From the Chronicle:
Suspended city lawmaker Ed Jew is expected to resign today in a deal to bring an end to a lawsuit and proceedings before the Ethics Commission to oust him from office for allegedly lying about where he lived to become a candidate for the Board of Supervisors in 2006, sources familiar with the arrangement say.
More to come I’m sure.
First, I want to make sure that everybody is clear that these endorsements come from the Calitics Editorial Board, not the community as a whole. The Calitics Editorial Board consists of myself(Brian Leubitz), – jsw, Julia Rosen, David Dayen, Lucas O'Connor & Robert in Monterey. We would have liked to endorse as a community, but there are tremendous problems with ballot stuffing that this software just can't deal with. That being said, all are welcome to agree, disagree, flame us, whatever, in the comments. That being said, I'll give you our endorsements here, and then briefly discuss them over the flip. An endorsement required 4 of the 6 votes. Furthermore, this post should not be considered my opinion or anybody else specifically. Rather, it's the voice of the Editorial Board as a whole. So, without further adieu, here they are:
President: Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL)
Proposition 91, Transportation Funding: No
Proposition 92, Community Colleges: Yes
Proposition 93, Term Limits Reform ( ): Neutral/No Recommendation
Propositions 94-97, Native American Gambling Referenda: No
Flip it for more.
President: Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL)
It was one of those fantastic things this year, we had a multitude of great candidates. You had a real progressive lion in the form of Chris Dodd who stood proudly for the values of the Constitution. You had Joe Biden who presents a coherent place for America in the new global environment. Kucinich, Richardson, Clinton, Gravel also brought much to the table. And, of course Sen. John Edwards was a very attractive candidate. For many of us, it seemed a tough course to reject Sen. Edwards; his message is so powerful. He is willing to stand tall against corporations and the anti-populists of the country.
However, when it comes to today, and given the current standing of the race, Sen. Obama is our choice. His vision of hope has brought countless young and otherwise new voters to the world of politics. In California, where 15-20% of the state makes decisions for the entire state, that is a particularly strong argument. And while some would say that he lacks experience, we ask them to look back over his political career in Illinois and DC. It is genuinely trying to find someone that really knows the man and will speak ill of him. He is an effective messenger for so many progressive causes.
Some also say that he hasn't spoken of specifics enough; we suggest they look to BarackObama.com and review his positions. They are specific enough for us to oppose him on several issues: “clean” coal, marriage equality, and healthcare, just to name a few. He's not perfect, not offering Medicare for all, not able to leap tall buildings in a single bound, either. But, he is a tremendous pioneer and agent of change that can get elected this year. And that's a great step forward.
Prop. 91, Transportation Funding: No
This issue was dealth with in Prop 1A in Nov. 2006, but was not removed from the ballot. It has no supporters, and there is no reason to vote for it.
Prop. 92, Community Colleges: Yes
This is a really tough issue for many of us. Ballot box budgeting is a bad concept in general, and it leaves us in these positions of always trying to dig ourselves out of a cement covered hole. It makes budgeting more challenging every year. Yet, there are reasons to vote yes sometimes.
Rules such as the 2/3 requirement to pass a new tax mean that the legislature rarely takes action on big matters and we can't move forward on new programs. That's not a knock of any specific legislator, it's a flaw in our system. And, as I've said before, our entire system needs reform. But, today, we must deal with the world as it is. And in this world, our community colleges are flailing, struggling from consistent underfunding. How are we to be a state of innovation if we have no innovators? How can we succeed if the labor pool can't progress beyond high school due to the prohibitive costs associated with college?
We are aware of the opposing talking points that the tuition fees are only a small part of costs associated with college, but the facts show that when fees jumped from $11 to $26/hour, 300,000 students left California's community colleges. Fees matter. So, we support Prop. 92.
Prop 93, Term limits reform: Neutral/No Position (Brian's Disclosure)
We split on this measure, so we remain neutral.
Props 94-97, Native American Gambling Referenda: No
A No vote on these referenda would overturn the compacts. These compacts do not make any guarantees of revenues to the state, although they toss around huge numbers in their ads, $9 B is the normal number. If non-gaming tribes do not receive enough revenue, as dictated by the compacts, the state has to dip into its portion of revenues.
Furthermore, there is the issue of the unions. The tribes are not subject to NLRB standards, and these compacts make no assurances that the workers of this casino will have fair opportunity to organize.
A lot of money will be spent on this, and a lot of communities will be ripped apart. Even if one were to disregard Marc Cooper's story about the troubling incidents in the Pechanga tribe, the issues remain in favor of a No vote.
Really small. He wants to suspend Prop 98, and cut funding for pretty much every state program and department. You can find his press release about this stinker of a budget at his website. You can find the video of both pressers here. For a more reasonable summary of what this budget does, here’s Speaker Nunez:
“The budget proposed today is what a cuts only budget looks like and the proponents of a cuts only approach need to own it,” Speaker Núñez said. “This budget isn’t going for an up or down vote today. Clearly if passed as written, it would cause a lot of permanent harm.”
Specifically, the Governor’s proposal:
ü Drastically cut funds for public schools and universities, healthcare, services for the poor, and law enforcement;
ü Proposes across the board permanent cuts to services;
ü Targets cuts on children, the poor, the elderly, and the middle class;
ü Results in the closure of 48 state parks and beaches.
ü Proposes drastic cuts to special education, class size reduction, and career technical education;
ü Requires giving back hundreds of millions of dollars to the federal government that we can’t match, particularly for healthcare; and
ü Results in tens of thousands of inmates being released early from prison.
Even with the Governor’s permanent cuts, the Administration still estimates that our out-year operating deficit will be close to $3 billion.
“It’s time for creative thinking and courageous action,” Speaker Núñez said. “This budget isn’t particularly creative or courageous. But if we have the will, and we stand up for California values then the ultimate budget solutions we come up with can be.”
Both the Governator’s and the Democrats’ Pressers will be on the Cal Channel. Arnold just finished his, the Dems’ is at 3:30 this afternoon.
Howdy all,
Just want to let you know about our new radio ad campaign against the fake healthcare reform bill. It will be running statewide throughout January, as the Senate considers whether to weigh in on the side of patients or the big insurance corps.
It’s based on the very interesting parallels between the national debate and the California debate for healthcare. Like the proposals of some politicians nationally, both Republican and Democratic, the Schwarzenegger-Nunez deal has at its heart an individual mandate.
The ad quotes Sen. Obama noting “some folks who said that it’s not possible to provide universal health care coverage unless there’s a mandate._ Their essential argument is the only way to get everybody covered is if the government forces you to buy health insurance. If you don’t buy it, then you’ll be penalized in some way….The reason people don’t have health insurance is because they can’t afford it.”
Under the Schwarzenegger-Nunez deal, ABX1.1, insurers would gain millions of new customers and hundreds of millions in additional profits while failing in its promise of solving the state’s healthcare crisis, says CNA/NNOC. Supporters of the bill include seven of the state’s biggest insurers: Kaiser Permanente, Health Net, PacifiCare, Blue Shield, Cigna, and Molina Health Care–for very obvious reasons.
“Individual mandates are not a humane or sound health care policy. Californians desperately want real healthcare reform, but AB x11 is not it,” said Zenei Cortez, RN, a member of the CNA/NNOC Council of Presidents. “Sadly, AB x11 is a prescription for more financial risk, denial of care, and heartache for California patients. As patient advocates, RNs will continue working to defeat ABX1.1.”
The ad also calls on Californians to join with nurses in working for genuine healthcare reform, such as SB 840, a bill that will be heard in the California Assembly later this year. The ad may also be heard at www.guaranteedhealthcare.org
The full text of the ad reads:
(voice over) The nurses of California agree with Senator Barack Obama: the government shouldn’t punish people who can’t afford health insurance. _
(Sen. Obama) I know that there have been some folks who said that it’s not possible to provide universal health care coverage unless there’s a mandate._ Their essential argument is the only way to get everybody covered is if the government forces you to buy health insurance. If you don’t buy it, then you_ll be penalized in some way. _And the reason people don’t have health insurance is because they can’t afford it.
(voice over) So why are Gov. Schwarzenegger and Assembly Speaker Nunez proposing a law, AB x 11, to force you to buy insurance which would pad the pockets of the insurance companies? AB x 11 is not the path to the universal healthcare we so desperately need. Don’t let the politicians force you to buy insurance you can’t afford and which won’t help you when you’re sick.
Join California nurses in calling for real healthcare reform.
Go to guaranteedhealthcare.org.
Paid for by the California Nurses Association which is responsible for the content of this ad. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.
( – promoted by David Dayen)
Man, where did I come up with a title like that?
John Doolittle will address the media at 10:30 am about his intentions. Regardless of what he decides to do, I don’t think it’s a controversial statement that the best candidate we have running as a challenger for Congress in California this year is Charlie Brown. He has the candidate experience, the most assured stance on the issues, and the money, but most important he has the right perspective, by not waiting until 2009 to lead but doing it every single day. The donation of a percentage of his fundraising to aid the care of our veterans is one of the more inspired displays of leadership I’ve seen out of someone running for political office. So let’s not forget that, no matter what happens.
UPDATE by Brian: The Bee is now reporting that the presser is to announce his retirement at the end of his current term.
UPDATE II: With Doolittle out, the rumors have him selected former Rep. Rico Oller to be the GOP nominee. Given Doolittle’s need to retire to avoid being slaughtered in the district, why should we expect his endorsement to carry any weight? We know that this will be a wild primary on the Republican side. Eric Egland and 2006 Doolittle Mike Holmes are already in, and State Assemblyman Ted Gaines and possibly even former Rep. Doug Ose could follow. This will be a bloody primary and I don’t think anyone will be anointed. Meanwhile, Charlie Brown keeps raising money and meeting the voters. You can give a donation today at our ActBlue page if you like.
UPDATE III: Charlie Brown’s statement:
Roseville: In response to today’s announcement that Representative John Doolittle will not seek re-election, CD4 Congressional Candidate and Retired Air Force Lt. Col. Charlie Brown issued the following statement:
“I believe John did the right thing today for his family, for the 4th District and for America . Now is the time to unite as Americans, heal our wounds and move forward to solve the many difficult challenges we face both here in CD4, and across the country we love.”
(Yesterday we saw Tim Prince’s email, here are some words about another Democratic challenger to the very corrupt Jerry Lewis. – promoted by Brian Leubitz)
(Note: This was written last night by my husband, and will be cross-posted on DailyKos under his username after I post this.)
I’m sure that around here, Jerry Lewis of CA-41 fame needs no introduction. Well, a few Democrats have entered the race.
Tonight (writing this as of January 9th), I just met one of them, and Dr. Rita Ramirez-Dean strikes me very much as the real deal. Passionate, outspoken, dedicated and strong-willed, with a life story that has “true Democrat” stamped on it, Dr. Ramirez-Dean could very well help us replace a, well, Jerry Lewis with a real progressive. Crooks and Liars has a great if brief post about her.
During a powerful speech to our Democratic club, I learned tonight that she wants to end the war in Iraq, bring us universal health care, ensure strong and well-funded education from grade school to higher learning (and end No Child Left Standing), and guarantee fundamental rights for all Americans, including protecting all religions (and the right to have none) and marriage for all citizens, regardless of orientation, as a fundamental human right.
I’m not trying to be impartial or measured here; I thought she was amazing. She did ramble slightly as the night got older, but after two hours of talking to nine partisan club members sitting around a restaurant table, that’s more than excusable. Her story of being told in the 40s and 50s that she was a “dirty Mexican” and “couldn’t get anywhere,” and then deciding she would get somewhere, is extraordinary. In an era where being non-white or a woman was a strike against you, Dr. Ramirez-Dean got a scholarship and put herself through college. Now, she wants to help fix our broken system to ensure that others get the same chances she did, chances she got thanks to education programs of that time.
She doesn’t need a lot of money, though obviously donations would help (she’s asking for “ten dollars and a book of stamps” from each donor, though AFAIK Act Blue doesn’t have a “donate stamps” option :-). Any progressives living in the area should check out her site, and if convinced to support her, should contact her campaign to help in whatever ways they can. Her campaign can use all the traditional forms of help — phone banking, precinct walking, the works.
—
(/) Roland X
Hope is a phoenix
This year the 40th Assembly District is one of the many open seats produced by the six year term limit. This seat is now held by Assemblymember Lloyd Levine, representing part of the middle of the San Fernando Valley in and around Van Nuys. There are at least four candidates running in the Democratic primary in June. This district has become more strongly Democratic over the years and so the winner will almost certainly become an Assemblymember.
If you want to know more about the candidates and decide who should be the next member of the Assembly then you should come to the Democratic club meetings where they will present themselves and answer questions. The first one is at the Democrats for Change meeting tonight 1/10. The Democrats for Change is the club that was for change before it was popular to be for change. (Actually it was a club formed in the 1990s after the first Clinton campaign though it is not especially Clintonite now.) We meet (as do many other SFV based Democratic groups) at the auditorium in the Van Nuys State Building. Directions and more details in the next box…
The State Building is at the corner of Van Nuys Blvd and Calvert St just north of the Orange Line crossing south of Victory Bl. 7:00PM is the start of the meeting Thursday 1/10. This meeting will also have a brief presentation on the 2/5 ballot measures by Zack Webber (your diarist). We should have a fun meeting and get to know our candidates better. Come on out, all are welcome! You don’t have to be a member, but if you want to join us talk to me because I am the club treasurer.
The big debate with a moderator will be next month at the meeting of the Sherman Oaks Democratic Club. SODC is the longest running Democratic club in the Valley, active over fifty years. We are honored to have LACDP Chairman Eric Bauman as our moderator. There will be written questions from the audience as well as the chance for the candidates to question each other. This one should be great! It will also be at 6150 Van Nuys Blvd, the State Building 7:00PM 2/13/2008.
You can get a much better sense of what the candidates are about by meeting them in person. This will be a competitive primary so you could help elect an Assemblymember if you like someone and want to support them. See you at the State Building!
Received an email from Sen. Barbara Boxer and her staff in Cathedral City. Given the strength of the GLBT community in the Coachella Valley, Palm Springs, Cathedral City, Indio, and elsewhere in the West and East Valleys, I thought that I would share it here:
Dear Friend:
I am pleased to let you know that I am an original cosponsor of the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act of 2007. This legislation would allow Federal employees who have domestic partners to be entitled to the same employment benefits that are available to married federal employees and their spouses. Likewise, Federal employees and their domestic partners would also be subject to the same employment-related obligations that are currently imposed on married employees and their spouses.
Under provisions of this legislation, Federal employees and their domestic partners would be entitled to employee health benefits; retirement and disability plans; family, medical, and emergency leave; group life and long-term care insurance; compensation for work injuries; death, disability, and similar benefits; and relocation, travel, and related expenses. Any natural or adopted child of the domestic partner will be treated as a stepchild of the employee. Employees and their domestic partners would also become subject to anti-nepotism rules and financial disclosure requirements.
This legislation is an important step in providing full benefits to members of domestic partnerships. You can count on me to work to pass this legislation and for similar efforts in the future.
Sincerely,
Barbara Boxer
United States Senator
If you look to our new California Newsladder in the upper right corner, you’ll see a headline “9th Circuit Upholds SF Universal Health Care Plan.” That decisions was announced only a few hours ago, and I still haven’t had time to take a look at the whole opinion, but you can see the order here(PDF). From the Chronicle:
The city of San Francisco won approval from a federal appeals court today to begin providing health coverage to all uninsured adult residents under a new ordinance and require employers to share the cost. A three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted the city’s request to suspend a federal judge’s Dec. 26 ruling striking down a key funding provision of the ordinance. That provision requires large and medium-size companies to offer insurance to their workers or pay a fee to the city.
The appeals court said the city was likely to prove that U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White was wrong when he ruled that local governments lack the power to force employers to contribute to a health care program. Today’s decision allows the city to enforce the entire ordinance while it appeals White’s decision.
Judge Fletcher, who wrote the order granting a stay of Judge White’s ruling, agreed with SF’s argument about the plan. Flip it.
Put simply, restaurants or any other business are not required to have any specific plan, or any plan at all. They are merely exempted from a fee if they do have a health care plan. While I think ERISA shouldn’t be applied at all in these cases, as ERISA was originally intended to benefit employees, not corporations, this ruling is consistent even with the broad counterintuitive reading that the Republican dominated judiciary is using these days:
White ruled that the provision violated a 1974 federal law that prohibits state and local governments from regulating employee benefit plans. But in today’s ruling, the appeals court said San Francisco has not required any employer to adopt a health plan or provide specific benefits, as long as the company complies with the ordinance by paying a fee.
To comply, “employers need not have any (health) plan at all; and if they do have such a plan, they need not make any changes in it,” Judge William Fletcher said in the 3-0 ruling.
Of course, the Supreme Court could eventually have something else to say about this, but in the meantime, the program goes forward, and people will enroll. Of course, this will affect the state health care plan as well, as the ruling’s logic basically reads right onto the state plan passed by the Assembly.
One little point, I think this ruling doesn’t save SB 840, single payer. If we did single payer, we would be saying to employers, cancel your current health care plans and join ours. So, I dunno on that. I’ll read the decision.
The Obama rally in San Francisco was your typical presidential rally. There were a bunch of people announcing they were endorsing him, including Reps. George Miller and Barbara Lee (who actually had already announced) and Supes Peskin, Daly, Dufty, and Maxwell. I imagine others will come on board the Obama train soon from what I hear.
Barbara Lee is always inspiring, but I’m always pleasantly surprised when I see George Miller in person. I don’t know if it’s just that he’s not all that telegenic or something, but he’s just one of those people who is better in person. Others attending included Asm. Wilma Chan, SF DA Kamala Harris and Steve Westly. You can check out more photos of the event at my Flickr set .