CLCV

I'm not going to step in the middle of this, but... (0.00 / 0)

...you should note that CLCV took issue with Dan Bacher's characterization of their stance on Feinstein here at Calitics:

CLCV does not score members of the Senate or House of Representatives. Our annual CLCV California Environmental Scorecard records the votes of the governor and members of the state Assembly and Senate on priority statewide legislation that impacts the quality of the environment and public health in California. For nearly 40 years, CLCV has used the California Scorecard as an important tool to hold lawmakers and the governor accountable for their environmental votes.

In short, your beef is with the national LCV, not CLCV. Or maybe it's with both, but you should be clear about this, and clear about why CLCV is a relevant target in this instance. Based on Dan's post, CLCV's response, and now your post, I am not convinced they are a relevant target at all.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

---

by: Robert Cruickshank @ Tue Feb 23, 2010 at 14:27:43 PM CST

ACtually, my beef is with DiFi. (0.00 / 0)

I also admit that I took the info on CLCV scorecard from Dan.  It is probably the second time in his life he made a mistake. But, you may remember that I also took the CLCV to task for it's high rating of Jared Huffman.

What get me p-o'd is to see a nominally non-partisan organization again and again give high scores to those Democrats in positions of power who are doing the most to screw up the environment. If Huffman is at the top of the scorecard for the CLCV and Feinstein gets a hundred from the LCV, this state and this country are in a lot of trouble.


Working for a real Green Governor, Laura Wells.  

---

by: wes @ Wed Feb 24, 2010 at 00:04:01 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Wouldn't our time be better spend fighting the real enemies of the environment? (8.00 / 1)

Some folks can never resist picking a fight, even if they have to do it with organizations who are fighting the same enemy. CLCV has spent four decades electing environmental champions, defending environmental laws, fighting corporate polluters and their elected allies, and holding lawmakers accountable.

To back up: Yesterday, the national League of Conservation Voters (LCV) announced the results of their 2009 National Environmental Scorecard.

Each year, CLCV (the California League of Conservation Voters), like state leagues around the country, helps LCV release their Scorecard to the public in our state in order to raise awareness about the national Scorecard and the performance of the California delegation.

Both Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, along with nearly two-dozen members of the House, received a 100% score from LCV on legislation considered a high priority by the national League. These scores and the pro-environment, pro-clean energy votes they represent are worthy of recognition. (In contrast, several  members of the House received a score of zero for voting against the environment every time.)

Wes and Dan, our praise for the 100%-scorers does not mean that CLCV agrees with every action taken by each member of the delegation either before or after the 2009 votes recorded in the LCV's annual Scorecard. I think you both know that. It would seem you are intentionally trying to confuse people in order to push your own respective agendas.

To clarify, CLCV does not score members of the U.S. Senate or House of Representatives on their environmental votes. The national LCV decides what bills will be scored and publishes their annual national Scorecard documenting those votes.

CLCV uses the results of the LCV Scorecard, along with additional information like previous and/or more recent activities of legislators, to make endorsements of candidates for federal office. For example, we are supporting environmental champion Senator Barbara Boxer in her 2010 reelection, which is likely to be a close race.

Wes, environmental voters are not going to be "confused" about Senator Boxer's performance based on another legislator's actions, as you seem to suggest, and turn their support over to, for example, Senate candidate and state Assembly member Chuck DeVore (who scored an abysmal 5% on CLCV's 2009 California Scorecard). Your suggestion seriously underestimates the intelligence of California's environmentalists and all voters.

To further clarify, CLCV's own annual California Environmental Scorecard (the most recent of which is available at http://www.ecovote.org/scoreca... records the votes of the governor and members of the state Assembly and Senate on priority statewide legislation that impacts the quality of the environment and public health in California.

For nearly 40 years, CLCV has used our annual California Environmental Scorecard as an important tool to hold California's state lawmakers and governor accountable for their environmental votes, and to make endorsements in state legislative and governor's races. If you look at our past Scorecards, you will see terrible scores for many Democrats along with Republicans. A terrible vote on the environment is a terrible vote, regardless of party affiliation.

As it has been for nearly 40 years, CLCV's mission is to elect environmental champions, regardless of party, who will stand up to powerful interests in defense of the environment. I urge Calitics readers to learn more about CLCV's work on behalf of the environment, including our campaign to elect a pro-environment governor in 2010, by visiting our Web site at http://www.ecovote.org.

Sincerely,
Jenesse Miller
Communications Director
California League of Conservation Voters

---

by: JenesseMiller @ Tue Feb 23, 2010 at 14:55:41 PM CST

Regardless of Party? (0.00 / 0)

Jenesse, when was the last time that the CLCV endorsed a Republican?  

For that matter, did the CLCV ever in it's existence endorse a Green?

I know that the Sierra Club has endorsed Green Party Candidates, so that is one up on you.

Actually, my beef is really with Feinstein who is an environmentalist until it comes to shifting some money to one of her family friends like Hurwitz and Resnick. And, you can be sure that I will be watching water issues along with Resnick's contributions to Jerry Brown... not at $50 K and counting.  

Working for a real Green Governor, Laura Wells.  

---

by: wes @ Tue Feb 23, 2010 at 23:57:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes, regardless of party. CLCV is nonpartisan. (0.00 / 0)

Wes:

To answer your two questions:

1) CLCV endorsed Republican Pete McCloskey in the 2006 primary in CD 11 through a joint endorsement process with LCV. CLCV also endorsed Republicans Tom Harman and Keith Richman in 2000, both for state legislature (I believe that was the last year we received an endorsement questionnaire back from a Republican candidate for a state office).

2) CLCV endorsed Green party candidate Audie Bock for re-election in AD 16 in 2000.

I can't speak to other organizations' endorsement process. But endorsing and electing the best environmental candidates in close California races is what CLCV has done for nearly 40 years. We include candidates in our endorsement process when they are viable (i.e.: have a measurable level of grassroots and financial support and therefore a shot at running and winning a campaign), regardless of party.

As for who your "beef" is actually with... it wasn't very clear from your post or Dan Bacher's (although I note he has made some corrections to his original post).

---

by: JenesseMiller @ Wed Feb 24, 2010 at 12:42:54 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Bock? (0.00 / 0)

Well, Jenesse, you understand how to re-write history.  Bock was originally elected as a Green.  Once in office, she was convinced to switch party to become a Democrat in order to have a decent committee assignment and other necessities for doing her job.  She did.

So, at the time of her re-election when you endorsed her, she was a Democrat, not a Green.  

So, once more, why is it that a nominally non-partisan environmental organization has never found a way to endorse a single Green Party candidate for anything.   My guess, you won't  even endorse Dan Hamburg for Mendocino County Supervisor. That is a non-partisan office but he is a registered Green and heads an environmental organization. Oh.. right.. that would be a local endorsement independent of CLCV. Well then there is hope.

As for Pete, and I helped the McCloskey / Lew Butler Revolt of the Elders Committee defeat Pombo on 2006 probably doing a lot more than the CLCV did, I will also note that he is also now a Democrat.. but for much more honorable reasons than that which convinced Bock to switch.  

Working for a real Green Governor, Laura Wells.  

---

by: wes @ Wed Feb 24, 2010 at 15:49:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Feinstein's "Perfect" Environmental Record (0.00 / 0)

Jenesse

You are dancing around the key point of my article - that for anybody to give Feinstein a "perfect" environmental score at this time flies in the face of political reality. It doesn't really matter whether LCV or CLCV developed the scorecard!

For Chabot and CLCV to praise Feinstein when she has taken a series of aggressive actions over the past two years that will seal the doom of California fish populations boggles the mind. It is insulting to all of the members of the environmental, fishing and tribal groups who have worked so resolutely against the peripheral canal and Feinstein's amendment to increase Delta pumping to corporate agribusiness to praise Feinstein for being an "environmentalist."

And your point about CLCV supporting the water policy legislation but not the water bond may be technically accurate, but very deceptive. The water policy/water bond legislation was pushed through the Legislature as a package. The water policy bill creates a Delta Stewardship Council. Four out of seven of its members will be picked by Schwarzenegger - and Schwarzenegger will definitely appoint pro canal members. You support for the water policy bill translates into support for the peripheral canal, whether you are willing to admit it.  

As Bill Jennings, executive director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance said so succinctly, "praising Dianne Feinstein for being an environmentalist is like praising Genghis Khan for being a peacemaker."

---

by: Dan Bacher @ Wed Feb 24, 2010 at 12:33:48 PM CST

Greensmearing (0.00 / 0)

Dan:

There's no dancing going on. The dance is yours as your continue to "greensmear" good organizations and committed activists like CLCV's Warner Chabot who don't swallow your narrow view of the world (hook, line and sinker). The point of an environmental Scorecard, whether it's CLCV's or LCV's (and yes, it DOES matter who develops it -- we are two separate organizations with distinct missions) is to score elected officials on multiple important environmental votes within a specified time period (in this case 2009).

Because of your very specific interest (some might call it an obsession) you would score everyone on one issue alone, all other pro-environmental actions be damned. (And somehow that makes Senator Feinstein Genghis Kahn? Are you kidding? It smacks of the absurd comparisons of Obama to Hitler made by extreme right-wingers.) CLCV stands by our praise for all of the 100-% scorers in the LCV National Scorecard.

Sincerely,

Jenesse Miller

PS: Below is a list compiled by Steve Maviglio in California Majority Report of Feinstein's environmental actions over the last two decades. I haven't spent hours fact-checking each bullet point, but at a glance it provides more of a look at the Senator's record than your limited focus. For the entire article, click on this link:
http://www.camajorityreport.co...

"During her 18-year Senate career, Senator Feinstein has engaged every major environmental issue facing California, including:

   * Convening the discussions that resulted in the 1994 Bay-Delta Accord, which established three goals: developing water quality standards to protect the estuary; coordinating operations of state and federal water projects, and developing a long-term solution for the Delta.
   * Authoring the 1994 California Desert Protection Act, to protect more than 7 million acres of pristine California desert. It was the largest such designation in the history of the continental United States, and established the Death Valley and Joshua Tree National Parks and the Mojave Natural Preserve.
   * Brokering the 1999 deal to save the Headwaters Forest, a 7500-acre grove of ancient redwoods in Humboldt County.
   * Authoring the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act of 2000, a major effort to keep Lake Tahoe blue. The legislation led to major investments in the environmental health of the Tahoe Basin, including $424 million by the federal government, $612 million by the state of California, $87 million by the state of Nevada, $59 million by local governments, and $249 million in in-kind contributions from the private sector.
   * Leading the 2003 effort to transform 17,000 acres of salt ponds into wetlands in the San Francisco Bay in the largest wetland restoration project on the West Coast.
   * Voting last year to stop an amendment that would have waived the Endangered Species Act in the Sacramento Delta.
   * Co-authoring the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act of 2009, which would authorize $415 million over eight years to combat invasive species, improve water clarity, reduce the threat of catastrophic wildfire, and restore the environment. The legislation is designed to continue the work begun under the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act of 2000.
   * Authoring the California Desert Protection Act of 2010, to designate nearly 1 million acres in the Mojave Desert for conservation, to enhance recreational opportunities, and to streamline and improve the federal permitting process to advance large-scale wind and solar development on suitable lands.

---

by: JenesseMiller @ Wed Feb 24, 2010 at 13:20:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Headlandf Forest agreement was a disaster (0.00 / 0)

I notice that you present a list of "accomplishments" authored by someone else so that you don't have to take credit (or blame) for it.  Nice move.

I can not believe that anyone would have the guts to list the Headlands Forest deal as a positive.  This was nothing more than a give away to a family friend Feinstein's Husbands business partner, Charles Hurwitz.  Actually Hurwitz was more of a supporter of Tom DeLay that of Feinstein, but he profited greatly off of Headlands deal.

Actually, it was our mutual hero, Pete McCloskey, who was in court taking Hurwitz to task for his multimillion $$ scamming of the taxpayers of CA.  Settled out of court for less than it should have been. You know that if Hurwitz was willing to settle, then he still had a good profit.

The other thing that you have to understand, but apparently don't, is that it does no good to state high sounding goals if the legislation establishes such restriction as to preclude ever reaching those goals.  That happened with CalFed. It happened with the Bay Delt Plan and it is happening with Darrel Steinberg special session legislation where the entire Ground Water Monitoring plan is not enforceable.

Working for a real Green Governor, Laura Wells.  

---

by: wes @ Wed Feb 24, 2010 at 15:35:04 PM CST

[ Parent ]

1994 Bay-Delta Accord Set in Motion the Delta's Destruction (0.00 / 0)

"I haven't spent hours fact-checking each bullet point, but at a glance it provides more of a look at the Senator's record than your limited focus."
Wow, it's very clear that you haven't spent ANY time fact checking this list.

First, these are bullet points for actions taken over the past two decades. I thought the purpose of the scorecard was to score her record for 2009?

Second, the first bullet point that is listed as an environmental accomplishment of Feinstein's is very revealing. She is praised for:

"Convening the discussions that resulted in the 1994 Bay-Delta Accord, which established three goals: developing water quality standards to protect the estuary; coordinating operations of state and federal water projects, and developing a long-term solution for the Delta."

Do you have any clue what is the result of the water policies implemented by the 1994 Bay-Delta Accord? Look at 2010!

• Salmon populations have declined to the lowest levels in history, due to record pumping of water to corporate agribusiness and Southern Californian and declining water quality that was authorized under the accord. The Central Valley fall Chinook salmon run collapsed to 39,500 in 2009, a new record low.

• Salmon fishing has been closed on the ocean for two years and the season is almost certain to be closed this year. The Central Valley rivers were also closed, with the exception of a brief six week season on a small stretch of the Sacramento River. The result is 23,000 jobs lost to the California and Oregon economy.

• Delta smelt, longfin smelt, American shad, striped bass, threadfin shad and other species have declined to record low levels, due to the record Delta water pumping that was authorized by the accord.

Feinstein, the Department of Interior and then Governor Pete Wilson, by engineering this accord that enshrined the co-equal goals of ecosystem "restoration" and water supply, set in motion the policies that have resulted in the current ecosystem crash.

In addition, the accord's organizers invited a few select environmental NGO's to participate in the water deal  and completely excluded California Indian Tribes, commercial fishermen, recreational anglers, Delta farmers and environmental justice communities from the process. This was environmentally injust and racist, in my opinion. You can't reach any just solution to California's water problems when you exclude the folks most directly impacted by water policies.

Feinstein and groups that so adamantly support her like CLCV and LCV are in fact green washing her abysmal record regarding California water when the first bullet point cited as proving her "committment" to the environment is something that she should be ashamed of.

In summary: the 1994 Bay-Delta Accord set in motion the Delta's destruction.

How can you possibly justify Feinstein's support of the horribly failed Cal-Fed process that put the Delta ecosystem and Central Valley fisheries in jeopardy as a result of the convening of the Bay-Delta Accord?  

---

by: Dan Bacher @ Wed Feb 24, 2010 at 15:26:52 PM CST

CLCV's apparent bias (0.00 / 0)

I really hope Jenesse returns and responds to the rebuttals of her posts.  I'm quite interested in seeing what she would say.

I wrote a letter to the CLCV expressing my disappointment with their latest blockage of the Greens on their GreenGov2010 website, it's on my blog along with a political philosophy piece on why the inclusion of third parties in the political forum is critical for the evolution of our society.  I'd be interested to receive some feedback or additional points I may have missed in this essay of sorts, if anyone has the time.

---

by: d_tleilax @ Mon Mar 01, 2010 at 06:35:22 AM CST