Sen. Sheila Kuehl’s SB 1437 is back in the news.  The SacBee published an excellent article about the current debate:

Sen. Bill Morrow, R-Oceanside, agreed that bullying and harassment have no place in school. However, he doesn’t believe the bill is a panacea.

Morrow, who spoke out against the bill on the Senate floor, called the legislation unnecessary, noting there’s nothing in the state’s education code preventing schools or teachers from discussing homosexuality.

[Student gay activist Lance] Chih said he has had to seek out his own heroes in literature.
***
Chih believes there are lessons to learn. For example, the gay rights movement was sparked by civil disobedience. The 1969 Stonewall riots in New York was one of the first times in modern history a significant body of gay people resisted arrest when police raided gay bars.  Students whose memories may include the slaying of Wyoming college student Matthew Shepard in 1998 could get a civics lesson on the subsequent push for hate crimes prevention.  “It’s not talked about in U.S. history. It should be,” Chih said. (SacBee 5/23/06)

As Chih states, it’s not about any agenda.  It’s about giving LGBT students the opportunity to thrive in educational settings.  Health classes just don’t cover enough. LGBT students are far more likely to attempt suicide and generally have lower grades. This law will help LGBT youth deal with the coming out process and the questioning that comes during adolescence in addition to promoting tolerance. 

Today’s California Blog Roundup on the flip.  Teasers:  Schwarzenegger’s steadfast commitment to saying whatever he thinks people want to hear, Westly & Angelides, immigration / mother tongues / National Guard, CA-04, CA-11, CA-50, other fun stuff.

Race for Governor

• At Alliance for a Better California, Juila was whacking Schwarzeneger like a piñata over the weekend. First, she notes that Arnold seems to be trying to buy off the voters with his sudden leftward shift. Then, Arnold abandons George Bush for the election, at least. Last, Arnold’s consistent first person singular followed by excuses.
• Bill Cavala (guest-post, CPR) thinks that the way the Democratic gov’s primary is being fought won’t really make a difference in the November general.
• Scott Clayton of Get Your Blog Up is not so optimistic. He thinks that Californians (especially the SoCalis) are pretty much “and a pony” thinkers, and worries about the tax-and-spend attacks from Schwarzenegger.
• Dan Ancona at Speak Out California responds (implicitly) to Scott. Did you know that California’s tax system is regressive overall? Also, Angelides’ people respond to the Westly “$10 Billion” ad at Speak Out CA.
• The Mad Professah endorses Angelides.
• The Pragmatic Progressive semi-endorses Westly (and makes some endorsements in other races as well).

Immigration Issues

• Ariel doesn’t like the Senate’s recent vote to make English the official US language. Nope, not one bit.
• Martini Republic thinks that we should purge the Spanish place names. I agree, and since the Catholic Church is immigrant-friendly, let’s get rid of the Catholicism as well. I, for one, want to live in Frank, California.
• And a post you really should read on this language issue: “ The Language Policy Debate” By US West (a Citizen).
• Marc Cooper reprints a NYT Editorial on the immigration mishigas (that last is a foreign word). It’s shockingly sensible.
• Frank Russo collects a variety of source materials on the issue of deploying the California National Guard at the Mexican border.

Paid-For Pombo / CA-11

• CQ Politics gives us their view of the CA-11 race. The anger at Paid-For Pombo’s reflexive hatred of the planet is center-stage.
• In that vein, it appears that Paid-For Pombo is feeling the heat. He’s started to be for destroying the environment in committee, but against destroying the environment on the floor of the House. Come on, Paid-For! Be a man! Destroy the environment all the time or not at all. And don’t forget to lie about how much the environment hates America.
• Down With Tyranny on the importance of the CA-11 primary for grassroots politics.
• Jonathan Singer of MyDD interviewed Jerry McNerney.
• The CA-11 Blog tells us that the Cook Report has moved CA-11 into “Lean Republican” from “Likely Republican”.

15% Doolittle / CA-50

• It’s possible that the Auburn Journal (15% Doolittle’s hometown paper) has endorsed Mike Holmes in the Republican primary. And this sort of thing may be why.
• Words Have Power reminds us that 15% Doolittle has already pocketed $37,500 of the $250,000 that Dick Cheney has raised for him. I wasn’t aware that it was possible for money to be tainted in that many ways.
• One more time: 15% Doolittle is corrupt.

CA-50, Miscellany

• Down With Tyranny on the importance of the CA-50 special election runoff for grassroots politics. Yes, it’s the same post.
• Dogged Blog asks the question nobody dares to ask: “ Is Gavin Newsom pretty enough to be President?”
• Robert Haaland of Left in SF takes Debra Saunders to task for her attacks on the LGBT community. Frankly, Saunders’ work is barely worth the pixels it takes to display her name, but I can understand why Robert was ticked.
• Loni Hancock, guest posting at California Progress Report, explains that the high school exit exam is not a best practice.
• The Santa Clara County Dems blog finds the San Jose Silicon Valley Chamber of Commmerce crossing the line in their recent mailer for the San Jose mayor’s race.
• Good gravy, mandated term limits are stupid.

From Dan Weintraub’s California Insider, a portion of Moody’s report describing the increase of California’s bond rating to A1:

California’s rating remains low compared to other states due to its ongoing fiscal challenges. The most immediate challenge is the state’s stubborn structural budget gap. Although moderate in size on its face — at less than 4% in the fiscal 2007 budget proposal — the gap remains a concern for three reasons: (i) its persistence after several years of good economic performance; (ii) the state’s still relatively narrow budget reserves; and (iii) the state’s high degree of reliance on tax revenue from volatile sources such as corporate net income, capital gains, exercised stock options, and high-income taxpayers generally. Although the conditions do not appear to be in place for a sharp high-end income decline in the near-term, this represents a significant area of potential exposure for the state. Any significant revenue underperformance in the near term would directly lead to a swelling of the structural imbalance and cause difficult budgeting challenges.(California Insider 5/22/06)

The upgrade, along with the similar move by Standard and Poor’s, will make the bonds substantially cheaper.  For a quick history of our credit rating, see the Treasurer’s website.  This is a really great thing for the state, it will save us millions of dollars on both outstanding and upcoming bond issuances.  However, the cynicism showed is probably something that should be taken to heart by those in Sacramento.  The windfall is not something that we should be counting on next year.  We still have yet to really fix the structural deficit. 

And the phrase “difficult budgeting challenges”, that’s a laugher huh?  Every year has difficult budgetary challenges.  Every year we hash out some sort of bizarre plan that makes nobody happy, but is required by the damn supermajority rules.  If push comes to shove and there is a real revenue crunch we end up imploding (see: Davis, Gray).

In the past we sought to use the extra revenue in fashions that bought us peace in Sacramento.  but that’s not necessarily what we need most.  What we need most is a workable budget that kowtows to nobody, but succeeds in following a vision of long-term stability.  The windfall should be used to ensure that the state can sustain economic hardships without resorting to political rarities.

The Buzz from the SacBee mentioned an article in the Washington Post about Doolittle’s wonderful campaign finance practice of using campaign funds to pay for baby-sitting for his 14 year old daughter:

CHILD CARE, most any parent knows, can be a huge expense. Some members of Congress, though, have found an innovative — and brazen — way to defray the cost: Their campaign funds pick up the tab when child care is needed because the candidate is out campaigning. A leader in this creative billing is Rep. John T. Doolittle (R-Calif.), who has had his campaign reelection committee and his leadership PAC pay $5,881 in child-care costs since 2001 for his daughter, now 14. This election alone, Mr. Doolittle’s campaign committees have paid almost $975 in child-care bills to a woman who lives near his family’s Oakton home.
***
This may be permissible under the lax guidance of the congressional enablers at the FEC. That doesn’t make it right. It’s the attitude of congressional entitlement to a subsidized lifestyle — cut-rate private jets, lavish private travel — that drives public disdain for Congress. Mr. Doolittle makes $165,200 a year as a member of Congress. His wife has already taken in close to $100,000 in commissions this election as his fundraiser. They should just pay the sitter, as other working parents do.(Washington Post 5/16/06)

But Doolittle has a habit of using campaign funds as his own personal piggy bank.  He, like many other GOP congressman, see the letter of the law as the only boundry, and only their vision of the law.  That they violate the spirit of laws, or any ethical constraints that most people would stick to seems to be a nonissue.  Doolittle is amongst the most egregious examples of this.  And it appears that the only thing that will stop him from running his own little fiefdom is a loss in November.