Tom Campbell was totally in it to win it. It's just that he was in it to win another "it." But his heart is totally in the Senate race now, though:
"What we've seen in the last year is a tremendous growth of the federal government, tripling the deficit and an expansion of the federal role in health care and financial services," Campbell told The Bee. "The federal issues are just exploding in the last year." (SacBee)
You see, it's just now that he realized that federal issues are important. Not when 12 months ago when Barack Obama inherited the worst economy in a generation. Not 6 months ago, when the vitriol around health care reached its crescendo. Not when President Obama was struggling with Afghanistan decisions. Now. When it looked like he was about to buried under a mountain of Whitman's cash.
Not to be a cynic twice over, but, well, I'm going to be a cynic again. Not only did Campbell wait, but he was also preening for the cameras in a perhaps more visible campaign. And one more thing, under state finance laws, one is allowed to raise a lot more than you are allowed to raise per contributor under federal laws. I wasn't able to determine how many big donors Campbell had, mostly because his funding was so anemic and the second half numbers haven't been filed yet. But, if one were to really, really need to raise his name ID, I'd think some additional time in the Gov race would be appealing
This has been brewing in the rumor mill for a few months now it seems. It looks like tomorrow will be the day that Tom Campbell makes it official. He's going to run in the GOP Senate Primary rather than for Governor.
In a move that will rock the state's political landscape, former Silicon Valley Congressman Tom Campbell will announce Thursday that he is dropping out of the California governor's race to run for the U.S. Senate, the Mercury News has learned.
Campbell has scheduled two news conferences to make the announcement: one at 9 a.m. in Los Angeles, the other at 2:30 p.m. at the San Jose Fairmont hotel, according to an e-mail from Campbell's campaign that was sent Monday to his major supporters. The e-mail referred to a "soon to be announced new venture" - confirmed by campaign sources to be a Senate run. (SJ Merc)
I think in order to rock the state's political landscape, you sort have to a) not telegraph the move months ahead of time and b) have a clear path to victory.
Tom Campbell would be a pretty tough race for Barbara Boxer. I think the betting line would still lean Boxer, but he's a more polished candidate than either Fiorina or DeVore. And he has the whole, not crazy thing going for him over DeVore. The trouble for Campbell is the same in the Senate race as it was in the Governor's race, except with a lot less money sloshing around. Basically, he's trying to run a campaign for the general electorate of the state in a primary. And given that the only people really excited to come out and vote in the GOP primary will be the right-wingers, the primary will be really, really tough for Campbell.
I suppose on the bright side for him, he won't be fighting Whitman's crazy dollars in this race. But the real winner here has to be Chuck DeVore. The "I can play sane on TV" vote just got split between Fiorina and Campbell. DeVore just might be able to somehow grab this nomination.
Carly Fiorina is officially announcing her candidacy today. Not much of a surprise really, considering her dipping of the toes process for the past few months. She's going to stream the announcement live from Garden Grove at 10AM, you can catch it here or over the flip.
But if you just can't wait, well, she's gone ahead and published an op-ed in the OC Register. It's really just some seriously good times, and really I can't think of a better way to start off an announcement than apologizing for not voting in the past:
Admittedly, I have not always been engaged in the electoral process, and I should have been. For many years I felt disconnected from the decisions made in Washington and, to be honest, really didn't think my vote mattered because I didn't have a direct line of sight from my vote to a result.
Just lovely, get the fact that you don't think voting makes a real difference out there right away, and then wait until the second paragraph to say "Obviously I was wrong." It is really hard to think of a worse way to have to start off your campaign where you have to ask voters to, um, vote for you than by saying that as a leader of one of California's largest companies you didn't think it was worth your time to vote. Niiice. But don't worry, she's got other reasons why she should lose to challenge Barbara Boxer.
Despite polls showing strong support for the public option in California, she's going to replace real healthcare reform with tort deform!
Congress should reform medical malpractice to match what we have in California where frivolous lawsuits are a thing of the past. We should permit consumers to purchase health insurance from any company in the country, expanding consumer choice and driving down cost and unnecessary mandates.
People want to know that their care will stay where it belongs: in the hands of doctors and patients. Unfortunately, the path Congress is on in this debate is not giving us the confidence that it will.
And just if that isn't enough, she wants to neuter the stimulus, that her pal and fellow Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger praised vocally yesterday.
Tax, spend and borrow is not a governing philosophy; it's a cycle of dependency and it is one that must be broken. Washington must show the discipline to cut spending and create policies that encourage and empower businesses to put people back to work.
Ah, old school Republican word play, I can't think of any way to connect to a heavily Democratic general electorate. Oh, right, she has to face down Chuck DeVore in that primary, where she doesn't even have a substantial lead despite her supposed viability. I hope Fiorina is steeling herself for the conservative onslaught, they are pissed from losing in NY-23 and are on the warpath. DeVore's right-wing messaging could be just the rallying cry they've been looking for.
Late last week we learned that California's unemployment rate dropped 0.1% in September, from 12.3% to 12.2%. That stat obscures far more than it reveals, including the fact that the 12.3% rate for August was an upward revision of the earlier reported number.
More significantly, the stat is not an accurate reflection of the job market in California. We actually lost 39,000 jobs in September. The only reason the rate appears to have dropped is that a significant number of the long-term unemployed have stopped looking for work and are no longer counted as "unemployed.
Nearly 1/3 of those lost jobs came from the public sector, as Steven Levy explained:
The state's job losses were especially pronounced in construction, which lost 14,100 jobs over the month, and government, which lost 12,700.
Cutbacks in government employment, which includes public schools, are partly to blame for the state's lackluster performance this month, said Stephen Levy of the Center for the Continuing Study of the California Economy.
"We are disproportionately hit in the government sector because our state and local governments are having worse budget shortfalls than in other states," he said. (LA Times, 10/17/09)
As Atrios said, that's not the way it's supposed to work. Government needs to be the employer of last resort, especially in a state that has the highest unemployment levels in 60 years. When 12,700 government employees lose their jobs, that translates into less consumer spending, which in turn means pressure to lay off more workers, all of which results in less tax revenue for the state, which merely exacerbates the vicious circle.
Yet Arnold Schwarzenegger simply doesn't care about the unemployment crisis. Instead of working to create private sector jobs through the preservation and expansion of public sector jobs, Arnold has engaged in a right-wing shock doctrine attack on the basic services of the state, an attack that was never going to succeed before the recession hit.
Once upon a time conservative Republicans claimed job creation was their #1 task, and that we had to give corporations whatever they wanted to create jobs - tax cuts, regulation cuts, etc. California did so - and as a result we have a far larger recession and unemployment numbers than we've ever had when Big Government supposedly ruled our political economy.
Today, you'll hear nary a peep out of the Republican Party about jobs. Sure, the Cal Chamber will publish its list of "job killer" bills, but that's only the public excuse to give Arnold the reason he needs to veto bills he'd have vetoed anyway. Instead you have a party that simply does not care about unemployment and the jobless. Instead, to hear Chuck DeVore tell it, the unemployed should just leave California.
California Republicans see unemployment as an unalloyed good, something to be embraced as a tool to destroy what remains of the New Deal and create a working class utterly dependent upon and unable to resist corporate power. California's economic policy has become nothing short of kleptocracy, justified by a constant media drumbeat demanding greater spending cuts, apparently for their own sake.
It is up to Democrats and progressives, then, to make the case to California that jobs matter, that jobs are what this state desperately needs, and that Republicans have not just given up on providing jobs, but are actively cheerleading unemployment and attacking the jobless.
Of course, we don't need jobs for their own sake. We need quality jobs, jobs that pay a living wage, jobs that are sustainable and not dependent on the latest asset bubble Ponzi scheme. And just as we learned in the 1930s, we need government to step in and provide them - instead of actively destroying them.
Chuck DeVore is still an unknown to most Californians, and Carly Fiorina is only slightly more recognized. However, it seems that amongst Republican right-wingers, Chuck DeVore might as well be Madonna; they just love him.
Tea party activists are also lining up behind challengers to GOP establishment-backed Senate candidates in Colorado and Connecticut. In California, former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina - like Crist, another National Republican Senatorial Committee-favored Senate contender - is the target of tea party animus in her primary against conservative state Assemblyman Chuck DeVore.
"My impression is that the support among tea partyers for DeVore is high," said Mark Meckler, a California-based organizer for Tea Party Patriots. "I hear nothing but praise for the guy." (Politico)
Now, you have to separate the two tea party factions. You have the faction that is run by the rich and powerful, that one is led by my former congressman, Dick Armey. But however they are bringing these folks, there is another part of it, that is pretty much your old Republican grassroots. Not much has really changed here, but some of the branding. So, the right-wingers are all abuzz with the hunk of burning electability that is Chuck DeVore. In case you don't know much about him, perhaps we should trust those who know him best, the right-wingers: He's a far right ideologue. Surely that will sway California's center-left electorate.
Meanwhile over in Camp Carlyfornia, we have Carly's turn to get beaten up with the facts that she isn't particularly interested in voting. Fiorina has a stunning 5 for 18 record since 2000. Clearly, she believes in civic engagement.
But don't worry, she's found an issue that she can use to curry favor with the base: West Central Valley water. Carlyfornia's op-ed in the Fresno Bee takes the Sean Hannity line, you know the one where farmers rool and fisherman drool! Boooooo salmon!!
The logic of the editorial is truly stunning though.
Common sense would tell us that it shouldn't take an act of Congress to put the urgent needs of people ahead of a small fish. Apparently it does. ... Congress tried to act the week before my visit to the Valley, however, Senate Democrats -- led by Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer -- defeated a California water amendment offered by South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint. This amendment should be reconsidered and approved. (FresnoBee)
The DeMint (R-South Carolina) amendment would have banned water diversions from farms in the state of California for the purposes of saving endangered species. Never mind that even Sen. Feinstein thinks this is none of his business, the fact is that ignoring one fish isn't really the way to solve important problems. It is this kind of short-term thinking: use whatever resources we have at hand, that has led us to the dangerous situation with climate change.
I recommend that Carlyfornia take a look at the story of DDT in Borneo. You soon begin to realize that nature is a delicate balance. You can't simply take out one player and expect the house of cards to remain in place. In the case of Borneo, DDT was used to reduce malaria, but ended up creating a series of local extinctions that threatened the way of life of Borneo. In the end, the WHO had to airlift cats into the island to save the ecosystem and the way of life for real human beings there.
Field continues its data dump with the poll numbers for the Senate race (PDF). While just skating the magical "50% line" Senator Boxer is doing pretty well at this point:
When Boxer is paired against the two GOP U.S. Senate hopefuls, the incumbent holds early
Candidate
Fav
Unfav
No Opinion
Boxer
48
39
13
Fiorina
12
16
72
DeVore
9
9
82
double-digit leads over her two lesser-known opponents in general election match-ups. Against Fiorina, Boxer's lead is 49% to 35%. When she is paired against DeVore her lead is 50% to 33%.
Senator Boxer has a huge advantage in name ID, but it is very heartening to see that despite the constant right-wing attacks against her, she is still a very solid +9 on the favorability scores. So few have heard of Fiorina and DeVore that the numbers aren't hugely significant right now. However, I did find it interesting that more Democrats than Republicans had an opinion of Fiorina.
But in the Republican battle, these numbers must be insanely frustrating for Carly Fiorina. She was supposed to cruise to the nomination, but she is tied (21-20) with Chuck DeVore, a right-wing Assemblyman without a ton of money. You have to wonder, if she doesn't bounce back from her bad month or so that she had, will she really want to get involved in this mess. Carlyfornia Dreamin' was such a clear disaster, will she really want to sink much of her own money into the race, and will people really give her any money if she doesn't sink some of her ill-gotten HP gains into it? It's really something of a vicious feedback loop for Carly now.
Meanwhile, Senator Boxer is losing some of her base enthusiasm. A health care and/or climate change win would do worlds of good for her amongst the Democratic base. Although perhaps some better language on cap and trade wouldn't hurt either.
In 2006, the Schwarzenegger campaign uncorked an ad almost immediately after the primaries showing Phil Angelides walking backwards, the assumption being that he would take the state backwards as well. One of the ads liberally quoted Angelides' rival for the Democratic nomination, Steve Westly, using the bruising primary against the winner. "What if Steve Westly was right?" the announcer says, after citing Westly's rhetoric in claiming that Angelides favored $10 billion in new taxes. Steve Westly wrote most of Arnold Schwarzenegger's early strategy and even his campaign spots, as Angelides was defined by his opponent swiftly.
Steve Poizner basically bestowed the same gift on eMeg Whitman over the weekend. The ads about Whitman's failure to register to vote for 28 years write themselves, but Poizner took the liberty of making the ad. If Republicans know how to do one thing well, it's go hard negative, and this ad will probably be very effective to the GOP primary audience. It will also be effective as a "here's what Republicans say about Meg Whitman" ad next year, should see prevail in the primary. Poizner actually reiterated his call for Whitman to drop out of the race "for the good of the party" over the weekend at the Republican convention in Indian Wells. The issue received major pickup throughout the media.
And Whitman did herself no favors at all with some of the worst damage control you'll see in politics, as she repeated like a mantra this line about how "there is no excuse for my voting record," completely avoiding any specifics about why. If she manages to win the primary, expect to hear this audio right through to next November. It's cringe-worthy.
I'm guessing the Republican Governor's Association just tried to pull back their invitation to Meg Whitman to come to any of their gala events.
This is terrible crisis management, of course. And it suggests that the general election would be no kinder on eMeg. But it's not like the split in the US Senate race, with serial non-voter Carlyfornia going up against wingnut conservative Chuck DeVore (The LA Times gets this wrong by trying to impose a blanket comparison). The Yacht Party grassroots has figured out that they have no candidate in the Republican primary, and regardless of who wins they probably won't be all that excited to work for the top of the ticket.
For activists such as Mike Spence, past president of the conservative California Republican Assembly, such centrist talk inspires unease following what they said was Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's betrayal of the Republican base.
Spence called the Republican governor a failure and blasted him for breaking his promises to conservatives by, among other things, approving the biggest tax increase in state history earlier this year. Schwarzenegger has also championed traditionally liberal causes such as Assembly Bill 32, which requires the state to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by about 25 percent by 2020.
"After the governor, people are cautious about who they support," Spence said.
Of course, this could be true of the Democratic grassroots as well, depending on circumstances. I think the only certainty in next year's elections will be the low turnout, as a slice of both sides stay home for their own reasons. But the Yacht Party's cast of characters look particularly uninspiring.
If you get a chance, take a listen to Warren Olney's Which Way, LA? tonight. You can find it right here.
The California portion starts about halfway in, at around 28:40.
So Warren Olney describes the craptacular deal, and then has two lawmakers on to talk about it. First up is Bonnie Lowenthal, who is positively ebullient about the prospect of selling out local governments and breaking the very fabric of the social safety net. Asked if she'll vote for the budget, she goes "I certainly am!" Olney, incredulously, lists the scope of the cuts, but she replies, "We have a deal, the stalemate is done, the IOUs will be over!" Later in the show, she enlightens us that it's better to have something than nothing, and that we saved the "framework" - not the funding, just the framework - of most programs.
Then Chuck DeVore comes on. Now DeVore is running for US Senate, and needs to be as crazy as he wants to be. So Olney asks him if he's voting for the budget. And he says he hasn't read it, but it didn't go far enough with the "reforms" and cuts to programs. (He also uses the spanking new right-wing canard that California has 12% of the population and 32% of the welfare recipients, which is only true if you count all kinds of services that other states don't consider welfare as welfare) Then Olney says that there were no new taxes in the deal, and DeVore hails that, and eventually says "this is the best compromise we could possibly get." And Olney says, "So then you'll vote for it." And DeVore says "No."
I guess DeVore didn't get handed his talking points that he's supposed to throw a hissy fit about a fake report in the LA Times regarding early release, almost certainly planted by Sam Blakeslee to give cover to Yacht Partiers who want to vote against the budget.
I don't think you could encapsulate the strategy and approach of the two parties better in a work of fiction. Lowenthal is just pleased as punch for everything to be over, DeVore knows he can get more and doesn't want any part of his own handiwork so Democrats can be blamed for the consequences. One side looks only to put out immediate fires and the other has a long game strategy playing out over decades.
It is not pleasing to be a Democrat at this juncture.
It's great to be here blogging with you at Calitics! I look forward to stopping by regularly and working with you in the weeks and months ahead.
As you probably know, I'm running for re-election in 2010, and our June 30th fundraising deadline is rapidly approaching. It's important that we post solid numbers at the end of each quarter to show our potential right-wing opponents that we're ready for anything they throw at us. But this deadline is even more important than most.
Since we're going with the eMeg monicker, I can't help but want to do the same with Carly Fiorina, another failed CEO who wants to enter politics. Fiorina left HP in disgrace, dogged by charges of corporate espionage. But hey, that's a record the people of California are going to love right? Oh...and she got thrown from Straight Talk Express at 60 mph.
Anyway, even for somebody who was super busy, and not involved in politics, you'd think that these big powerful CEOs might be thinking about their potential future. Perhaps they could get around to voting, you know, maybe sign up for vote by mail to save themselves time. I understand with all of these initiatives, it can be time consuming, but, you know, have one of your underlings prepare a memo or something.
But nope, Carla Marinucci did some digging, and neither of our failed CEOs can quite get the voting thing down. First, Fiorina, a likely Republican candidate for Senate, voted in just 25% of elections. Ouch:
Fiorina, 54, of Los Altos Hills, who recently acknowledged that she is "seriously considering" a run, has voted in about 1 in 4 of the national, state and local elections in which she was eligible to cast a ballot since she registered in the Bay Area as a Republican in 2000, according to Santa Clara County records.
She didn't vote in presidential primaries in 2000 and 2004, the county's Registrar of Voters database shows. Nor did Fiorina cast a ballot in the primary or general elections in 2006, when Californians last voted for a U.S. senator, re-electing Democrat Dianne Feinstein. (SF Chron 6/2/09)
Not that 2006 really mattered in the Senate election, but I'd be interested in finding out who Fiorina supported in that election. Maybe the always sleuthful Carla Marinucci will be able to pin down hCarly on that question, despite the fact that the issue wasn't worth her five minutes.
Incidentally, I have to say, I don't think that Fiorina is instantly the front runner if she enters the race, despite her wealth. The CA GOP primary electorate is pretty freaking crazy. And you know who else is pretty freaking crazy? Yup, that'd be Chuck DeVore. So, perhaps Fiorina needs to, um, Talk to Chuck.
As for eMeg...well, it's even uglier. In a BusinessWeek magazine article from 2000, she was found to lack even a registration at her then current address. She did finally register as DTS in 2002 and then Republican in 2007. I'm sure the GOP primary electorate will love that little deet.
And if you're thinking that both of our failed CEOs can simply buy their way through the primaries, well, just ask Al Checchi how that went.
I just appeared on KPFA with Eric Klein to talk about the Governor's proposed budget cuts, along with several experts and stakeholders, including friend of Calitics Anthony Wright of Health Access California. I agree with him that it's almost hard to fathom the amount and severity of the cuts proposed for health care, especially at a time with the federal government is moving forward with a "do or die" plan to reform the health care market, increase access and lower costs. The proposed Governor Hoover cuts would have the exact opposite effect, and the people gravely impacted by this will not have the luxury of waiting around for the Feds to catch up and fill in the gaps.
Two recent CBP fact sheets help break down the Governor's proposed cuts to Medi-Cal and Healthy Families, in numbers that are easier to grasp. These fact sheets show:
More than 940,000 California children would lose health coverage if the Healthy Families Program is eliminated as the Governor proposes. More than 240,000 children in Los Angeles county alone would be affected. Want to know how many children would be impacted in your county? Check out the fact sheet to see.
In total, more than 1.9 million Californians could lose access to health coverage within three years through proposed reductions to the Medi-Cal Program and elimination of Healthy Families.
As the Governor said himself today, "behind every one of those dollars that we cut there are real faces."
Kudos to the LA Times, by the way, for allowing the great unmentionable to get printed on their pages - the decisions made in Sacramento will truly be the difference between life and death for many Californians.
Schwarzenegger argues that the state's declining economy and plummeting tax revenues have boxed California into a corner, forcing deep and historic cuts in the health and welfare programs that form the state's social safety net. Without those tough measures, he says, California will cartwheel toward insolvency.
But a 10-person legislative budget panel, which is reviewing the governor's proposals, listened during a long day in a crowded hearing room to scores of people who said their survival depends on programs set to be hit by the budget ax.
They heard from mothers of children with autism, representatives of people on dialysis, poor parents whose children see dentists on the government's dime, former drug abusers set straight by a state rehab program.
And they heard from a woman named Lynnea Garbutt who has lived with AIDS all of her 24 years.
She has survived with the help of a state program that provides the expensive antiviral drugs she takes. Now, with that program facing elimination, she pleaded with lawmakers to save it -- and her life.
"If these cuts take place, you're not just cutting money from the program -- you're cutting my life," she told the panel, her voice shaking and tears falling. "I choose to live. Please don't make me die. My choice is life."
This is how Yacht Partier Chuck DeVore responded - move out of the state. Love it or leave it!
The cuts made to programs like Healthy Families (California's SCHIP) would eliminate federal matching funds and double or triple the scope of the cuts. And it would be one thing, by the way, if the Yacht Party simply held the line and said "we can't afford it." But no, they want to spend billions of dollars, only on their own projects instead of saving human lives.
In this article in the San Diego Union Tribune, the same Republicans (and Republican governor) who would eliminate children's health care and basic services for the neediest Californians, actually want the state to pony up the money for a water bond.
Schwarzenegger, says the article, is still fixated on a whopping $10 billion bond. And Senate Republicans are right there with him:
"Sen. Dave Cogdill of Modesto, the lead Republican on water issues, agreed. "It's obviously a tough time to bring it forward, but we can't wait," the article notes.
We can't wait? According to my calculator, If the entire $10 billion was sold together, the interest payment could be in the neighborhood of $660 million annually. That's $660 million more that would have to come out of schools, health care, and other items on the chopping block.
Similarly, the Yacht Party cried poor about programs that help people, but made room in the February budget for a huge corporate tax cut.
Everyone who has spent 10 seconds on this recognizes that there's no good way to use current revenues to provide the basic level of services Californians deserve. To the extent that I have hope that we will overcome the selfishness of the cruel and the impossibility of navigating a broken system, it comes from people, who are fed up and starving for leadership and change from a government that no longer serves their interests. To turn the figurative starvation literal, Los Angeles teachers are going on a hunger strike to protest budget cuts. We're all hungry, and we'll be a lot hungrier if Governor Hoover has his way.
If you've been watching your TV over the past few months, you've undoubtedly seen the rotoscoped ads (edited based on user input) from Charles Schwab that feature that tagline Talk to Chuck.. When you visit the website, you should notice the emblem at the lower right corner: a square "talk bubble" with "talk to Chuck" inside it. Notice the style and font.
Now go over and have a gander at the website of self-styled conservative Republican (why anyone would call themselves that these days is beyond me) Chuck Devore, who is challenging Barbara Boxer for her Senate seat in 2010.
Scroll down. Notice the "talk to Chuck" with the square talk bubbles and a very similar block font? Definitely not coincidental. And IANAL, but does this constitute some sort of infringement of intellectual property rights? After all, if I were a brokerage, I wouldn't want to be associated with a political candidate on either end of the spectrum. Then again, if I were a political candidate on either end of the spectrum, I wouldn't want to willingly associate myself with a brokerage house. But then again, I'm not Chuck Devore.
From the twitter updates I've seen so far, it looks like the Governor is leaning very, very hard on Cogdill, Ashburn and Dave Cox. At this point it looks like Sen. Cox (R-Fair Oaks) is the key vote. Incidentally, Maldanado is doing us no favors. Good thing nobody ran against him last year.
Another interesting tidbit from the Capitol: Asm Chuck DeVore, (R-OC) and Republican candidate for Boxer's Senate seat, attempted a coup on Assembly Minority Leader Mike Villines. It failed.
Update by Robert: DeVore resigned his post as whip in the aftermath of the apparent leadership struggle, thereby taking his ball and going home:
"For these reasons, I believe it is appropriate for me to resign as Chief Republican Whip, effective immediately. I can no longer participate as a leader on a team that is preparing to make a fundamental mistake of colossal proportions. For the sake of California I hope I am wrong - however, I fear I am right and that this tax increase and budget deal will result in more harm to the Golden State than good."
In the Byzantine world of Yacht Party politics this of course is good news for his chances of winning the party's nomination to get pummeled by Barbara Boxer in 2010.
Update by Brian: Per John Myers' tweets it appears Dave Cox is trying to get Prop 10 (tobacco tax) money diverted from children's health care programs. So far, it seems the Democrats are resisting. While we're speaking of kids, the CA Budget Project has a chart (PDF) of how much the deal would cut from K12 funding by district.
Update by Brian 6:30am: Well, it seems the legislators have pulled an all-nighter, as the Senate continues to be one vote short. John Myers has been a real sport and tweeted throughout. Sen. Cox announced at about 1am that he was a no on the budget, despite the changes to Prop 10 that were done only to please him. On another note, apparently when the Assembly went into lockdown, they really went into lockdown, Assembly sergeants-at-arms at the doors and everything. Over in the Senate, they dimmed the lights.
This process has been a disaster. The worst of everything that we've been going through for months, even years, with the Republicans. This is a fancy stick-up, with a patina of legitimacy. Who knows if a deal will be reached, but at this point there can be no question from the High Broderists who caused this. Every newspaper, every television station, every radio station should do what the Media News group did and call out the Republicans for their stickup of the state.
Their sheer cowardice to face down their own interest groups is remarkable. It is truly a sad day when a group of elected leaders, when faced with a clear policy decision between what is good for the state and what is good for the politician, have decided that they choose themselves. They have willingly played along with the anti-tax rigid ideology, and their capacity to actually lead on their own has withered away.
What happens from here is anybody's guess. Maybe they get the additional vote, maybe they don't. Perhaps, Arnold will be willing to sign the majority budget agreement that the Democrats passed back in December now, because lord knows we cannot simply do nothing. Arnold wanted to play brinksman, well here it is. We are standing at the precipice, does he want to jump?
Update by Brian: Quick thought - how big is that LA Board of Supes victory by former Sen. Mark Ridley-Thomas. If he were still in the Senate, rather than the seat being vacant until March, the deal would have gone through by now. You have to wonder whether maybe labor wishes they hadn't worked quite so hard to help him defeat Bernard Parks...
Your last word in what's happenin' (apologies to Raj and Rerun):
• Here's George Skelton having some fun and making up statistics to scapegoat immigrants, failing to mention the economic activity they produce and the Social Security payroll taxes they pay but never collect. It's simply wrong to pander to xenophobes the way Skelton does in this piece, under the guise of "being honest." If you want to be honest, explain that, as baby boomers age, the fiscal impact of younger workers in the country is positive, at least so says that left-wing rag the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and countless other studies.
• Debbie Cook has resufaced at the new site OC Progressive, and she writes a strong post about to need to collectively focus on energy as crucial to our future as a sustainable planet. It's really good.
• The Museum of Contemporary Art in L.A. reduced its staff by 20%. Not only construction and manufacturing jobs are affected by the meltdown. The arts and non-profits are among the hardest-hit.
• Just why did the NFL and the Los Angeles NBC affiliate ban an ad on marriage equality, and then lie that they weren't airing "advocacy-based" ads during on Super Bowl Sunday to boot? Someone ought to find out.
• California now has less wind power capacity than Iowa. I don't totally agree with the conclusions for why, but it's worth studying.
• CA-Sen: ZOMG, Chuck DeVore Twitters! And Facebooks! He raised $1,600 on Twitter! He's TOTALLY like Obama! (Is that 140 characters yet?)
By the way, that picture in the WSJ of DeVore checking his Blackberry like a strung-out meth addict should be atop all of Barbara Boxer's campaign literature for the next couple years.
Just a reminder about the Internet for Everyone Townhall on Saturday at the Radisson at USC. Should be interesting, just click that ad to the right. Now, to the links
• Chuck DeVore has his first TV ad for the 2010 Senate race against Sen. Boxer. No word on other candidates for this race, but if DeVore is it, well, I'll be entertained.
• CA-41: Is Jerry Lewis in more legal trouble related to a plea bargain by Duke Cunningham briber Mitchell Wade? Lewis has dodged these bullets plenty of times before, but Wade is apparently singing like a canary.
• Check it out, our own Dante Atkins' ad about Prop. 8 and the Mormons found its way into a Jonah Goldberg column and, apparently, Hannity and Colmes last night. The column is Goldberg's usual collection of deliberate omissions (that whole "separation of church and state" thing) and outright falsehoods. Hey, Dante, the author of Liberal Fascism wrote about you! Swell company!
• Some folks on the local level are fighting back against the raid on their money. In this case its redevelopment agencies suing the state for taking money from their fund to put into the general fund.
• This is a very favorable ruling for California consumers, protecting them from getting squeezed when they use an out-of-network provider for emergency room visits.
• Gov. Schwarzenegger isn't asking for money to pay day-to-day expenses, but rather for money for infrastructure projects. This directly contradicts the letter that Speaker Bass sent Speaker Pelosi and our Senators. Bass asked for money more in the form of a "bailout."
• While everybody else is focusing on the Prop 8 numbers from the PPIC poll, Joe Matthews is looking at the opportunity for initiative reform. There are some interesting possibilities there, including greater transparency and the possibility of getting a legislative review process.
Chuck DeVore discussed his senate campaign with Erick Erickson of RedState prior to his announcement. If you read between the lines, DeVore's plan (loosely based on the plot of the movie Superman) is to have the left half of the state fall into the ocean. But instead of nuking the San Andreas, DeVore's scheme is to drill enough offshore and throw enough red meat to the base inland to create an unnatural imbalance in California that results in a devastating earthquake.
"A plurality also favor offshore drilling," he tells me, again pointing out Barbara Boxer disagrees. Boxer, he emphasizes, "is an unreconstructed extremist liberal." That's red meat rhetoric that will play well to the Republican base.
Devore is committed to picking off Boxer. In 2010, an political earthquake is coming to California. He is taking advantage of it.
Actually, DeVore as an evil mastermind is far more Dr. Evil than Lex Luthor, thinking he can win with minorities.
Devore and the conservatives in California are much more in line with Latino voters and black voters than Barbara Boxer and the urban white elites whose policies have made it even more difficult for poorer families to survive.
Clearly, DeVore resonates with the right-wing bloggers to the point they make even less sense than normal. He is their type of candidate and I fully expect them to Palinate DeVore through the primary and bring him to within 20 pts of Boxer when all of the voters are counted.
Despite the expected post-election lull, there is actually a lot of intrigue over various open seats and 2010 prospects happening right now. Mark Ridley-Thomas' vacant State Senate seat will draw an election, likely in March, and potential gubernatorial candidates are jockeying for position (much more on that in the weeks to come). But there's also the matter of the 2010 Senate race against Barbara Boxer. The ongoing rumor was that Arnold Schwarzenegger, who is termed out in 2010, might go after this seat. However, being a complete failure as Governor has dampened that speculation somewhat. So into the breach has stepped... Chuck DeVore?
Republican Assemblyman Chuck DeVore will announce Wednesday that he will run for U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer's seat in 2010.
DeVore, R-Irvine, is declaring his candidacy just one week after winning his third and final term in the 70th Assembly District, representing Laguna Beach, Irvine, Newport Beach, Tustin and other portions of Orange County.
DeVore has scheduled an Internet news conference at 1 p.m. Wednesday to make the announcement. He confirmed his intention Tuesday in a phone conversation with Capitol Alert.
Now, Chuck DeVore is, frankly, crazy, and there's blogospheric evidence to back up that opinion. I don't think I have to cite much more than his opposition to marriage equality because it would embolden NAMBLA.
DeVore, well-liked by hard-right conservatives, is a down-the-line Yacht Party regular, in a state where the last statewide election favored the Democrat by 24 points. The lesson learned by Republicans, I guess, is to "go boldly in the direction of the insane." I'll say this - it will be an entertaining race.
I have a bunch of things that might have been more appropriate for Quick Hits, but rather than flooding the Quick Hits Section, I'll do it here. So, here we go:
Ted Gullickson of the SF Tenants' Union, along with similar groups from across the state, has started a new blog, Oppose the Landlord Scheme, to, um, oppose the landlord scheme. Go check it out. Ted and the SFTU are always hard at work to protect and further the rights and interests of tenants.
You will soon be seeing signature gatherers for, yet another, parental notification measure. The last two went down, with Prop 85 (45.8% Yes) garnering an even lower share than Prop 73 (47.2%) did before it. Each version has its own slightly different kicker. This one would require doctors to notify the authorities of children who can't, for whatever reason, tell their parents of the pregnancy. If they don't, they can be prosecuted. Can you imagine the consequences of that? Apparently the drafters of the initiative didn't bother to think about the actual effects of this law from within their bubble (Great Prop 85 ad).
The referenda on the Indian Gaming Compacts have qualified. They will be Props 94 (Pechanga), 95 (Morongo), 96 (Sycuan), and 97 (Agua Caliente). There was a little bit of a debate about these during the E-Board in Anaheim. UNITE-HERE is gearing up to fight these.
Asm. Chuck DeVore of Orange County has withdrawn his initiative to relax the rules for building nuclear power plants. Shockingly enough, he couldn't get the signatures. This initiative would have gone down in flames, so I imagine even power companies wouldn't want to touch it with a ten-foot pole.
But anyways, as I was starting to feel happy that the Assembly approved legislation that would allow me to find the hubby of my dreams, Chuckie just had to piss me off by saying this. Whatever. All I say to him, and to others who oppose equal rights for all, is that allowing all loving couples to make lasting commitments for life strengthens marriage. Discrimination doesn't.
But enough of Chuckie, let's get back to the good news of today! Fortunately, most Assembly Members don't share the same distorted views as Chuckie. They recognize that the institution of marriage is only strengthened when the state does not discriminate over which loving couples can get married and which ones can't. Thank goodness they did the right thing today. : )
Conservative Republican Assemblymember Chuck DeVore stopped by the conservative OC Blog to talk about his legislation with progressive San Francisco Assemblymember Mark Leno. As you can imagine, some of the readers weren't exactly thrilled to see DeVore working with Leno (just like some here might feel about Leno teaming up with DeVore). But it is good to see two lawmakers from opposite sides of the aisle work together to pass common sense legislation that is popular.
