Arnold Schwarzenegger’s war on public transportation could be about to claim a very high-profile victim: Caltrain. Caltrain CEO Mike Scanlon gave a dire warning yesterday about massive cuts that would wipe out half of Caltrain’s services:

Caltrain has gone broke and will likely need to wipe out half its service – including weekend, nighttime and midday trains – officials warned Thursday, bracing passengers for a major shake-up to the popular commuter line that links San Francisco to the South Bay.

“This is not an April fool’s joke,” Caltrain CEO Mike Scanlon told the agency’s board of directors. “This is real. We’re at a watershed moment where there’s a possibility this railroad could go away.”

Scanlon said the service cuts, which would idle trains for much of the day, would need to be completed by June 2011, although the agency may begin slashing its schedule as soon as this fall.

The impact of these cuts would be nothing short of catastrophic for the Peninsula’s economy, which relies on Caltrain to get workers to their jobs and consumers to retailers (and in many ways that includes the San Francisco Giants and San Jose Sharks) to a far greater extent than is realized. Losing this much Caltrain service would be a massive step backward for the Bay Area, a step away from mass transit and back toward the failed model of dependence on cars and freeways that the region had begun to move beyond.

As Michael Scanlon pointed out, the loss of state funding has been simply devastating:

The agency has lost $10 million in funding from the state each of the past three years. And for more than a year, it has been losing riders, which account for 40 percent of its revenue.

But now a new, more damaging problem has emerged. Scanlon, who is also the CEO of the San Mateo County Transit District, or SamTrans, said he will ask that agency’s board of directors to lower its Caltrain contribution by nearly 70 percent by July 2011.

SamTrans, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority and San Francisco Muni each provide Caltrain with a subsidy, which combined amounts to $39.4 million. But with the smaller SamTrans contribution, VTA and Muni will lower their shares proportionately. SamTrans, Muni and VTA all recently cut service and raised fares, and Scanlon said they are “beyond broke.”

A fare increase has not been proposed, as officials say it would drive away even more riders. They also don’t expect to propose any ballot measures, such as tax increases, citing the recession.

In short, because Arnold Schwarzenegger has used the state budget crisis to wage war on public transportation to benefit his oil company donors, with a Department of Finance full of right-wing ideologues who demand mass transit pay for itself when freeways aren’t held to the same standard, local transit agencies are hemorrhaging money, worsening Caltrain’s already precarious situation.

Ultimately the response will have to be some sort of regional funding source to support mass transit. There should be a Bay Area-wide tax, ideally on gas, to fund operations of the region’s transit agencies, from Muni to BART, from Caltrain to AC Transit, and the smaller agencies in between.

And of course, there will need to be an all-hands-on-deck effort to restore state public transportation funds. This needs to become a top priority not just of the passenger rail advocacy community, but of Californians as a whole. In the summer of 2008 local transit agencies had much more capacity to handle the massive increase in ridership that helped California avoid the worst of the gas price increase. As we face another increase in gas prices later this year, we are left with much less transit to fall back on. The result could be a choking off of our state’s halting steps toward economic recovery.

Arnold’s war on public transportation has extremely dire effects for all of us. It’s time to band together to save not only Caltrain, but transit services across the state, and our own future prosperity.

Read more about this, and the impact on high speed rail, over at my California High Speed Rail Blog.

John Eastman, a Republican from the wingnut factory that is Chapman University in Orange, is running in the Republican primary for Attorney General. He wanted to be listed on the ballot as “Assistant Attorney General” which is an actual title he has – in South Dakota. As the LA Times reported last month, Eastman was given a temporary appointment as SD’s Assistant AG while working on a case.

LA County District Attorney Steve Cooley, another Republican candidate for AG, sued to reject that ballot title. As Shane Goldmacher reports, the suit was successful:

On Thursday, Sacramento Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley ordered Eastman, who recently resigned as dean of Chapman University School of Law in Orange County, to be identified as a “constitutional law attorney.”

Of course, Eastman isn’t even a very good con law attorney. He is one of the wingnuts who believes the federal health care bill is unconstitutional, a view that the Sacramento Bee slammed as being a form of “nullification” which was settled by the Civil War.

The Bee editorial also mentioned the Supremacy Clause, which as a con law attorney, you’d think Eastman would understand. Apparently not.

As someone raised in an Irish Catholic household, I don’t know the first thing about a Passover seder. As a generally intelligent human being, I also know to not act as if I have knowledge about something I actually know nothing about – like a Passover seder.

Unfortunately Carly Failorina doesn’t share that sensible outlook on the world. In an email this morning she showed a stunning lack of knowledge of Passover and its key rituals:

Passover is a time of remembrance and thanks. This festival provides us all — Jewish, Christian and all faiths — an opportunity to reflect on the challenges we have faced and the triumphs we have achieved together. It is also a reminder of the resilient spirit that has carried people through trials of every kind through every generation.

“This week, as we break bread and spend time with our families and friends, I hope we also take a moment to say a word of thanks for our freedom and for those who have given their lives in freedom’s name. Let us also look ahead with hope to the opportunities to come.

Someone who actually does understand what happens at a Passover seder, SF Chronicle reporter Carla Marinucci, explains why this is a huge FAIL for Failorina:

OK, so Fiorina needs a little help in the campaign research department: Bread is a definite no-no on Passover, the Jewish holiday also known as the “Festival of the Unleavened Bread” the annual remembrance of the escape of the Hebrews from Egyptian slavery. On the run, they didn’t have time for bread to rise, so at this time of year, to commemorate that plight: it’s matza, please — matza.

Oops. This particular FAIL has gotten a lot of attention on the blogs and Twitter this morning, with former Orange County resident Atrios offering one of the best replies:

carly fiorina will celebrate rosh hashana with traditional bacon and cheese sammich

At some point you have to wonder what if anything aside from pure greed and a massive ego is driving Carly Fiorina’s campaign for US Senate. She is not only clearly unqualified for the position, not only brings a long record of massive failure encapsulated by having run Hewlett-Packard into the ground, but doesn’t even have a basic grasp of how to reach out to your electorate without offending them on one of their most important holy days.

Jean Ross and the California Budget Project have long ago proven themselves to be indispensable to the progressive movement in California, particularly to helping us cut through the BS and understand what is actually going on with the state budget. They’ve gone and proved their value again with this list of myths about the state budget – and what the truth really is. A sampling:

Myth: The largest share of the state budget goes to prisons.

Fact: The state spends 4 times as much on K-12 education than prisons, and 3 times as much on health and human services than prisons.

Myth: State spending is out of control.

Fact: State spending is $21 billion below the 2004 baseline projections, and as a share of the state economy, spending is lower than at any other time since the early 1970s.

Myth: California’s schools don’t have a “money problem”

Fact: By all measures, California’s schools rank near the bottom in terms of per pupil spending.

Myth: Raising taxes during a downturn is bad for the economy.

Fact: Prominent economists agree that spending cuts are more harmful to the economy than carefully targeted tax increases.

The full CBP report busts those and several more myths, all accompanied by charts that show very clearly what the truth is. It’s definitely worth a read.

Overall, it paints a very clear picture of what has happened to California’s budget. Hammered by the worst recession in 60 years, tax revenues suffered a catastrophic fall, worsening a situation in which the state already was keeping taxes artificially low. Since 2007, Sacramento has made the choice – and the CBP makes clear that it was indeed a choice – to enact austerity budgets characterized by unprecedented cuts that have shrunken state government to its smallest size (proportionally speaking) in 40 years. That comes despite the fact that the recession has increased demand for state services, and as the CBP shows, despite the fact that the most effective form of economic stimulus comes in the form of health and human services programs like food stamps.

These mythbusting facts are good things to keep on hand the next time you hear someone spout off about California’s “spending problem” or about some other aspect of the budget debate that cannot be supported by the evidence.

“It” refers to granting amnesty to undocumented immigrants. In 1986 Ronald Reagan signed a bill that included amnesty provisions, yet conservatives and Republicans still revere him. That 1986 bill did not destroy America or its economy, as we had at least two sustained periods of significant economic growth in this country afterward.

Despite the myriad other problems facing California, Meg Whitman and Steve Poizner have apparently decided that “illegal immigration” is the most important issue facing Californians. Both have written op-eds in today’s LA Times on the issue, and both try to outdo each other in opposing amnesty, blaming immigrants for California’s problems, and pledging a crackdown, even though none of this is either practical or necessary.

Meg Whitman:

As a Republican, I believe it’s important to both continue our rich tradition of protecting the rule of law while diligently reaching out to the millions of Latinos who share our values.

While I am a strong proponent of legal immigration, I am 100% opposed to granting amnesty to immigrants who entered the country illegally. It is the wrong policy for California, it is the wrong policy for America, and it is grossly unfair to those immigrants who have followed the law to obtain legal status….

Taken together, these steps would make a significant difference in reducing the burdens of illegal immigration without casting unneeded and discourteous aspersions on Latino American citizens and driving them away from the Republican Party.

I have been criticized for opposing Proposition 187, which was on the California ballot in 1994. It is true that I am opposed to cutting off public education and healthcare services to immigrant children. I do not believe that kids should be punished for the sins of their parents.

This is notable for a few reasons. First, it’s one of the first times Whitman actually acknowledges she’s a Republican, something she won’t do in her TV ads. Second, it shows she is calling Reagan’s own policy “wrong for America.”

Third, it is intended to show she is sensitive to concerns that she might alienate Latino voters with this stance. She mentions her opposition to Prop 187 not out of a desire to clear the air, but as a signal to Latino voters that she’s not Pete Wilson (just that he’s one of her key advisors).

She’s gambling that her 50-point lead over Poizner is enough cushion to try and ever so timidly reach out to Latinos. There’s no reason to believe Whitman is driven by anything other that political calculus here, and it doesn’t hide the fact that the Republican Party as a whole in this state remains deeply hostile to Latinos, does not see them as legitimate members of our society, and instead sees them as a scapegoat at best, villains at worst.

If any evidence of that is needed, just read Steve Poizner’s op-ed:

Above all, California has too many policies that reward illegal aliens and act like magnets, drawing them to and keeping them in our cities and communities. We have to change those policies.

Ten other states, including neighboring Arizona, have passed laws to cut taxpayer-funded benefits for illegal immigrants. We need such legislation too. In this time of fiscal crisis, we can’t afford to subsidize the presence of illegal aliens.

One taxpayer-funded benefit for illegal aliens that should be stopped is in-state tuition at our public colleges and universities. Today, California is one of just 10 states that allow illegal immigrants access to reduced college tuition at taxpayer expense.

In other words, Poizner actually does believe that we should punish children for their immigration status or that of their parents. He justifies this by claiming that such policies act as “magnets” for immigrants, which is total nonsense.

As Poizner almost certainly knows, immigration is driven largely by job opportunities in this state. Immigrants have been among the hardest hit Californians during this recession, especially those engaged in agricultural and construction work, industries with unemployment rates of 30%-40% depending on the location.

Poizner thinks the path to the Republican nomination lies through bashing Latinos and immigrants. Usually that might work, but with a 50 point deficit, I’m doubtful it will. Still, by once again scapegoating immigrants for economic problems caused by others (large corporations and banks), the Republican candidates are once again unleashing a monster of hate and intolerance. It’s unnecessary, and Californians will be able to render their judgement on these vicious campaign tactics in November, no matter who the Republican nominee turns out to be.

Most Californians accept the reality of global warming. They also understand that its effects are to be taken very, very seriously – from rising sea levels that threaten the SF Bay Area and the Port of LA-Long Beach to drought and firestorms to threats to the wine industry. Only a fool would say we have no reason to take quick and aggressive action on global warming to forestall and/or deal with these and other related impacts.

So does that make Carly Fiorina a fool? Or just a global warming denier? Check out what she told the Sacramento Bee:

Calling it an “unbelievable job killer,” GOP Senate candidate Carly Fiorina today urged the elimination of California’s landmark global warming law….

And she said the science involved in global warming should be subject to more scrutiny.

“I think we should have the courage always to examine the science,” she said.

Fiorina, caring not a whit about the thousands of jobs AB 32 has created in the green tech industry, has apparently declared herself a climate scientist. She’s offered no facts or analysis to support her claims that AB 32 kills jobs or that global warming science needs greater scrutiny.

More importantly, she’s proved that she cares nothing at all for the millions of people who either live in a place or depend on places that will be underwater if the Greenland Ice Sheet or one of the Antarctic Ice Sheets melts in the coming years and decades.

I guess all those people who live and work in those areas don’t count as much as the handful of folks who might possibly be impacted by AB 32. Not to Fiorina, who seems to believe that any change to the status quo is bad, even if that change is designed to avert catastrophe in the near future.