Once More Unto the (Pro-Choice) Breach ...
I told you that Son of Prop. 73 was
rolling around again. You read it here first, folks.
I’d like to say that I admire the right wing goofs’ tenacity but it’s really a massive waste of time and resources. One of the most frustrating parts of building the brave new progressive world is fighting these rear guard actions against the dark minions of Fantasy 1955.
I’d think of them are more honest if they weren’t also so dead set against contraception. You hear ‘em talk about how trying to prevent pregnancy even –within- marriage is “anti-life’ and leads right down that slippery slope toward Baby Killing. The fact that how when and why people, even just heterosexual people, choose to couple is a pretty personal decision goes right them. For this crowd, the only personal decision allowed is where you’re going to pray on Sunday.
So I’ll give my time, money and bile to the cause to hopefully drive them back underground for good, or at least a long time.
I mean, what are they doing here anyway? Don’t they know that Alabama is still in the Union and it’s cheaper to live there anyway?
Fixing the Electoral College State by State
There’s an interesting idea afoot in the California and other state legislatures. The goal, proposed by Tom Umberg’s (D-Santa Ana) Assembly Bill 2948, is to have participating states direct their Electoral College votes to support the winner of the popular vote for president. (
Read the news here.) For example, if George Bush beats John Kerry by three million votes nationwide, all of California’s electors would vote for Bush when they gather in early December.
This seems a little weird at first. But when you look a little deeper you see that it's trying to fix something which needs fixing, by making sure that the popular vote is reflected in the electoral college White House is won by the man or woman who gets the most individual votes, not the most individual states, as is the current practice.
In 2000 we the loser of the popular vote won the election. In 2004 we almost had the loser by several million votes, John Kerry, win if he’d have taken Ohio. Both sides of the aisle are worried about this happening again, and some thoughtful souls are looking for ways to fix the current system without requiring a constitutional amendment which would be almost impossible to pass (as it should be; the Constitution is wisely designed not to be tinkered with easily).
So the reformers are looking at state-by-state reform, because under the current rules every state pretty much selects its electors as it pleases. A compact of the kind under consideration would probably require congressional approval under the Constitution’s Compact Clause but that’s a much lower hurdle than getting three-fifths of the states to approve an amendment.
The goal behind the compact idea is sound. But it’s going about it the wrong way.
Under the current system a presidential candidate only has to bother with the so-called “battleground” states” during the summer and fall. All of the others just stand and watch. Rich states like California are little more than ATM’s for both parties. And why not? Why waste resources on an irrelevant battlefield?
My suggestion is to divide the votes more proportionally within the states, which can be done under current law. States are allowed, under the Constitution, to decide how their votes are apportioned, so there's no constitutional change required. Each individual electoral vote represents a seat in Congress. I suggest tying each vote to how a specific Congressional district votes, with the two Senate seats going to whoever wins statewide. Maine and Nebraska do something like this. This puts most states back into play in presidential elections. Every state has something to offer. California would have the blue counties east and northeast of Sacramento and around parts of the inland to offer the GOP. Texas would have red counties to offer the Democrats. Candidates and national parties would have to see the election map as district-by-congressional district, not just state by state. Every state would be a potential "swing" state, which is the way it should be, and why other states would to want to sign up if we get the ball rolling on this.
My hope is that Umberg’s bill starts a discussion we need to have before the next presidential election rolls around. Unfortunately, history shows that it usually takes a train wreck to move real reform. But we can still try.
Taking Stock of New Bonds
Someone recently asked me about the big bond the Legislature recently agreed on. My response:
---------------------------
It’s not one bond, it’s several.
SB 1266 / SB 86‹ Transportation $18.975 billion
SB 1689 / SB 364 Housing 2.850 billion
AB 127 / SB 79 Education 10.416 billion
AB 140 / SB 87 Flood protection 4.090 billion
Total $36.331 billion
My prognosis:My own gut instinct says that the Transportation and Flood Protection measures will pass. There's general agreement among enough people that our roads are in terrible condition. The measure will be opposed by transportation alternative advocates but with a simple majority needed the road-loving majority will prevail. As for floods, after Katrina this is almost a slam dunk.
The Education measure is a tossup given
recent polling on how voters see education spending, and Housing probably dead on arrival. With home prices skyrocketing even in the inland areas, I feel that voters are going to be less likely to view (in perception) spending tax money to make it easier for someone else to keep a roof over their head.
There are a whole lot of potential measures for the November ballot, everything from eliminating domestic partnership, new taxes to allowing parents to give alcohol to their kids. This June is pretty thin regarding initiatives. There is also talk of the legislature removing a bond for high speed rail up and down the state. Next November is probably going to be a whole lot more interesting.
Here’s the secretary of State’s link to what’s on tap:
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/elections_j.htm#2006General
Leadership
Does this explain a lot of Red State political leadership style?
--------------------------------------------
Questions for Cesar MillanLeader of the PackBy DEBORAH SOLOMON - New York Times
Q: As the founder of the
Dog Psychology Center in Los Angeles, you claim that Americans are driving their pets to the brink of insanity by smothering them with affection.
The U.S. is a very assertive society with people, but not when it comes to dogs. People are soft and kissy with dogs. That is why dogs take over. All dogs in America are suffering from the same problem — lack of exercise and lack of leadership.
On your television show, "Dog Whisperer," and in your new book, "Cesar's Way," you encourage dog owners to treat their pets with the "calm assertiveness" of a natural pack leader. Why is that state apparently so hard to achieve?
Because Americans are focused on making money. And to make a lot of money, you have to be hyper.
And you believe that we're projecting our own neuroses onto our dogs, even when we leave the house?
If what you do is say, "I'm sorry, baby, Mommy has to go, blah, blah, blah," the dog doesn't understand what you are saying. He only understands that you are in a soft state and he is dominating you.
So what departing words would you prefer we say to a dog?
"Bye, man." Do you think it is O.K. for a dog to sleep in bed with his owner?
Yes, because a dog pack sleeps together. But the thing is, you have to invite the dog into your bed.
Should a dog be allowed on the living-room couch?
Make sure you invite them. The whole point is that you always remind them who owns the couch. The pack leader reminds them who runs the show.
How do you explain this country's infatuation with dogs? There are some 65,000,000 pet dogs in America.
You know why people like dogs? Because dogs can't talk and say, "You didn't walk me today." Do you realize how many people would be sued by a dog if a dog was capable of suing them?
Your Honor, my owner failed to take me to the park.
Believe me, it would go all the way to the Supreme Court. When a dog barks and destroys the house, it's because his physical body is not being fulfilled. In the natural habitat, a dog migrates constantly. They can cover 90 miles in one day.
Do you find that dogs on the West Coast or in the suburbs get more exercise than New York City dogs, most of whom live in apartments and don't have backyards?
The backyard is not exercise. It doesn't represent freedom. It doesn't represent fun. It doesn't represent balance. The backyard is just going back and forth between walls. People in New York don't have the backyard and are forced to walk the dog more often, which is the best thing that can happen to dogs.
Yet in your book you insist that many Americans and especially New Yorkers don't know how to walk a dog properly.
Every time I go to New York, I see dogs in front of people. Oh, brother. The dog should be behind the person. In the natural dog world, the dog is always behind the pack leader. Pack leaders never, ever tell the dog to go in front.
But what if a person is a schlepper by temperament? Not everyone can be a pack leader.
Not everyone is a pack leader with humans. But anyone can be a pack leader with animals.
On your show, you tend to play up your image as a virile, Mexican-born farm boy in touch with your animal instincts.
This isn't about gender. Look at female elephants. They rule the pack, and they don't act like males.
What do you make of that best-selling book about the dog who misbehaved, "Marley and Me: Life and Love With the World's Worst Dog"?
I didn't read enough of it to say. I didn't find it interesting from a psychological point of view.
You're not actually a psychologist, are you?
No. Not by a school. There is no college that teaches you how to control a pack of dogs.
But how can you justify running a dog-psychology center when your whole approach is based on the idea that we're already too dog-obsessed in this country?
The dog doesn't have to know that. Only the dog owner knows.
Splish, Splash: Senators to the Rescue
In an earlier post I noted that President Bush had turned down Governor Arnold's request to help rebuild and repair California levees.
Fortunately, the federal budget is within the general purvey of the legislature, not the executive. Our blessed Blue State senators Boxer and Feinstein have fought to include $22.3 million in levee work in a proposed supplemental spending bill. Among the projects that would be funded are:
– South Sacramento Streams: a project in southeastern Sacramento County includes building 12 miles of floodwalls and constructing 13 miles of levee improvements. The completed project improvements will provide minimum 100-year protection to over 100,000 residents.
– Sacramento River Bank Protection: a project north of the City of Sacramento provides erosion control bank protection for the Sacramento River Flood Control Project levees. Almost 200 actively eroding sites on levees banks have been identified, 29 of which are considered to have a high potential for failure during the next high water event.
– American River Common Features: this project includes levee improvements along the lower American River and Sacramento River that, when complete, will protect the 50,000 residents of Rancho Cordova in eastern Sacramento County as well as over 400,000 City of Sacramento residents downstream.
(Information provided by Senator Boxer's office.)My flood insurance policy thanks them.
Spaceport California
Bill seeks loan for spaceport in south state
By Judy Lin -- Bee Capitol Bureau
Published 2:15 am PDT Sunday, May 7, 2006
Story appeared on
Page A3 of The Bee
When SpaceShipOne became the first private manned spacecraft to leave the Earth's atmosphere two summers ago, the pioneering flight happened over the Mojave Desert, chalking up another aeronautical milestone for the Golden State.
But when the achievement sparked talk of building spaceports from which these rocket planes can one day take off and land, California soon found friendly competition from other states. New Mexico, in particular, also saw dollar signs and jobs in the nascent space tourism industry.
In order to woo entrepreneurs like Virgin billionaire Richard Branson who are seeking to bring space travel to the masses - or at least initially to those with $200,000 lying around - industry officials believe states will need to build an infrastructure to support it.
On Monday, the Senate Appropriations Committee is scheduled to debate a bill giving the Mojave Spaceport an $11 million loan for the construction of two buildings - one for a terminal and the other for a research facility.
Backers say the loan is small compared to what other states are spending but would help keep leading space firms like Scaled Composites, which built SpaceShipOne, in California.
With no guarantees that the loan will be repaid, California lawmakers will have to decide whether it is worth backing a risky, for-profit endeavor. A committee analysis has questioned whether a state general fund-backed loan is the best use of public dollars, especially when someone like Branson might become a tenant through his commercial space tourism enterprise,
Virgin Galactic. ….
(Excerpt from the Sacramento Bee)---------------------------------------
According to Star Trek lore, San Francisco will one day become headquarters of Starfleet, the defense and exploration arm of the U.N.-in-space come the future. So maybe the Legislature is just trying to get a head start on this.
I’m a really big fan of space travel and space exploration. I faked tummy aches to stay home and watch the Gemini and Apollo launches as a kid. I support a broad expansion of our manned spaceflight program. I favor the creation of an international space agency to coordinate the effort. I believe that China has no need to go to the moon. We’ve already been there and tell them all they need to know about what they’re going to find.
Private spaceflight, however, is a toy of the rich and we don’t need to subsidize it in any way.
The only possible public benefit is the development of a sub-orbital plane capable of shortening flights from hemisphere to hemisphere. But even that’s a nice idea without a real need demonstrated. Few Americans insisted on taking the Concorde to Europe and back.
If the rich want to fly around space because it’s fun, let them, and let them pay for it. Party on, dudes.
I suppose this is the sort of thing we can expect from the state where vision of the future rules. This is the downside. As someone once wrote about maverick Oakland A’s owner Charlie Finley, who proposed the designated hitter, three balls walks and orange baseballs, “the price for every great idea is two kooky ones.”
Legislature, please beam this bill and loan outta here. We’ve got more down-to-earth issues to deal with.
Forty Days and Forty Nights
I live within a pleasant walk of where the Sacramento and American Rivers come together. There’s a lovely small beach there, in Discovery Park. I can see it from Highway 5 every time I head south toward downtown. Before moving to my current home in Natomas I lived in an apartment within a stone’s throw an overflow canal running along the American River just before it pours into the Sacramento along a stretch of road atop a levee called Garden Highway. Every rainy season the American River spills over into the overflow canal, and when I lived in the apartment I could almost throw a rock over the levee road into a water level a good thirty feet or more higher than the ground where I parked my car in the apartment complex.
There’s great faith in the local levee system. So much so that I live in what’s known as a “100 year flood plain”, meaning it’ll go nuts on the average of once every hundred years.
I don’t know when the hundred year cycle is supposed to start.
I don’t have to have flood insurance. My mortgage holder is happy to take my money without it. But I have it anyway, and have had it for a year.
Still, I watch developments regarding flood control. I’d rather not have to put my flood insurance to the test.
The Legislature and governor have recently been far-seeing in this matter. They’ve agreed to put a bond measure calling for $4.09 billion for flood protection along with a $500 million appropriation for levee repairs. Since no legislator or governor wants to explain why billions of dollars has still left the state capital under water after a flood, I think it’s safe to say that my local levees will receive a lot of love under these measures.
For this, I thank President Bush.
Bush came to California and stood next to his famous Republican governor as he told the state that we were pretty much on our own when it comes to upgrading our flood protection.
So, being California, we said, “Fine. We’ll take care of it.” We did the right thing.
California, as a good progressive friend of mine says, is nothing but an ATM machine for the national parties. Bush and his handlers know that there’s little chance our Electoral College votes are coming their way. They’ve also seen in two presidential elections that they can win the White House without them. Bush isn’t going to waste precious federal largesse here. I can accept that. That’s politics.
So we’re left to take care of the issue ourselves. I think that come November we will. And I thank the president for giving us the half peace sign on this to force it to the front of the line regarding voter-approved state spending priorities.
Some of other measures are more problematic. I think the housing measure will have a hard time because voters who are being frozen out of buying their own won’t be happy about spending money to help get a roof over someone else. I think the transportation measure will face a furious attack from alternative transportation advocates, although our state’s car loving voters might fight that off just to get better roads.
But the powerful images of the mighty Mississippi sucker punching New Orleans makes the flood measure a probable lock.
Thanks George W. You’ve done almost nothing else in your second term. This is one case where doing nothing caused something good to happen.
Family Ties
Ohio candidate's sons cost him county race
The Associated Press
Published 4:55 am PDT Thursday, May 4, 2006
CASTALIA, Ohio
(AP) - You're both grounded!
Two voting-age sons of a northern Ohio candidate didn't go to the polls Tuesday, and their father's race ended in a tie.
William Crawford, trying to retain his seat on the central committee of the Erie County Democratic Party, and challenger Jean Miller each received 43 votes in the primary balloting.
Officials plan to conduct a recount, but the race may have to be settled by coin flip, said David Giese, the county's Democratic Party chairman and an elections board member.
Crawford was able to laugh about it Wednesday, but he said his sons are going to be getting an earful for skipping the election.
"Oh they will, let me tell you," Crawford said.
Son Jim lives across the street from Crawford's home in Castalia, about 45 miles southeast of Toledo, and son Andy is a college student who lives at home. Both are registered Democrats.
---------------
This re-affirms the importance of good precinct work. Never take anything for granted, even your own flesh and blood.
The Golden State Pastime
A letter to SF Chronicle reporter Steve Tady, aka
The Betting Fool:
The Fool Wrote: A MAYS-ING MEMORY:
The year was 1970. I was getting close to reporting to sixth grade at Portola grammar school in Los Altos, but I went to a ton of Giants games that summer. On July 18th, I saw Willie Mays poke a grounder to left past Montreal's Coco LaBoy for his 3,000th hit. Ron Hunt was hit by a pitch, Gaylord Perry twirled a masterful four-hitter and less than 30,000 witnessed it all. The Giants' stock lineup for much of that summer was Bonds-Hunt-Mays-McCovey-Henderson-Hart/Gallagher-Dietz-Fuentes-Lanier. Perry and Marichal were backed by Frank Reberger, Ron Bryant and Skip Pitlock. Happy birthday, Mr. Mays.
-----------
My reply:
Dear Fool,
My stars. I remember this game.
I was twelve and this was the first year I was old enough to follow the boxscore and the rest of the league. NBC’s “Game of the Week”, Saturdays at 11 am, had meaning. And how could you leave out Frank Johnson, Bobby Taylor and Russ Gibson?
This was the first game I ever attended on my own, the second game overall (my first was a trip for school crossing guards in ’68). Willie was set to get his 3,000th hit.
I had two younger neighbor kids with me and we were going to have fun at the game just like the grown folks. Boy, was I excited.
Except that I never saw the game. General admission tickets sold out and I didn’t have enough cash in my pocket for reserved seats . So we left.
I remember hearing the roar go up as Willie got his 3,000th hit. I remember walking down Jamestown Street back to the number 15 bus to go home wrapped in one of the worst feelings I’ve ever had as a kid. I remember my father asking me why I was home in the seventh inning with the Giants up 10 – nothing or something.
I remember swearing that, as God was my witness I’d never miss another game like that as a kid. So for the next couple of years, esp 1971, when the Giants won the division, I doubled the price of a seat when I asked my folks for a ticket to the game. Sometimes I'd end up in general admission and wandered over to reserved (this before the ushers started speaking German and waving nightsticks at morally suspect migrating bleacher creatures). Sometimes I sat in reserved, out of the sun, and ate the sandwich I brought in to save a little money. But I always had enough for a seat.
Thanks for resurrecting the memory. Honestly, those early years of mine at the ‘Stick were great times, and recalling this game, as poor as it was, was a key part of it all. Thanks again. Sincerely.
---------------------
Say "classic baseball" and most people think of hot summer nights in an Eastern or Midwestern city. Yet, in 2004, five of California's six major league teams drew over three million fans. The minor league
Sacramento River Cats have been at our near the top of minor league attendance since coming into the
Pacific Coast League in 2000. The
California League has enjoyed great attendance over the past decade, particularly in the booming inland areas. California loves the national pastime. This is baseball country. I like that.
It's also the land of sensible taxpayers who don't want to spend money so millionaires can make more millions. I like that too.
San Francisco Bay Area voters said "no" to four different measures to spend tax dollars to build a stadium for the Giants, two votes in in San Francisco, one in Santa Clara and the last in San Jose. San Diego's Petco Park was held up for several years due to lawsuits over its use of public money, and the final project required the Padres to make a multimillion dollar investment in the community around the new park.
Fans don't stop at baseball. The Sacramento Kings pro basketball team is immensely popular here in the Capital City, but over two thirds of the voting public objects to proposals by the mayor and my councilmember to spend over a quarter billion to build them a new arena. Similar objections keep the NFL from relocating to Los Angeles.
This doesn't mean there's a complete building moratorium on sports arenas in the Golden State, oh no. Stockton recently put together a tax package to build the California League Stockton Ports a lovely little park. San Jose put the Shark Tank together. But these are generally few and far between and built to house relatively inexpensive "B" level sports teams.
There’s just something about sports stadiums and arenas which turn ordinarily sensible public officials' brains into goo.
Back in the late ‘80s and early ‘90s some of these people actually said that “Without the Giants, San Francisco won’t be a ‘major league’ city.” I guess the stunning scenery, the fantastic weather, the high culture, the cable cars and the history means nothing without a major league pitchers mound right smack dab in the middle of it.
I had a high school teacher in San Francisco who actually didn’t mind having taxpayers build stadiums. As he was a card carrying member of the Democratic Socialists of America, this was kind of surprising.
Stadiums are public places where people come together for relaxation and community, he said. That’s a good public purpose which even a lukewarm pinko like he could support. He just had one caveat.
If everyone’s taxes are paying for it, he said, every seat should be the same price because everyone should enjoy the same right to a seat as they generally would in any public space. You don’t set rates for Golden Gate Park, he said, holding the prettier parts for those willing or able to pay more. The maintenance and operations come out of everyone’s pocketbook, so everyone has the same right to access. The only qualification is who shows up early enough to get the best seat on the grass at the Park. Public stadiums should operate the same way.
It’s an interesting idea. I’ve carried it with me through years of debates over public stadium finance in San Francisco (for the Giants); Oakland (for the Raiders) and now here in Sacramento, where the NBA Kings are insisting that the city build them a new arena.
The proudest card carrying liberal can get swept up in all the supposed civic virtues of a publicly funded place for millionaire athletes and their owners to make even more millions.
In 1989 San Francisco's mayor was Art Agnos, a former social worker whose claim to infamy lay in part in allowing a smelly homeless encampment to take over Civic Center. He put time and energy into a proposal for a ballpark at the current site. He lost, and paid for it when the local left turned against him at the next election (splitting the vote and bringing in a former police chief to replace him.)
Oakland has almost no private tax base outside of the people who live there. It’s the core part of the House district of Barbara Lee, the lone persistent voice against giving George Bush carte blanche to start wars. It’s Berkeley with a ‘hood. Yet they spent millions in tax dollars to build swanky suites at the Oakland Coliseum (which have remained generally unfilled) to bring the Raiders back to Oakland from L.A. The city and county promised to sell tickets and corporate suites for Al Davis, so the team owner wouldn’t have to dirty his hands with trying to earn his own living. This was the second and successful attempt to bribe Davis back from Los Angeles. The first try, in 1990, sank when it was revealed that the city and county promised to buy unsold seats to guarantee Davis a sellout every game.
Sacramento mayor Heather Fargo is a nice, sensible, progressive mayor. She represented my district before becoming mayor. She has good ideas about managing growth, preschool and efficient government. But she’s nuts about spending $400 million on a new arena for the Kings. As noted above, local polls and other devices find little support for the idea. She had to pull an advisory vote on one proposal after it became clear that it was dead in the Sacramento River. But she persists, up to engineering the premature retirement of the city manager who opposed it.
They say it sells the city.“The Raiders sell Oakland.” Yeah, unfortunately, they do. When folks see the Hell’s Angels-in-Darth Vader guys beating the crap out of each other in the seats and the parking lot, they go, “yeah, that’s Oakland.” One would imagine a good public relations firm could do much better for far less.
Same here in Sacramento, which suffers under a poor self-image of being the “cowtown” of Northern California cities. Yep. Being the capital of one of the largest states and, effectively, nation of the world is nothing but a pile of oats and alfalfa without an NBA team.
Stadiums and arenas are not civic investments. Study after study finds this that they don’t add a dime to the tax base. The brilliant
Field of Schemes website provides in-depth research and review on all this. Yet we’re in a Renaissance-style era of public stadium and arena construction.
And I’m part of the problem. Despite everything I’ve written above, if my favorite baseball team threatened to pack up and leave because it wanted a new place to play, I’d be the first to the street corner lying my tail off to get voters to give ‘em one. (I’m saved regarding the Kings in that I’m not much of an NBA fan.) There’s something about the crisp green grass, cold beer and the crack of the bat that I just can’t resist. I'd beg, borrow and steal to keep them around.
Play ball. Just do what I think and not what I feel and play it where the taxpayer isn't footing the bill.
In The Year 2026
The Republican president, in the second year of his second term and needing a win, decided to take on immigration policy reform, to win a victory for “legacy”, something to be remembered by. Presidents usually don’t have much political capital to spend at this point, so a win here would go far in the eyes of the pundits and historians.
The measure was built around amnesty for illegal immigrants currently in the country and increased sanctions for employers who hired illegal immigrants in the future. Many conservatives thought it rewarded illegal behavior and worried about an army of papists overrunning the land. Liberals generally applauded, but felt it didn’t go far enough and worried about employer sanctions justifying workplace discrimination against legal residents. The proposal passed with enough cross party support to override these political concerns.
This isn’t a crystal ball’s look into 2007. It’s a look back to 1986.
We’ve been here before. We’ll no doubt be here again twenty years from now too.
The forces pulling at immigration from down south is strong. It’s the only place where the First and Third Worlds live in such close proximity and along such a long border. There’s nothing natural about the border, except a murky ditch along the eastern end which came in handy when drawing lines after the Mexican War but has rarely been much of a hindrance to people going in either direction over it. People are going to come. There’s no stopping it.
So I figure that the “immigration reform” debate is just something we’ll have to put up with every generation. As the economy grows it will require cheap labor, and cheap labor will come to meet the need. Eventually, this will well up into a national debate, frightening many and encouraging others. We’ll have rallies, angry militias and congressional proposals. We’ll come up with a new amnesty, new requirements and sanctions for employers who hire (but unless we adopt a verifiable form of electronic national work I.D, it won’t mean anything) and we’re set for another generation.
So when my son Leroy is watching this play out again in 2026, I can yawn from my rocking chair and say, “been there, done that…twice.” And tell him to mark his calendar for 2046 when he too can see it again.
