerry Brown recognized when he was governor 30 years ago, and still recognizes today, density done right is the key to maintaining the middle-class California dream for the 21st century. Only by following the Portland model of strictly limiting sprawl and encouraging infill development and providing the transportation options needed to serve that development can we bring affordability back to California, and secure the economic future for new generations of Californians.

Steinberg's genius move is to link that strategy to the fight against global warming. It's nice to finally see some real leadership from Democrats on this matter and particularly from the new leader of the State Senate. SB 375 may not make it to the governor's desk this year, but it deserves our strong support in the 2009 session. It will transform California for the better, and there are few bills aside from SB 840 that can credibly make that claim.

Tyrone Freeman, the rising star who had led the United Long Term Care Workers local of SEIU, has stepped down from his post in order to allow an investigation into his spending habits.

Tyrone Freeman, president of the Service Employees International Union chapter, said in a written statement that he was taking a leave of absence and that the local would be placed in a temporary trusteeship.

"In order to ensure that any investigation of the allegations is fair and free from any question of interference or influence, I am taking a leave of absence effective immediately for the duration of the investigation," the statement said. "I believe these steps will allow our union to continue to serve the best interests of our membership during this time." (LA Times 8/20/08)

Freeman had been a star protege of SEIU International President Andy Stern, and had frequently clashed with United Heathcare Workers West president Sal Rosselli. Joe Matthews had an interesting post about this last week at Blockbuster Democracy:

Why does the action need to be so clear-cut? Because the labor movement is on the rise in Los Angeles. To attend a city council meeting or a mayoral press conference is to watch the labor movement governing the city. As the journalist Harold Meyerson has written, the rise of the LA unions as a labor force has been aided by the widespread perception that our unions are not old-style, corrupt empires. This is supposed to be new labor. The public needs to see transparency and accountability in the response to this.

As for Freeman, I hope he can make amends for this conduct and have a future in the labor movement. But it can't be as president of this local.

While the move isn't permanent, it would be hard to imagine Freeman back at ULTCW. My guess is that he finds a job elsewhere within SEIU, but likely outside of California.

So, Arnold Schwarzenegger just held a press conference that was webcast on his website. He proceeded to introduce exactly the same plan that he had been pushing for the last 6 weeks: a 1% sales tax and a bunch of budget reforms. The sales tax, by the way, which would affect far more people and inflict far more harm than reverting to the Reagan era tax brackets. No specific mention of a spending cap, but I'm sure we will hear more about this new "compromise plan".

Ultimately, I think the point of this was just to castigate the legislature. "The Republicans need to come out of their idealogical corner where they say no tax increases, and the Democrats need to come out of their ideological corner where they say no cuts," the governor said.

Except wait, rewind that a bit.  The Democrats say no cuts? Except the over 8 Billion already cut? Except for the further 3 or so they are offering to cut now?  Speaker Bass has already tried three ways from Sunday to compromise with the Republicans, but they just won't do it.

Oh, and the Governor also addressed his speech at the Republican National Convention.  Apparently he won't be making it if there is no budget.  If I'm John McCain, I'd be working on getting a replacement speaker.

UPDATE: You can watch the video here.

For the last few years, I've been quite involved in the CDP.  I care deeply about the California Democratic Party and the tactics and policies that it pursues. I know that this Party can be a vehicle for real fundamental progressive policy change at all levels of government. However, we have a wide range of obstacles in front of us in the coming years to ensure that we strengthen our Party for the challenges of the next generation. That is why I have decided to run for vice-chair of the California Democratic Party.

As Democrats, we are fortunate. We needn't concern ourselves with suppressing any voting blocs or hiding from our positions. The simple truth is that when the people come out to vote, we win. But turnout operations require people, thus we must become a truly people powered party. In word and deed. We need to continue the work of the neighborhood leader program, and build upon our recent successes. We need to register more voters, and then make sure they get to the polls.  That much we all know, but getting all that done requires a people-powered machine of volunteerism.

We must engage the grassroots of the party, and throw open the doors of the California Democratic Party.  It is increasingly clear that if we are to truly build a people-powered party that we need more transparency at all levels within the CDP. If we are to ask people to volunteer for our campaigns, shouldn't they know what they are signing up for? It's simply a matter of motivation, people are more likely to dedicate their time, effort, and resources to a party that explains their strategy to them.  This CDP should be of, by, and for grassroots Democrats as we attempt to ensure our collective success.

This people-powered party shouldn't simply exist to serve a legislative caucus or any particular donor, but rather to ensure that the collective action of thousands of grassroots Democrats can be heard.  This means truly opening up ourselves to introspection.  It means reviewing our processes to ensure that we are an institution that is seeking the best solution rather than the easy solution. It means recalibrating ourselves to overcome inertia in the service of positive change. After all, if there is one thing that term limits have taught us, it is that incumbency is ephemeral, values are permanent.

But reform is a two-way street.  In order to build a truly people-powered party, we must follow up by building a program to increase donations to the party from grassroots activists. As transparency can increase activism, it can also increase fundraising.  While nobody expects to compete with presidential candidates, the growth of online donations from Howard Dean to Barack Obama shows that there is money there for those who speak clearly and openly of their beliefs. The same is true of the CDP .  Grassroots donations will not come until the grassroots activists are completely assured that their money will be spent wisely and for their intended purpose of supporting Democratic values.  This is not an overnight process, but rather a long process of growing relationships and building trust.

One way of supporting those Democratic values is to invest resources to expand the reach of our Party and fully implement our 58-County Strategy. Despite any conventional wisdom to the contrary, we are capable of growing the Party all across the state.We should encourage the growth of our Democratic County Central Committees and support their party-building efforts, whether they be volunteer voter registration drives or the hiring of regional field organizers.  Furthermore, we need to field candidates everywhere, because, as Howard Dean said, we can't expect votes unless we ask for them.  We needn't limit ourselves to the Coast, because despite the attacks that our leveled against us, we are right.

We are right that we can't sell our civil liberties for a false promise of Big Brother providing us security. We are right that we all deserve access to health care without the concern of going broke (and then losing our homes to foreclosure). We are right that climate change presents to us a major and immediate challenge. We were right that Iraq was a war that should have never been authorized and never been waged. And we are right to provide the troops with all that we have promised, including quality health care and quality education when they return. Because despite the foolhardy nature of the mission, they have served admirably.  We are right that California, and the nation, need clean, publicly-owned, and trustworthy elections. And we are right that all Californians should be free to marry the one that they love.

We already have the capacity to make this a people-powered party. All the tools are already here. It's simply a matter of will. Together we can build this CDP into our CDP .  Over the coming months I hope to talk to any delegates and as many interested Democrats as possible to discuss these challenges to the CDP in more detail.  I do not take this lightly. I have considered this for a long time, and feel that I can provide value to the CDP in the role of vice-chair. My experience with Calitics has given me a catbird seat view of the issues presented to the CDP.  And I am confident that my education and experience as a lawyer and a policy analyst will be an asset to the party. I have experience working for and against statewide propositions, and understand the good, bad, and ugly of California politics.  I have high expectations for this party and know that we will always have more work to do.  I'm ready to do some of that work.  If you have questions, let me know. Email me at brian AT calitics dotcom, and I'll get back to you promptly. And if you're going to be in Denver, well, I'll do my best to speak to as many Californians as possible.

Bio: Brian Leubitz runs Calitics.com, the leading California progressive blog covering California politics and policy. He holds a law degree from the University of Texas and a Master of Public Policy (M.P.P) from the Goldman School at The University of California, Berkeley. After practicing law in San Francisco, Brian transitioned into politics and launched Calitics .com in 2005.  He has worked on several campaigns in the state, including the Yes on 93 (term limits reform) and the No on 98/Yes on 99 (eminent domain and property rights) campaigns. He currently is a member of the Democratic State Central Committee, serves on the CDP's resolutions committee, and is on the boards of the San Francisco Young Democrats and the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club.

Monday night.  Be there.

Maybe he can tell them all how they have to compromise and raise taxes and to stop with the nonsense right-wing Republican talk that lies to the people.

Somehow, I expect it to be more in line with the dogma.

By the way, aren't the legislators not supposed to leave for their respective national conventions until a budget is signed?

I guess it's OK if you're Arnold.

One of the most important but so far overlooked narratives of this election cycle is the return of taxes as a major political issue. The recession is hitting government budgets just as that same downturn, combined with soaring gas prices and global warming is creating demand for new spending.

Against this backdrop conservatives are now convinced that their way out of an ugly election cycle is to rally the public behind their rabid anti-tax politics. Constant attacks on Obama as a tax-raiser are partly to blame for McCain's recent rise in the polls.

And here in the states Republicans are again turning to the tax revolt, their bread and butter for 30 years. Republican intransigence on the California budget is best seen as part of this national strategy to break Democrats on the tax rack.

The Wall Street Journal has a great overview of tax politics in the states, including a lunatic proposal to eliminate Massachusetts' income tax and a equally nutty plan to allow Oregon residents to deduct an unlimited amount of federal tax on their state returns.

Here in California conservatives are already circling the wagons on taxes. John and Ken, the reliable bellwethers of SoCal conservatism, raked Arnold over the coals yesterday over taxes:

Schwarzenegger tried to defend new taxes as necessary because the state was still paying off debts incurred by predecessor Gov. Gray Davis. But the hosts pressed further and suggested that Schwarzenegger abandoned his original mission of fixing the state's fiscal situation in order to pursue environmental goals.

That seemed to upset the governor, who maintained that his environmental policies had nothing to do with the state budget.

"This is absolutely absurd what you're saying right now," Schwarzenegger said. "....You're living in the Stone Age if you think that the environmental issue has anything to do with the budget or the declining economy worldwide."

"Don't lie to the people," Schwarzenegger added. "That's all I can tell you, don't lie to the people. Don't pull wool over their eyes. It's nonsense Republican right-wing talk."

To which John and Ken then asked whether Arnold was under anesthesia. Stay classy, Los Angeles.

What this shows is that the conservatives are in no mood whatsoever to give ground on taxes. The drubbing John and Ken gave Arnold is a taste of what many Sacramento Republicans might face from within their own party. Their fear is that by voting for a tax increase, they're going to face primary challengers who will simply tell the wingnut base "my opponent voted for a tax increase" and their ambitious political careers will be over.

So it seems very unlikely that Republicans will give in this time. That leaves it up to Democrats to force the issue. The only thing that should scare Republicans more than a primary fight is losing the general election. That means Dems have to go after Republicans hard - and that in turn means Dems have to finally stop avoiding the issue and for the first time in 30 years make a case for taxes.

The problem is that, with reporters like Lisa Vorderbrueggen repeating conservative tax framing, Dems have an uphill battle. Way too many Californians assume taxes are taken out of their own pocket and never returned to them, even though Californians derive great and real economic value from government spending.

One angle would be to, as Anthony Wright suggests over on the left-hand column, make the budget about the economy. Explain the value of the services Californians receive from government and show how, in a recession, the loss of those services will hurt their bottom line.

Dems would also do well to explain to voters how Republican tax cuts are behind this crisis - from the 1998 McClintock tax cuts to Arnold's $6 billion VLF cut to the repeated borrowing that Republicans have demanded, this budget crisis would be quite manageable were it not for reckless tax cuts.

Further, explain how tax cuts are also responsible for our economic downturn. With more government spending on higher education, health care, and mass transit, many of the costs that currently cripple households would be eased.

It's not about the "budget" and never has been. This about taxes. With their backs up against the wall conservatives have returned to the strategies that brought them to power in the first place, and in California that means stoking a tax revolt. Unless Dems are able to defang that argument this budget crisis, and perhaps even the 2008 election, are not going have a happy ending.

At this point the judiciary is pretty much the only government entity in this state I have a modicum of belief in; they aren't hamstrung by ridiculous rules that make it impossible to function, so they can simply follow the law.  State agencies, when properly run, also can exhibit some independence.  Lately, there have been several cases ruled in favor of reformers at the expense of malign protectors of the health care status quo.

After a series of investigations from the California Department of Public Health, 18 hospitals have been fined for substandard care.

Violations included an improperly inserted catheter, a ventilator that was not turned on and surgical tools left inside patients after operations [...]

The hospitals were fined $25,000 for each violation - the latest of dozens of penalties the state has issued in recent years to more than 40 hospitals.

"The number of penalties will decrease and the quality of care will dramatically improve as hospitals take action to improve," said Kathleen Billingsley, director of the health department's Center for Healthcare Quality. "The entire intent of these fines is to improve the overall quality of care in California."

As care is improved, so must access for treatment.  The proposed cuts to Medi-Cal by the governor would have decimated the ability for the poor to find a doctor.  The cuts never made it through district court.

A federal judge has ordered a temporary halt in the state's 10 percent reduction in Medi-Cal reimbursement rates, improving access to care for 6.5 million low-income patients but throwing a new wrench in already difficult budget negotiations.

The U.S. District Court decision forces the state to reimburse most Medi-Cal providers at rates prior to the 10 percent cut, which lawmakers and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger made effective July 1 as a cost-cutting measure to help resolve a $15.2 billion budget shortfall this year.

The move increases reimbursement rates the state pays to doctors, dentists, pharmacists, adult day-care centers and other providers who serve Medi-Cal patients. It excludes some hospitals who do not contract with the state and do not provide emergency care.

This just shows the fallacy of a cuts-only budget, which runs into all kinds of voter mandates and constitutional demands.  The good news here is that reimbursement rates will be sustained, albeit at a level low enough that half of the state's doctors will still probably reject Medi-Cal patients.  The Democratic budget would also have rescinded the Medi-Cal rate cuts.

In a separate decision in the State Supreme Court, the justices ruled that doctors cannot deny care to gays and lesbians based on moral objections.

Justice Joyce Kennard wrote that two Christian fertility doctors who refused to artificially inseminate a lesbian have neither a free speech right nor a religious exemption from the state's law, which "imposes on business establishments certain antidiscrimination obligations."

In the lawsuit that led to the ruling, Guadalupe Benitez, 36, of Oceanside said that the doctors treated her with fertility drugs and instructed her how to inseminate herself at home but told her their beliefs prevented them from inseminating her. One of the doctors referred her to another fertility specialist without moral objections, and Benitez has since given birth to three children.

Nevertheless, Benitez in 2001 sued the Vista-based North Coast Women's Care Medical Group. She and her lawyers successfully argued that a state law prohibiting businesses from discriminating based on sexual orientation applies to doctors.

Of course, we cannot rely on the courts to shape public policy.  But they set the boundaries - the lines that lawmakers cannot cross.  And those boundaries are leading to increased access and improved care.

The Assembly Dems have pumped out a couple of videos on the budget in the last week.  Sure, I'm partial to Mark Leno, so I thought I'd share his speech from the Assembly floor on Sunday.

Hey, did you know FDR caused the depression? Pretty amazing that he did that in 1929, 3 years before he became president in 1932. It's cool what you can learn from the Republicans! And, you know, FDR did some pretty darn bad things like establish the social security system. Man, what was that guy thinking, providing a safety net for our nation's seniors?! That pretty much ruined America, right?

The important part here is that the Republicans don't want to lay their cards on the table. Why not? Well, could you imagine a true cuts only budget? It would be horrific, with massive cuts to education and healthcare services.

I suppose they just want to let the next generation pay for operating expenses of today. No better way to show you love your kids than saddle them with debt.

[UPDATE] Almost as soon as I posted this Arnold announced the fundraiser will be rescheduled to Sept. 19. Doesn't change the basic issue though.

Not content with firing 20,000 state workers and jeopardizing the wages of thousands more, and apparently unconcerned that the lack of a state budget might further harm California's already reeling economy, Arnold Schwarzenegger is going to Portland on Thursday to raise money for Republican US Senator Gordon Smith.

The fundraiser is a slap in the face to Californians, and not just because Arnold is abandoning the budget stalemate. Gordon Smith played a central role in the salmon crisis that has crippled the California fishing industry and imperiled the jobs of thousands.

In 2002 Smith conspired with Karl Rove and Dick Cheney to divert water from the Klamath River to farmers in southern Oregon experiencing dry conditions, in order to shore up Smith's rural base. Cheney convened a "God squad" that overrode endangered species protections in order to make the water diversion for nakedly political purposes - still one of the boldest and most destructive anti-environment moves of the entire Bush era.

The result was an ongoing catastrophe for the Pacific Coast salmon fishery. The diversion caused a massive die-off of salmon in the Klamath River in 2002, but the effects have been long-lasting. Salmon numbers have been so slow to recover that salmon fishing was severely restricted in 2007. Here in 2008, of course, the ENTIRE west coast salmon fishery has been closed, an unprecedented event. While the issues in the Sacramento Delta were a primary motivator behind the total closure, the ongoing weakness of the Klamath fishery, dating to the 2002 fish kill, is a contributing factor.

Gordon Smith is unrepentant  about his role in the fish kill:

Sen. Gordon Smith said Tuesday that he has no regrets about the diversion of water from the Klamath River that was intended to protect fish but instead went to farmers....

"I am not here to make any apologies," said Smith, who faces re-election next year. "I am proud to fight for the farmers or any group of Americans whom the federal government says has no standing, no water. I just find that offensive."...

I am not sorry for fighting for farmers. I have a responsibility for humankind.

Arnold Schwarzenegger has his own responsibility - to Californians and their jobs. To Californians who have been devastated by the salmon crisis, from Yurok and Hoopa peoples living along the Klamath whose traditional rights have been eroded, to the fishermen in towns like Fort Bragg and Monterey whose livelihoods have been put at risk so Gordon Smith could score points with a few farmers in southern Oregon.

Arnold's attendance at the fundraiser is a slap at his fellow Californians. And while it's not likely that we can convince him to cancel the event, we can fight back by donating to Jeff Merkley, the progressive Democrat running against Smith. Merkley has said that he will help save the salmon by preferencing science, not crass politics. It's a better position for us Californians than the fish and job killing of Gordon Smith that our own governor is now helping enable.

The story of Sacramento lobbyists killing two bills to eliminate PFC chemicals from packaging is short, so you can go read it yourself.  It's the same old story - legislation that is overwhelmingly popular and easily implementable is killed off by lobbyists for business and industry.  Regardless of the budget fight, that's life in Sacramento.  And at the same time, legislators scurry to one fundraiser after another where the same lobbyists pat them on the head and hand them a check.  It's nauseating, and anyone outside of a political consultant who thinks that the next governor race matters even a whit absent fundamental change of this aspect of Sacramento politics is dreaming.

And people power is the only thing that'll kill it dead, not a kinder and gentler version of the same old politics that can't change the state.

UPDATE by Brian: I've added the vote information for both bills in the comments.

SF Mayor Gavin Newsom has announced a campaign team for his run at the governorship in 2010.  In this respect, he gets a jump over any other candidates, potential or announced.  However, if you have read Calitics for any length of time, something in the following PolitickerCA story will stick out to you:

SAN FRANCISCO - Famed California political strategist Garry South has joined Mayor Gavin Newsom's 2010 gubernatorial exploratory committee, a spokesman for the committee announced this morning.
***
Exploratory committee spokesman Eric Jaye also announced that the committee has retained influential political polling firm, Benenson Strategy Group, and its principals Joel Benenson, chief pollster for U.S. Senator and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama and Peter Brodnitz ... will join the exploratory effort.

It's an interesting team, once you throw in campaign manager and former Hillary NH state director Nick Clemons. But, of course, the elephant in the room is the Lieberman strategist Garry South.  Garry and I don't have the best relationship.

Personal feelings aside, I still believe that he is a force for milquetoasty centrist policies. I'll leave it up to you whether you think that's a good thing in an adviser. Now, you can debate whether Newsom is as sculptable as Davis, but I'm sure there will be plenty of eyes on Newsom to see if he runs this primary campaign as a California Lieberman or as a California Wellstone. Of course there's a big spectrum between those two styles.

South, at least in his previous campaigns, was none too fond of people-powered campaigns or the broader movement. Let's just say, he was not empowered by Howard (Dean) and the internet. Time will tell if he recreates his past "success" with Newsom.

With the convention days away everyone asks "You're a delegate.  Who's your choice for VP?"  Easy answer, "It's not my choice."  But were it my choice I'd pick Senator Joe Biden.  He is well known and well respected all across the nation.  He has gravitas.  He is an expert on international relations which is always important in every administration.  He has been a national candidate and has the experience of campaigning in multiple states.  And always a key consideration is: Could this person be a good president if necessary? The answer again is a strong yes. There you have my answer to a choice that is not mine to make.

Garamendi is a Clinton delegate and the state of California's top ranked Democrat.

Late on Friday, word broke that a lawsuit had been filed over Ken Calvert's most recent shady land dealings. As the PE reports, "The Jurupa Area Recreation and Park District is suing the Jurupa Community Services District, charging the water and sewer agency with fraud and deceit in connection with the 2006 sale of property to Rep. Ken Calvert and his partners."

This is centered around California law requiring that all government land coming up for sale first be offered to other government agencies. In this case, the Jurupa Area Recreation and Park District wanted this land for new development, and had for several years before the sale. Instead, the 4 acres was sold directly to Ken Calvert for a cut rate, circumventing the Recreation and Parks district. They were, to put it mildly, miffed.

A Riverside grand jury has now determined that the land deal violated state law, clearly the way for this lawsuit to proceed. Calvert, for his part, is no stranger to this or other exceptionally shady land dealings in his district. In exchange for his preferential (and illegal) treatment in this deal, Calvert delivered for Community Services board members prime access to members of Congress in order to lobby for water project funding. Water projects that just so happen to directly benefit the property that Calvert bought illegally.

That is, Calvert received an illegal sweetheart deal from the Community Services District, then brought the board members to DC and hooked them up with other Congressmembers to get water projects for the property they sold him illegally.

Calvert of course has a long-standing record of corrupt dealings. So much so that even the right wing blogosphere flipped out about another corrupt Congressman being appointed to the appropriations committee back in 2007. Back in 2004 he was running around Saudi Arabia with Duke Cunningham (R-Tucson Federal Correctional Institution) and unindicted co-conspirator #3 aka Thomas Kontogiannis. He also pushed through more than $90 million in earmarks for a lobbying firm now under federal investigation (so is Calvert and Jerry Lewis for that matter). He's also pulled down earmarks of $1.2 million for transit improvements around seven of his properties in Corona.

Just another in a long line of Calvert fleecing the public to line his pockets. Perhaps what we've come to expect from the modern GOP, but Calvert has grown so comfortable that he's not worried about bringing Dick Cheney in to fundraise for him. Dick Cheney. Who absolutely nobody likes.

Bill Hedrick is looking to send Calvert a wakeup call this year.

This cartoon by PolitickerCA cartoonist (click here to view at original size) Rob Tornoe (archive) hits dead on.  He calls Villines' gunsmoke partisanship, and ultimately that's what it is.  The Assembly Minority has chosen the Club for Growth and Partisanship over the greater will of Californians and what is best for California.

Due to the inanity that is the 2/3 budget rule, a minority can hold the majority of the state hostage. And that word is used liberally throughout the coverage of this story, precisely because this has all the classic signs of a hostage taking.  Heck the Republicans even have a ransom letter, ACA 19, where they gave a list that would make the Joker double take.  And this message of hostage taking is continuing.

From today's La Opini?n:

California's fiscal situation, with its deficit of over $15 billion, requires an open, pragmatic vision in Sacramento. In this context, there is no room for compromise on the ideological matter of not raising taxes. Moreover, this inflexible position only serves to block a system that requires bipartisan agreement.

California is now hostage to a harmful extremism, as a minority ideology is being imposed on the majority.

You can't agree on a compromise if you have signed your soul over to some hardline pledge. Signing pledges creates an environment of partisanship and ultimately is deeply irresponsible.

[UPDATE] by Robert: Sandr? Swanson, Loni Hancock and Mark DeSaulnier are vowing to put a measure repealing the 2/3 rule on the 2010 ballot - but it would only repeal the 2/3 rule for approving a budget, leaving the 2/3 rule to approve a tax increase in place. That's not good enough, as the Howard Jarvis Association responds:

Conservatives say Democrats can have a simple majority vote on budgets; it's the two-thirds vote on taxes they'll defend to the end, they say.

"The two-thirds vote on the budget is almost irrelevant - it's almost a moot point," said Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. "The issue is tax revenues, not expenditure plans."

As much as I hate to write this...Coupal is right. The issue IS taxes. Dems need to be attacking the Republicans not just on obstinacy but on taxes. Dems can't avoid the issue any longer.

I work for the Courage Campaign

After months of simmering, reports last week sounded rather certain that negotiations between the U.S. and Iraq to continue the American presence in Iraq would include the elimination of immunity for security contractors. Talk of a timetable for withdrawal- phased or complete- has been one sticking point, the Washington Post reported "Iraq's insistence that its laws should prevail stems largely from the excesses of private U.S. security contractors, whom negotiators have agreed would be subject to Iraqi law." Specifically the Nisoor Square massacre in which Blackwater agents killed 17 unarmed civilians without provocation.

The road towards some sort of justice for that massacre has been a long and torturous one (see here for a brief rundown of the attempted coverup). Despite a U.S. military investigation finding no evidence that Blackwater was fired upon, blanket immunity was immediately offered and counter-theories popped up all over the place. But after fighting through the courts for almost a year, there's encouraging progress towards justice. Over the weekend, the Washington Post reported six Blackwater agents received target letters from federal prosecutors, suggesting that indictments for at least some of them will be forthcoming.
It's vital that the framework be established to govern security contractors in Iraq because there are simply so many of them. For the first time in U.S. history, the ratio of contractors to servicemembers is 1:1. And so far, there's absolutely no mechanism to hold those 190,000 contractors accountable under any laws anywhere. Jennifer Daskal of Human Rights Watch reminds us "[t]his [Nisoor Square] is definitely the most high-profile case of contractor abuse in Iraq, but it's certainly not the only one."

With movement in both Iraq and the U.S. to start holding these folks accountable, it only bolsters the argument that Blackwater is not a good neighbor in San Diego or anywhere else. They simply don't serve the community or the country and- no matter how much Don Rumsfeld wanted to completely outsource the military- have no business undermining the servicemen and women who actually perform these jobs with skill and honor. Once Blackwater is forced to accept the consequences for reckless barbarism, it'll bolster the case of grassroots activists that have never given up the fight against Blackwater. One more step in the right direction.

Brian mentioned this in the open thread, but it really deserves its own post, it's such a ridiculous column. George Skelton today made a full-throated but deeply flawed argument for offshore drilling that as far as I can tell boils down to "well we did it in the past, and it's not going to help in the future...so why not?!" and winds up arguing that we should sacrifice the future for hardly anything in return. The column doesn't start off on a promising note:

On some beaches around Santa Barbara, you could feel the oozing tar between your toes -- and that was long before a Union Oil platform five miles offshore spilled crud all over 20 miles of coast in 1969. For centuries, the tar naturally had seeped up through the sand, providing the native Chumash with caulking for their canoes.

Calling it "crud" is deliberately misleading readers about what actually happened in 1969. From UCSB:

Animals that depended on the sea were hard hit. Incoming tides brought the corpses of dead seals and dolphins. Oil had clogged the blowholes of the dolphins, causing massive lung hemorrhages. Animals that ingested the oil were poisoned. In the months that followed, gray whales migrating to their calving and breeding grounds in Baja California avoided the channel -their main route south.

The oil took its toll on the seabird population. Shorebirds like plovers, godwits and willets which feed on sand creatures fled the area. But diving birds which must get their nourishment from the waters themselves became soaked with tar....

Grebes, cormorants and other seabirds were so sick, their feathers so soaked in oil that they were not difficult to catch. Birds were bathed in Polycomplex A-11, medicated, and placed under heat lamps to stave off pneumonia. The survival rate was less than 30 percent for birds that were treated. Many more died on the beaches where they had formerly sought their livelihoods. Those who had managed to avoid the oil were threatened by the detergents used to disperse the oil slick. The chemicals robbed feathers of the natural waterproofing used to keep seabirds afloat.

In all 3686 birds were estimated to have died because of contact with oil. Aerial surveys a year later found only 200 grebes in an area that had previously drawn 4000 to 7000.

Skelton's blithe dismissal of the ecological consequences of drilling is appalling. It's not as if our oceans are healthy - oceans face crippling ecological crises and they're in no position to withstand drilling.

Skelton goes on to turn "Big Oil" into a nostalgia piece (I'm guessing someone didn't see There Will Be Blood):

Oh, another thing: My dad was an oil field roustabout, or driller or whatever job he could fill on a given shift. So were his dad, brother and cousins. They left their Tennessee farms and followed the migration to California for the 1920s oil boom.

My first summer job out of high school was in a Ventura oil field, an experience guaranteed to prod a kid into college if nothing else would. (But the oil job paid better than newspaper work, I soon discovered.)

So "Big Oil" never has been a big bugaboo for me. It was the producer of a vital commodity and provider of working-class jobs. Although oil derricks annoy many people as unsightly, I've always marveled at how they work, especially all lighted up at night.

Nostalgic memories do not count as a sound basis for public policy - unless of course he thinks we should go back to the days before OSHA, dump our toxic waste into the drinking water supply, and drive without seatbelts.

Worse is the conflation of Big Oil with working-class prosperity. Perhaps at some moment in the past this was true, but Skelton here merely reveals that he, like all the High Broderists, does not live in the 21st century, instead assuming that the conditions of the 1970s remain true today. They don't.

Here in the 21st century Big Oil sucks precious income away form working-class families while returning hardly any in the form of jobs, taxes, or anything else resembling prosperity. And as anyone living near the Torrance refinery knows, they tend to actually have rather debilitating effect on working-class communities.

More below...
Skelton's main thrust of the article is some weird attempt to argue that offshore drilling will actually produce self-sufficiency - since California uses so much gas, shouldn't we drill offshore for more?

This argument has numerous flaws. First, Californians are reducing their gas consumption which has been relatively flat over the last 8 or 9 years. Conservation, not wasteful and useless drilling, is what brought prices back from the brink of $5 earlier this summer, and it alone is what will produce long-term savings.

Skelton tries to dismiss the correct argument that drilling now won't produce usable oil for at least ten years:

Offshore exploration opponents point out that if the federal drilling ban were lifted today, there'd be no immediate effect on gasoline prices. It could take 10 years to get any crude to the gas pump. Fine. Most people driving today still will be 10 years from now.

This is a statement deeply ignorant of how oil works today. He is assuming that the supply of oil and the demand for oil will remain static so that in 10 years, the oil we drill off our coast will make it to the pump and reduce prices.

He is wrong.

The fact is that the demand for oil is soaring around the world, and it is becoming difficult if not impossible to increase production to match it. That is the phenomenon of peak oil at work and that is why gas prices have climbed by 30% every year since 2002. Supply can't match ever-rising demand. The oil off American shores is so small an amount as to not be able to dent oil prices that, ten years from now, are very likely to be much higher than they are today. As demand rises around the world, oil companies will sell the oil we drill off our coast on a global market. The chances it will bring down the price of gas here in CA is next to none.

The only thing offshore drilling will accomplish is fouling our already suffering oceans and wildlife while lining the pockets of oil companies that sell the oil to China and India. How is that useful again?

Skelton does deal with the argument that lifting the drilling ban detracts us from the necessary long-term investment in alternatives - by dismissing it almost entirely:

Alan Salzman, founder of VantagePoint Venture Partners...adds, "The car industry is going to switch over to electric, and that's a certainty. Hundreds of thousands of electric cars will be on the road in 2011."

Let me know when one is affordable, practical and in the showroom.

People didn't give up their horse and buggy until Henry Ford began making affordable cars. We're anxiously awaiting our next transportation mode. Meanwhile, we'll need to keep pumping gas -- some of it from the Santa Barbara Channel.

Skelton needs to get out of the LA Times offices and take a look at the city around him. He might be surprised at what he finds. Hundreds of thousands of his fellow Angelenos have found alternatives to driving. That's what enabled them to reduce their gas consumption and in turn bring down prices, albeit slightly. They bike. They walk.

His own paper reported on Metro Rail's soaring ridership and again on Metrolink's soaring ridership. Nowhere in Skelton's drilling article is the MTA sales tax discussed, which would have the Subway to the Sea open by the time the first oil from the Santa Barbara Channel reaches Chinese gas pumps. Nor is high speed rail discussed, or clean bus technology, or greater urban density, or any other alternative to oil that is ready to go, right now, stalled merely for lack of political will that is currently being wasted on drilling.

Al Gore said it best at the TED Conference here in Monterey last March: drilling is "like a junkie looking for veins in his toes so he can get one last fix." Drilling distracts us from the real problems our state faces, and for absolutely nothing in return.

Skelton doesn't have to live in a future where the oil runs out and Californians, instead of building alternatives when we had the time and money to do so, are left with no viable alternative to oil. Unfortunately the rest of us do.

His plan for more drilling isn't letting go of the past, it's clinging desperately to the past in a blind refusal to accept the need to change in order to produce a better future. Just as California has failed its offspring by kicking the tax and deficit issues into the future, so too will it fail the future by drilling instead of developing alternatives.

If Skelton wants to live in the past, he's welcome to do so. But he should not condemn the rest of us to do as well. California must change if we are to have a prosperous future.  

? In an unanimous decision, the California Supreme Court held today that religious objections do not exempt businesses (specifically doctors) from providing equal services under the Unruh Civil Right Act.  It's a solid decision, read it here (PDF).

? SacBee: Where a battle of the nerds intersects with the battle of the budget.

? George Skelton gets all nostalgic about oil rigs and wants to see more of 'em off our cost.  Note to George: We already have enough known oil deposits to thoroughly destroy our environment if we burned them.

? California: Still a big, big ATM. Obama reaped nearly $8 million last night in San Francisco. How much of that do you think will stay in California?  Sorry, Todd.

? The LA Times looks at Portland, OR in envy of their magnificent public transportation system.  Portland should be a model for every American City of the 21st Century.

UPDATE by Dave: Just to pile on:

? A rare bit of good news in the housing market, as Southern California prices have dropped enough for a 13% increase in sales in Southern California, though not in LA County.  Riverside County sales jumped 48% year-over-year, as the market must have corrected enough there.  However, 43% of these transactions were from foreclosure resales, so I don't see this spurring construction.

? In more news of the good, it looks like the federal government will not be sanctioning states, including California, who seek to enroll children in the SCHIP program above 250% of the federal poverty level.  SCHIP needs to become a bigger part of the debate this fall - bringing up the program for a vote again would help, Speaker Pelosi.

? Fabian Nu?ez talks up AB 2386, which would set a fair labor election process for farmworkers.  Which the rise in worker deaths in the field, it is vital this vulnerable group gets the union representation they need.

? And in another labor dispute, Mickey Mouse was arrested at Disneyland.  No, really.  

This is a developing story out in Riverside.

Some Coachella Valley voters were duped into registering as Republicans, the Riverside County Democratic Central Committee alleged Wednesday.

The party is launching an investigation into the 2,312 new Republican voters that were registered countywide between July 14 and Aug. 11, many in Coachella Valley cities that typically swing Democrat.

They've also contacted the Secretary of State and District Attorney's office. Riverside County DA spokesman Michael Jeandron said he could neither confirm nor deny any investigations.

Democrat party officials raised the questions after getting numerous reports that people were standing outside of stores saying they were collecting signatures for child abuse-related petitions, only to turn around and use the names for voter registration.

(Question: is Michael Jeandron related to Gary Jeandron, the former Palm Springs police chief who's now running as a Republican for State Assembly in AD-80?)

Now, exactly what the point for this would be is an open question.  If they're registering voters without telling them, it could perhaps get problematic later if these voters tried to legitimately register as Democrats.  That might throw up a lot of mud about doubled registration forms and voter fraud.  The other possibilities are that Riverside County Republicans want to maintain their voter registration lead, or simply that paid signature gatherers wanted a few extra dollars for themselves for turning in additional voter registration forms.

Nonetheless, it's very curious.

While shopping at the local Wal-Mart, (Eric Antuna) was asked to sign a petition protesting the early release of child molesters.

He agreed - until he was told he would have to fill out a registration card to prove his identity so the petitioner could be paid.

"Do you mind if I put you as a Republican?" Antuna said the man asked him.

The Democrat did mind.

This is an ongoing investigation and I'm sure the Riverside County Dems will have more.

UPDATE: This is not the first time questions have been raised about GOP voter registration efforts in Riverside County.

Yesterday, when the Assembly mustered a simple majority but not a 2/3 vote for the Democratic budget plan, Yacht Dog Democrat Nicole Parra did not cast a vote.  She has said that she would not vote for a budget unless it included a water bond for the November ballot.

Actions have consequences.

In the latest episode of Capitol punishment, Assembly Speaker Karen Bass tossed Assemblywoman Nicole Parra from her office on Monday morning after the Central Valley Democrat failed to vote for the budget on Sunday.

In a twist, Parra hasn't been reassigned to more cramped quarters in the Capitol itself - but booted straight across the street to the Legislative Office Building. She will be the only member of the Legislature whose office is not housed in the Capitol.

"I knew going in Sunday that if I didn't support the budget, something was going to happen," Parra, D-Hanford, said in an interview shortly after receiving the news. The budget, now 49 days late, failed 45-30, with 54 votes needed for passage.

The state Assembly's chief administrative officer informed Parra of the change shortly before noon and gave her staff until late afternoon to clear out of the office, she said.

"Boxes have been delivered," said Parra, who added that she was unhappy she would be unable to pack her "personal stuff" because the Assembly was in session and she was on the floor.

Move her into Storage B for all I care.  Parra, who has all but endorsed a Republican to succeed her in the 30th Assembly district when her term ends in November, is putting her own interests above the needs of the state.  Water is obviously a crucial issue to the Central Valley but there are a variety of opinions on how to best deal with it.  There are no other Democrats in the Central Valley intending to hijack the state budget.  Parra, in short, is a selfish Yacht Dog who is comfortable with drawing attention to herself and being a media darling and uncomfortable with moving the state forward.

The quotes in the piece of Todd Spitzer coming to Parra's defense are fairly nauseating, too.  Parra is done as a viable electoral prospect in the Democratic Party.  And when Fran Florez wins in November, we'll at least have some leadership in the 30th Assembly district.  In my mind, that'll be a pickup.

It wasn't too long ago that the McCain campaign tried desperately to mock the Obama suggestion that people would be well served to keep their tires inflated properly in order to get better gas mileage. They went so far as to send out a fundraising email offering a "free" tire gauge in exchange for a donation to the campaign. They asked "[w]ill simply inflating your tires reduce the financial burden of high gas prices on your wallet?"

Turns out, the answer from every corner is yes. To the point that McCain had to back off it entirely and concede that it's probably a good idea to properly maintain one's car.

But as McCain and other Republican leaders continue to push the ridiculous on its face notion that only increased offshore drilling can address the current energy challenges in this country, Automobile Manufacturers and our own Governor Schwarzenegger are lining up to push car maintenance and better driving habits as a simple way to ease the hit at the pump. He was even good enough to put a video together to promote the new EcoDriving campaign. Echoing Obama's statements on the issue, Schwarzenegger says in part, "You can reduce your fuel costs by more than 15%. And I am talking about simple things, like proper tire pressure, avoiding rapid starts and stops, and keeping your engine tuned."

This is admittedly a mixed bag. Better driving habits and car maintenance does have a significant impact on gas mileage, and the more attention this gets, the more likely it is that consumers will receive the message. But it's also incumbent upon auto makers and others to not use this as a cop out on their responsibility to keep working towards more eco-friendly cars. Informing consumers is fantastic, passing the buck to consumers in not. Either way, especially in a car-centric state like California this is a nice step.

(over)
It also serves as yet another reminder that consistently, nobody agrees with John McCain. He tries to belittle the advantages of better driving habits and gets smacked down by the people who know- AAA and car makers. He tries to run on his foreign policy brilliance and even tried to claim that Obama "has now adopted John McCain's position" on Iraq. Which was almost immediately met by Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki saying McCain's Iraq plan "would cause problems" as he endorsed Obama's plan for withdrawal over 16 months. Which left McCain with the embarrassingly sad response: 16 months is now "a pretty good timetable."

Every time McCain tries to lead on an issue, he's promptly smacked down by the tag team of Obama and reality. If McCain hadn't made such an absurd deal out of proper tire inflation, nobody would have said anything about it and we likely wouldn't have a national push from auto makers advocating better driving habits led by one of McCain's most valuable allies. But here we are, and McCain is left, once again, looking out of touch and unprepared to deal with the world as it is.