Arnold’s Privatization Push: A Dangerous Giveaway For California

The campaign to turn California’s public infrastructure over to private profit is gathering steam. Today’s LA Times reports on a new push by Arnold for privatization of public resources:

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signaled a major push today to engage private companies in the construction and management of state and local infrastructure, adopting a strategy employed in Canada, Britain and elsewhere…

The Schwarzenegger administration is contemplating a plan, probably requiring state legislation, to create a California agency to oversee state and local public-private partnerships, aides said. Modeled after one in British Columbia, it would be staffed by professional financiers and other experts who could oversee the structuring of deals by both state and local governments.

As Brian explained in his excellent Pat Brown is Rolling Over In His Grave post last month, this push is part of a broader assault on the public ownership and operation of our basic infrastructure. The LA Times does not quote a single opponent of privatization, instead casting opponents as merely greedy special interests wanting to protect their fief:

opposition from labor unions and from legislators reluctant to give up too much control over big spending projects.

One of Arnold’s financial advisors, David Crane, is allowed to declare that this is about innovation and progress:

Whereas we’re a very innovative state in many ways, when it comes to infrastructure we are less innovative, and the governor intends to bring public-private partnerships into our portfolio.

Read on to see why this is a dangerous idea…

In Naomi Klein’s new book The Shock Doctrine, she explains how the last 30 years of neoliberal economic policy, aimed at the transfer of wealth away from working people and toward a small elite, was implemented largely through the taking advantage of a crisis, a crisis usually manufactured by those same neoliberals. As she explained it to Democracy Now!:

The shock doctrine, like all doctrines, is a philosophy of power. It’s a philosophy about how to achieve your political and economic goals. And this is a philosophy that holds that the best way, the best time, to push through radical free-market ideas is in the aftermath of a major shock. Now, that shock could be an economic meltdown. It could be a natural disaster.

She went on to explain that Milton Friedman played a key role in articulating this idea:

He had a vision of society, in which the only acceptable role for the state was to enforce contracts and to protect borders. Everything else should be completely left to the market, whether education, national parks, the post office; everything that could be performed at a profit should be. And he really saw, I guess, shopping — buying and selling — as the highest form of democracy, as the highest form of freedom.

That digression is significant because David Crane, Arnold’s privatization guru, is a self-described follower of Friedman:

Crane’s economic philosophy sounds distinctly libertarian. He advocates against government intervention in private business and touts his admiration for conservative economist Milton Friedman.

“Governments don’t create jobs, and if they are not careful they can kill jobs,” Crane told an audience of business leaders at a San Francisco
luncheon last summer.

The Capitol Weekly profile that quote is taken from (linked above) goes on to detail Crane’s right-wing economic views, which hold that public pensions are “special privileges” and that the minimum wage hurts jobs. The Capitol Weekly claims his “abrasive” personality has alienated him from many Sacramento lobbyists and interest groups, which along with his right-wing economic views cost him a spot as a CalSTRS trustee earlier this year.

It’s not that Crane and his ideas are right-wing that is the problem. No, the real issue is that public-private partnerships (PPP or P3) don’t actually work in practice. Arnold is taking his cues from British Columbia, whose right-wing government has aggressively pursued P3. They point to British Columbia’s P3 projects as if we’re supposed to ooh and aah. Instead these projects have been extremely contentious, cost FAR more than originally anticipated, and caused a massive corruption scandal when the RCMP (the Mounties) raided the BC Legislature and found evidence that companies bribed government officials to win the privatization of BC Rail. A Canadian public employees union sums up the flaws of P3:

•P3s are being aggressively pursued in BC in spite of a lack of evidence that they are a superior option.
•P3s are less cost-effective, timely and transparent than traditional government procurement.
•Partnerships BC, whose mandate is both to promote P3s and evaluate whether they are appropriate for use on specific projects, cannot adequately protect the public
interest.

Another Canadian union has collected an extensive list of P3 problems. They note that in Ontario, a P3 hospital cost $300 million more than if it would have been publicly built.

Britain is also cited as having successful P3 projects. But in fact, their P3 projects and privatization have led to disaster and even deadly tragedy, especially on Britain’s P3 and privatized railways. As Christian Wolmar explains in his 2005 book On The Wrong Line: How Ideology and Incompetence Wrecked Britain’s Railways:

Britain’s rail privatisation has been one of the greatest political failures of recent history. A well-functioning industry was torn apart to satisfy political dogma and privatised in a way that not only compromised safety and wrecked performance but also resulted in financial melt-down…A decade after privatisation the railways receive more taxpayers’ money – over £6bn per year – than ever before. Yet there are still more late trains than in the days of British Rail which, though accused by the government of being inefficient and expensive, provided a better service and more investment on a fifth of today’s subsidies.

California is no stranger to P3 projects. In the 1990s a private company built the 91 Express Lanes – toll lanes in the middle of the extremely congested 91 freeway between Anaheim and Corona. Significantly, the private builders did not believe they could turn a profit without a “non-compete agreement” preventing Caltrans from widening the 91, even though such widening was sorely needed.

As it turned out, the 91 Express Lanes failed to ease congestion and was rumored to be financially insolvent (a charge never proven one way or the other because the books remained private). In 2002 the Orange County Transportation Authority, sick of the ongoing congestion, bought out the 91 Express Lanes at a cost of $207 million, so as to remove the non-compete agreement.

In Stockton, a deeply controversial water privatization was rescinded earlier this year after opponents successfully sued in federal court. As the Sierra Club noted, the privatization actually would lead to a serious decline in water quality and maintenance:

In fact, the city did no environmental review at all, despite evidence for potentially severe environmental consequences. At a time when the Sacramento Delta water system is already polluted and highly fragile, OMI-Thames declared a “Run to Fail” operating mode, consciously deciding to neglect management problems until resulting in harmful infrastructure neglect. The company proposed severe budgets cuts that would have undoubtedly affected quality of services in several arenas, including maintenance of systems, disposal of waste, dealing with vermin, odor control, and sewage over flows…

In Atlanta, for instance, after privatizing the water systems, the quality of the drinking water degraded to such a point as to make it undrinkable. Suez, the largest private water corporation in the world, operated the water systems, and as a result, the rates increased, the water became brown and people were advised to boil the water before drinking.

What, then, are the lessons of P3 around the Anglo world?

  • Failure to actually save money – instead they actually COST taxpayers more than a publicly funded project
  • Failure to provide efficient, quality services – instead they put people at risk
  • Lack of public oversight
  • Corruption

California should know better especially with regard to the latter point. Public infrastructure is public for a damn good reason. As California knew all too well, when vital transportation infrastructure is in the hands of private companies, they WILL use it to screw lower- and middle-income people and small and medium-sized businesses. The Southern Pacific railroad was the primary example here in CA – and to protect their cash cow they turned the State Legislature into a wholly owned subsidiary. They made the current system of corporate contributions look positively clean.

Because of SP’s many faults, Californians in the 20th century insisted that the road network they were developing (a network that barely existed in 1900) be owned by the public. This was a universal sentiment across the state. Hell, even the reactionary LA Times led the fight for a publicly-owned port (which is why the Port of Los Angeles is at San Pedro and not Santa Monica as originally planned).

By paying for infrastructure out of tax dollars, you can provide the kind of network that a modern society needs to function without causing ruin to the poorest and most vulnerable members of our society and parts of our economy. Additionally, by providing for infrastructure on an as-needed basis instead of on a “what will make us money” basis, every part of California gets to benefit from the public transportation system, even if they are poor or sparsely populated.

Going down the privatization road is a path that will ensure some wealthy areas have great infrastructure, and everyone else has squat, because private companies will see no incentive to build rail to South LA or rebuild sewers in east Oakland.

But we’re going to go down that path not because we must, but because California politicians are not willing to properly fund public infrastructure. Taxes are never fun, but they are FAR more affordable to Californians and bring much better, effective services than privatized services.

Ultimately, it seems more and more clear that this is deliberate. Arnold is leading a California Shock Doctrine in which taxes are kept low, even at the cost of fire protection, in which higher ed is slowly but steadily privatized, closing off access to education, basic security, and opportunity to all but those who can afford it. He “solved” the previous budget crisis by gutting $6 billion in MVET revenue and borrowed to cover the rest, leaving the state vulnerable to a fiscal crisis that can then be used to sell off effective, affordable, productive public assets. Privatization and P3 is but the final blow.

SF: Harvey Milk Memorial March

(I’m at the memorial now. Pictues soon. – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

DSC03622I’ve got some more pictures with a bit higher resolution that I’ll post when I get home. This event has really been great, props to the Milk Club for getting a good roster of attendees.  The music has been inspirational, the speeches powerful, but it’s the memory of a leader who changed the city of San Francisco and the state of civil rights.

5PM today at Harvey Milk Plaza in San Francisco, there will be a memorial for Harvey Milk, who was assassinated 29 years ago today. Full details over the flip.

The Harvey Milk Club invites you to join us for the annual Harvey Milk Memorial March. This year, in addition to the candlelight march from Harvey Milk Plaza to the site of Milk’s former camera shop down the street, there will also be performances to celebrate his life. This occasion kicks off a year-long series of events leading up to the 30th anniversary of Milk’s assassination on November 27, 1978. The Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club was founded by Harvey Milk, and renamed in his honor.

WHEN: 5:00 p.m., Tuesday November 27th
WHERE: Harvey Milk Plaza (corner of Castro & Market)

FEATURING:
Brian Basinger and Krissy Keefer – MCs
Dance Brigade 
Shawna Virago
SF Gay Men’s Chorus
Keith Hennessy
Carole Ruth Silver
Sup. Tom Ammiano
Assemblyman Mark Leno
Holly Near 
Senator Carole Migden
Sup. Bevan Dufty
Melanie DeMore
Cecilia Chung, Transgender Law Center
John Newsome, And Castro For All
Don Romesburg, GLBT Historical Society

– Presented by the Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club –
Brian Basinger, President 
Krissy Keefer, Event Producer

Nunez schedules vote during GOP caucus meetings

Both the Assembly and Senate GOP caucuses will be meeting in San Diego on Dec. 5 to talk about how to block progress strategy for the coming year. Well, Speaker Fabian Nunez has a different plan for that date. Specifically, he’s scheduled a vote on the Democrats’ health care plan for that day:

When Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez postponed a floor session on health care until early December, he rescheduled the vote for the day the Assembly Republican caucus is slated to be in San Diego for its annual policy retreat.
***
Assembly GOP leader Mike Villines says he has spoken with Núñez, who told Villines he would “try to accommodate” but didn’t promise to push back session from Dec. 5, when both the Senate and Assembly GOP caucus will be in San Diego. (SacBee CapAlert Latest 11.27.07)

I wouldn’t expect the Assembly Republicans to miss the vote on account of the cancellation fees, but I suppose nobody is weeping at the Speaker’s office over those lost deposits at the posh, non-union, digs the Republicans are surely meeting at.  But at any rate, the vote on 12/5 is far from a certainty, as the Governator hasn’t given any plan (other than his 0-vote plan) his stamp of approval. But, it’s likely the last opportunity for any plan to get on the February ballot.

Optimism and Pessimism in the Writer’s Strike

Though there’s been a news blackout from the bargaining table, many in the entertainment community are cheered by Nikki Finke’s report that a deal is imminent in the 4 week-old writer’s strike.  Her source makes sense, saying that the agents have brokered this; they have a stake in both writer profits and studio profits, not to mention getting production back in gear again. 

However, in the wake of this impending deal we should not forget about the forgotten writer’s strike of 2006.  I’ve been saying from the beginning that the strategy of the WGA, to get as much as they can for current members instead of growing the membership, is fatally flawed, and will result in a constriction of revenue for writers as less and less spots on the TV schedule will require them.  Daniel Blau came forward last week with the inside story:

In the early summer of 2006, only one of the “Top Model” writers was involved in the union campaign. The rest of us were, at best, tangentially aware of its existence. Until, that is, the afternoon of June 21. That was the date of our first official meeting with WGA organizers. Over lunch at a Tex-Mex restaurant in Santa Monica, they spelled out the manifold benefits of guild representation: health insurance, pension contributions and credits for our work. The industry was ready for reality story editors to enter the WGA, they said. Les Moonves — head of CBS, which owned the new CW network — had been “put on notice.” There was no talk of losing our jobs. We believed the guild’s ambiguous promise, “you’ll come out of this better than you went in.”

Why only “Top Model?” one co-worker asked. Why not all reality shows? “‘Big Brother’ is ready to go out,” they told us. “So is ‘The Amazing Race.’ But you need to start the ball rolling.” We would be the vanguard. Our fellow reality scribes would take to the street inspired by our courage, they said. They bought us lunch […]

The next morning, July 20, in front of our production offices in West Los Angeles, I read our statement to about 100 supporters and the news crews, officially launching our strike. We hoisted our WGA strike signs and never entered those offices again. In the weeks to come, our supporters would dwindle, then disappear.

The last week of September, we all received letters notifying us that our jobs had been eliminated, the entire story department abolished. The guild had vanished from our cause, and the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, which represents the video editors, swooped in to unionize the show, freezing the WGA out of “Top Model” for good.

The lack of organizing for nonfiction and reality shows has given the studios a powerful fallback position which represents 25% of this season’s network schedule, and will only grow if writer benefits expand in a new contract.  This strike is noble, and from a public relations standpoint, the WGA has hit a home run.  The organizing strategy is simply flawed, and I’m not sanguine about the prospects for the future.

On Oct. 23 of this year, with talks stalled between the WGA and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, Variety published an article summed up by this headline: “WGA gives up on nonscripted effort.” Organizing reality TV writers was one of the contract demands that the WGA was willing to toss aside to reach a deal before the Nov. 1 strike deadline, the article reported.

The next day, an e-mail with the expected rebuttal arrived from the WGA president. The guild’s reality TV efforts were as strong as ever, he said. But as far as I could tell, the only error in the Variety article was that it hadn’t been published a year earlier.

So let’s hope there’s a resolution in the offing, but one that recognizes that any show with a script – and every show I’ve ever worked on has one, be it fiction, nonfiction, reality, game show, whatever – deserves benefits for whoever created it.

Think you got a deal on that out-of-state Cyber Monday Purchase? Think Again

By law, we are all required to declare items for which we did not pay sales tax because it was shipped across state borders. In practice, few actually do.  However, the members of the Board of Equalization  are signaling that they intend to crack down on cross-state purchases.

As Internet commerce continues to flourish, California tax officials have a piece of advice: Save your online sales receipts.

You’ll need them to report your “use tax,” the money that the state collects on taxable purchases made from out-of-state sellers.

The California State Board of Equalization wants to tighten up use-tax collections, which totaled just $5.5 million. Officials estimate that another $1 billion went uncollected.

I’ll admit I’m not as good as I should be on keeping track of my online purchases. I’ve always paid something for my use tax, but it’s not always easy to tally all those purchases up. I suppose I should be fortunate for gmail’s searching capabilities, but like last year I’ll probably just end up estimating and paying 40-50 in use taxes.

The thing about this is that we have a fake moratorium on “taxing the internet.” So, what we end up doing is having honest people pay a few bucks each year, and creating a complicated system. And for the vast majority of people who don’t pay a use tax to their home state, laws aside, end up getting a subsidy to buy at these large companies, like Amazon.  Why, prey tell, do the Amazons of the world need this tax benefit. It’s certainly not an overwhelmingly difficult task to create a database with sales tax rates to charge the sales tax just like any purchase.

I honestly never thought I would be arguing to end the internet sales tax morotorium, but here I am. I’m sure it’s not a particularly popular sentiment in my neck of the woods, but it’s, IMHO, the best solution. These complicated systems of trying to get people to pay use tax, and the subsidies to large corporations over small businesses just don’t make sense from a policy perspective.

Prop. 83: Exhibit A for the failure of direct democracy

So now we learn that the implementation for Jessica’s Law is completely impossible and will likely never happen.

Law enforcement leaders who pushed for a ballot initiative requiring sex offenders in California to be tracked by satellite for life are now saying that the sweeping surveillance program voters endorsed is not feasible and is unlikely to be fully implemented for years, if ever […]

The difficulties include the impracticality of tracking sex offenders who no longer must report to parole or probation officers, the lack of any penalty for those who refuse to cooperate with monitoring and the question of whether such widespread tracking is effective in protecting the public.

The biggest issue, however, is that the law does not specify which agency or government should monitor felony sex offenders — and shoulder hundreds of millions of dollars a year in related costs.

That said, these same law enforcement officials claim that the law is worthwhile, mainly because they don’t want the egg on their face for the next 20 years, and they can quietly put the whole thing to rest once everyone forgets about it.

In truth, the unworkability of this law, which trades liberty for security and provides neither, making it far more difficult to track sex offenders while beginning a slippery slope toward lifetime surveillance of anyone who commits a crime we collectively decide not to like in the future, was obvious from the beginning.  It was written poorly, and maybe some of that can be fixed.  But the restrictions on housing have caused ex-cons to live under bridges, which seems to me to set the table for them to commit more crimes so they can get some shelter.  The lack of reporting to parole officers, too, just drops these offenders off the map – when the point is supposed to be to FURTHER track them so they don’t molest again.

This is also about the dangers of ballot-box budgeting.  With the vague nature of the funding in the law, everyone’s trying to force payment on somebody else.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and state law enforcement leaders, who were allied in backing the measure, are engaged in a standoff over who should bear its financial burden.

“I don’t know of any agency that has the resources to track and monitor . . . in real time,” said Vacaville Police Chief Richard Word, president of the California Police Chiefs Assn. “You’ll need an air traffic controller to track these folks.” […]

Corrections analysts estimate that it costs the state up to $33 a day in equipment and labor to monitor a sex offender by GPS, and it would take nearly $90 million a year just to track the 9,000 now on parole if all were subject to Proposition 83.

Once offenders are discharged from parole, the state will no longer monitor them electronically, Corrections Secretary James Tilton said last month, because his department lacks jurisdiction at that point. The agency also is overextended, with an overcrowded prison system under review by the federal courts.

Nick Warner, a lobbyist and spokesman for the California State Sheriffs’ Assn., said the state’s refusal to monitor sex offenders after parole “passes the buck to local law enforcement, who are not equipped to handle them.” He said the state was “setting up communities to fail” and predicted that the matter would end up in court.

Schwarzenegger, who faces a $10-billion state budget gap next year, said through spokesman Bill Maile that he would wait for the sex offender board to address the question of who should fund lifetime GPS tracking before taking a position on the issue.

The law is clearly unworkable and unsuccessful.  Yet it got 70% of the vote because these flaws were hidden from public scrutiny.  And as a result, everyone is afraid to say we should scrap it, due to political factors.

Welcome to your direct democracy in action!

See also:
Jessica’s Law Tag
What California should learn from the Genarlow Wilson case (but almost certainly won’t)
 

Stakes are too high, caucus today!

The stakes are high in the next election and we can’t sit idly. Join the National Presidential Caucus (NPC) effort to confront the heavily compressed primary schedule we’re facing today. NPC is hosting a National Caucus Day on Dec. 7th.

www.nationalcaucus.com

To encourage voters to form opinions before the early primary states and the media determine who the leading candidates will be, NPC is asking people like you to host caucuses in their communities.

To make this work, we need as many caucuses as we can get.

Here’s how it works:
-Post a caucus on the website
-Meet offline on December 7th to talk about issues and candidates that matter TO YOU
-Post your results on our website with all the other caucuses from across the nation

Hosting a caucus is as simple as getting some friends, family, or whomever you want together. It’s really easy to do!

What if every state’s caucus and primary were weighted equally? I don’t know about you, but I’d call that democracy. 

Register to host a caucus today . Together, let’s try to reinvigorate democracy as we know it.

Big Shitpile Update

With home prices sinking, and expected to drop another 20% after already falling 12% in just a few months, I think this deal between Arnold Schwarzenegger and mortgage lenders smacks of desperation more than anything.

Four major subprime lenders promised to give a break to California homeowners who cannot afford escalating mortgage payments, under a plan announced Tuesday by the lenders and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Countrywide, GMAC, Litton and HomeEq – which collectively service more than one quarter of subprime loans to people with poor credit – agreed to maintain the initial, lower interest rate for some subprime borrowers whose rates are scheduled to jump significantly higher. To qualify, borrowers must occupy their homes, have made their payments on time and prove they cannot afford payments with the higher interest rate.

These lenders obviously think that they would rather get less money than no money at all.  Of course, we’ve substituted “subprime mortgages” for “mortgages that people can’t afford.”  Actually the problem is as widespread in million-dollar-plus mortgages, which aren’t subprime at all.  The lending companies basically offered lots and lots of money to anyone who was able to sign their name, and are now feeling the sting of consequences.  Will they offer the same relief to homeowners with million-dollar homes?  That seems unlikely.

So while I applaud any effort to keep people in their homes, somehow this deal makes me more worried about the long-term consequences of this runaway mortgage crisis than ever.

UPDATING THE UPDATE: We’re apparently all indirectly paying to bail out Countrywide:

Countrywide Financial Corp. fell more than 10 percent in New York Stock Exchange trading after U.S. Senator Charles Schumer urged the regulator of the Federal Home Loan Bank system to probe cash advances to the largest U.S. mortgage lender.

Schumer said he was alarmed by the volume of advances the system’s Atlanta bank has made to Countrywide considering “the rapid deterioration” in the credit quality of some of the Calabasas, California-based company’s mortgages. Schumer expressed his concerns in a letter sent today to Federal Housing Finance Board Chairman Ronald Rosenfeld.

The Atlanta bank has made $51.1 billion in advances to Countrywide as of Sept. 30, representing 37 percent of the bank’s total outstanding advances, Schumer wrote, citing U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filings.

No respectable company would assume 37% of Countrywide’s debt.  The Federal Loan Home Bank system, however, isn’t a company at all.  It’s as close as you can get to a federal bailout.

The Federal Home Loan Bank is what the British call a quango – a quasi-non-governmental organization. Although it isn’t legally backed by taxpayer money, it’s widely perceived as having an implicit federal guarantee. And at first glance, it appears that taxpayers’ trust is being used to bail out one of the biggest bad actors in the subprime story.

More here.

PETTIS LAUNCHES BID FOR ASSEMBLY WITH DISTRICT-WIDE TOUR AND WEB LAUNCH

Re full disclosure, BlueBeaumontBoyz is a supporter of Greg Pettis’ amazing campaign for the CA-80 Assembly District seat.

I received this Press Release from the Greg Pettis for CA-80 Assembly District, a seat occupied by the termed-out potty mouth Repugnant Bonnie Garcia.

For Immediate Release  November 27, 2007
For More Information  Richard Oberhaus 760-413-7938

PETTIS LAUNCHES BID FOR ASSEMBLY WITH DISTRICT-WIDE TOUR AND WEB LAUNCH

El Centro – Veteran Cathedral City Councilmember Greg Pettis officially kicked off his campaign for the open 80th Assembly District seat today, surrounded by supporters in front of the El Centro Regional Medical Center and Desert Regional Medical Center in Palm Springs.

Pettis pledged to use his two decades of experience, building relationships and working on issues that benefit families to create a healthier California.

“I’m launching my campaign in front of a hospital because it is the symbol of hope for a better tomorrow. It’s time to extend that hope to the 6.5 million uninsured Californians as well as individuals and businesses who are struggling each week with the high cost of health care,” Pettis said.

Pettis’s Press Release continues:

“A healthy California doesn’t stop with just the health care issue,” Pettis added, “but also a healthy economy and environment and schools that give our children the opportunity to live their dreams close to their roots.”

Pettis’ campaign launch coincided with the launch of his campaign website at www.gregpettis.com, where viewers can view videos and read about the Pettis Plan for Progress.

“Over the last 10 years, I’ve been working with Greg in Sacramento to improve Imperial County’s transportation system. As a member of the Assembly, I know he’ll give the Valley the priority we deserve,” said El Centro City Councilmember Sedalia Sanders.

“From his 13-years on the City Council in Cathedral City to his work on the Salton Sea Authority to building new parks for our kids, he brings a reservoir of practical experience making government work for our corner of the state, said Palm Springs City Councilmember Ginny Foat.

Pettis is considered the Democratic frontrunner in the race to replace Assemblywoman Bonnie Garcia, who will be stepping down due to term limits. He has raised more money hand has more donors than all the other Democratic candidates combined based on the last filings with California’s Secretary of State.

He has also won the endorsements of the San Bernardino/Riverside County Central Labor Council, Building Trades of California, Democracy for America, Victory Fund, Desert Stonewall Democrats, Cathedral City Professional Firefighters; State Controller John Chiang and former State Controller Steve Westly; State Board of Equalization Member Judy Chu; State Senators Carol Migden, Christine Kehoe, Sheila Kuehl and Darrell Steinberg; and Assembly members John Laird Lloyd Levine and Mark Leno.

Democrats now outnumber Republicans by 9%, i.e., 13,000 voters in the 80th AD.  This district, with its open-seated status, will be in the top-two most contested seats in the State in the General Election.

Greg Pettis Officially Launches Bid for Bonnie Garcia’s 80th Assembly District Seat

Re full disclosure, BlueBeaumontBoyz is a supporter of Greg Pettis for CA 80th Assembly District and blogs under the nom de plume BluePalmSpringsBoyz in mydesert.com.

Tonight, at the Campaign Kick-Off tonight, the Greg Pettis campaign for the CA-80 Assembly District previewed its new website at www.gregpettis.com which will be officially launched tomorrow, November 27, 2007.  Then, Cathedral City Council veteran and Mayor Pro-Tem Greg Pettis officially launches his bid for the 80th State Assembly District seat.  The CA-80th AD seat is currently held by Repugnant Bonnie Garcia.

The Campaign Kick-Off Event tonight at the Cathedral City Public Library was extremely well-attended and included presentations by Pettis, Richard Oberhaus, Campaign Director, and Pettis’ campaign consultant.  Those in attendance included elected officials, political activists, media representatives, and campaign volunteers.

Elected officials in attendance, included Ginny “Ma” Foat, Palm Springs City Councilwoman, Paul Marchand, Cathedral City City Councilman, Pat Hammer, Cathedral City City Clerk, and Karl Baker, Desert Hot Springs City Councilman-elect.  Political activists in attendance included George Zander, President of the Desert Stonewall Democrats, Bob Silverman, Treasurer of the Desert Stonewall Democrats, and Chuck McDaniel, President of the Desert Hot Springs Democratic Club.  Other political activists included Bob Mahlowitz, Chair of the Palm Springs Office of Neighborhoods, Robert Marchand, Chair of the Cathedral City Public Arts Commission, Sonia Marchand, Jono Hildner of the victorious No on C pro-environment campaign, Roger Tansy, Bill Cain-Gonzalez, and many others.

Media representatives included a reporter from The Desert Sun, The Observer and BluePalmSpringsBoyz, bloggers from mydesert.com, and BlueBeaumontBoyz.

Pettis discussed the strengths of his campaign, including strong financial backing, sizable electoral base, significant relevant experience, and support in the Hispanic and Latino communities.  Pettis reported that his campaign has already raised more monies than that raised by all of his Democratic opponents combined!  Pettis also reported significant electoral support in each of his election campaigns in Cathedral City, one of the largest cities in the 80th AD.  Amazingly, Pettis garnered even more support in the Hispanic and Latino communities during his last re-election campaign than he did in the Anglo community!  Pettis reviewed his primary campaign themes including:

  • Health Care: Affordable and Accessible Medical Coverage for All Californians
  • Economy: Good-paying Jobs and Opportunities for All Californians
  • Clean and Safe Environment

Regarding health care, Pettis said:

“It’s time to extend the hope of affordable and accessible health care to the 6.5 million uninsured Californians as well as to individuals and businesses who are struggling each week with the high cost of health care.  California also requires a vibrant economy, clean and safe environment, and superior schools that give all of our children the opportunity to live their dreams.”

More below the flip…

Pettis has already won the endorsements of the San Bernardino/Riverside County Central Labor Council, Building Trades of California, Democracy for America, Victory Fund, Desert Stonewall Democrats, Cathedral City Professional Firefighters; State Controller John Chiang, former State Controller Steve Westly; State Board of Equalization Member Judy Chu; State Senator Carol Migden, State Senator Christine Kehoe, State Senator Sheila Kuehl, State Senator Darrell Steinberg; and Assemblyman John Laird, Assemblyman Lloyd Levine and Assemblyman Mark Leno, Palm Springs City Councilwoman Ginny “Ma” Foat, Cathedral City Councilman Paul Marchand, Desert Hot Springs City Councilman-elect Karl Baker amongst many others.

In a related event, a Media Advisory from the Greg Pettis Campaign indicated that the official announcement of Pettis’ candidacy for the CA 80th AD will occur in two stages, one in El Centro tomorrow morning and the second in Palm Springs in the afternoon.

DATE:  November 27th, 2007
TIME:  10:00 AM
LOCATION:  1318 South Imperial Ave., El Centro (across from El Centro Regional Medical Center)

TIME:  2:30 PM
LOCATION:  E Tachevah Dr & N Avenida Olivos, Palm Springs (Outside of Desert Regional Medical Center)

Greg Pettis will officially launch his bid for the open 80th Assembly District seat. Pettis is a Democrat who has served 13 years on the City Council in Cathedral City. He will be joined by 80th District leaders and supporters.

The 80th Assembly District encompasses eastern Riverside County and all of Imperial County including the communities of Blythe, Brawley, Calexico, Calipatria, Cathedral City, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, El Centro, Holtville, Imperial, Indio, La Quinta, Palm Springs, and Westmorland.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:  Campaign Manager Richard Oberhaus

760-413-7938

Kakie Urch, reporter from The Desert Sun, indicated today that

Cathedral City Council veteran Greg Pettis on Tuesday will officially launch his bid for the 80th State Assembly District seat currently held by Bonnie Garcia.

Pettis and his campaign plan two events, one in El Centro and one in Palm Springs, to kick off the campaign for the Democrat who has been on Cathedral City Council for 13 years.

In Palm Springs, Pettis will make his announcement at 2:30 p.m. outside to Desert Regional Medical Center at E. Tachevah Drive and North Avenida Olivos.

In El Centro, the announcement will be across from El Centro Regional Medical Center at 1318 South Imperial Ave.

Garcia, a Republican cannot run for re-election to the Assembly seat because of statewide term limits.