Daily Archives: January 2, 2007

Los Angeles Area

Living Wage Battle in LA Escalates

2 Comments

(As usual, this is x-posted from Ruck Pad

I didn’t have time to blog this article when it first came out, but this is too important not to go back and post on.  The living wage battle in LA, centered around the workers at LAX area hotels just stepped up a notch.  The big hotels have organized into the ironically named “Save LA Jobs” coalition.  They appear to have more than enough signatures to place an initiative on the ballot to repeal the big living wage victory for the hotel workers.

Opponents of the city’s expansion of the “living wage” ordinance to workers at LAX-area hotels have gathered twice the number of signatures required to qualify a referendum for the ballot, according to people familiar with the effort.

The foes’ political committee, which is called Save LA Jobs and is backed by hotel owners and business groups, has scheduled a news conference for this morning at the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce. The group is expected to say that they will turn in more than 100,000 signatures.

That is more than double the amount they need to place it on the ballot.  The City Council now has the option to rescind the law or put the initiative up for a citywide vote.  May 2007 would be the earliest date for such an election.

The city’s living wage ordinance, which was passed a decade ago, requires that workers at companies that contract with the city be paid wages and benefits equal to $10.64 per hour.

The new law, which is strongly backed by Los Angeles’ labor movement, for the first time expands that worker protection to businesses – a dozen Los Angeles International Airport-area hotels – that have no formal financial relationship with the city.

Many workers at the hotels already make a living wage, but labor has embraced the law as a means to pressure the hotels to recognize an ongoing effort to organize their workers.

The hotels have resisted that effort, with some suspending or firing employees involved in the effort.

They are not challenging the constitutionality of the law.  The big hotels simply want to be able to pay their workers below poverty wages.  They are illegally resisting the worker’s attempts to unionize by firing and suspending the workers in retaliation.  Of course, the toothless NRLB will be useless and they will not be held accountable for such actions.

Last month the a group of hotel workers fasted to draw attention to their plight.  Hotel Workers Rising is an excellent source for more information.  Also, see the Courage Campaign’s Elliott Petty’s post.

Arnold Schwarzenegger, California

One Sweet Party

1 Comment

Arnold Schwarzenegger will once again be inaugurated as the Governor of the great state of California, and he’s decided to take the opportunity to throw a bitchin’ party.  Dude.  Broken Roid Leg be damned.

He may have trouble cutting a rug while clutching crutches, but a hobbled Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger plans to christen his second term in inimitable style this week with a lavish, $1 million-plus celebration. (SJ Merc 1/2/07)

According to the Governator, even if they have to cart him in there on a hospital gurney, he wants to see his kick-ass party.  It’s all for him…him…him.  We like him, we really like him.

Oh wait, who is it that likes him? Let’s go over the flip.

There will still be a fair helping of Hollywood ritz, with singers Donna Summer and Paul Anka entertaining guests at a black-tie, $500-a-person “Celebrate the California Dream” gala. Add to that some populist and bipartisan flair — an open-to-the-public kickoff at Capitol Park highlighting environmental issues and a swearing-in emceed by former San Francisco mayor and Assembly speaker Willie Brown, a Democrat. Mix in the requisite frisson of controversy as the governor attends a swanky private dinner Thursday for inaugural donors, many of whom have an interest in the governor’s 2007 policy agenda.

You see this party is being paid for by some of Arnold’s big business friends.  And oh yeah, they’d looove it if he could cut them some slack this year.  I’m sure they’ll let him know that.

Sure, this isn’t illegal, but must the man take every opportunity to whore himself out to big business? I mean really, couldn’t he raise some of this money and then, I dunno, put it towards unfunded Prop 49, his after-school initiative? Or to something that would help the people of California more than another Hollywood-glam party?  Just once, I’d like to see him do something that is more than politically expedient or cool, and just do the right thing.

Ahh…who am I kidding?

Uncategorized

Deconstructing the Reapportionment argument

I’ve not been all that coy on the fact that I think California’s government, structurally is not built on a solid foundation. We have our messed up tax code that taxes the poor at a higher rate than the rich. (Yup it’s true…mad props out to Peter Camejo for pushing this theme. Oh and Warren Buffet who once famously said that his housekeeper paid higher taxes than he did…only to be muzzled by Arnold, whom he was advising at the time) We have issues like the 2/3 rule that hinder true representative democracy. And don’t even get me started on the issue of ballot box budgeting.  Ok, actually, maybe just a little bit.

Look, democracy is cool. I love the feeling of the raw democratic (small d) power of the initiative process. But unless you are the size of ancient Athens when all the voting-eligible citizens could meet in one meeting room (it’s a lot easier when you exclude all but the rich, male landowners), direct democracy has some serious flaws.  I know Hiram Johnson meant well when he pushed to remove the power from the railroads that controlled the legislature at the time, but these are different days. Heck, back in the day the California legislature actively encouraged genocide. I hope we are at a different point in history.

Take, for example the Runners. As I mentioned a few days ago the Runners, who passed the horribly drafted Jessica’s Law, are looking into quashing gangs. Problem is that the way they want to do it is to push more gang members into prisons…whereupon they become more active in the gangs of the prison. Wonderful!

There is no panacea. Neither open primaries (which former Assembly member Joe Canciamilla is very, very fond of), nor splitting the property tax rolls (although that would be a really good start) nor anything else would solve all the problems. Each reform comes with its own benefits and its own drawbacks. For example, take a look at reapportionment reform. All the proposals now are to take this power away from the legislature and give it to some other party. Great, but how do you select that group. Oh, and by the way, you’ve now created an unelected, unaccountable body, likely consisting of Californians who don’t have much of a background in the science of drawing district lines. Sure, we could reject the maps, but then it’s back to square 1. All in all not that attractive of a possibility for the accountability thing.

Oh, and one other major flaw of relying on reapportionment to “moderate” our representatives (other than the fact that many of us don’t really want to see our representatives moderated): it likely won’t succeed. Which districts that were uncompetitive will become competitive? I’m sure you could count the number on a single hand. Oh, sure, a less generous plan to incumbents likely would see greater minority representation, which isn’t a bad idea, either, but it’s just really, really hard to point at districts and say, that seat will be newly competitive, so those legislators will have to be more “moderate”. As much as Common Cause or the Governor want it to be so, it’s just not going to have the effect that they desire.

For better or for worse, America has gradually, and now very pointedly, segregated ourselves along political lines. San Francisco is a progressive area, with a large bloc of progressive voters, and It’s just not possible to make the district competitive. Those who have chosen to live in the vast suburbia that is the OC have consciously chosen that. And furthermore, where districts do spread long distances, there are currently general interests that unite those distances. (Take CA-01, where Mike Thompson represents all of the North Coast, much of which has very commen interests when compared to the interests of say, Redding) To argue that we can somehow draw political lines that are going to change the game is either naive or colored by unrealistic optimism.

I’m not totally opposed to redistricting reform, but the fact is that we can’t unilaterally disarm for Congress. I won’t freak out on the state legislature, it’s just that I don’t actually think it would change a whole lot, and hand over the process to an unaccountable system. I just think there are better use of resources.