LA May Day Rally Update

The FBI will investigate the LAPD’s conduct in firing rubber bullets to disperse the crowd at the end of Tuesday’s immigration rally, and everybody is doing their best to distance themselves from the incident and show that they’re doing something about it.

Authorities have launched several investigations into the Police Department’s actions at Tuesday’s rally at MacArthur Park, where police fired 240 rubber bullets. Video images of the incident were broadcast worldwide.

“I was very disturbed by what I saw,” (LA Mayor Antonio) Villaraigosa told reporters in Mexico City on Thursday.

The FBI said Thursday it would open an inquiry into whether the officers’ conduct violated citizens’ civil rights.

Prior to the FBI announcement, Police Chief William J. Bratton had said he would inquire whether an FBI probe was possible.

“I have no issues with the FBI coming in … and taking a look at it,” he said.

The FBI probe is the fourth official investigation of the incident. The Police Department opened two investigations almost immediately after the violence, one to create an “after-action report” that evaluates planning and operations, and another by internal affairs to probe complaints against officers.

The mayor even left Mexico early to deal with the public relations fallout.  See, he means business!

The LAPD doesn’t exactly have a sterling record with regard to police brutality, and the tensions inherent in that kind of scenario, with a few agitators on one side and an armed force on the other, with the addition of the emotional nature of the immigration debate, made this more possible.  Investigations are nice, but this kind of thing happens because of training and rules of engagement.  I guarantee you that the police officers didn’t do anything wrong in the eyes of their superiors, and that’s the problem.

Arnold sits down with John Myers

Arnold Schwarzenegger sat down with KQED’s John “The Last Honest Reporter in Sacramento” Myers. In a wide ranging interview, the Governator talked about prisons, his campaigns, and health care.  You can listen to it at KQED’s California Report site.

Frank Russo of CPR pulled out a bunch of interesting quotes. Notable on the prison front, Myers asked Arnold how he felt about the fact that he’s paroled more prisoners than Gray Davis.  His response:

“I’ve always said to our Democratic leaders and to our Republican leaders, I said: We should put everything on the table–which is building more prisons, which is looking at parole reform, and also at a sentencing commission. I’m willing to talk about all of those things, but we should always be clear that we should not release people out of prison and put them back out on the street just because we run out of space. It won’t happen.

He simply refuses to come off the “Tough on Crime” high horse. If we truly want to solve these problems, he can’t talk about putting all options on the table, and then remove them.  So, will the Governor fully fund Prop 36 to reduce drug offendor populations in prison? Or better yet, make Prop 36 treatment funding more widely available. Drug offenders, and society, are not served well by putting drug offenders behind bars over and over again. It just doesn’t make sense.

Anyway, check out KQED’s California Report site and Frank Russo of CPR .

Where’s the Affordable Housing?

I just noticed something on Jon Lansner’s real estate blog on The OC Register’s web site. The market may be cooling, but prices remain high… VERY HIGH. Actually, home prices are still at RECORD HIGHS here in Orange County.

Fresh stats from DataQuick give a confusing signal about the market for resales of single-family residences. Sales activity is off, again. For the 22 business days ended April 18, volume is down 22.9% vs. a year ago in this key market niche. That’s a strong hint that single-family resales for all of April will fail to meet last year’s count for the 19th straight month. However, the most recent median selling price — $720,000 — would be a new record high for a full month. The current record, $705,000, was set in April 2006.

So what’s wrong with this picture? Although the market is settling down, prices aren’t going down. And with prices remaining this high, way too many folks can’t afford to buy a home in places like Orange County.

Come on over, and join me after the flip for more on what still needs to be done to help people afford a home in this area…

Let’s face it: The market is flattening. Real estate in Southern California is certainly not as red-hot as it was just three years ago. The market peaked in 2005, and there just isn’t as much demand for homes ever since. However, supply is still limited as there isn’t much land left in Orange County for new homes. And still, there will always be some demand as jobs are created here in OC, and people continue to move down here for the jobs.

So what can be done about this? Some would just like to build more expensive McMansions out in the hills, in the small patches of open space that we have left. However, this won’t solve our housing problem. We need lower priced homes near urban cores of Orange County where all these
new jobs are being created.

So what can we do? Perhaps we can offer incentives to developers who agree to set aside a good percentage of their homes for affordable housing. Maybe we can also encourage these developers to build higher density housing in these urban cores where all the jobs are. And maybe we can encourage these cities to make these areas attractive by fixing the roads and placing parks within reach of these new homes. Perhaps this can become more than just building affordable housing, but also revitalizing our cities in a responsible way.

So what ideas do you have for affordable housing? What do you think we need to do to allow workers to actually live near their work? And how can we make this new housing into neighborhoods that people can actually live in?

Let’s start thinking of good ideas to solve this problem. : )

California Blue Cross Abuses “Hole in Heart” Baby–SB 840 Update

Being a Blue Cross patient sometimes sound like being a character in a horror movie.  The latest: a four-year old boy in California is born with a hole in his heart…as soon as Blue Cross finds out they cancel the family’s policy.  Cruel.  Read the whole story after the flip, along with an update on families forced into near-indentured servitude by medical bills, and good news in the fight for affordable prescription drugs and guaranteed healthcare.

Brought to you by the National Nurses Organizing Committee as we organize to make 2007 the Year of GUARANTEED Healthcare.

How can this be?

Four months after her first son, Jack, was born, Jessica Bath received a letter from her health insurance company, Blue Shield of California, saying she and Jack were no longer covered. Jack was born at Sierra Vista Regional Medical Center on April 8, 2003, with a hole in his heart. Bath was counting on Blue Shield to pay for a scheduled surgery to repair it.
Suddenly, both she and Jack were uninsured.
“It was absolutely devastating for us,” Bath said. “How were we going to pay for his heart surgery?”
Blue Shield claimed it was canceling the Morro Bay resident’s policy because she had a medical condition, which she failed to disclose when she applied for the insurance. She and her lawyer contend the condition was insignificant and did not have anything to do with her son’s heart problem.

Just in case you’re inclined to believe Blue Cross’ side of the story:

Bath’s attorney, Ray Mattison of the San Luis Obispo firm Ernst and Mattison, said the case fits a pattern of similar lawsuits filed in Southern California accusing insurance companies of “post-claims” underwriting, meaning they search for reasons to cancel a policy after members file claims.

In March, the state regulators fined Blue Cross $1 million for routinely canceling policies of individuals who filed claims. They found that in all 90 cases investigated, the insurance company broke state law that allows rescission of a policy only if the insurer proves members intentionally withheld information when they applied for insurance.

The worst-case scenario was selling her home to pay for the surgery. But she discovered Jack’s condition qualified him for two public programs, California Children’s Services and Medi-Cal, which paid for the surgery.

It’s fortunate the baby got the surgery-but a crime that the public ends up paying the bill after the  Bath family spent years paying premiums to Blue Cross.  This is called cherry-picking, and it’s why all the reform plans built on private insurance will never work.

Larger questions: how can the Blue Cross executives sleep at night?  And why are we letting them do this to people?

The Baths probably will still have some medical bills to pay.  Let me introduce you to another woman to learn the effect medical bills can have on a family

Claudie Harris, 54, of Kansas City, Mo., knows about living on the edge. She owes about$5,000 toward her late husband’s medical bills. She’s paying it, slowly, from the salary she earns as a housekeeper at a facility for the mentally ill. But that leaves her a little short. So, to get by, she’s been taking payday loans, which are loans against her future earnings. “It’s easy money,” Harris says.

The fees are stiff-Harris usually pays $50 for a $250 loan. In two weeks, the loan falls due. If you can’t pay, it costs another fee to renew the debt for another two weeks. Pretty soon, the amount of interest could exceed the original loan, making it difficult to dig out: Harris’s receipts show an annual interest rate of 521 percent.

This is like indentured servitude.  She can keep working but can never be free.  All of the “individual mandate” plans proposed by politicians will continue to expose Americans to terrible financial burdens like this.

But there’s hope.  David Sirota writes today that the heartless healthcare corporations might be about to suffer a big defeat in Congress.  And a reporter in the “Insurance City,” Hartford, CT jumps on the bandwagon of guaranteed healthcare on the SinglePayer model after his incredibly frustrating run-in with an insurer.  Finally, a physician in New Hampshire lays out very clearly the reasons why we can and should enact fundamental healthcare reform to guarantee healthcare for everyone.

But it’s not going to happen without your help.  If you want to join the fight for guaranteed healthcare (with a “Medicare for All” or SinglePayer financing), sign up with GuaranteedHealthcare.org, a project of the National Nurses Organizing Committee.  You can help the fight by sharing your story about surviving the healthcare industry here.

My Very Long Report on the California 2007 Democratic Convention

(Cool! – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

I attended the California Democratic Party’s 2007 convention in San Diego last weekend.  The whole family went down there with me to make it a full-fledged vacation before and after the event. It was nice to see more than the inside of a convention center and hotel; there were trips to Balboa Park, La Jolla, and a stroll across the border into Tijuana to make the trip a well-deserved break.

Recently re-elected to represent the 16th Assembly District (Oakland/Piedmont/Alameda), this was my third convention of the type.  The state convention is only slightly similar to the national conventions that people see on TV, which are really a big infomercial for the presidential candidate of choice.  Here, ordinary citizens (well, politically engaged ones) get to converge to get inspired, get the word out about the causes they feel passionate about, schmooze, and learn.

My goals for this convention were two-fold.  First off; I was there to help get some of the resolutions passed that the 16th AD Democrats had submitted (including one to make global warming a priority) and that I had written myself and submitted (including one about transportation in California).  Second, I was hoping to find a presidential candidate that I could support, not having had a preference yet.

I feel that I succeeded on both counts.  Our Global Warming passed as a “priority” resolution (along with a number of other good resolutions including out-of-Iraq and investigation/impeachment) and my my transportation resolution passed.  And I found a candidate to support.  It was not the candidate that I was expecting to support, and if you had predicted that I would be creating a website for any candidate only a few days later, I would have thought you crazy!  Read on to find out what transpired.

Friday

After getting registered, I looked through the goodie bag.  One nice-looking item was a black baseball hat with a logo that didn’t look familiar.  It turns out that it was provided by the Indian Gaming lobby, trying to win support for their assembly bill.  Quite an expensive bit of “swag” to give out to over 2000 delegates.  Oh, they were sponsors of the luncheon and dinner as well.  Are they trying to buy our support?

The interesting scandal that fellow delegate Jason G. and I discovered when we were looking for some kind of union “bug” on the hats was that the “made in ….” tags had actually been cut off of them!  Organized labor has had a problem with tribal gaming; with this discovery, it became clear that the hats were made in a sweatshop somewhere in the world (unfortunately like most of the clothes you are probably wearing right now).  I always look forward to getting nice union-made swag at political events!  So I gave the hat back to one of their people; I’m certainly not going to wear a hat that a regressive “cause” such as tribal gaming.

The big events for Friday are the caucuses.  Caucus meetings are great ways to get like-minded delegates (or delegates with similar backgrounds) together outside of the official convention agenda.  This was the third year for the Progressive Caucus, which (as usual) overflowed the huge room it was given.  There were a few speeches by politicians like Loni Hancock and Jerry McNerney, but what really brought the house down was a no-holds-barred, inspirational rant against the wishy-washy leadership of the California Democratic party by  the chair of the caucus.  I also attended the not-too-exciting computers and Internet caucus but declined to re-join, and the Environmental Caucus which was almost as rockin’ as the Progressive caucus.

The resolutions committee met in a large room, not quite big enough for observers.  I was pleased to see that many of the resolutions written by me and my fellow 16th AD delegates were passed.  The task ahead was to choose the top ten that would be ratified at the convention; these tend to get a bit more press coverage then those passed later in the year at executive board meetings.

After eating not quite a full meal at the opening reception, a group of us headed over to a local pub for a fundraising “blograiser” to benefit Jerry McNerney and Charlie Brown.  The candidates were there as were their spouses; I chatted briefly with Jan Brown (whom I had just met earlier at the environmental caucus) and for quite a while with Mary McNerney (whom I’ve known now since early in the 2006 campaign or maybe even the 2004 one).  A group of us also had a great chat with Assemblymember Mark Leno (now running for State Senate).  I told him about my resolution on transportation, which effectively supports his  ‘Complete Streets‘ bill.  He’s a really funny guy, the kind of person you’d want to have a beer with.  Oh, I guess we did!

Saturday

The second day of the convention was, for me, Speech Day. And what a disappointment it was.  Actually, it was great to hear Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi.  I sincerely hope he will run for governor in 2010 – he will get my support.  (I remember when he mentioned Global Warming in a debate before the primary election last year and that was a notable thing. This year, global warming was on everybody’s lips!)  It was wonderful to see Secretary of State Debra Bowen.

But the Presidential candidates?

The first of them to give a speech was Hillary Clinton.  She had a big following (surprisingly big) though I couldn’t understand why she had so much support when the overall mood of the convention was way more progressive than she is.  (Somebody later pointed out how many people they saw carrying “Hillary” signs while wearing out-of-Iraq buttons without seeing the irony.)  She and her speech really impressed me in some ways, but I felt that she spent most of her speech trying to connect with the audience by telling stories about her childhood, in an attempt to get us to see her as a real person and not as the elitist that she is painted as.  That time was wasted when she could have been talking about something more substantial.  Her political points were mostly platitudes; unfortunately, and when she started talking about “immigration reform” and somehow linking that to terrorism, it seemed like she was trying to appeal to the right wing of the Democratic Party or perhaps those “swing” voters who might be watching her on YouTube later on.  She certainly lost any hope of my support.  It’s too bad – she’s a brilliant person, but I just don’t see her ever overcoming the hurdle that she is public enemy #1 (or maybe #2 if Michael Moore is #1) of the right wing, plus getting support from the many Democrats who don’t like her centrist approach.

Barack Obama arrived with welcome given to a “rock star.”  He has a huge following, which is great.  I was prepared to be blown away by his speech, and wondering if he would impress me so much that I’d put a back seat to my doubts of his inexperience or his very questionable votes in the Senate regarding the war, torture, judge confirmations, and so forth.  He was a good speaker, but when a comment from my seat-neighbor jarred me out of a daydreaming reflection I was having on the John Garamendi speech earlier that day, I realized that Obama wasn’t really doing much for me.  I see great potential for Obama, but I couldn’t imagine getting involved in his campaign at this time.

Senator Chris Dodd was there and gave a very old-fashioned politician kind of speech.  I don’t think he got more than polite applause at the convention.  I’m sure he’d be good at the job, but I can’t imagine him getting very far in his campaign.

The last speech from a presidential candidate for the day was Dennis Kucinich.  I’ve admired most of his positions and ideas; he’s outspoken and is certainly pushing the conversation to the left.  But his speech was one of the most painful things to watch and hear I have endured in a long time.  It showed that he is completely unelectable.  He would alternate between loud sections (with grandiose gesturing like a symphony conductor who can’t get the symphony loud enough for his tastes, all the while with a smile plastered on his face so that he didn’t appear angry) and quiet, high-voiced passages.  When he quoted the entire passage from the Statue of Liberty (“Give me your tired, your poor…”), it reminded me of William Shatner “singing”.  Apparently some people liked that style, but personally I wished he would spend a bit more time in his capacity as the chair of the United States House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Domestic Policy and investigate the Bush administration’s activities and less time on the campaign trail.

After the Kucinich speech, I was worried that I was going to have to advocate an imaginary “Frankenstein” candidate: the ideas of Kucinich, the Charisma of Obama, etc.  I just hadn’t found a candidate I could really get behind.

That evening, the Resolutions Committee posted the thirteen resolutions had been approved for ratification at the convention.  There are supposed to be ten, but there were two ties and one “special” (i.e. feel-good “cumbaya”-style) resolution that brought the total up to thirteen.  Surprisingly, the Global Warming resolution we submitted barely made the cut.  At least it made it!

Outside the convention hall were a large number of “protestors.”  There were a number of groups and causes represented: Impeachment, Out of Iraq, 9/11 Truth, Stop Blackwater, Code Pink, and so forth.  The funny thing was that I think that the “protestors” were actually in agreement with most of the convention attendees; maybe “demonstrators” is a better term in this case!  Walking down the sidewalk with the protestors behind the police barricades facing us, it was sort of like looking in a mirror.  I chatted with a bunch of the folks, gave high fives, and so forth.  It was invigorating to see them there.

I attended the banquet dinner honoring Nancy Pelosi, not quite sure what to expect (other than banquet-quality food).  The speeches were actually entertaining, and when Nancy Pelosi came out, she didn’t give a speech (as she had the evening before), but more of a conversation.  Though I wish she would show more leadership in getting this administration stopped (by impeaching them) and getting us out of the occupation by cutting funding, it gave me a lot more understanding and respect for her than I had before.

The final events of the evening were the many hospitality suites.  I avoided the expensive party funded by the Indian Gaming interests, instead hanging out at the PDA party for a while, as well as a party put on by a couple of state officeholders, Jack O’Connel and Bill Lockyer.  They had an interesting setup where people could take pictures with them; those pictures were transmitted to an array of Macs and imported into iPhoto, where you could email yourself the picture.  It was a nice way to get attendees to see how cool Macs are.  (Macs are ideally suited for Democrats; Windows machines were engineered to please Republicans.)

Sunday

Sunday was a short day, and a lot of attendees were already gone.  It was truly their loss.  Maxine waters came out with a fiery speech calling for the immediate end to the occupation.  Her words were memorable:  “Not another nickel, not another dime, not this time – bring our soldiers home!”  Had I found the candidate I wanted to support for President?  Alas, she is not in the running!

So when John Edwards came into the room for his speech, I was surprised that he got a “rock star” reception as well.  I hadn’t given Edwards much consideration, though fellow 16th AD delegate Jason G. was supporting him.  After only a few minutes in his speech, I could see why.  Here was a candidate whom I actually wanted to see in the Oval Office!  He really imppressed me how he told it like it is.  He had specifics, not platitudes.  He admitted his mistake about his previous vote on the war, and convinced me that he wants us to get out immediately, not someday.  He had words about solving global warming that showed me he has the understanding, the will, and the leadership to actually solve the crisis.  Only Al Gore had seemed fit for the job of leading us out of that crisis, but he’s not running for President (and I doubt he will no matter what).

Before Edwards had finished, I had reached into my bag and fished out the Edwards sticker I had been given earlier – and put it on.  By the end of the speech, I had firmly decided I had found a candidate whom I approved of at both the intellectual and emotional levels.  The level of cheers and applause in the hall made me think that he had won a lot of people over with that speech, the way Dean did four years ago.  I found it strange to be there – I certainly didn’t get a lot of Edwards in the last cycle, but it’s clear he has matured since then.  I see a bit of Howard Dean, a bit of John Kennedy, a bit of Al Gore, and a bit of Jimmy Carter in him.  He has a few issues that need to be dealt with between now and Election Day, but I think he’s the candidate that most deserves our support.

After the speech, I decided to go grab some Edwards swag from the campaign’s booth, but the booths had been mostly closed up by that point.  I head there was a room where Edwards supporters were going, so I figured I’d dive in and see what was happening.  The room was way too small for the number of people who crowded in.  Was this bad planning, or a surge in supporters?  I found a partial answer when I looked around the room and saw a lot of faces of people I know, people I trust, Dean people.  And other than Jason, none had been Edwards supporters before to my knowledge.  I realized then that I wasn’t the only one who had found a candidate to support at the convention.  An article on Calitics agrees.

Lastly, we heard from Bill Richardson, Governor of New Mexico, afterwards, and I liked him a lot.  He didn’t capture anybody the way Edwards did, and I don’t know if his bid is really full-power.  But he’s very qualified, certainly, and of all the presidential candidates, probably the one whom I’d most like to have a beer with.  (Mark Leno could join us.)  He or Obama would actually be a good balance on a ticket with Edwards, if you want my opinion.

Aftermath

So I left the convention with a candidate, and a good feeling about the resolutions, and glad to have a candidate that I can support.  (I really don’t want to hold my nose and vote!)  Reading some of the blogs later on, notably calitics and California Progress Report, I did find a few things that I think need to be improved.

One is that obvious conflict on interest in the California Democratic Party with its sponsors.  There was some debate about the fate of the Network Neutrality resolution  that had been submitted and referred to Siberia, and the fact that AT&T is a major sponsor to the California Democratic Party.  I was also concerned that the Indian Gaming sponsorship is going to prevent the party from speaking out against this industry.  Fortunately there are some delegates that are working on pushing the party toward financial audit-ability.

Another concern that I read about, which I agree with tremendously, is that need to encourage more diversity in the progressive caucus.  The meeting of that caucus was scheduled opposite all of the ethnic/cultural caucuses, meaning that it was difficult or unlikely for a person of color to attend both, even if they wanted to.  I don’t know what the solution given the scheduling constraints, but it is important to encourage diversity in the progressive community as much as possible.

Besides Network Neutrality, there are other issues that need to be talked about, that haven’t quite reached the mainstream discourse.  Issues like stopping the Halliburton private army, Blackwater, investigating the discrepancies in the 9/11 commission’s report, and putting an end to the IMF and world bank and so-called “free trade”.  Two years ago, impeachment and global warming and getting out of Iraq were not mainstream concepts at the democratic convention; in 2007 they are.  Who knows what will be mainsteam next year?

After talking with a couple of other activists, I decided to throw together a website “Deaniacs for Edwards” to help focus Edwards as a candidate that former Dean people like myself can get behind.  It’s online now, and I’d love to get some short submissions from fellow Deaniacs who have decided to support Edwards.

The Republicans Debate (and John Edwards wants in)

The Republican candidates for president are in Simi Valley, CA at the Reagan library today for the first Republican debate of the 2008 presidential season. And while the location has more to do with the conservative icon whose library is playing host than the fact that it's in California, we at ATMWatch will be watching for references to California's primary and the issues Californians care about.

The debate will start at 5pm PDT (webcast available HERE) and is co-sponsored by MSNBC and politico.com, which asked people to submit questions online to be asked of the candidates during the debate, much as we are asking regular voters for questions to ask the candidates HERE. We're getting your questions to the campaigns and we'll have our first candidate response video next week.

Now, while we're used to asking candidates questions, we're not so used to candidates asking other candidates questions but that's exactly what John Edwards has done in advance of tonight's debate. His question for the Republican candidates:

"Has the Bush doctrine of a Global War on Terror backfired? Does the president's focus suggest a fixed enemy that can be defeated through a permanent military campaign or do you think we need a broader approach as many military leaders believe?"

1/3 of tonight's debate will be devoted to answering questions submitted online and will be voted on by readers. Hopefully we'll be able to rate Edwards's question up so it gets asked. Would love to hear them defend Bush's war strategy or even claim with a straight face that  there is one. Consider this an open thread.

Will Mr. Republican Insider Fight the War He So Wants?

(Looky, looky here! It’s none other than Jubal/Matt Cunningham coming onto our fair site to respond. Hi, Jubal! ; ) – promoted by atdleft)

Tell you what; you’re still a relevative [sic] young man in good health who obviously supports this president and this war. Do what hundreds of other soliders have done. Put your life on hold and go enlist. Ask to be assigned a unit going to Iraq. Support this war and this president all you want. But the veto is not supporting the troops. The veto is a sentence to extend this quagmire to satisfy a tyrant president’s stubborness and refusal to admit mistakes.

Dan Chmielewski said that to Republican insider/consultant/”blogger” Jubal/Matt Cunningham on Monday, after Jubal/Matt spewed out the same old Republican talking points that Democrats hate the troops. Well, all hell soon broke loose as Jubal/Matt had his fit. I guess it’s so much easier to “support the troops” by blithely sticking a yellow ribbon on a Middle-Eastern-oil-guzzling SUV while ignoring the real hell that our troops must suffer in Iraq.

Well, The Liberal OC just couldn’t let go. Chris Prevatt offered Jubal/Matt the challenge once more:

So Matt/Jubal, since you seem to support this debacle in Iraq so much; since you seem to believe that this war is really about terrorism and not an occupation; since you support this President and his stubborn insistence that there is something over there that can be won, other than oil and no-bid contracts for his friends; why don’t you put your butt where your mouth is, step up to the plate, and become part of King George’s noble cause.

So will Matt Cunningham take up the offer? After all, doesn’t he share King George the Chimpy’s vision of victory? Oh wait, aren’t we headed toward victory?

Perata Endorses Clean Money

This is an absolutely enormous development.  Clean Money got kind of lost in the shuffle at last weekend’s CDP Convention, but Loni Hancock’s AB 583 has been quietly making its way through the Assembly.  It cleared the Assembly Elections Committee, and yesterday there was a hearing in the Assembly Appropriations Committee, which was favorable.  And now, the Senate President pro Tem has signed on to be a co-author.  Considering that the CDP wouldn’t take a position on Clean Money just a year ago, this is historic news.  Susan Lerner writes in an email to supporters:

I want you to be among the first to hear the exciting news:  California Senate President pro Tem Don Perata just became a co-author of AB 583, the Clean Money bill!

The President pro Tem joins an ever-growing list of Legislators who are co-authors of AB 583, the California Clean Money and Fair Elections Act.  Clean Money supporters in Senator Perata’s Oakland district and throughout California should be proud because it was your calls, letters, and petitions that convinced him to sign on as a active Clean Money supporter.

over…

As Mark Leno said in yesterday’s Appropriation Committee hearing, “AB 583 is more than just a bill, it’s a movement.”  Two years ago it was stopped in committee.  Last year it cleared the Assembly.  And this year, Perata’s support will go a long way to helping it pass both houses and go on to the governor.  This movement understands that the ability to wage fair and clean elections is vital to sustaining our democracy.  You can join the movement working to clean up our political process here.