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.

I don’t know what the specific ratio of placating-the-masses to completely-out-of-ideas might be, but San Diego’s city government is asking for ideas. The big one is Mayor Sanders soliciting lightning bolts on budget cuts. I’m kinda terrified to imagine what this might elicit, but maybe there’ll be a few gems. At the very least, it’s a nice shift from his consistent (if often unsuccessful) fits of dictatorial governance.

With San Diego’s budget future linked to woes at the state level, negotiations beginning with HUD over millions in mismanaged funds which may need to be repayed, and major concerns over access to food stamps, it’s probably not a bad time to see if anyone happens to be particularly inspired.

At the same time, a charrette (pdf) is kicking off soliciting bright ideas for community redevelopment, specifically the Grantville area. SD Business Journal explains that the neighborhood “is undergoing a Master Plan transformation that could prove a blueprint for the greater redevelopment of our neighborhoods throughout the city.”

There’s lots of talk about “stakeholders” and communities investing in their own futures, which is a good start. And with the San Diego Democratic Party bouncing back fast from rock bottom in the June primary to strengthen its hold on the city council, hopefully this is the beginning of legitimate dialogue with the community. The November election brought a consumer advocate reporter (Marti Emerald), a long-time community volunteer (Sherri Lightner), and a Housing Commissioner and District Director (Todd Gloria) to the board. Three people who are, at the very least, used to soliciting opinions and perspectives from the broader community as an essential function of their professional lives. It’s a valuable shift in mentality that the Mayor seems to also be picking up on, even if it’s also a reflection of how few good answers seem to be forthcoming these days.

We’ll have to wait a while for the payoff. In the meantime, a little more openness is a decent place from which to start.

Update I should add that Mayor Sanders has taken the request for ideas to twitter. It isn’t exactly Debra Bowen, but it’s a lot better than many politician accounts. At least he’s stepping outside the tubes and into the ether.

The S&P Case-Shiller Index is one of the leading trackers of the national housing market. It recently reported a 16.6% national drop in home prices for the third quarter, and included projections for 2009 and 2010. Happy holidays- Eight of the ten worst projected housing markets for 2009 are in California:

1. Los Angeles

2008 median house price: $375,340

2009 projected change: -24.9%

2010 projected change: -5.1%

2. Stockton

2008 median house price: $248,050

2009 projected change: -24.7%

2010 projected change: -4.0%

3. Riverside

2008 median house price: $256,540

2009 projected change: -23.3%

2010 projected change: -4.8%

5. Sacramento

2008 median house price: $225,140

2009 projected change: -22.2%

2010 projected change: 2.3%

6. Santa Ana/ Anaheim

2008 median house price: $532,810

2009 projected change: -22.0%

2010 projected change: -3.5%

7. Fresno

2008 median house price: $257,170

2009 projected change: -21.6%

2010 projected change: -3.3%

8. San Diego

2008 median house price: $412,490

2009 projected change: -21.1%

2010 projected change: -2.9%

9. Bakersfield

2008 median house price: $227,270

2009 projected change: -20.9%

2010 projected change: -2.5%

Just the technical populations of those eight cities is a combined eight million people. The metropolitan areas are of course much larger. While Republicans in Sacramento continue to watch the state’s financial situation spiral further and further out of control, home owners still have a lot further to fall. Which means that as the GOP tries to force deeper cuts into safety net programs, they’re going to be that much more desperately important in the future.

These numbers should be extremely scary. Nine of the state’s thirteen biggest cities are on the above list. This morning, Paul Krugman wrote: “Whatever the new administration does, we’re in for months, perhaps even a year, of economic hell.” That’s with the best minds in the nation formulating policy that will find executive and legislative branches working together to pass a recovery plan. On the other hand, California is staring down the barrel of a gun at the freezing of transportation projects, furloughed state workers, wage freezes, and deep cuts to the programs that protect citizens in times of economic downturn.

Nothing is going to be enough to truly counterbalance these grim economic times in the next year. But doing nothing simply can’t be an option with California now not only self-destructing, but leading the rest of the country down as well.

full disclosure: I work for the Courage Campaign

Police expected 5,000 people today for San Diego’s Join the Impact march against Prop 8. Police are currently estimating 20,000 marchers turned out in support of equality (link will also lead to some cool pics and video). Organizers upped their estimate early this morning to 25,000 and they’re sticking with that number. Either way, it doubles last week’s 10K strong San Diego march.

I arrived at the jumping off point at the appointed 10am hour. There were thousands of people spread throughout Balboa Park- old and young, gay and straight, male and female, all races and ethnicities. Some were alone, some came with families, some with groups of friends. It took about 30 minutes to get things organized, in part probably because of people like me who were working the crowd as much as possible. And I’ll tell you how I knew right away that this was a really big deal: While I’m sure many were there, I didn’t see a single person I know from political activism. But I saw people I knew from my neighborhood, from bars, from sports, from music, from church. In other words, this wasn’t the same old political demonstration with the same old faces. This was everyone who normally don’t obsess about politics. People who normally may not even be out of bed at 10am on a Saturday much less marching for miles in the 85 degree heat. This wasn’t politics, this was a movement.

I was very careful to pack my trusty Flip Video, and I got some shaky clips of the beginning of the march (above) and the pivot from 6th Avenue to Broadway (right). The march ran a three mile course south on 6th Avenue along Balboa Park, west through downtown on Broadway, and up Pacific Highway past the Star of India before culminating at the County Administration Building (where marriage licenses are issued). Gloria Allred, city councilman-elect Todd Gloria and reps from the ACLU, Equality California and the Human Rights campaign were on the docket for the rally between the building and the bay.

Chant sheets were everywhere and the chants rarely stopped. The homemade signs were plentiful and ran the gamut from Lincoln to Hitler and Chickens to Satan. I was pleasantly impressed though by the VAST majority of people embracing the positive messaging. People get that this is about love, acceptance and equality. And that abandoning that is to let agents of intolerance win.

The only arrest reported at this point was a member of the Minutemen. Which is a nice juxtaposition to the experience of marching through downtown. Cars honked in solidarity, people cheered from balconies and streamed out of offices and hotels to root us on and give high-fives. In the course of 3 downtown miles, I spotted maybe 7 Yes on 8 folks. Organizers kept people reasonably well behaved, and nothing advanced beyond an occasionally aggressive air horn. Heck, the handful of unattended Yes signs we passed had police attendants.

This is just one of the first reports to come today. There are more than 300 events scheduled throughout the state and across the country. And I said to a friend who marched with me, “You will not be able to stay home brother.

…

Because…people will be in the street looking for a brighter day.

…

The revolution will be live.”

full disclosure: I work for the Courage Campaign. I went to Qualcomm because that’s where the fight to maintain human rights is being waged.

Let me be clear. I’ve been to a lot of all day music festivals, and generally people skip the first seven hours. So maybe that’s what’s going on here. But after a couple hours at Qualcomm earlier for the massive Yes on 8 rally organized by The Call…nobody’s here. Check out the poor but illustrative video I grabbed with my Flip Video. I was down on the field, just to stage left. Joint was empty. They threw a party and nobody came.

The parking lots were mostly empty. The trolley station that goes essentially right up to the door was almost entirely empty. The concourses and hallways were empty. Most of the seats were empty. A popular shirt as I walked around (but don’t have a picture of right now) was a bright yellow Tshirt reading “You can’t change God’s Law: Yes on Prop 8.” But you know…don’t worry about this being the effective repeal of the separation of church and state. It’s just God’s law. Being written as state law. Right. “It Ain’t Just Genetics” was another personal ‘favorite’ of mine.

Let me also add: Not a single solitary counter-protester. Nobody at all. Everyone’s on the phones making real calls. Completely non-political friends of mine were talking last night in the midst of Halloween parties about their plans to phonebank today. This campaign is doing a tremendous job channeling the energies of supporters to the work that really matters. Really impressive to see.

Update: Photos from earlier today can be seen here

Update: I’m about to crash, but I wanted to confirm: nobody else ever showed up. The No on 8 counter-rally at 9pm in Hillcrest rivaled the Qualcomm turnout- it stretched for blocks and blocks, many people deep. All the more striking because the Qualcomm rally was designed for busloads from around the state and across the country while the No on 8 rally was only motivated locals. Volunteer now. We can do this.

In 2006 I contributed to a project originated by Chris Bowers called Use It or Lose It. It came back in lower profile again this year, but it’s a good habit to get into up and down the political spectrum every election cycle. The premise is that our elected Democrats- when safe or unchallenged for re-election, should be dipping into their campaign cash reserves to bolster our chances in competitive races. It’s been particularly relevant these two most recent election cycles because of the myriad pickup opportunities across the country and across the state.

Dave in particular has been hammering around these Calitics parts for a long time on the need to target a 2/3 majority in the state legislature if we’re ever going to pass a reasonable budget or pass a legitimately progressive budget (Democrat does not necessarily equal progressive I realize). So how have our state Dems been doing when it comes to spreading the wealth? We all know that incumbency is a powerful force in this state, so generally sitting on a lot of cash can’t be explained by anticipating a re-election fight. A quick chart of the notable and the affluent Democratic state legislators submitted without further comment. You can make your own analysis and comparisons, though there are certainly some aspirants to leadership here: