Gloria Romero Stands Tall Against The Tough On Crime Crowd

State Sen. Gloria Romero, a.k.a. the only one in Sacramento who gets the prison problem, is really sticking her neck out to deny the rapacious fearmongers more sentencing laws, and she deserves our support.

Republicans are outraged that more than two dozen bills in the Legislature that would create new crimes or lengthen sentences will languish until next year in a committee controlled by Democrats.

Sen. Gloria Romero, who chairs the Senate Public Safety Committee, imposed a one-year moratorium earlier this year on all Senate and Assembly bills that would worsen crowding in California’s prisons and jails.

That’s what you do when there’s a CRISIS.  And considering that there have been nearly 1,000 laws in the past 30 years raising sentences for criminal offenders, I would guess that every additional law is completely unnecessary.  Of course, that’s the bread and butter for those so wedded to the “Tough on Crime” label.  So Republicans are miffed:

But Sen. Dave Cogdill, vice chairman of the committee, maintains the panel “shouldn’t be holding the safety of the people of California hostage to this situation.”

The Modesto Republican concedes prison crowding “is very real, but the reality is any bill that we take action on this year wouldn’t become law until January 2008.”

Right, because new prison facilities can be conjured in a matter of months.  Who’s the architect, Merlin?

over…

Romero, the chief force behind the bill to create an independent sentencing commission, is dead right on the optics of the whole prison crisis.

Romero noted the prisons’ medical system already is being run by a receivership established by the federal courts. And two federal judges have indicated they are leaning toward creating a judicial panel charged with setting a population cap for the entire system.

“We can try to look like we’re tough on crime, but how tough are we if at a certain point the receiver takes over the entire system?” she said, noting that 30 of the state’s 58 counties already have established population caps for their jails.

That’s all some of these legislators care about, looking tough while in actuality squandering our tenuous hold on the prison crisis, increasing recidivism rates, destroying rehabilitation and treatment, and making everyone in this state less safe.  It’s a simple-minded approach that neglects the very real issue of overcrowding.

Romero is really putting herself out there on this.  It may not be a popular position but it’s the right one.  And she should be applauded, as well as supported in her efforts to create a sentencing commission outside of the political sphere so that this “Tough on Crime” nonsense can be muted.

Worst Political Journalist in the State

So when the publisher of Calitics fled town for vacation, I might recollect an email about no fights (and I stayed out of the blogger fight on Friday night). But since there is already a fabulous flame war about the worst California Journalist, I figured anyone who wanted to should chime in.

While I sit back and enjoy my popcorn, my only thought is that Bill Bradley would win the title hands down if anyone other than Rough and Tumble were dumb enough to take him seriously.

As for Marc Cooper, since nobody would be dumb enough to repeat day job intimidation calls that backfire I might sneak away with a links to this and this.

Although the pool for potential worst journalist is growing smaller every day, punking the bad ones only gets easier.

How Green is your City?

(xposted from terryfaceplace)

For those of us who care about the health of our planet, it’s been disheartening and disturbing to watch the federal government’s actions regarding climate change and environmental protection throughout the Bush years. It’s not enough to sit back and grumble, and it’s long past time for action. We can do something now. Of course the federal government has an enormous responsibility to protect the United States and the planet, but it’s our responsibility too. We can start working immediately on a personal level and within our cities. Who is responsible for protecting the environment? We are. Every last one of us. We need to start taking better care of our world today. We can not sit on our hands waiting for the state or federal government to tell us what to do. Individual and community action are essential.

Read below the fold for more….

Some of the most innovative, positive results can be found at the local level and within local jurisdictions. This is where we can make change happen. While congress debates, we can get busy working on the problem of excess carbon emissions in our personal environment today. You can change your incandescent light bulbs, buy energy saving appliances, and weatherize your home, but you can also demand that your local government go green by implementing sustainable practices in your community.

Why should our cities go green?  Because it’s time to provide leadership and to lead by example. It’s the right thing to do. It’s the smart thing to do. It’s the responsible thing to do. As a bonus, going green can save money which translates into taxpayer savings and efficiency for the city. There’s a common misconception that focusing on sustainability is expensive, but officials around the country have found significant long and short term cost savings in their transition to a cleaner, sustainable city.

The most obvious savings is in the reduction of energy costs. For example, several years ago the city of San Jose tested CalTrans approved red LED traffic indicator lights for both street and pedestrian signals. They were pleased to find that the change provided energy savings of 45.5% per light. Additionally, as the technology has improved, it’s possible to change lights less often, which provides the additional savings associated with lower procurement costs and the reduction of maintenance expenses.

Moving toward the goal of a sustainable city also reduces costs associated with waste management. Less garbage means a reduction in land fill fees (which are calulated by weight), and reduced expenses related to the disposal of hazardous materials. This directly and positively impacts operating costs for the city.

Recently San Francisco’s mayor Gavin Newsome decreed that the city would no longer spend $500,000 per year purchasing bottled water.  In addition to eliminating an unnecessary cost, the plan will reduce the amount of trash that goes to the landfill. More than a billion water plastic bottles end up in California’s landfills each year. Additionally the production of the disposable plastic bottles alone comsumes over 1.5 million barrels of oil per year, not to mention the fuel burned in shipping bottles of water around the country. It makes both financial and environmental sense for cities to adopt this green practice.

Cites can also work toward a sustainable future by attracting businesses that provide good jobs and have a positive environmental impact, implementing anti-sprawl land-use policies, and using green building standards in public works projects, and in local building code. There are innumerable ways to go green and save money at the same time, but it’s important to keep in mind that the benefit is more than financial. We can look at the economic bottom line, which of course is very important, but the bottom line should also be viewed in social and environmental terms. 

What can you do to help your city to “go green” and to bring the concept of sustainability into their everyday operations? I have the perfect answer!

In 2005 Seattle mayor Greg Nickels proposed the U.S. Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement. This plan has been endorsed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors. It began in 2005 as a protest against the inaction of the federal government. When it became clear that the U.S. would not join the Kyoto Protocol, Mayor Nickels decided it was time to show the world that there is, in fact, intelligent life in the United States. However this is no longer a symbolic gesture, as it has taken on a life of it’s own and is making a difference in hundreds of communities in California and around the country. This agreement has been signed by 592 U.S. city mayors who have pledged to reduce carbon emissions in their own cities, and these mayors are seeking a block grant from the federal government to provide seed money for further innovations that can be implemented at the local level. Cities who participate in the Climate Protection Agreement agree to the following terms.

  • Strive to meet or beat the Kyoto Protocol targets in their community, through actions ranging from anti-sprawl land use policies to urban forest restoration projects to public information campaigns.
  • Urge state and federal government to enact politices and programs to meet or beat greenhouse gas emission reduction target suggested for the US in the Kyoto Protocol — 7% reduction from 1990 levels by 2012.
  • Urge Congress to pass bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legislation, which would establish a national emission trading system.

So how green is your city, and has your mayor signed the Climate Protection Agreement? I live on the east side of San Diego and the east county mayors that haven’t signed the pledge here are Mark Lewis of El Cajon, Mary Sessom of Lemon Grove and Randy Voepel of Santee. I’m going to work on my little corner of the world, and I challenge anyone who’s mayor isn’t on the list to do the same. We can make a difference now. There’s no need nor time to wait. 

For more information on the U.S. Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement.

July 7, 2007 Blog Roundup

Blog roundup on the flip. The labels should be self-explanatory.

Schwarzenegger’s Air
Resource Board Shenanigans

Health Care

California Politics


Local and Labor

Republicans Are What They
Are

ACTION ALERT: Tell The Legislature To Keep The Pressure On The Governor

Frank Russo predictably delivered with great coverage of yesterday’s Assembly Natural Resources Committee hearing into political pressure from the Governor’s Office on the California Air Resources Board.  Just keep scrolling.  The most shocking piece of news that Russo highlights, which was also in a couple news articles on the subject, was that the Administration flack sent to give the Governor’s side of the story, Dan Skopec, ISN’T EVEN PART OF THE ADMINISTRATION ANYMORE.

Skopec no longer works for the Schwarzenegger Administration as of a week ago, and has started his own firm, “Climate & Energy Consulting” on Sacramento’s K Street Mall, to serve clients he described as “emerging technologies companies that will take advantage of the changes in energy that will result from climate policies.” Despite repeated questions from committee members, he refused to reveal who in the Administration had asked him to testify, who he had spoken to about the hearing, who had prepped him, and what he was told. Although he repeatedly testified about actions of the Schwarzenegger Administration using the word “we”, he later apologized for the use of that word which he is accustomed to use. He later admitted that he was not speaking for the Schwarzenegger Administration, but was basically there as a private citizen.

They sent a lobbyist to defend the Governor.  The hay that can be made from that decision is pretty clear.  And this part could be even more damning:

Dr. Sawyer (the former CARB chief), in his testimony, complimented Catherine Witherspoon for resigning from her position as the Executive Officer of CARB since she serves in that position at the pleasure of the board itself. Despite the desire of Susan Kennedy, Schwarzenegger’s Chief of Staff, to have her fired, this could not be accomplished directly by the Governor. Sawyer said he had been ordered to place this on the agenda and met with a subcommittee of the board only to find out that there was a consensus of fellow board members not to do so. It was feared that had Witherspoon remained in the position that individual board members would be removed until there was a majority willing to fire her.

Does this remind one of the Saturday massacre involving U.S. Attorney General Elliott Richardson and Archibald Cox during the Watergate scandal of the Nixon Administration?

Schwarzenegger is taking a beating in both the local and national press, as well he should.  This reflects nothing more than an abuse of power.

I would like everyone reading this who lives in California to call their Assemblymember.  They need to know that they will be supported in this effort to rein in the Schwarzenegger Administration and ensure that oversight is undertaken and the laws of the state are met.  That includes subpoenas for top Schwarzenegger Administration officials if need be.  The Senate also needs to hear from you; they will be meeting next week in the Rules Committee to confirm the new chair of the Board, Mary Nichols.  That needs to be a legitimate confirmation hearing with tough questions about Nichols’ independence and how she will implement the Global Warmings Solution Act.  This is not a small issue; as I write, I’m watching the Live Earth concerts and seeing millions of people begging for action on climate change.  Now, here we have one of the only legitimate pieces of legislation in this country addressing the issue, and it’s being undermined by a Governor who wants to talk big on the environment while supporting his corporate buddies behind the scenes.

Information on the flip:

These are the Democrats on the Natural Resources Committee, who are particularly important.

Loni Hancock – Chair
Dem-14 (916) 319-2014  [email protected]
Julia Brownley
Dem-41 (916) 319-2041  [email protected]
Felipe Fuentes
Dem-39 (916) 319-2039  [email protected]
John Laird
Dem-27 (916) 319-2027  [email protected]
Lori Saldaña
Dem-76 (916) 319-2076  [email protected]

Here are the points of contact for the Senate Rules Committee:

Senator Don Perata (Chair)
[email protected]
(510) 286-1333.
Senator Gilbert Cedillo
contact
Senator Alex Padilla
(818) 901-5588
contact

It helps, of course, if you are a constituent (Asm. Brownley will be getting plenty of calls from me).  But even if you’re not, this is an important enough issue, one that speaks to the very structure of democracy in this state, that you should make a call.  And ALL of your representatives ought to know that you’re paying close attention to this issue and that you want results which are consistent with the law and the need to take a real and not a symbolic step in the fight against global warming.

A missed opportunity for cleaner cars in California

The Assembly failed to pass Ira Ruskin’s clean car Discount Bill (AB 493) a few weeks ago before the assembly bill deadline.  The bill would provide rebates on fuel-efficient vehicles, paid for by fees on gas guzzlers. Great policy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase the market for fuel-efficient cars.

What went wrong, and what can we do?

The Merc had the math and the politics of it…

Ruskin’s bill, AB493, failed Wednesday night (June 6) on a 35-35 vote in the state Assembly. The measure needed 41 votes to advance.  Democrats have a 48-32 majority in the Assembly. Every Republican voted no.

Three Democrats joined them in opposing the bill: Cathleen Galgiani, D-Stockton; Nicole Parra, D-Bakersfield; and Charles Calderon, D-City of Industry.  Ten other Democrats did not vote, nearly all of them from the Los Angeles area.

The gas guzzler 10 were:
Mike Davis (LA)
Hector De La Torre (Southeast LA)
Mervyn Dymally (Compton)
Felip Fuentes (E. San Fernando Valley)
Ed Hernandez (W. Covina)
Tony Mendoza (Artesia)
Anthony Portantino (Pasadena)
Laura Richardson (Long Beach)
Jose Solorio (Anaheim)
Nell Soto (Ontario)

Opponents were concerned that the bill would hurt auto dealers — the same brilliant thinking that is causing the US auto industry to fall beyond Toyota, which sees efficiency as an opportunity, not a threat.

If any of you are in these districts, please write your rep and let them know that you are disappointed by their inaction on this measure, which is a powerful action the state could take to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and oil dependence.

Ira Ruskin is promising to bring the bill back next session. If any of you are in his district (Redwood City, Palo Alto), send him a note thanking him and encouraging him to try again.

Members’ contact information is here:
http://www.assembly….

How Do I Use the Bus When the Drivers Are on Strike?

OK, this will sound bizarre to all of you who believe in the stereotype of people in “The OC” speeding around in Hummers and Maseratis… But I often ride the bus here. That’s why I’m now worrying about
the bus workers’ strike that started at 12:00 AM today.

I don’t know what’s happening to the buses that usually glide down Bristol Street just outside my house. I don’t know if I can take the bus today to where I had been planning to go. I’m now wondering if my idea of being more eco-friendly by using mass transit was a stupid idea after all.

But more importantly, I’m worrying about all those hundreds of thousands of people who depend on the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) to get around. How do they get to work and to school and to the grocery store now? What the heck will happen to all these people?

Follow me after the flip for more…

Right now, OCTA bus drivers are paid between $13 and $21 an hour. That may sound good, but consider how much it costs to make do in a place with such a high cost of living as Orange County. And consider that they haven’t had a pay increase in years. And consider that the wage and benefit package that’s being offered by OCTA won’t meet the projected living standards offered by the county. The only reason why the drivers are going on strike is because they can’t keep up with inflation and the rising cost of living.

So OCTA is starting to budge. Why couldn’t they budge sooner? And why can’t they just agree upon a fair deal with the drivers? Some 220,000 riders depend on these buses to get around every day. And now that the entire Orange County bus system is in limbo, how can these people get around?

Maybe a few of these people have their own cars. Maybe some of these people have friends who can give them rides. But what about all those folks who have no access to a car? Are they just screwed?

So this strike isn’t a good deal for any one. The drivers need a living wage that will help them get by in such an expensive place to live as OC. The riders need buses to get them to where they need to go. And the OC economy depends on these workers and consumers who use the bus to get around.

So what happens now? I guess I’ll have a hard time getting around today. Perhaps I can bum more rides off my dad. But what about all those folks who can’t bum a ride off my dad? How will they get down Bristol Street to the mall now? How will they get to work at that sushi place in Newport? How will they get to the grocery store off 17th Street?

I guess that’s the way the strike blows.

Exclusive: Two New SF Mayoral Candidates

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketEXCLUSIVE: Must credit Matt Drudge or something.

So there were some bloggers who might have spent a good part of the day discussing the professional use of social lubricants. And uh, the rumor by the end of the night was that if Matt Gonzalez doesn’t get off his ass and run for Mayor there are two new candidates.

Luke Thomas and Krissy Keefer have both theoretically agreed to shell out $5K and run for Mayor if Matt doesn’t. And on that front, it is still all rumors. A whole bunch of bloggers headed to the bar where his brother’s band was playing yet Gonzo didn’t show and we escaped with only one altercation and two new candidates.

CARBgate Hearing – Republicans chicken out, Democrats hold firm

The first couple reports about today’s Assembly Natural Resources Committee hearing into the politicization of the California Air Resources Board are starting to dribble out.  The SacBee described a set of angry lawmakers sking pointed questions and threatening that their probe into how the Governor is trying to manipulate the board into adopting his favored implementation of anti-global warming laws would continue.

Assembly Democrats said Friday they will continue investigating whether Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger exerted “illegal and improper pressure” on the California Air Resources Board after they were dissatisfied with answers given by two lower-level representatives of the governor at a Capitol hearing.

A full report on the flip:

The higher-ups sought for questioning, Chief of Staff Susan Kennedy and Cabinet Secretary Dan Dunmoyer, did not arrive, even though handy seat cards were placed at the table awaiting their presence.  Dan Skopec, the functionary who the Schwarzenegger Administration sent to testify, apparently grumbled and gainsayed his way through the hearing, much to the dismay of committee Democrats.  Matt Jones at CMR writes:

Skopec, who, in a former life, carried the water of Rep. Doug Ose (the former Sacramento area Congressman who defended the energy generators), was a disaster. He called the testimony of CARB officials “fiction,” and then refused to answer committee questions about the Governor’s staff review of his testimony. He also provoked the committee by calling the hearing political theater — not a wise move for someone who later said he may soon be a lobbyist before the legislature.

Skopec’s comments drew scorn from Assemblymember Jared Huffman of Marin County, who compared the Schwarzenegger Administration’s micromanagement of the Air Board to Karl Rove in the White House. LA Assemblymember Mike Feuer also lit into Skopec for failing to fully answer questions. Other members of the panel — including Santa Barbara Assemblymember Pedro Nava, Sacramento’s Dave Jones, and Mark DeSaulnier of Contra Costa County — also asked pointed questions and drew incomplete answers from the Administration officials.

Jones also mentioned that not one Republican on the committee even bothered to show up at the hearing.  They want no part of this controversy, probably because they don’t believe in such a thing as global warming to begin with.

The testimony of the two former members of the Air Resources Board, Robert Sawyer and Catherine Witherspoon, seemed to me to be fairly damaging.

Schwarzenegger fired Sawyer last month, and Witherspoon resigned Monday because she said the Governor’s Office had tried to control the air board to the benefit of polluters. In particular, Witherspoon said Schwarzenegger deputy chief of staff Dan Dunmoyer had routinely called her to question whether ARB policies would unduly hurt businesses in California.

Sawyer said the governor’s office has undermined the traditional independence of the air board, which has the reputation of being an apolitical, science-based body.

“The governor’s staff has the task of conveying policy directions from the governor to the Air Resources Board,” Sawyer said. “However, Gov. Schwarzenegger, your staff has interjected itself in a manner that has compromised the independence and integrity of the board.”

You know, it doesn’t matter whether or not legislators want the Governor’s support on healthcare reform, or the term limits initiative.  This cuts to the very heart of how the branches of government in California function.  The Assembly is standing up right now, so far, because they feel the presence would have no meaning if they pass laws that the Governor then can simply circumnavigate to arrive at his preferred solution.  In addition, the Assembly is not being permitted to conduct oversight with the actual executive staff involved in the incident.  If Dan Dunmoyer was calling CARB members and pressuring them to back off tough regulatory stances, then he must be brought before the committee to answer for that.  It’s quite simple. 

As for next steps, Loni Hancock, who’s an excellent progressive voice in the Assembly, is mulling over a variety of options.

Afterward, Assemblywoman Loni Hancock, D-Berkeley, the committee chair, left open the possibility of seeking a subpoena of Kennedy and Dunmoyer to force them to answer committee questions. She also said lawmakers may pursue bills that enable air board appointees to serve for fixed terms rather than at the pleasure of the governor, giving board members more independence. Another possibility is to give state lawmakers appointment powers.

I don’t see how the Governor would sign bills taking away his authority, so to me, the subpoena route seems the only one that’s viable.  Democrats are also starting to fight this one in the court of public opinion, which to someone like the ego-driven Schwarzenegger is the only court that matters.

This should get very, very interesting.  Stay tuned…

Villaraigosa, Delgadillo, and Racial Identity in Los Angeles Politics

As juls noted in a quick hit, Mayor Villaraigosa’s girlfriend Mirthala Salinas has been put on temporary leave by Telemundo, calling her job into question.  Elsewhere though, the LA Times is all over this latest scandal.  There are 133 pages and counting of users comments in response to the situation and Steve Lopez is wondering “Who needs telenovelas when you have Los Angeles City Hall?”  Lopez brings up several legitimate questions, like whether taxpayers have paid for any part of the relationship and what effect the relationship may have had on the Telemundo newsroom.  But as compelling as all of that is, the real fallout may not be felt until next fall.  In light of scandals for Antonio Villaraigosa and Rocky Delgadillo, the Times is also exploring the extent to which the Latino community may be disillusioned by their political superstars.

The last several years have shown the Latino population gradually moving away from the Republican Party, and in 2006, Latino’s in the West went 72% for Democratic candidates.  This has been coupled in Los Angeles with a city government that increasingly matches its Latino population:

Over the last decade, the city’s government has finally started to reflect its demographics. Los Angeles, with a Latino population of nearly 50%, has a city attorney named Rocky Delgadillo and a City Council on which five of 15 members are of Mexican descent.

As noted in the article, it’s far too early to know whether either Villaraigosa or Delgadillo will personally face political ramifications for their respective scandals.  The potential problem that the Times suggests may be simmering though is that, at a time of major political gains for Latinos, future Latino candidates or future Democrats will have one more hill to climb on the way to election.

Please do read through the article for the full gamut of reactions from both insiders and people-on-the-street.  What’s particularly striking though is that the progression of Latinos into mainstream politics brings along a complex identity crisis.  Indeed, much of the concern reflected in the Times article touches in one way or another on concern that race would be caught up in analysis of the scandal:

“I don’t think it speaks to a problem of leadership in the Latino community,” [Former City Councilman Richard] Alatorre said. “We all make mistakes…. It just so happens that it happened all in one week.”

Will this demoralize the building political engagement and activism in the Latino community?  Will race be unfairly conflated with scandal within the broader population?  Or is Antonio Gonzalez (Southwest Voter Registration Education Project) right in seeing this as growing pains for the still young but increasingly influential Latino voting bloc?  Too early to tell, but the role of race will be something to follow as these stories evolve in the media and the public consciousness.