Leadership Change for Senate Republicans?

Over at Capitol Alert, there is some speculation about when the Senate Republicans will transition from the leadership of Sen. Hollingsworth to Sen. Dutton.  But in typical Republican style, they are using this to leverage additional concessions from the Democrats.

“If the Democrats drop their demands for unsustainable levels of spending and higher taxes, then it’ll mean we’re probably getting pretty close and there’s no reason why we couldn’t postpone the transition and finish it off,” Hollingsworth said. “But if they are not going to drop those demands for higher spending and higher taxes, it means we’re essentially at square one and there wouldn’t be any harm in Sen. Dutton taking over because there wouldn’t be very involved negotiations happening yet.”(SacBee)

Hey, Hollingsworth, if you all drop your demands of drowning the state government, then perhaps we’ll wrap this up quickly too.

Ya’ll Come On In: Fiorina Sends Jobs Everywhere But California

I’ve mentioned the fact that I grew up in Texas on a number of occasions on this blog.  In many ways it is a great place to grow up, and in other ways…not as much.  For example, you want a world class education from a public university, thank the oil severance tax.  Now, if you wanted a functioning local library, you might look elsewhere.

I bring this up on the occasion of a quick youtube video put out by the LA County Democratic Party’s CEO Watch.  See, Carly Fiorina loves sending jobs everywhere BUT California.  Indonesia, Malaysia, China, she’s all about “rightshoring.”

California’s Military Women Support Our Freedom. Shouldn’t We Support Theirs?

By Maggie Crosby, Staff Attorney, ACLU of Northern California

Imagine you’re a soldier stationed overseas and discover you’re pregnant. If you want to have an abortion but are living in a country where it’s illegal, you might as well be living in pre-Roe v. Wade America. Why? Current federal law prohibits almost all abortion services at U.S. military hospitals, even if a woman pays for the procedure herself. So, like a woman in the 1950s, you can fly to another country to obtain safe, legal abortion care (if you can afford to travel and can arrange leave) or take your chances with an unsafe, illegal, local or self-induced abortion.

Here in California, we are sending thousands of women into military service and have the highest proportion of female veterans of any state-and these numbers are growing. We have among the strongest laws in the country protecting reproductive rights. But when California servicewomen are shipped out of state or overseas, they are deprived of the fundamental right to make pregnancy decisions.

The ban, which has no exception for pregnancies that jeopardize a woman’s health, poses grave risks for women stationed in countries where abortion is outlawed. Coupled with a tremendously high number of incidents of sexual assault in the military, a disturbing scenario emerges. A new analysis from  the Guttmacher Institute documents that “the restrictions fall hardest on the most junior of enlisted ranks, who are also the most likely to have an unintended pregnancy.”

This ban on abortion at military facilities hasn’t always been in place. Prior to 1988, military women were allowed to use their own funds to obtain abortions on military bases overseas. Military officials had wisely recognized that at many overseas stations-or even isolated areas in the U.S.-safe and reliable civilian facilities that provide abortion care are not always available.  

An amendment to the pending National Defense Authorization bill would repeal the dangerous ban on privately funded abortion care and allow U.S servicewomen to use their own money to obtain abortion services at U.S. military facilities. Congress will likely pass the bill sometime in the fall. Since the  House version doesn’t include a repeal of the ban, it’s important to reach out to representatives to urge them to support reproductive health care for our soldiers.

California  congresswoman Jane Harman has said that military women are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq. Several studiesindicate that as many as a third of military women report rape or attempted rape during their military service. Department of Defense research reveals 3,230 reported sexual assaults in 2009, up 11 percent from the previous year. Servicewomen and veterans indicate that, due to incredibly low reporting rates, the actual number of sexual assaults of military women is much higher. DOD’s own statistics confirm low reporting rates.

Although the ban on abortion at military facilities includes an exception for rape and incest, it is meaningless when women in the military don’t feel that they can report sexual assault, especially if that assault is by commanders or fellow soldiers.I recently met with a young veteran who told me that when she reported being raped to her commander, his response was “What is it with you women? You’re the third this week.”

Journalist Kathryn Joyce reported the story of a 26-year-old Marine named Amy* who was stationed in Fallujah when she realized she was pregnant as a result of rape. Amy didn’t report the rape, fearing backlash from her male comrades. The abortion ban meant there was no other way to end her pregnancy. She attempted to self-abort using a cleaning rod from her rifle.

Lifting the ban would return the Department of Defense to the policy that existed for many years: women soldiers facing unintended pregnancies could obtain safe abortion care from doctors willing to provide it. It’s such a cruel irony that America’s young women who volunteer to protect our constitutional rights are denied theirs.

Congress should act now to end the ban on private funding of abortion at military facilities. Our Armed Services women deserve more from their country.

*pseudonym

California’s Military Women Support Our Freedom. Shouldn’t We Support Theirs?

Imagine you’re a soldier stationed overseas and discover you’re pregnant. If you want to have an abortion but are living in a country where it’s illegal, you might as well be living in pre-Roe v. Wade America. Why? Current federal law prohibits almost all abortion services at U.S. military hospitals, even if a woman pays for the procedure herself.

By Maggie Crosby, Staff Attorney, ACLU of Northern California

Imagine you’re a soldier stationed overseas and discover you’re pregnant. If you want to have an abortion but are living in a country where it’s illegal, you might as well be living in pre-Roe v. Wade America. Why? Current federal law prohibits almost all abortion services at U.S. military hospitals, even if a woman pays for the procedure herself. So, like a woman in the 1950s, you can fly to another country to obtain safe, legal abortion care (if you can afford to travel and can arrange leave) or take your chances with an unsafe, illegal, local or self-induced abortion.

Here in California, we are sending thousands of women into military service and have the highest proportion of female veterans of any state-and these numbers are growing. We have among the strongest laws in the country protecting reproductive rights. But when California servicewomen are shipped out of state or overseas, they are deprived of the fundamental right to make pregnancy decisions.

The ban, which has no exception for pregnancies that jeopardize a woman’s health, poses grave risks for women stationed in countries where abortion is outlawed. Coupled with a tremendously high number of incidents of sexual assault in the military, a disturbing scenario emerges. A new analysis from  the Guttmacher Institute documents that “the restrictions fall hardest on the most junior of enlisted ranks, who are also the most likely to have an unintended pregnancy.”

This ban on abortion at military facilities hasn’t always been in place. Prior to 1988, military women were allowed to use their own funds to obtain abortions on military bases overseas. Military officials had wisely recognized that at many overseas stations-or even isolated areas in the U.S.-safe and reliable civilian facilities that provide abortion care are not always available.  

An amendment to the pending National Defense Authorization bill would repeal the dangerous ban on privately funded abortion care and allow U.S servicewomen to use their own money to obtain abortion services at U.S. military facilities. Congress will likely pass the bill sometime in the fall. Since the  House version doesn’t include a repeal of the ban, it’s important to reach out to representatives to urge them to support reproductive health care for our soldiers.

California  congresswoman Jane Harman has said that military women are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq. Several studiesindicate that as many as a third of military women report rape or attempted rape during their military service. Department of Defense research reveals 3,230 reported sexual assaults in 2009, up 11 percent from the previous year. Servicewomen and veterans indicate that, due to incredibly low reporting rates, the actual number of sexual assaults of military women is much higher. DOD’s own statistics confirm low reporting rates.

Although the ban on abortion at military facilities includes an exception for rape and incest, it is meaningless when women in the military don’t feel that they can report sexual assault, especially if that assault is by commanders or fellow soldiers.I recently met with a young veteran who told me that when she reported being raped to her commander, his response was “What is it with you women? You’re the third this week.”

Journalist Kathryn Joyce reported the story of a 26-year-old Marine named Amy* who was stationed in Fallujah when she realized she was pregnant as a result of rape. Amy didn’t report the rape, fearing backlash from her male comrades. The abortion ban meant there was no other way to end her pregnancy. She attempted to self-abort using a cleaning rod from her rifle.

Lifting the ban would return the Department of Defense to the policy that existed for many years: women soldiers facing unintended pregnancies could obtain safe abortion care from doctors willing to provide it. It’s such a cruel irony that America’s young women who volunteer to protect our constitutional rights are denied theirs.

Congress should act now to end the ban on private funding of abortion at military facilities. Our Armed Services women deserve more from their country.

*pseudonym

California’s Military Women Support Our Freedom. Shouldn’t We Support Theirs?

By Maggie Crosby, Staff Attorney, ACLU of Northern California

Imagine you’re a soldier stationed overseas and discover you’re pregnant. If you want to have an abortion but are living in a country where it’s illegal, you might as well be living in pre-Roe v. Wade America. Why? Current federal law prohibits almost all abortion services at U.S. military hospitals, even if a woman pays for the procedure herself. So, like a woman in the 1950s, you can fly to another country to obtain safe, legal abortion care (if you can afford to travel and can arrange leave) or take your chances with an unsafe, illegal, local or self-induced abortion.

Here in California, we are sending thousands of women into military service and have the highest proportion of female veterans of any state-and these numbers are growing. We have among the strongest laws in the country protecting reproductive rights. But when California servicewomen are shipped out of state or overseas, they are deprived of the fundamental right to make pregnancy decisions.

The ban, which has no exception for pregnancies that jeopardize a woman’s health, poses grave risks for women stationed in countries where abortion is outlawed. Coupled with a tremendously high number of incidents of sexual assault in the military, a disturbing scenario emerges. A new analysis from  the Guttmacher Institute documents that “the restrictions fall hardest on the most junior of enlisted ranks, who are also the most likely to have an unintended pregnancy.”

This ban on abortion at military facilities hasn’t always been in place. Prior to 1988, military women were allowed to use their own funds to obtain abortions on military bases overseas. Military  officials had wisely recognized that at many overseas stations-or even isolated areas in the U.S.-safe and reliable civilian facilities that provide abortion care are not always available.  

An amendment to the pending National Defense Authorization bill would repeal the dangerous ban on privately funded abortion care and allow U.S servicewomen to use their own money to obtain abortion services at U.S. military facilities. Congress will likely pass the bill sometime in the fall. Since the  House version doesn’t include a repeal of the ban, it’s important to reach out to representatives to urge them to support reproductive health care for our soldiers.

California  congresswoman Jane Harman has said that military women are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq. Several studiesindicate that as many as a third of military women report rape or attempted rape during their military service. Department of Defense research reveals 3,230 reported sexual assaults in 2009, up 11 percent from the previous year. Servicewomen and veterans indicate that, due to incredibly low reporting rates, the actual number of sexual assaults of military women is much higher. DOD’s own statistics confirm low reporting rates.

Although the ban on abortion at military facilities includes an exception for rape and incest, it is meaningless when women in the military don’t feel that they can report sexual assault, especially if that assault is by commanders or fellow soldiers.I recently met with a young veteran who told me that when she reported being raped to her commander, his response was “What is it with you women? You’re the third this week.”

Journalist Kathryn Joyce reported the  story of a 26-year-old Marine named Amy* who was stationed in Fallujah when she realized she was pregnant as a result of rape. Amy didn’t report the rape, fearing backlash from her male comrades. The abortion ban meant there was no other way to end her pregnancy. She attempted to self-abort using a cleaning rod from her rifle.

Lifting the ban would return the Department of Defense to the policy that existed for many years: women soldiers facing unintended pregnancies could obtain safe abortion care from doctors willing to provide it. It’s such a cruel irony that America’s young women who volunteer to protect our constitutional rights are denied theirs.

Congress should act now to end the ban on private funding of abortion at military facilities. Our Armed Services women deserve more from their country.

*pseudonym

California’s Military Women Support Our Freedom. Shouldn’t We Support Theirs?

By Maggie Crosby, Staff Attorney, ACLU of Northern California

Imagine you’re a soldier stationed overseas and discover you’re pregnant. If you want to have an abortion but are living in a country where it’s illegal, you might as well be living in pre-Roe v. Wade America. Why? Current federal law prohibits almost all abortion services at U.S. military hospitals, even if a woman pays for the procedure herself. So, like a woman in the 1950s, you can fly to another country to obtain safe, legal abortion care (if you can afford to travel and can arrange leave) or take your chances with an unsafe, illegal, local or self-induced abortion.

Here in California, we are sending thousands of women into military service and have the highest proportion of female veterans of any state-and these numbers are growing. We have among the strongest laws in the country protecting reproductive rights. But when California servicewomen are shipped out of state or overseas, they are deprived of the fundamental right to make pregnancy decisions.

The ban, which has no exception for pregnancies that jeopardize a woman’s health, poses grave risks for women stationed in countries where abortion is outlawed. Coupled with a tremendously high number of incidents of sexual assault in the military, a disturbing scenario emerges. A new analysis from  the Guttmacher Institute documents that “the restrictions fall hardest on the most junior of enlisted ranks, who are also the most likely to have an unintended pregnancy.”

This ban on abortion at military facilities hasn’t always been in place. Prior to 1988, military women were allowed to use their own funds to obtain abortions on military bases overseas. Military  officials had wisely recognized that at many overseas stations-or even isolated areas in the U.S.-safe and reliable civilian facilities that provide abortion care are not always available.  

An amendment to the pending National Defense Authorization bill would repeal the dangerous ban on privately funded abortion care and allow U.S servicewomen to use their own money to obtain abortion services at U.S. military facilities. Congress will likely pass the bill sometime in the fall. Since the  House version doesn’t include a repeal of the ban, it’s important to reach out to representatives to urge them to support reproductive health care for our soldiers.

California  congresswoman Jane Harman has said that military women are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq. Several studiesindicate that as many as a third of military women report rape or attempted rape during their military service. Department of Defense research reveals 3,230 reported sexual assaults in 2009, up 11 percent from the previous year. Servicewomen and veterans indicate that, due to incredibly low reporting rates, the actual number of sexual assaults of military women is much higher. DOD’s own statistics confirm low reporting rates.

Although the ban on abortion at military facilities includes an exception for rape and incest, it is meaningless when women in the military don’t feel that they can report sexual assault, especially if that assault is by commanders or fellow soldiers.I recently met with a young veteran who told me that when she reported being raped to her commander, his response was “What is it with you women? You’re the third this week.”

Journalist Kathryn Joyce reported the  story of a 26-year-old Marine named Amy* who was stationed in Fallujah when she realized she was pregnant as a result of rape. Amy didn’t report the rape, fearing backlash from her male comrades. The abortion ban meant there was no other way to end her pregnancy. She attempted to self-abort using a cleaning rod from her rifle.

Lifting the ban would return the Department of Defense to the policy that existed for many years: women soldiers facing unintended pregnancies could obtain safe abortion care from doctors willing to provide it. It’s such a cruel irony that America’s young women who volunteer to protect our constitutional rights are denied theirs.

Congress  should act now to end the ban on private funding of abortion at military facilities. Our Armed Services women deserve more from their country.

*pseudonym

California’s Military Women Support Our Freedom. Shouldn’t We Support Theirs?

By Maggie Crosby, Staff Attorney, ACLU of Northern California

Imagine you’re a soldier stationed overseas and discover you’re pregnant. If you want to have an abortion but are living in a country where it’s illegal, you might as well be living in pre-Roe v. Wade America. Why? Current federal law prohibits almost all abortion services at U.S. military hospitals, even if a woman pays for the procedure herself. So, like a woman in the 1950s, you can fly to another country to obtain safe, legal abortion care (if you can afford to travel and can arrange leave) or take your chances with an unsafe, illegal, local or self-induced abortion.

Here in California, we are sending thousands of women into military service and have the highest proportion of female veterans of any state-and these numbers are growing. We have among the strongest laws in the country protecting reproductive rights. But when California servicewomen are shipped out of state or overseas, they are deprived of the fundamental right to make pregnancy decisions.

The ban, which has no exception for pregnancies that jeopardize a woman’s health, poses grave risks for women stationed in countries where abortion is outlawed. Coupled with a tremendously high number of incidents of sexual assault in the military, a disturbing scenario emerges. A new analysis from  the Guttmacher Institute documents that “the restrictions fall hardest on the most junior of enlisted ranks, who are also the most likely to have an unintended pregnancy.”

This ban on abortion at military facilities hasn’t always been in place. Prior to 1988, military women were allowed to use their own funds to obtain abortions on military bases overseas. Military  officials had wisely recognized that at many overseas stations-or even isolated areas in the U.S.-safe and reliable civilian facilities that provide abortion care are not always available.  

An amendment to the pending National Defense Authorization bill would repeal the dangerous ban on privately funded abortion care and allow U.S servicewomen to use their own money to obtain abortion services at U.S. military facilities. Congress will likely pass the bill sometime in the fall. Since the  House version doesn’t include a repeal of the ban, it’s important to reach out to representatives to urge them to support reproductive health care for our soldiers.

California  congresswoman Jane Harman has said that military women are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq. Several studiesindicate that as many as a third of military women report rape or attempted rape during their military service. Department of Defense research reveals 3,230 reported sexual assaults in 2009, up 11 percent from the previous year. Servicewomen and veterans indicate that, due to incredibly low reporting rates, the actual number of sexual assaults of military women is much higher. DOD’s own statistics confirm low reporting rates.

Although the ban on abortion at military facilities includes an exception for rape and incest, it is meaningless when women in the military don’t feel that they can report sexual assault, especially if that assault is by commanders or fellow soldiers.I recently met with a young veteran who told me that when she reported being raped to her commander, his response was “What is it with you women? You’re the third this week.”

Journalist Kathryn Joyce reported the story of a 26-year-old Marine named Amy* who was stationed in Fallujah when she realized she was pregnant as a result of rape. Amy didn’t report the rape, fearing backlash from her male comrades. The abortion ban meant there was no other way to end her pregnancy. She attempted to self-abort using a cleaning rod from her rifle.

Lifting the ban would return the Department of Defense to the policy that existed for many years: women soldiers facing unintended pregnancies could obtain safe abortion care from doctors willing to provide it. It’s such a cruel irony that America’s young women who volunteer to protect our constitutional rights are denied theirs.

Congress should act now to end the ban on private funding of abortion at military facilities. Our Armed Services women deserve more from their country.

*pseudonym

A Fabricated Controversy vs The Golden Parachute

There was once a day when the word “pension” inspired not jealousy, but pride for having done hard work to earn it.  Yet these days, pension seems to be a dirty word, while “golden parachute” seems to be all the rage.  Take our two candidates for governor.

Meg Whitman has been trying to pin the infamous “double-dipping” tag on Jerry Brown.  Brown’s service in state government in addition to his tenure as Mayor of Oakland would offer him two different methods of a pension. Outrageous cries the Whitman campaign, he’s probably taking billions of money from public coffers. I should know, I looted eBay on the way out the door. And all that.

However, it seems Whitman speaks from too much personal experience and not enough actual knowledge of the situation.  Brown released his pension records, and he is due slightly under $80,000 per year when he retires. (With his selected option of keeping his wife on as a survivor.)

As for Ms. Whitman, let’s go back to that looting of eBay.  Her exit from eBay can be best described as a gentle nudge by the Board after some controversy with rising fees (taxes?!) and some issues on the stock front.  She stuck around at eBay on the Board for a few years after she left, and it was during the time immediately after she left the CEO gig that her successor laid off 10% of eBay’s workers.  Meanwhile, Whitman was receiving a fat golden parachute.

But, you see, Whitman earned that! Right? Right?  

So, to summarize, it is great, nee awesome, to raise fees on small businesses so you can get a phat golden parachute. But to work for 25 years as a public servant to get a modest pension?  Outrageous!

Why is Brown’s pension even an issue? Or is this one of those Karl Rove jujitsu moves where she’s attacking where she’s weak?  Fact is, that Whitman carted off a billion dollars worth of loot from small businesses trying to create jobs.  Do as I say, not as I do, I suppose.

August 26 Open Thread

Links:

* Looks like sunshine wins over CSU’s secrecy. They had to release Sarah Palin’s contract.  The CSU-Stanislaus foundation paid her $75,000, plus expenses.  Her demands included first-class airfare (or a Lear jet), prescreened questions, and “bendable straws.”

* The Congressional campaign of Mike Berryhill isn’t doing too well.  The challenger for Dennis Cardoza also got slammed by a former staffer.

* SFWeekly has a profile of Nancy Pelosi. It’s a bit of a journalistic mishmash.

* The “big 5” had a meeting today, their first in a while.

IOKIYAR: Steve Cooley Edition

Now in Orange.

Oh, the old phrase IOKIYAR. So useful, especially back in the old Jack Abramoff days. In case you are just joining the show already in progress, it stands for It’s OK if you’re a Republican.  Get it? Good.

And here we have the latest contestant, Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley.  You may know Cooley from such one-hit wonders as initimidating and attempting to crush the union in his office and living the good life through gifts, but this one has to be the pièce de résistance:

In 2003, District Attorney Steve Cooley had a billionaire in his sights. Alan Casden was a real estate developer with a history of generosity toward political campaigns, especially those of local Democrats.

After a grand jury investigation, Cooley brought felony charges against a Casden executive, John Archibald, and 13 other defendants for reimbursing friends and associates for donations to city politicians, thereby violating contribution limits. …

At the time of the investigation, however, Cooley was accepting the same kinds of contributions for his own campaign. While he pursued Casden and others who engaged in similar finance schemes, he did not go after his own contributor, Gladwin Gill. (LA Weekly, emphasis added)

To be clear what was going on here, Gill was giving money to other people to contribute to Republican candidates. He plead guilty to these charges on contributing money for George W. Bush through this scheme.  But, importantly, the same people that he used for the Bush scheme? Yeah, they show up on Cooley’s donor lists.

Gill was prosecuted by the federal prosecutors for his federal crimes.  Archibald and Casden were thoroughly investigated by Cooley’s office.  Pierce O’Donnell, another Democratic contributor was dealt with by Cooley’s office.  As for Gill’s local involvement, well, there has been no word from Cooley’s office on that. IOKIYAR, I guess.

Note: As you may know, I do some work for Cooley’s Democratic opponent, Kamala Harris.

UPDATE: Cooley’s campaign consultant, Kevin Spillane, has responded by noting that the statute of limitations has expired, and that the money has been spent anyway. Now folks, that’s how you play IOKIYAR.  

Kevin Spillane, FTW!