CA-41 Jerry Lewis’ Lobbyist Friends

UPDATE: Repaired a link -Brian

Time is just out with an article on the relationship between Representative Jerry Lewis (CA-41) and Jeffrey Shockley. Shockley’s lobbying firm is none other than Copeland, Lowery, Jacquez. The San Diego Union Tribune highlighted the intimate relationship between Lewis and Bill Lowery back in December.

Before Jeffrey Shockey worked for one of the most powerful committees in Congress, he was a lobbyist at one of the more successful boutique lobbying firms in Washington. Before that, you guessed it, he worked for one of the most powerful committees in Congress. In fact, Shockey, 40, has breezed so smoothly through the revolving door between Congress and the lobbying world that, critics say, it’s hard to tell where one job begins and the other ends.

Shockley’s career is a series of moves between jobs in Congressman Lewis’ office and jobs lobbying Congressman Lewis’ office.

Shockey’s career is a case study in how the game works. When he left Capitol Hill for the lobbying world in 1999 — after spending more than eight years working for Rep. Jerry Lewis, a Republican from California who had chaired key subcommittees — many of his new clients, including muncipalities, hospitals and lesser-known universities, were from Lewis’s district. After years of getting paid to represent them on the Hill, he was now getting paid a lot more to represent them on the Hill.

Shockley’s record as a lobbyist is staggering. Though his efforts, he was able to direct over $150 million in pork barrel projects to his clients, earning himself $1.5 million in his first year as a lobbyist. And, Shockley was able to insure that his grateful clients directed hundreds of thousands of dollars to Representative Lewis and his political action committee.

Last year, Lewis’ largess within the party, thanks to the efforts of lobbyists like Shockley helped Lewis achieve the chairmanship of the House Appropriations Committee. Lewis asked Shockey to work for the committee. Shockley accepted the job despite a 10 fold reduction in salary. But, the Shockley family won’t go hungry.

Copeland, Lowery, Jacquez — where Lewis’s close friend Bill Lowery, a former California congressman, is a partner — gave Shockey a $600,000 going-away buyout, according to Shockey’s financial disclosure form. He was to receive his buyout in three $200,000 payments scheduled for February, May and August 2005 — even as he was in his committee post. The firm would also keep Shockey in the family by hiring his wife, Alexandra — another former Lewis aide — as a consulting lobbyist.

What a sweet deal this is for Lewis. No matter where Shockey works, he ends up helping raise funds for Lewis. From Shockley’s perspective, no matter where he works, his take home pay is going to be substantial. It’s a win, win, win situation. Well, except for the taxpayers who are covering the cost of all of Lewis’ earmarks to companies that Shockley used to represent, but which are now represented by someone else, who also used to work for Lewis.

With the help of another former Lewis aide who took over some Shockey accounts at his lobbying firm, many of Shockey’s more than 50 former clients have continued to land tens of millions of dollars in earmarks, courtesy of the panel Shockey now helps Lewis run.

Jerry Lewis sure knows how to rig the game in his favor.

Words Have Power.

Kaloogian Alert – Toxic – Full Protective Gear Required

Down With Tyranny holds its nose and links to Howard Kaloogian’s most recent fund raising appeal in his campaign for Randy Cunningham’s vacated congressional seat in CA-50.

I won’t link directly to Kaloogian’s document for fear of contamination.

Kaloogian is a puzzle to me. He is either a right wing nut case with little conception of the real issues in this country; OR his is a tool of right wing puppet masters who want to make sure that the real issues in this country are kept hidden from its citizens.

Frankly, I don’t care into which of the two categories Kaloogian falls.  In either case he is a dangerous politician.

Kaloogian tars anyone who disagrees with his position, any position held by the extreme neo-con right or King George Bush as a “liberal.” That is the worst criticism that members of Kaloogian’s cult can come up with to use against an opponent. And, it is the one word that so scares the far right-wingers who support politicians like Kaloogian that they will immediately write a check to his campaign.

The fact that more than 60% of Americans disagree with President Bush’s policies and direction for the country means nothing to Kaloogian. All those people are either “liberals” or the victim of “liberal media lies.”

Kaloogian wants to make sure that the ultra-rich and big corporations avoid paying taxes. He has no problems with “earmarks” as a form of corporate welfare or as a means of rewarding campaign contributors. Kaloogian has no real coherent political position. He can only define himself by what he is against, not by any policies or positions that he advocates.

He has no interest in the issues that are important to the people living in California’s 50th Congressional District. He has no position on education. He has no position on lobbyist reform. He has no position on the environment. He has no position on transportation policy. He has no position on senior drug benefits. He has no position on support for military veterans.

Kaloogian’s most recent political positions have been against the United Nations, against national politicians who disagree with George Bush and against the concept of a free press telling the truth to Americans.

As I said, Kaloogian is either the willing tool of the American hating extremist on the right wing fringe of our society or he is one of the leaders of these fringe extremists. Take your pick.

10 Years Isn’t Enough For Cunningham

(The sorry details of Randy “Duke” Cunningham’s betrayal of the public trust. He is sleazy even by Republican standards. – promoted by Words Have Power)

Federal prosecutors presented a San Diego court with a recommended sentence for former congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham. You can read the entire sentencing memorandum here or check out the San Diego Union Tribune’s shorter version here.

Having admitted unparalleled corruption, defendant Randall H. Cunningham now comes before the Count to be sentenced for his stunning betrayal of the public trust. Cunningham used his status as a war hero to get into Congress, and then he used his Congressional office to get rich. In doing so, Cunningham reneged on his obligation to execute his office with conscientious, loyal, faithful, disinterested, and unbiased service. The length, breadth, and depth of Cunningham’s crimes against the people of the United States are unprecedented for a sitting Member of Congress. So too, should be his sentence.

With that as an introduction, prosecutors asked the court to sentence Cunningham to the maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.

What the details in the sentencing memorandum make abundantly clear is that Randy Cunningham sold his influence and used his office to make himself rich. Cunningham was not caught up in the schemes of others, he was the prime instigator of this criminal endeavor. A copy of a bribe payment schedule (bribe menu) was included in documents filed by the prosecution.

In this “bribe menu,” the left column represented the millions in government contracts that could be “ordered” from Cunningham. The right column was the amount of the bribes that the contractor giving up his title to a boat (“BY) for which Coconspirator No. 2 had initially paid $140,000 (“140″). The next four rows indicate that an additional million dollars in funding was “for sale” in exchange for every additional $50,000 that Coconspirator No. 2 was willing to pay Cunningham. Once Coconspirator No. 2 had paid Cunningham $340,000 in bribes, the rates dropped; and, as the final five rows reflect, Cunningham would charge only $25,000 for each additional million dollars that was awarded in Congressman was demanding in exchange for the contracts.

The federal documents lay out an incredibly damning case. Cunningham was literally selling government business to his co-conspirators. No wink and nudge stuff, but tit for tat – you give me money and I’ll give you government contracts for a specific amount. It is breathtaking.

In order to completely pay off his Rancho Santa Fe home, Cunningham turned to Brent Wilkes and Mitchell Wade.

…Cunningham demanded that Co-conspirator No. 1 (Brent Wilkes) give him $525,000. Coconspirator No. 1 agreed, but on condition that he receive an additional $6,000,000 in government funds. Shortly after receiving this money (through a DoD subcontract), Coconspirator No. 1 wired the $525,000 (thinly disguised as an “investment”) to Coconspirator No. 3’s financial services company. Cunningham never made another payment on his second mortgage.

…Cunningham demanded that Coconspirator No. 2 (Mitchell Wade) pay him $500,000, to eliminate the remaining mortgage burdens for his Rancho Santa Fe mansion. In return, Cunningham promised to support a specific defense appropriations request. Coconspirator No. 2 agreed. To disguise this bribe, Coconspirator No. 2 divided the $500,000 into two unequal checks (one for $329.000 and one for $171,000), both made out to Top Gun Enterprises. Although both checks were made out at the same time, Coconspirator No. 2 sought to further disguise the illegal activity by utilizing different dates and non-consecutive check numbers. He added false notations on both checks that suggested a legitimate purpose.

It’s all here in the government documents. The big bribes, the little bribes, the furniture, the cars, all of it laid out in stunning detail.

What is clear from this evidence is that Randy Cunningham is a crook and a liar. He broke his oaths and he betrayed his office. Randy Cunningham is a disgrace and deserves to go to jail for the rest of his life.

Also posted at Words Have Power

Sexual Predators and Some Other Crazies

( – promoted by SFBrianCL)

We can all agree that sexual predators are bad and that we need to protect children from them.  Assemblyman Mark Leno is working to do that.  His Democratic bill AB 50 has universal support from Democrats and passed the Assembly with 49 yes votes.  However, he had to strip funding provisions because he could not achieve the 2/3 majority required to pass funding measures.  He plans on restoring them after the trip to the Senate:

Leno said he intends to restore the $23 million appropriation once the bill reaches the Senate – $15 million to create local Sexual Assault Felony Enforcement Teams and $8 million to add 500 Global Positioning System devices for tracking high-risk sex offenders.(Sac Bee 1/27/06)


The real craziness is on the flip…

The key provisions:

Key provisions in AB 50 include:

* Prohibiting registered sex offenders from school grounds.

* Adding continual sexual abuse of a child to a list of offenses eligible for a life sentence on a first offense.

* Requiring a sentence of life with the possibility of parole for kidnapping with intent to commit various sex offenses.

* Allowing a person who possesses more than 100 items of child pornography to be charged with a felony. Leno said he plans to lower the threshold to 25.(Sac Bee 1/27/06)

But the key part isn’t what’s in the bill, but rather what isn’t in the bill.  The Republicans dropped their support for the bill after deciding  that it wasn’t strong enough.  All but one Republican, Tim Leslie of Placer County, abstained from the vote.  Apparently, they want it their way, or no way.  They would rather leave the loopholes to the law gaping than repair them.  In other words, they would rather pay politics than actually protect our children.

But that’s not even the craziness that I referenced in the title.  That honor belongs to the Republicans who are spreading fear. The SF Bay Times has an article which highlights some of that craziness:

“This is bull—-,” shouted Assembly speaker Fabian Núñez (D-Los Angeles) as he approached Assemblyman Todd Spitzer last week, waving a copy of a commentary in which the Orange County Republican had characterized Leno as “anti-public safety” “pro-criminal” and accused Leno of protecting child molesters and abusers – the Sacramento Bee’s Jim Sanders reported on Monday.
***
Republican bloggers and radio pundits have, for months, been hammering away at Leno. “What I’m talking about is evil, pure evil,” opined Karen Hanretty communications director for the California Republican Party “Mr. Leno is a danger to society…”
***
Lesbian legislator Jackie Goldberg said she was targeted by Rep. Sharon  Runner, a Palmdale Republican, in one of many attacks. On a recent radio show she said that Goldberg, who raised her child from birth, “was not a real mother,” Goldberg said.

Vaguely anti-gay? “Not vaguely, honey,” Goldberg said. “It’s more than that. Of course I’m a parent. But I don’t count.”
***
At that point the Republican minority accused Leno and his committee of being “soft on crime” and “putting the rights of career criminals over those of law-abiding citizens, especially children,” Orange County Republican Assemblyman Spitzer wrote.

Pretty sickening all around.

MediaMatters: O’Reilly denies that he called for an attack on San Francisco

( – promoted by SFBrianCL)

We all know that Bill O’Reilly hates San Francisco.  But now, for some reason, he wants to hide his past statements about his disdain for our shining city on the hill.  MediaMatters points out that he now denies calling for an Al Qaeda attack on San Francisco:

On the November 8, 2005, edition of his radio program, O’Reilly said:

  O’REILLY: Listen, citizens of San Francisco, if you vote against military recruiting, you’re not going to get another nickel in federal funds. … And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we’re not going to do anything about it. We’re going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead.

During his February 1 show, after reading aloud a viewer’s letter that referred to O’Reilly’s remarks, O’Reilly replied: “Wrong, sir. I gave Al Qaeda your address. That’s just a jest.” He then added: “But here’s some serious advice: Stay away from the far-left web sites. They do not make you look smart.”

Not really related to California so much, but I do love mocking Bill O’Lielly.

Is Dick Pombo a Liar? You Decide.

Dick Pombo (CA-11) is the most anti-environment legislator to pass through the United States Congress in a generation. His legislative iniatitives include gutting the Endangered Special Act, proposing the sale to private interests of millions of acres of public land – including several national parks and providing unbridled access to public land and resources to timber and mining interests.

Pombo claims that his anti-environmental positions are driven by a highly developed sense of property rights, the need for American energy independence and an acute empathy for farmers and ranchers who have their land usage dictated by the federal government.

Pombo’s story plays well in the rural sections of his district. His family has owned vast tracts of property in and around the city of Tracy for a century. His extended family lives on a 500 acre ranch on the outskirts of Tracy. And, Pombo uses his cowboy image to garner agricultural votes and support.

More untruths in the extended.

What Pombo isn’t so forthcoming in sharing with his neighbors at the feed store is the source of most of his campaign funds. The Los Angeles Times isn’t so reticent.

Text According to data compiled by the Campaign Finance Analysis Project, Pombo has, during his congressional career, collected more than $800,000 from agriculture, timber and fishing interests. The building industry has given him $205,000; oil and gas, $169,000; mining, $55,000; and casinos and gambling, $147,000.

Virtually none of these big campaign donors reside in the CA-11. But, Dick Pombo has certainly done a lot for the big corporate interests that want more access to public land and to see environmental laws relaxed or repealed.

Dick Pombo, the friend of the small rancher and famer, is also one of the chief architects of turning Tracy into a bedroom community for Silicon Valley. And, turning Tracy into a developer’s paradise has been very good for the Pombo family.

During Pombo’s two years as a local councilman before heading to Congress in 1992, he worked on a general plan that set the stage for Tracy’s explosive growth. Today much of the farmland for sale on the town fringes is staked with the red and white signs of Pombo Real Estate, founded in the 1960s by his late uncle Ernie and carried on by relatives.

Now pretending to be one of the boys down at the 4H Club and at FFA meetings isn’t lying, it just hypocracy. Running around in a cowboy hat isn’t them same as being supportive of family farming, especially when you are developing plans to rezone the land those farms sit on and in the process insuring that members of your family make millions.

But, let’s look at another case the Times lays out regarding Pombo.

The family lands figure prominently in Pombo lore. It was the government riding roughshod over the family’s property rights, he says, that spurred him to get involved in national politics.

In 1994 he told a Senate subcommittee that he ran for Congress after the ranch was declared critical habitat for the endangered San Joaquin kit fox, stripping his land of its value and forcing his family to run the ranch “with an unwanted, unneeded, un-silent partner — the federal government.”

The tale turns out to have been embroidered. Pombo’s ranch is a corridor for the kit fox, the smallest fox in North America. But it is not critical habitat, which the government has never designated anywhere for the tiny fox. Pombo paid $5,137 into a regional habitat conservation plan to compensate for houses he and relatives were building on the ranch. But that was years after his congressional testimony.

Today, Pombo concedes his characterization was “mistaken” and says having kit fox habitat on his land “didn’t prevent me from doing anything.”

Hummm…. The intrusive federal government “stripped” Pombo’s land of its value and forced itself upon Pombo as “unwanted, unneeded” partner in his business. Except, the whole story is a fabrication. It didn’t happen. It allows Pombo to create a strawman – the evil Endangered Species Act – and tell first hand of the damage the act caused him and his family. A hypocritical act and an outright lie.

A few years ago, Pombo lent his expertise to a report critical of the Forest Services’ handling of a fire in the Pacific Northwest. According to Pombo, four firefighters died because a fire fighting helicopter was denied access to river water because of regulations protecting fish in the river.

Again, a great story.  Foolish, excessive enviromental laws caused a tragic loss of life.

Guess what?  Another Pombo story that turns out to be …. untrue.

“Highly inaccurate…. The whole thing was a bunch of baloney,” Jim Furnish, a former deputy chief of the U.S. Forest Service who headed an investigation of the deaths, said in an interview. The probe found that although there was some confusion about whether a helicopter could draw from the river, endangered species regulations did not forbid it and most of the delay in using the chopper was unrelated. Moreover, investigators concluded the four died because of command misjudgments and because the fire crew disregarded standard safety procedures.

Dick Pombo is a tool of special interests. He has found a perfect niche from which he can work to destroy generations of conservation and enviromental progess. The money pours in from corporations whose interests Pombo serves. In his district. he can wear a cowboy hat, spit and load feed bags into the pick-up, but when he goes to Washington, Dick Pombo serves the special interests that fill his campaign coffers to overflowing.

To justify his support of these major corporate interests, Dick Pombo cultivates the image of a small town rancher fighting the intrusive federal government.  That image is just that, an image.  Manufactured to sell to the rubes back in his district so they will send him to Washington to serve the big money interests.

Crossposted at Words Have Power.

The Speaker Speaks: Bond Packages and more

Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez (D-LA) spoke to SacBee reporters, who published portions of the interview.  What I found most interesting was a tidbit about the debate over the bond packages:

A: I can’t tell you whether it’s going to be in June or November. … But here’s what it’s going to take to get it done for June. It’s going to take political will, not just on the part of the Assembly Democrats. It’s going to take the Senate Democrats, and it’s going to take the Republican legislators. … The thing that you’ve got to understand is there are a lot of issues on the infrastructure bond that come into play when trying to figure out what ought to be in the bond, what ought not be in the bond. One really needs to take their time and make sure that it’s done right. And, really, a lot of it is about people putting their cards on the table early and saying, “Look, this is what I can live with and this is what I can’t live with.”

And what the Democrats apparently can’t live with is a large bond package.  Nunez is balking at the $68billion that the Governor is asking for:

Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez said Tuesday that his caucus cannot support a $68 billion package of general obligation bonds that is a linchpin of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s 10-year “strategic growth plan.” (Sac Bee 2/15/06)

As I’ve discussed before, we need to take a look at how we are going to spend these bonds.  We’ve neglected our infrastructure for so long, it isn’t even possible to estimate what kind of money we need to expend to improve it.  There

There are many infrastructure projects that will need money in the next ten years.  Obviously, the LA and SF Bay areas need attention, but the booming economy of the Central Valley requires massive infrastructure improvements as the roads around the major Central Valley city are too small for the current population.  But, as I’ve stressed before, the levees around the SF Bay Delta need a major overhaul.  While this should be a combined state/federal project, the state needs to ensure that we have the funds for that.

Which brings me back to the issue of timing.  The Governor, and some Democrats, are aiming to get the bond issue on the June Primary election ballot.  Why the rush?  The statewide conversation on these issues just began.  Perhaps what would be more wise is a statewide prioritization of infrastructure needs.  A rapid task force would probably also be helpful, but perhaps that delay would turn off voters.  However, we are going to have to have this discussion before any money is spent anyway.  Why not wait for this election until we are sure of our needs? $68Billion is a lot of money, we need to make sure we know where it’s going.

There was more, mostly about the assisted suicide bill, a topic that I plan on tackling in the near future.

New Rasmussen Governor poll

Interesting data from Rasmussen, a robopollster. I’m not sure how important the polling data against Angelides and Westly is though yet.  Westly has pretty low name ID, which is pressing his numbers down.

The golden state’s movie-star governor has scrounged a narrow lead over State Comptroller Steve Westly (D). Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) is still neck and neck with State Treasurer Phil Angelides (D).

The latest Rasmussen Reports California election poll shows Schwarzenegger leading Westly 39% to 34% in his bid for reelection. The Governor trails Angelides 41% to 40%.

Since January, Schwarzenegger has lost one percentage point when matched with Angelides. This is the third straight poll showing the gap between Angelides and Schwarzenegger as smaller than the survey margin of sampling error.

But against Westly, the governor has been gaining ground. In December, Westly had a modest lead. In January, they were essentially even. Now, the Governor has a five point advantage.

The governor, once very popular, is now viewed unfavorably by 50% of the state’s voters. Just 41% view him favorably.

Abramoffitis is insidious in the California GOP

Yes, that most terrible of disease, Abramoffitis, has beset the California GOP once again.  And this time it’s one of our favorites around here: Rep. Richard Pombo (R-Tracy).  The LA Times has a profile on Pombo in today’s paper, and it has some very illuminating passages:

A Massachusetts tribe and client of Abramoff’s that donated $20,000 to Pombo received the congressman’s help seeking federal tribal recognition. Pombo supported the resumption of commercial whaling while accepting thousands of dollars in international travel from a private foundation funded by the seafood industry and a whaling association.

Also interesting is the data on the special interests from which Pombo has taken money…lots of money.

According to data compiled by the Campaign Finance Analysis Project, Pombo has, during his congressional career, collected more than $800,000 from agriculture, timber and fishing interests. The building industry has given him $205,000; oil and gas, $169,000; mining, $55,000; and casinos and gambling, $147,000.

Don’t forget that Pombo is being challenged by Republican former Congressman Pete McCloskey as well as the favorite for the Democratic nomination Jerry McNerny.  For more information on Pombo, see Say No to Pombo.  While not a prime Congressional target due to gerrymandering, taking Pombo out should be a priority.  His corruption combined with the efforts he has put in to allowing ecological harm should be enough to clue the voters of CA-11 in.  Mr. Pombo does not represent California nor his district.

A few more choice tidbits on the flip…

Well there were so many, it’s hard to choose.  But, choose I must.  Pombo certainly needs to go

Pombo’s critics have focused on his campaign’s reliance on donors from industries that stand to benefit from his legislation. Just months before the mining proposal made it out of Pombo’s committee, a former committee aide who once worked for Abramoff’s firm and is now a lobbyist for mining interests hosted a $1,000-a-head fundraiser for Pombo.

The Times reported earlier this year that Pombo joined forces with former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas in efforts to squelch a federal banking investigation of Texas financier Charles Hurwitz. Pombo, who had previously received a campaign contribution from Hurwitz, has contended that the investigation was unfounded and abusive.

Distinguished U.S. Army Corps General says Sacramento must have 500-year flood protection

By Tom Foley, President, CCRG.  January 31, 2006 Submitted by Dr. Dale Smith, Alfa Omega Associates

The Concerned Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. (CCRG) website asserts:  “The citizens of California deserve the Governor’s leadership for what CCRG calls the 5-5-500 flood protection plan.  5 years – 5 billion for 500-year flood protection for all Central Valley populated areas.”

This idea did not originate with the CCRG, but with a Presidential Commission, articulated clearly by retired General Gerald E. Galloway, PE, PhD, University of Maryland Professor of Engineering in testimony before the House of Representatives on October 27, 2005:

  “The massive flooding that occurred in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina was, in part, a reflection of a growing lack of attention to our national flood damage reduction program.

  We recommended that population centers be given a higher level of protection than most now have, roughly equivalent to a 500 year event. 

  In the late 1920’s and early 1930’s, it was stated in Congress that ‘…destructive floods upon the rivers…constitute a menace to national welfare.  The mission was straightforward, ‘Don’t let catastrophes happen.’ 

  Over the last 70 years, we have lowered the protection by many federal projects to the 100-year level, a level that has a one in four chance of being exceed in the life of a 30-year mortgage.

  It is amazing to me that the capital city of California, Sacramento, is only protected to the 100-year level.  Can the nation afford to risk losing another major metropolitan area?”

Surely the Sacramento Bee story of January 6, 2006 was good news.  “Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s bond plan unveiled Thursday would dedicate $2.5 billion to repairing California’s aging weirs and levees.”  But is it really good news?

“It’s huge,” said Les Harder, acting deputy director of the state Department of Water Resources. “It doesn’t cure everything, but it’s … probably as much for flood control as the state could apply to the problem in the next five to 10 years.”

This bureaucratic attitude is questionable.  General Galloway says this region deserves 500-year protection, but the Governor’s plan is only 100-year protection.  Harder was totally surprised when I told him about

Galloway’s 500-year protection goals in his office the day before Thanksgiving.  Do Harder’s Sac Bee statements reflect official California flood policy?

Galloway, 38-year Army Corps of Engineers veteran made three points to Congress October 27, 2005 about the lowering of standards that came from a combination of:

  A fixation on economic benefit-cost ratios to the exclusion of non-economic factors.

  Unwarranted belief that the 100 year standard of the National Flood Insurance program represented a safe level of protection for a levee system.

  The institution of cost-sharing where local sponsors were only willing to fund a minimum level of protection.

The 1-5-06 Bee reported:  “Before any money can be raised, though, state lawmakers would have to approve bond legislation that would then go to voters. The Legislature would have to act quickly if the issue is to land on the June ballot.”

Will these funds materialize?  Dan Walters cites the urgency in today’s Bee:  “State and local politicians will be playing Russian roulette with the lives of tens of thousands of innocent people if they continue to allow floodplain development without ensuring that levees and other flood-control systems have been strengthened to much-higher levels of protection.”

Was General Galloway merely a voice crying in the DC wilderness when he told Congress?

  “We need to take an approach to flood damage reduction that brings all of the players to the table in a collaborative approach that shares responsibilities and funding.

  “Given the tragedies we have seen over the last weeks, the governments and the public must be prepared to take action to ‘do it right’ – to take recommendations out of the too hard box and move ahead.”

In California?  Not yet.  Dan Walters had it right when he wrote on October 30, 2005 just two days after the Galloway testimony:

ACTION ON FLOOD PROTECTION SWIRLS AIMLESSLY IN POLITICAL WHIRLPOOL

For Details on 5-5-500 — see ccrg.cc.

Website Address, Galloway Statement:  http://www.house.gov/transportation/water/10-20-05/galloway.pdf

Tom Foley is a long-time Yuba County rancher and founder of Concerned Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc.  The Sacramento Bee quoted him saying:  “It’s glaringly obvious developers are being accommodated and public safety is being forgotten.”  Foley is retired from ranching, now working in community service.  Alfa Omega Associates in Auburn, CA represents CCGA and posts this article for Calitics readers.

Telephone: 530-218-7058 — E-mail: [email protected]