Single-payer healthcare reform has a new bill number and a new sponsor.  With my former State Senator Sheila Kuehl termed out, Mark Leno has stepped up to carry SB810, which in the past was known as SB840.  The bill would, in the words of the press release, “guarantee comprehensive health care benefits to every California resident and streamline claims and reimbursements, which will save billions of dollars in health care administrative costs.”  Here’s Sen. Leno:

“As a nation, we spend twice as much per person on health care as other wealthy countries, with the hope that our families will be protected from illnesses, yet most insured Americans still worry about how they will afford critical care if they become sick,” said Senator Leno. “In California, 7 million people do not have health insurance. Wasteful health care spending is crushing our economy and forcing families to forego basic medical care. With the money we spend today on health care, California can have a modern, universal health care system that provides high quality care for everyone,” he said.

A version of this bill has basically already passed the California Legislature, only to be vetoed by the Governor.  So it shouldn’t be a surprise that 43 lawmakers, including both leaders in the Assembly and Senate, have already signed on as co-sponsors.

Given the conservative veto and the 2/3 rule for revenue, SB810 lacks a funding source, so even if it were signed at some point – and realistically, Governor Schwarzenegger won’t be the one to sign it – supporters wold have to go to the ballot to raise the necessary revenue to fund the bill.  

There is no question that our health care delivery system is grossly inefficient, and insurance company profit and overhead is a pool of money that does little to provide quality care.  As a nation we spend an extreme amount on health care – $2.4 trillion dollars in 2008, closing in on 20% of GDP – without a proportional increase in health care outcomes over the rest of the industrialized world.  In fact, we pay more for care while ranking below dozens of nations in quality.  Single-payer care, while varied in different nations across the world, has generally been proven to offer the best quality at the most reduced cost.

But of course, that is on a national level.  And even though with 38 million people we have as many citizens as several other nations which have implemented single-payer, universal health care, what we lack is a printing press to coin our own money.  Given the constraints of a balanced budget, given the far more onerous constraints of the conservative veto, and given that states have little control over the boom and bust cycles of the national economy, universal health plans have largely come ashore and beached when they are done at the state level.  There are certainly reforms that can take place here, but we need the structural reform to set the table for them, and even with that, I am highly dubious (though willing to be convinced) that any state can manage UHC on their own without the tool of deficit spending that would occasionally be needed.  And history bears this out.

As someone who has written before of the water problems our state faces, and who has repeated the “omg worst drought ever” frame, it’s important that I give some necessary attention to Michael Fitzgerald of The Stockton Record, who called bullshit on the whole thing today:

California’s “drought” is overblown. The alarmists calling it a historic disaster are trying to pull a fast one….

Besides, state officials, SoCal water importers and other Chicken Littles don’t mention they drained Northern California reservoirs prior to February’s storms.

“In the first year of the drought, we passed water like a drunken sailor,” said Bill Jennings, head of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance.

Some perspective: In the 1990s, the state and feds exported 4 million acre-feet of Delta water annually. In this decade – and well into the drought – officials imprudently powered up exports to more than 6 million acre-feet a year.

They irresponsibly sucked reservoirs down. They nearly killed the Delta. They stopped only when a federal judge called a halt.

“We cannibalized Northern California to sock it away in the Kern water bank and Diamond Valley water bank down south,” Jennings said, “giving no thought to the question of a second or third year.”

In short, those who have the weakest water rights claims – such as sprawling Southern California exurbs – have been recklessly drawing down our water supplies to support a totally unsustainable  use of the land. We’ve had intimations that this is going on, with the collapse of Delta fisheries and the West Coast salmon population. But the media often reported this as an unfortunate consequence of mandated water deliveries from the Delta, through the pumps at Tracy and down the delivery chain that the drought (and everyone agrees we’re in some sort of drought) has exacerbated.

Funny thing about those “mandated water deliveries” though:

The 80-year average for Delta water is 29 million acre-feet annually. The state and feds wrote contracts promising 130 million acre-feet: 41/2 times reality.

Other contracts bring total export contracts to an insane 245 million acre-feet, an ocean of paper water promised to people who gauged their farms, businesses or urban water consumption accordingly.

In other words California water policy has been built on debt, just as I’ve been arguing. To water the suburban sprawlconomy and the agricultural sprawl necessary to feed that sprawlconomy, we created a kind of “water bubble”, where contracts to deliver water were written without regard to mother nature’s ability to pay. This almost exactly parallels what went on in banks during the housing bubble.

And like the collapse of the housing bubble, those who engineered the water bubble are saying the answer is to spend more public money on bailing them out – in this case through more canals and dams.

Don’t get me wrong, California does face water problems and does need to change how we use water here. But the answer isn’t to waste more water on sprawl. Instead it’s time we got serious about providing water security by reducing how much we use, retrofitting urban areas to do more recycling, and implementing more water-friendly and environmentally sensible farming practices across the state.

November 4th was a bittersweet day for our LGBT brothers and sisters in California. Even as we made history for electing a young black man named Barack Hussein Obama to the White House, a narrow majority of California voters chose to take away their right to legally marry. For them, it was one step forward, two steps back.

But here’s the thing, rather than accept defeat, they took to the streets. Not only in California, but nationwide. New LGBT leadership grew out of the ashes of thefailed “No on 8” campaignand taking a page from Obama, began a organized from the bottom up.

In Los Angeles, former Obama organizers (including my partner in the campaign, Mike Bonin) teamed up with the Courage Campaign to create “Camp Courage” – weekend workshops on marriage equality that borrow heavily from the “Camp Obama” model and the teachings of Marshall Ganz.

After taking the concept out for a successful one-day test drive in West Hollywood, the organizers took the show on the road: First stop, Fresno.

Yesterday over at Red County was an interesting stab at what the purpose of the California Republican Party should be now that they’ve demonstrated an inability to prevent tax increases. It’s a fascinating amalgam that’s roughly equal parts proof that there’s no particular logic governing the GOP and a blueprint to a Republican version of the DLC.

Answering the question “why do we exist?”, the leading principle as stated is

We exist to find solutions to problems that do not increase the size or cost of government.

Which of course means government can only get smaller. We’ve heard this before when Grover Norquist was having wet dreams about drowning government (sidenote: why doesn’t anyone call Grover Norquist an anarchist? He wants to eliminate government.). But it sets the tone nicely by establishing that there’s nothing new here, just an attempt to paint over the fundamental failures of GOP ideology. But we’re just getting started.

We exist to ensure a responsive, transparent, competent government that provides essential services in an efficient and timely manner.

Those are all nice words, but none of them alone or in combination actually equal “effective” essential services. Note that “effective” is not the same as “cost effective.” If I wanted to maximize the cost effectiveness of my grocery shopping, I’d just spend all my money on rice and die of scurvy. But I digress. Presumably this is a subset of the first principle of not expanding government. So you only get responsive, transparent, competent, efficient and timely as long as it costs no more than what you’re getting now. In other words, the plan is straight from Homer Simpson: “Can you guys work harder?” But this is reasonable next to…

We exist to lower healthcare costs through competition, not regulation.

Healthcare costs are set via competition right now. Has anybody noticed their healthcare suddenly getting cheaper lately? But wait, there’s more. MUCH more!

We exist to guarantee that every Californian will receive an above-average primary and secondary education and that our state will continue to have the world’s foremost public system of post-secondary education.

Well sure. Me too. But the explanation leads off with “…I love beating up on the teachers’ unions as much as anyone (probably even more)…” In my experience, being the enemy of the folks delivering the education is step one to getting the best product from those people. Then comes gems like “We need to let parents know that we’re willing to spend more money on education” and “I think we should actually go a step farther and reclaim the promise of a free college education for every qualified student.” You know where I’ve heard this? From Democrats. For my entire life. And for generations before that.

Thing is, I suppose being “willing to spend more money” isn’t the same as actually spending it since that would presumably not maintain or reduce the size of government. Neither, presumably, would the additional professors, administrators, support staff, classroom space, textbooks and other supplies needed for all those new free college educations likely be free or less than free. Alright, but something has to make sense right?

We exist to preserve our environmental heritage and to protect the environment against the worst abuses in ways that do not harm economic growth or undermine personal liberty.

You may have heard this argument before in its original form “the environment is a top priority right after any other priority” or “let’s absolutely protect the environment except from anything that actually poses a threat.” The suggestions from this post focus largely on clean parks and beaches, conservation and underfunded state parks. Mind you, we aren’t going to increase the size of government, so we’re going to increase funding for state parks by cutting funding elsewhere. Maybe education. No wait, we’re expanding education. No wait, the GOP just spent months holding the budget hostage to cut education. My head hurts. And this is getting long, so let’s take the next two together:

We exist to protect individual rights and fight laws that detract from those rights.

We exist to ensure the stability and virtue of our society through traditional values.

These statements seem like they would be natural enemies in the wild, no? Of course, because imposing morality in a libertarian manner isn’t exactly possible. By definition. No matter though. Why? Because “that’s the burden of being the party of conservatism, but I’m happy to bear it.” Right. The burden of being the party of conservatism is trying to package and sell doublethink. That’s gotta leave you feeling good at the end of the day. And finally we wrap up with another classic:

We exist to create a business climate where entrepreneurs of all kinds are allowed to thrive.

Is this last for any particular reason? Is it supplicated to the previous or the most important saved for last? I ask because there are times when the bottom line health of a business is not, in fact, the same as the best interest of society as a whole. I know, I know. Even allowing such a thought to flicker in my mind makes me a communist. Whatever. I’m pretty sure that if we’ve learned anything in the past 12 months, it’s that entrepreneurs can screw things up pretty badly, and not because they were chasing after the greater good for humanity. Should we try to allow people to flourish? Of course. Are there limits on the quest for personal wealth and power based on the negative impact on society as a whole? That’d be nice too.

Lest you think our blogger is too much a dreamer and are concerned because:

“We’re never going to be able to attract environmentalists, convince the education establishment and their supporters that we care about kids, or get poor people to believe we’ll give them a better deal on healthcare than the Dems.”

Take heart. None of that matters:

You’re right, but that’s not the goal. The objective is to break down the growing resistance that the electorate has towards all things Republican.

It seems to me that another option would be actually taking a meaningful look at all the things the electorate is resisting and…like…changing some of them. But the concession here that the brave new GOP will not actually care about kids or give poor people a better deal on healthcare is convenient at least.

But that’s just me. I don’t want to come off like a total curmudgeon though. If there’s an option to have a pony with my cake, sign me up.

 (Cross-posted at Living in the O.)

Last night, I went to Gavin Newsom’s town hall at the Rotunda in downtown Oakland. Overall, I wasn’t surprised by the event. He touched on many subjects – health care, education, improving the environment – and his overriding theme for the evening was that while many candidates talk about these issues, he has shown real progress on them. He did fail to mention though that many of the projects he took credit for last night (like universal health care) actually originated in the Board of Supervisors. But that’s pretty typical – he’s a politician and of course is going to take credit for everything he possibly can.

I really appreciated the fact that he took almost an hour of unfiltered questions from the audience. And I could not have been much more pleased when our new AC Transit Director, Joel Young, asked the first question. Joel explained that the state had defunded public transit and asked if Newsom, as governor, would restore public transit funding.

Newsom responded that public transit is so important for the environment and briefly answered, “Yes,” that he would restore the funding. But then instead of explaining why or how, he jumped into a long-winded speech about high speed rail. He started off by saying that he wanted to tell us about a project that he knew not all of us supported because it barely passed. This is a strange thing to say because 63% of Alameda County voters voted in favor of Prop 1A.

He then explained how high speed rail was going to change the state, creating jobs and changing how we thought about and used transportation. He talked about his vision for the “Grand Central Station of the West,” which is what some are calling the Transbay Terminal. Energetically, he explained how this would greatly improve the Bay Area region, making it easy to get from downtown to downtown (Oakland to SF).

And that was it. That was his answer to an AC Transit Director.

Now I’m very supportive of high speed rail (though I think it was a failure to choose the Pacheco alignment over the Altamont alignment), and I endorsed Prop 1A. But high speed rail won’t do us much good if our local transit agencies crumble. Getting from downtown to downtown might be made easier, but most of us don’t live downtown so if AC Transit cuts lines that would get us there, this “Grand Central Station” won’t be much help to us, will it?

As you might have read in the Chronicle yesterday, AC Transit will be voting tomorrow on fare increases, and soon after that will consider service cuts. And it’s not just AC Transit. More than 80 local transit agencies nationwide are facing fare increases and/or service cuts. At the same time, ridership is increasing, in the East Bay, the Bay Area, and beyond.

What I’m looking for in a candidate for governor is someone who not only understands and is committed to the big, sexy transit projects like high speed rail, but for someone who shares the same commitment to funding and improving our local transit agencies. I want to find a candidate who gets excited talking about buses and who understands the need to solve this problem (PDF, via A Better Oakland). Last night, Newsom failed to prove that he is that candidate so, for now, I’ll continue my search.

(If you’d like to read about the other topics Newsom covered, check out a diary at Daily Kos by a friend I sat with last night.)

Orange County’s Board of Supervisors may have crossed the line with this one.

The Orange County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously today to suspend a county contract with Planned Parenthood to provide health education for thousands of teens and preteens because the nonprofit organization offers abortions.

“I personally have a problem with government funding of an organization that provides abortion services,” said Supervisor John Moorlach, who placed the item on the agenda.

As it says in the opening graf, Planned Parenthood in Orange County does not provide abortion services.  It provides health education for teenagers, including information on contraception and birth control.  All this does is make kids in the area more susceptible to STDs.  This is religious extremism that actually puts people at risk.

But alas, this is Orange County, some say.  If they are so wedded to an extremist anti-choice ideology, then so be it.  Except that’s more true of the political class than the people who live there.

Despite testimony that the Planned Parenthood services under contract through the community health clincs is not funding abortions, and has been extensively audited, the Board of Supervisors voted to defund a contract that includes Planned Parenthood as one of 18 community clinics receiving funding under Propostion H […]

Recent polling has shown that anti-choice activists in Orange County are now outnumbered over two to one by those who believe that abortion should be available without any restrictions, or with minor restrictions. (emphasis mine)

Two things jump out here.  Planned Parenthood was receiving the funding via a voter-approved initiative.  And then there’s the part I bolded, that Orange County is strongly in favor of abortion rights.  This is nothing new, by the way.  The county has long been more socially liberal and economically conservative.  Here’s an article from June 2000 highlighting a survey showing the OC’s tilt toward choice:

The county’s libertarian bent also was evident on the subject of abortion. Sixty-five percent of those polled support abortion rights.

It seems to me that this vote could be a launching pad.  The culture wars have played themselves out nationally, particularly in light of the economic crisis.  South Dakota, one of the most conservative states in the country, couldn’t pass an abortion ban in 2006 or 2008.  The public supports abortion rights and even more strongly supports birth control and family planning (try 91%).  This punitive measure by the OC Supes could be a rallying cry, starting a movement tailored to the libertarian thinking of the area, demanding that these lawmakers get their prying eyes out of their constituents’ bedrooms.  This is the kind of misstep that loses people elections.  We’ll see if anyone capitalizes.

My sister got her layoff notice yesterday. After teaching 5th grade for three years in an Orange County school district, and having achieved “permanent” status, she was told her services will no longer be needed as of the end of the school year. By all accounts her students’ parents loved her, and as she told me last night, “I don’t know what else I would do, teaching is all I’ve ever wanted to do.” And that’s true, ever since she taught our cousin what a fork was. Teaching is the family business, and now, she’s been told her dreams are no longer possible because California has stopped caring about schools.

She is not alone in watching her hopes and dreams vanish. Over 20,000 of her fellow teachers have been pink slipped, with LA Unified alone firing 9,000 teachers. Uncounted numbers of support staff – the people who answer the phones, who drive the buses, who enable teachers to focus on their jobs, are getting laid off as well. Nobody in Sacramento or the offices of the Zombie Death Cult have been able to explain how this is going to help our state survive economic crisis.

The mass layoffs are an act so vile and insane that it almost defies description. Teachers should be the last people in society laid off, before almost everyone else but the technicians at the water treatment plant. To engage in a mass firing of teachers in the midst of a Depression is like a man stranded in the desert poking out his eyes with a stick because the sun is too bright. Sure, it might help temporarily, but eventually you’re going to want to see where you’re going, and wish you’d never acted so rashly back there on the dune.

Here at Calitics we have repeatedly explained why these layoffs are happening – a conservative veto (the 2/3rds rule) enables Republicans to starve government of revenue and then force crippling cuts while Democrats fail to craft a coherent response. Our knowledge of those underlying causes should not blind us to the insanity of these layoffs.

These pink slips also make a mockery of President Obama’s education plans, which revolve around trying to attract new teachers to the profession:

And so today, I am calling on a new generation of Americans to step forward and serve our country in our classrooms. If you want to make a difference in the life of our nation; if you want to make the most of your talents and dedication; if you want to make your mark with a legacy that will endure – join the teaching profession. America needs you.

Such words ring hollow here in California, where those who already have stepped forward to make the most of their talents and to make a difference in the life of our nation have discovered that the legacy that will endure is a pink slip telling them “sorry, we don’t really want you after all.”

As Chris Bowers pointed out yesterday Obama’s education plans have an overemphasis on dealing with “bad teachers”:

I don’t entirely understand why talk of making teachers work harder, making their profesion more competitive, and making their job secure is so common in America.  We don’t talk about making the lives of other people who work in public service, such as soldiers and first responders–or even health care workers–in such a foreboding way.  If, as a nation, we actually want to solve our teacher shortage, part of that is going to mean dropping our constant national threats to make teachers lives more difficult.  That is just a really, really bad way to recruit and retain teachers.

Obama’s efforts to attract and retain the good teachers is simply impossible and unrealistic when those teachers who, like my sister and her 20,000 colleagues, have been given glowing reviews from administrators and parents alike and yet still find themselves turned away from the career they love.

His plans also suggest he is too wound up in what education writer Stanley Fish called the neoliberalization of education – the belief that education reform involves introducing market forces into schools, even though market forces prioritize money and denigrate other values such as good teaching, care for students, and building communities.

If Barack Obama wants to be serious about education reform, he needs to realize that you must first stop the bleeding before you can do anything else. The US Senate’s decision to gut the state stabilization funds is behind the mass layoffs here in California. That act will neutralized the effect of the stimulus in California and cause lasting damage to a generation of young people whose education has been sacrificed to appease Republicans in Sacramento and the US Senate.

Before Obama focuses on how to fire bad teachers, he needs to first ensure that we retain the good ones. If teaching becomes seen as a profession where quality work brings no job security, then reforms are doomed from the outset.

X-Posted @ BearFlagBlue & DailyKos

Newsom noted that the divide between urban and rural areas in this state is often greatly exaggerated and used that as a jumping point to cover the major priorities he sees the next Governor of California needing to focus on…not that he’s running or anything. Healthcare, Education, Environment, Jobs…these are issues that all Californians are concerned with, he assured the crowd, regardless of geography. After speaking with people all across the state, from big cities to small towns, he believes that we are all basically on the same page as it regards issues such as prison reform, crime reduction, foster care, and homelessness. I’m not so sure.

A fair amount of time was spent discussing the need for universal healthcare and Gavin reminded the crowd that SF was the first county in the US to pass universal healthcare. He also cracked a line about the child drinking problem…that being the 64 oz Big Gulp. Ha! Then Newsom took a moment to discuss the clean-up of old shipyards/. that leak toxins into the bay. He noted that this was not only an environmental issue, but a health issue as well. He must have known what was coming for him later in the meeting.

At that, the floor was opened for questions, in boy- girl-boy-girl order, after having received complaints at previous town halls, that the guys had been feeling short changed.

Newsom was asked about the need for healthcare & green jobs…

and spoke about the need for green jobs & universal healthcare…basically repeating the question.

He was asked about funding for AC transit…

and then talked about the need for a high speed rail system that connects SF to Grand Central Station. He also mentioned the fact that the next Governor will have to look over protecting California’s voter approved High Speed Rail system, which I was happy to hear, but he never did quite get to answering the question on funding for AC Transit, which I believed was actually asked by one of the Board Members of AC Transit. Ouch.

He was asked about ICE deportations of undocumented youth that have been arrested on felony charges…

And Newsom spoke about his pride in SF’s sanctuary city status, but then said that he didn’t feel that sanctuary needed to apply to criminals. He kind of dodged whether or not he would continue the program as Governor, saying only that he had explained his position. I was left wondering if Gavin Newsom believes in the concept of innocent until proven guilty. Families are being broken up and kids are deported for merely having been arrested…not actually having been convicted of a crime. I know from my own personal experiences in my youth, that anybody can be arrested for any number of trumped up charges…and I’m a white guy. I can only imagine what it’s like if you happen to have brown skin. His answer or lack thereof on this question really kind of pissed me off. I raised my hand to get some clarification, but the mic never made it my way.

He was asked about the legalization of Hemp (as in rope…not dope)…

But instead decided to talk about how proud he was to support medical marijuana in SF. I think he may have kind of sort of mentioned his support for the newly introduced AB 390 which would legalize and tax marijuana, but spent most of his time on the question talking about how legalization would be against Federal law which complicates issues and legalization likely wouldn’t happen any time soon. It was quite the endorsement. I don’t think he ever did answer the question regarding Hemp though.

In regards to what he would do differently to pass a budget were he elected Governor…

He said we need to repeal the two-thirds rule to pass a budget and we need a constitutional convention. Newsom didn’t explain whether or not he thought we should repeal the 2/3rds rule for both passing a budget and raising taxes, and he didn’t mention whether he thought the threshold should be a simple majority or some arbitrary percentage. He also didn’t elaborate on why he thought we needed a constitutional convention…just that we need to have one.

But when a woman in the back of the room spoke of her son’s constant nose bleeds and the toxic waste in the Bayview/Hunters Pt district that she felt was destroying her community and poisoning her children, particularly citing the redevelopment work of the Lennar Corp. Well, the best way of putting it is that the room got rather contentious.

Newsom sort of dismissed the woman, stating that there was no way of knowing where those health problems came from and that Lennar had only been around for a few years, while the toxic Navy ship yards had been there for over 50. Wrong answer. In the end, it doesn’t really matter where the toxic waste is coming from. Half the problem the residents have is that they want their kids tested for lead and asbestos and other harmful chemicals so that they can know if and who is poisoning their children. Apparently this testing has been prevented up to this point out of concerns over liability.

Throughout the course of the questions that followed it seemed as if Newsom repeatedly tried to shift blame away from the Lennar Corp and onto the feet of the Navy and the Fed Govt, but these very well informed residents were having none of it and at the end of the day the concern wasn’t over whether it was Lennar Corp or the Feds who were poisoning their children and killing off minority populations. The residents just want something done about it. When reminded that minority populations in San Francisco have been dying off in record numbers. The residents seemed especially pissed that Newsom implied that he didn’t believe that anybody was being intentionally targeted. He was reminded once again that were he to look at the location of super fund sites around the state, he would find that each one is located near a minority community, a minority school, or a minority children’s park.

Rather than directly addressing their concerns though, he spent much of this period of the town hall trying to explain vague details of the situation to the rest of the room with his own little spin on the story. I have a feeling this only worked to anger the residents even more. It’s like somebody not acknowledging you, yet talking about you to somebody else, when you’re standing right there listening. At many points during this questioning things got rather heated, angry and chaotic. Newsom seemed to be losing control of the room at this point, with folks from all corners airing their grievances in no particular order.

The room did eventually calm down…right about at 8 when it was time to wrap up. I’m guessing he had better luck with the folks that surrounded him for photos and autographs afterwards than with the actual meeting itself.

I don’t know. Maybe I’m too hard on the guy, but I was wholly unimpressed with Newsom’s performance. It just seemed to me like he was giving generic answers to questions that weren’t even asked.

Although he did have what I thought was one original proposal…

Apparently, Gavin Newsom is very concerned that something must be done about teenagers who use google maps to find foreclosed homes with pools, so that they can then drain the pools and skateboard in them…ruining the pools and lowering the property value.

He was serious.

I’d have to say it was one of the stupidest things I’ve heard from a politician all day. I’m not sure I even know where to start.

For one, if Newsom hadn’t noticed…home prices are plummeting anyways…I really doubt rogue skaters are contributing to the problem to any significant degree.

Besides being expensive to maintain, we’re in a drought, and people that are having their homes foreclosed on shouldn’t be keeping their pools up in the first place. Those pools should have been drained already. Especially if the home has already been emptied, at which point there is no maintenance going on with these pools anyways.

So now you’ve got a house with a green pool in the backyard, growing who knows what in it, and destroying the pool anyways. But wait, it gets better, because now summer is here and we have thousands of mosquito breeding grounds, spread out in communities all across the state.

A few chipped tiles and some scuff marks aren’t the end of the world.

Skate or Die! From my perspective we should be thanking the skaters for saving us all from West Nile Virus.

Anyways…

I’m still not backing any candidate for this race and went into tonight’s town hall meeting really wanting to be swayed Newsom’s way…but, I’d have to say that after tonight’s testy exchanges in Oakland…in Newsom’s own backyard… the would be Governor still has a whole lot of convincing to do.

I brought my camera along, but in the end, I didn’t even bother trying to get a picture with the Mayor. I didn’t so much care anymore and really just wanted to get out of the place and home.