MyDD and BlogPAC’s Chris Bowers wants to help us reform the CDP and is, “more than willing to help put some actual resources behind serious silent revolution efforts.”
Daily Archives: December 8, 2006
Are you represented by a blue dog? and what to do if…
here are 37 Blue Dog or “moderate” Democrats in the 110th Congress. That’s using the projected 229 official Dems, 2 Independents caucusing with us. If the current totals hold, (c’mon Christine Jennings!) that’s still 16%(see the list at http://www.house.gov… )
That seems like a lot, to me. Sixteen percent “moderate” Democrats. Sixteen percent having special little “meetings” with the President. http://www.firedogla… Some of that 16% voting for torture in our name. http://www.dailykos…. Some doing the Family Research Council’s bidding on issues like marriage “protection”, eliminating abortion on military bases, and embryonic stem cell research. http://www.frc.org/g…
Sixteen percent. Well, we can afford it. After all, we’re in the majority, and we can count on “moderate” Republicans voting for common sense issues, rather than picking away at our 16% just for political points. We have moderates, and they have moderates, right? Right?
Well maybe not so much, according to the Washington Post. The 110th Congress isn’t going to have as large percentage of “moderate” Republicans in their caucus as they had in the 109th.
With the defeat of Leach and several other Republican moderates Nov. 7, the Democrats’ victory in the midterm election accelerates a three-decade-old pattern of declining moderate influence and rising conservative dominance in the Republican Party. By one measure, the GOP is more ideologically homogenous now than it has been in modern history. The waning moderate wing must find its place when the Democratic majority takes over in January.
In fact, the Post says the Republicans “moderates” will account for “well under 10%” (of the Republican caucus) http://www.washingto…
And I don’t have to remind anyone here that a “moderate” Democrat is a LOT farther to the Right than a “Moderate” Republican is to the center. In fact, a “moderate” Democrat today probably votes closer to a middle of the road Republican thirty years ago, and a “moderate” Republican today would look like a Goldwater Republican then.
So, what to do? Where to start? Start here:
Start organizing for 2008. Some guy named Stu quoted Chris Bowers:
“I want 80 serious challenges to GOP House incumbents every two years and a Democratic name on the ballot in all 435 districts,” he demands. “I have had enough of just targeting the twenty or so top races – let’s engage in a full-frontal assault. … The first step is to identify eighty Republicans against who we could mount a serious challenge.”
http://www.dailykos…. I say, let’s get our percentage of “moderates” down to where the R’s have theirs. Ten percent of our 229 Dems is 23. Figure we’ll need 20% more serious challengers, since incumbants are entrenched, to win the 14 primaries we’re targeting. That means, to paraphrase Chris, I want 17 serious primary challenges to the Blue Dog Dems, and a Progressive Democratic name in every Democratic primary with a “moderate” Democratic incumbent for the 2008 election cycle. I’ve picked mine: http://dumptauscher….
Look for a candidate. Jerry McNerney was asked to run by his son. http://www.jerrymcne… Who do you know? Who’s on the back bench of your local politics. Your state representative, town councilman, mayor, alderman (sp?). Here in California, we have term limits, so a lot of our state pols are looking for jobs in ’08. How do you qualify a candidate? See the next two steps.
“It’s STILL the economy, stupid” How’s the economy where you are? How’s your potential candidate’s record on small business? Did they vote a big tax break or other incentive so Wall Mart could move into your town? Build any stadiums for multimillionaire sports franchises? What was their reaction when jobs in your neighborhood were outsourced. (see the P.S. below on other Congress-critters that may need replacing.)
Don’cha know there’s a war on? I’ll bet a pizza and beer with the first five people that email me that the war in Iraq is still a campaign issue in 2008. There are quite a few cities and towns that have had symbolic votes for peace. Also, there are more vets coming home every day. We saw in the last election that returning vets can run and win as Democrats, the DCCC’s Duckworth notwithstanding. ($3 million! Oy, vey!)
Why am I suggesting this, since the “moderate” Democrats are in place for the next two years, anyway? I’m glad you asked. Just because the election is over doesn’t mean we can be passive and quiet.
We need to make some noise. Let your blue dog know they’re being watched. An old dog CAN learn new tricks, and as Governor William J. LePetomane (Mel Brooks) said, “We’ve gotta protect our phoney baloney jobs, gentlemen!” http://www.imdb.com/… My little blog is less than 2 weeks old, and I’ve already gotten some email that looks like it came from sources closer to Tauscher than the average constituent. And I just started publicising my blog yesterday! Hmmm…
P.S. There are non-Blue Dogs who actively acted against the poor and middle class, too. That means any Democrat that voted for the bankrupcy bill. (73 names, feel free to find primary candidates for ALL of them, lited here: http://www.commondre… ) Then there’s NAFTA, CAFTA, any “free” trade bill as opposed to a “fair” trade bill. Keep an eye on the upcoming minimum wage bill in Pelosi’s first 100 hours. If she doesn’t get every Democratic vote, you’ve found a blue dog.
Cross posted at Kos and MyDD
Still Working On Those Levees…
(The levees should see some money out of the bond packages. Problem is that we have to wait for the legislature and governor to allocate those funds. That must be the top priority. Also, check out wu ming’s blog, Surf Putah – promoted by SFBrianCL)
An article in yesterday’s Chronicle suggests that we could be in for another nail-biter of a winter storm season. While the bond measures thankfully passed, the funds won’t be available until next June, while repairs on last year’s erosion damage are still ongoing, and running out of time before the rains start:
More than one month into California’s flood season, engineers are scrambling to repair 71 deeply eroded spots that water officials worry could lead to collapse of the delta’s levee system, which protects more than 500,000 people and property valued at $47 billion.
The nearly unprecedented repair efforts — such work is generally not done this close to winter, when weather is bad and water levels high — come after the state spent the summer and $176 million strengthening 33 other sites it feared could lead to levee breaches when battered by winter storms.
“I expected at this point in time to be patting everybody on the back saying we solved the erosion problems for the year,” said Les Harder, deputy director for public safety for the state Department of Water Resources. “Instead, we now have another 71 to do. We’re actually further behind than when we started.”
High floodwater levels in both the Sacramento and San Joaquin watersheds lasted well into the late spring, making both surveys below the waterline and repairing storm damage difficult. To make things worse, we still don’t really know what the levee system is actually made of, although the state hs begun frantically taking core samples from urban levees (the government of West Sac had the sense earlier this fall to start doing the job on its own, instead of waiting for the state to get around to it).
At least Lois Wolk is looking a bit ahead to dealing with the root cause of the problem (ie. sprawl in the floodplain), with land use restrictions:
Assemblywoman Lois Wolk, D-Davis, whose district includes major parts of the delta, favors a similar distribution formula where areas of highest population and risk get first attention. But she also insists land-use rules need to change.
“We need to create good policies that don’t put more people at risk,” Wolk said. “Development continues where it should not be — behind these eroding piles of dirt. No one should be under the illusion that everything is fine.”
Of course, the Water Reclamation Board got fired by Schwarzeneggar last summer when they made the same suggestions on reining in development in the floodplain, and were replaced with developer-friendly types. Here’s hoping Arnold v. 5.0 will pay attention a little better than v 3.0 did, before Natomas or Rio Vista looks like this:
In related news, the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency is considering charging fees on urban development and using the revenue to purchase development rights on adjacent ag land in Yolo and Sutter counties to prevent development in the floodplain, in hopes of preserving the current hydraulic system in a manner similar to the Yolo Bypass. By preserving ag land adjacent to the Sacramento River, floodwaters past a certain level would be drawn away by weirs and other waterworks, and allowed to flood fields in exchange for payments to farmers. The idea sounds good, and the fact that Sacramento is pursuing it is great news for Yolo County, which as a small county simply doesn’t have the resources to fund the same sort of easements or flood protection. In the future, if we’re smart, government will do more of this sort of thing, thinking in terms of hydrological watersheds instead of artificial county boundaries.
In his book The Retreat of the Elephants about Chinese premodern environmental history, Historian Mark Elvin makes a strong case for the dangers of relying upon massive levee systems to defend urban centers, and the problems that occur when manmade defenses against water encourage more development behind levees, when combined with the inevitable decline of those hydraulic systems over time, and the natural propensity for rivers to silt up, change course, erode their banks, etc. Before an area is developed and levees established, it is easier to set aside open areas such as the Yolo Bypass to lessen water bottlenecks during a flood, but that once those areas are built in, the whole economy ends up locked into a system that is expensive to maintain, and which tend to get underfunded and neglected until the next disasterous system failure.
We cannot change the way that the Sacramento River drains through the Central Valley, and we can’t do much about the cities that already exist, but getting smarter about developing on higher ground, concentrating growth in well-defended urban centers, and hardening the levees we have, are well within our grasp, should there be the political will to resist selling out to developer interests for short term political gain. While “no growth” is not a reasonable solution, smart growth, especially in a region so vulnerable to flooding, should be a no-brainer.
Now let’s all cross our fingers and hope that this winter doesn’t send us a pineapple express to rain on the snowpack, like has happened in past El Niño years.
Originally posted at Surf Putah
2008 Assembly and Senate Outlook
(With Republicans’ budget tantrum swinging legislative approval to such a degree — and with the GOP tanking nationally — I wanted to bump this as races that might have felt out of reach a year ago are now potentially competitive. – promoted by Bob Brigham)
The 2006 California Legislative election have come and gone with no change in the composition of either the Assembly or Senate. In the Senate,.we kept the 25-15 lead thanks to Lou Correa’s narrow win in SD-24. The only near miss was Democratic challenger Wiley Nickel narrowly losing to Republican incumbent Jeff Denham in SD-12. In the Assembly, things are still 48-32, just as they were before the election. So, onward to 2008.
For the most part, I’m going to be focusing on open seats since that’s where most of the action is. In 2008, the odd-numbered Senate seats are up.
(More after the flip)
23 Assemblymen are term-limited in 2008, 12 Republicans and 11 Democrats. Here are the districts which will be open, the term-limited incumbent (for reference) and the registration statistics.
Republicans-Held Seats (12):
AD-02 (Doug La Malfa)
Democratic: 31.93%
Republican: 47.82%
Gap: R+15.89
AD-03 (Rick Keene)
Democratic: 33.33%
Republican: 42.27%
Gap: R+8.94
AD-10 (Alan Nakanishi)
Democratic: 37.77%
Republican: 42.07%
Gap: R+4.30
AD-15 (Guy Houston)
Democratic: 38.02%
Republican: 40.19%
Gap: R+2.17
AD-26 (Greg Aghazarian)
Democratic: 40.92%
Republican: 42.20%
Gap: R+1.28
AD-34 (Bill Maze)
Democratic: 32.87%
Republican: 47.22%
Gap: R+14.35
AD-36 (Sharon Runner)
Democratic: 35.53%
Republican: 43.94%
Gap: R+8.41
AD-64 (John Benoit)
Democratic: 33.50%
Republican: 46.04%
Gap: R+12.54
AD-71 (Todd Spitzer)
Democratic: 26.50%
Republican: 52.68%
Gap: R+26.18
AD-75 (George Plescia)
Democratic: 28.70%
Republican: 43.57%
Gap: R+14.87
AD-78 (Shirley Horton)
Democratic: 40.89%
Republican: 34.75%
Gap: D+6.14
AD-80 (Bonnie Garcia)
Democratic: 45.59%
Republican: 37.37%
Gap: D+8.22
We can classify these as such
Non-competitive:
AD-71: R+26.18
AD-02: R+15.89
AD-75: R+14.87
AD-34: R+14.35
AD-64: R+12.54
Potentially Competitive:
AD-03: R+8.94
AD-36: R+8.41
AD-10: R+4.30
AD-15: R+2.17
AD-26: R+1.28
Lean Democratic:
AD-78: D+6.14
AD-80: D+8.22
Democratic-Held Seats (11):
AD-01 (Patty Berg)
Democratic: 44.54%
Republican: 28.45%
Gap: D+16.09
AD-08 (Lois Wolk)
Democratic: 45.53%
Republican: 30.06%
Gap: D+15.47
AD-13 (Mark Leno)
Democratic: 56.21%
Republican: 9.66%
Gap: D+46.55
AD-14 (Loni Hancock)
Democratic: 58.48%
Republican: 15.50%
Gap: D+42.98
AD-19 (Gene Mullin)
Democratic: 50.10%
Republican: 23.04%
Gap: D+27.06
AD-22 (Sally Lieber)
Democratic: 43.25%
Republican: 24.56%
Gap: D+18.69
AD-27 (John Laird)
Democratic: 47.98%
Republican: 26.61%
Gap: D+21.37
AD-30 (Nicole Parra)
Democratic: 47.38%
Republican: 38.16%
Gap: D+9.22
AD-40 (Lloyd Levine)
Democratic: 47.84%
Republican: 28.65%
Gap: D+19.19
AD-46 (Fabian Nunez)
Democratic: 63.01%
Republican: 13.69%
Gap: D+49.32
AD-52 (Mervyn Dymally)
Democratic: 67.24%
Republican: 14.19%
Gap: D+53.05
So, these can be classified as
Not competitive:
AD-52: D+53.05
AD-46: D+49.32
AD-13: D+46.55
AD-14: D+42.98
AD-19: D+27.06
AD-27: D+21.37
AD-40: D+19.19
AD-22: D+18.69
AD-01: D+16.09
AD-08: D+15.47
Potentially competitive:
AD-30: D+9.22
Senate:
10 Senators are term-limited in 2008, 6 Democrats and 4 Republicans. I’m also going to include one-term Senator Abel Maldonado on the list because his increasingly Democratic district could be a pickup with the right candidate (John Laird?).
Democratic-Held Seats:
SD-05 (Michael Machado)
Democratic: 45.82%
Republican: 33.26%
Gap: D+12.56
SD-07 (Tom Torlakson)
Democratic: 46.66%
Republican: 31.06%
Gap: D+15.60
SD-09 (Don Perata)
Democratic: 59.07%
Republican: 13.78%
Gap: D+45.29
SD-21 (Jack Scott)
Democratic: 45.69%
Republican: 29.13%
Gap: D+16.56
SD-23 (Sheila Kuehl)
Democratic: 50.01%
Republican: 25.83%
Gap: D+24.18
SD-25 (Edward Vincent)
Democratic: 58.64%
Republican: 21.72%
Gap: D+36.92
Not competitive:
SD-09: D+45.29
SD-25: D+36.92
SD-23: D+24.18
SD-21: D+16.56
SD-07: D+15.60
SD-05: D+12.56
Republican-Held Seats:
SD-15 (Abel Maldonado) (not term-limited but I wanted to include because it is a Democratic-favoring seat)
Democratic: 39.56%
Republican: 37.32%
Gap: D+2.24
SD-19 (Tom McClintock)
Democratic: 36.04%
Republican: 40.99%
Gap: R+4.95
SD-29 (Bob Margett)
Democratic: 32.18%
Republican: 45.16%
Gap: R+12.98
SD-33 (Dick Ackerman)
Democratic: 26.90%
Republican: 51.39%
Gap: R+24.49
SD-37 (Jim Battin)
Democratic: 34.42%
Republican: 45.98%
Gap: R+11.56
Not competitive:
SD-33: R+24.49
SD-29: R+12.98
SD-37: R+11.56
Potentially competitive:
SD-19: R+4.95
SD-15: D+2.24
So, in conclusion, some key races to target and defend are:
Republican-Held Seats:
AD-03: R+8.94
AD-36: R+8.41
AD-10: R+4.30
AD-15: R+2.17
AD-26: R+1.28
AD-78: D+6.14
AD-80: D+8.22
SD-19: R+4.95
SD-15: D+2.24
Democratic-Held Seats:
AD-30: D+9.22
Why Tauscher must go, and we’re starting now…
According to the New York Times:
Representative Ellen O. Tauscher of California, a co-chairwoman of the 47-member New Democrat Coalition, said that 27 of the top 40 contested House seats were being pursued by Democrats who have pledged to become members of the group, which says its chief issues are national security and fiscal responsibility.
“I think there’s tremendous agreement and awareness that getting the majority and running over the left cliff is what our Republican opponents would dearly love,” Ms. Tauscher said, adding that this was something “we’ve got to fight.”
juls at Calitics notes that Ellen and the Blue Dogs went off to see the Wizard http://www.calitics….
and even though Dear Ellen says: “We are fully committed members of the Democratic Party and we are foursquare with Speaker Nancy Pelosi. There is no sunshine between us.” juls is correct in concluding:
There you have it folks. Tauscher wants to take this meeting seriously. She wants it to be a regular occurrence. Rather than having the President go directly to the Democratic leadership, she finds value in this sub group meeting with Bush. The only value is to split our caucus.
Tauscher needs to go.
Chris Bowers said it best over at MyDD:
Here is why I will continue to fgiht: because as long as Ellen Tauscher and her ilk are running the Democratic Party, the conservative movement will continue to rise. Ellen Tauscher can’t beat the conservative movement. She and her friends showed us this time and time again from 1978-2004 just how utterly ineffective they are at doing anything except ushering in a new era of Republican dominance. As long as they are in leadership positions of the Democratic Party, the only avenue available to stop the conservative movement on the electoral front, this country that I love so dearly will continue on a long, downward spiral. Both defeating Republicans and wiping their Democratic enablers out of power is the only way to save my country.
Ellen Tauscher, just so you know, when you have a surprisingly strong and well funded primary challenger with tons of volunteers and lots of support in the progressive media come out of seemingly nowhere in 2008, just look over the cliff to see where that challenger is coming from. At the bottom, you will see me standing there, with hundreds and thousand of my friends and colleagues. We will be in the process of forming a human ladder for your challenger to use to climb up the cliff. When s/he reaches the top, don’t be surprised if more than a few of us come along, and suddenly you find yourself outnumbered, even as you stand next to your twenty-seven new friends. And then we will see who gets run over the cliff next.
Read the whole thing at http://www.mydd.com/…
Chris was right in October. Dear Ellen raised almost $1M, in a fight against an opponent spending almost $4000 (no kidding $4000) http://www.opensecre… . That means that, just in terms of finances, we need to start NOW.
Does anyone know if you can start an Act Blue page for a candidate to be named later? Chris, this first step is for you: http://dumptauscher….
My 79 year old mother cried when she went to get her prescription
Cross posted at Daily Kos
It has taken me a week to be able to write this diary. First I was in tears, then I was angry, then I was frustrated, and now I am just a total mix of all those emotions, but more then anything the overwhelming sense of disgust at the GOP envelopes all of my being.
Many of you already know that my Mother was very ill at the start of this year, she was in and out of the hospital and there was a point that the Doctors thought she wasn’t going to pull through. During her illness she lived with us, thankfully she recovered and is now in better health then she has been for years (of course my household is still recovering from her 5 month stay with us : )
More..
Because my Mother was so ill she was on many different medications, but as she recovered she didn’t need to take everything (such as diabetes medication, her numbers went back to normal after a few months) that had been prescribed in the beginning of the year. She used up her “benefit” from the new “drug plan” and thus has hit the “donut hole,” which means NONE of her medication is covered by “the plan.”
The other day she went to get her medication at Kaiser and was told the bill was $900, to which she burst into tears and didn’t know what to do. She didn’t have $900 (her monthly income is Social security of about $600 and some income from property she owns, she lives month to month with little if any “extra” income). She called me in tears, and I told her to charge the amount on her Visa.
After I got off the phone with her I was crying (mainly because we are not in the position to give her much financial help), and then I became so very angry, angry at those who passed this shitty drug plan that makes our seniors cry. How can any group of people be proud of a program that has so many shortcomings it becomes everything but what it says it is.
It isn’t just my Mom though, so very many people who are in retirement are facing these issues, for example, San Diego County just took away the health benefits of:
current and future retirees, virtually assuring the benefit will disappear, under a plan adopted by the Board of Supervisors yesterday.
Retired San Diego County employees (from left) Larry Carolan, Bernard Schermerhorn and Donald Bennett showed their displeasure as the county Board of Supervisors voted to cut some health benefits. Because of the overflow crowd, they watched from a conference room.
Supervisors unanimously approved the cuts yesterday over the objections of more than 200 current and former employees.Pensioners now receive up to $400 a month to help pay for health insurance premiums, under a plan that is not guaranteed but has been in place since 1974.
And there are so many more working people without health insurance, so many diaries written here about far too many who cannot afford even the simple health care they deserve and should be entitled. How can a 21 year old afford $460 a month for health care insurance? (Our daughter, while still covered by our insurance, took a semester off from school, the cost was $460 a month to keep her covered).
As San Diego County cuts benefits, will other counties, cities in CA follow suit? My husband (who is 11 years older then I am) wants to retire in 5 years, and when he retires I will lose my health insurance. Right now he will continue to be covered (but he works for a public agency, will they have to go the way of San Diego?) We will have to figure in the cost of my insurance as well as our son’s (who will be in college), which will amount to $900 or so a month, added to our house payment, college tuition and basic living costs with an income that will be less then we have now.
Our situation is not unusual, and actually we are better off then most Americans, however, the fact of the matter is that we are middle class and we could easily find ourselves living below the poverty level in a few short years. How many other Americans are going to get the same wake up call? How many of our seniors are struggling, right now, with the inability to improve the quality of their last years by having affordable access to the medications they need?
I have read about the GOP congressman who was complaining that he was going to have to show up for work five days a week due to the Democrats who are requiring congress to actually do their job, claiming how harmful to his family this workload would be. If that GOP congressman had DONE his job when HIS party was in power, maybe, just maybe, there would be more time for longer weekends with his family, but because the GOP has done NOTHING for Americans, they are going to see how their “do nothing” congress has harmed our families: seniors, working families and our nation.
It is our job to remind Americans why our Seniors cry when they go to get their medication, it is our job to remind Americans that their retirement is not going to be their “golden years,” it is our job to tell Americans over and over that we are at this place because of GOP leadership, we cannot stop reminding Americans that the the GOP ignored the well being of our citizens, and we must fight like hell to make sure that our majority in congress addresses these issues and we once again protect working and retired Americans.