At the debate last night, moderator and KTVU political editor Randy Shandobil got frustrated with Fiorina’s evasive answers on Prop 23.  Apparently the other reporters at the post-debate press conference were getting pretty frustrated with the situation as well.

Well folks, I’m going to let you in on a little secret.  Carly Fiorina supports Prop 23 and the death of AB 32.  She said as much in the debate. When she evaded the answer, she said specifically that it would “make sense to suspend it” or something to that effect.  Ladies and germs, that is what Prop 23 is arguing that they want to do.  Not sure how much more clear it can be made. She can hem and haw all she wants, but she can’t jujitsu this one.  She opposes Prop 23, but doesn’t want to say as much because that will turn off environmentally minded voters and signal that she isn’t some sort of moderate that she is trying to play.

Nope, Carly Fiorina is just another short-sighted CEO who couldn’t even manage the short-sighted goals of increasing stock value at HP.  She likes to posture, even going so far as hiding her impressive educational resume to build up her “rags to riches” street cred.  But, California voters can see through these charades.

Jim Sanders has some interesting thoughts, many of which have passed between my two ears over the last couple of weeks with the closing of the legislative sessions. Specifically, there have been a few instances of crass political maneuvering outweighing policy.  Not that it is anything new, nor is the impact of lobbyists anything innovative. But it seems, as the legislature has completely lost its institutional knowledge, the power of the almighty lobbyist dollar has become magnified. And Sanders has some specific examples, take for example the interesting case of the plastic bag measure, AB 1998.

Plastic bags have been “banned” from major San Francisco groceries for several years now.  The sky has not fallen, and prices have not skyrocketed. You see more reusable bags these days (which is an incontrovertible good), and a bunch more paper (which is a bit of a wash).  But, what is also clear is that the plastic bags are killing the San Francisco Bay and other California waterways.  Millions are floating around the bay, and drastic action is necessary, as these things just don’t break down over any short-term horizon.

But, you know, as Dustin Hoffman learned in The Graduate: “plastics!”

Supporters of the plastic-bag ban struggled to overcome an army of lobbyists – including former Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez – and a tsunami of “misleading ads,” said Dan Jacobson, of Environment California.

“Money was no object,” he said of opponents, who also unleashed a flurry of political donations.

“If the American Chemistry Council wasn’t in the middle of the debate, this would have been a no-brainer bill getting through the Legislature and to the governor’s desk,” said Assemblywoman Julia Brownley, a Santa Monica Democrat who proposed the ban.

But Tim Shestek, of the chemistry council, said accusations of undue influence unfairly ignore that the coalition of AB 1998 supporters was high-powered as well, including grocers, labor groups, environmentalists and legislative leaders. (SacBee)

Was it a fair fight, maybe, maybe not, but the greater issue is that the paid corporate interests are now drowning out the voices of the people. Even if legislators make a concerted effort to talk to constituents, they get flooded with industry spurred communication.

There are many reasons for these issues, and some have no simple cure.  BUt surely, some sort of fix that allows our legislators to gain the upper hand through experience in their position before they are on to the next gig would be a reasonable starting point.

The Senate debate will be streamed live at 7 PM on ktvu.com, as well as on the real tv in the Bay area on Channel 2. See the flip for full details on where to watch/listen to the debate.

There are a number of major issues to be discussed, but expect to hear a lot of questions about the economy, jobs, and perhaps a word or two about the environment. Any thoughts?  

August 31st, 2010 by Ian

Tomorrow night at 7 p.m. PDT, Senator Boxer will debate Carly Fiorina, and we hope you’ll join us by tuning in and watching live. Here’s where you’ll be able to see the debate:

On TV:

Bakersfield                                     KGET

Chico                                             KRVU

Eureka                                           KEMY

Fresno                                           KMPH

Los Angeles                                   KTTV

Palm Springs                                 KMIR

Sacramento                                   KCRA

Salinas                                           KSBW

San Diego                                      KGTV

San Francisco                               KTVU, KICU            

Santa Barbara                               KCOY

C-SPAN TV National Coverage

C-SPAN Radio National Coverage

On Radio:

San Francisco (Radio)                  KQED-FM

California (Public Radio)               NPR

San Francisco (Public TV)            KTEH

Streamed live on KTVU.com, with links to SFGATE.com and KQED.org

Meg Whitman has an ad out with some specifics about how she’s going to cut 40,000 jobs without harming state services. And she’s really serious about this.  Only problem is that her plan is really nothing new at all, her “facts” are just wrong, and as an added bonus she goes after the most needy among us while ignoring those who skirt taxes and the billions of unnecessary tax loopholes and credits.  Stay classy Meg!

Take a listen to the ad here, the biggest part of this plan is for a civil grand jury to go through and find the “waste, fraud, and abuse.” That would be a great idea for some body to go through and compile a list of everything that should be combined, reduced, and other savings opportunities.  So great in fact that it has been done before.  And not like done before thirty years ago, but done before as in 2005.  Arnold Schwarzenegger had this same plank, but he dubbed it the California Performance Review.

These sorts of reviews aren’t really all that cheap, so what Meg is asking the state to do is to write another report, on the taxpayers dime, when the CPR is still sitting there. Sounds like some waste to me.

Meanwhile, as she continues on the “billions of waste, fraud, and abuse” right-wing canard, she’s really talking to the right-wing base, in the whole wink-wink way.  When she says there are billions of waste in IHSS, Medi-Cal, and welfare, what she is talking about to the right-wingers is the whole concept of those programs.  To them, IHSS is a big waste. That is until one of their family members gets sick and they need to rely on state assistance. If you look at the actual reports, IHSS fraud exists sure, but not to such a great extent that it is really any more prevalent than other workplaces.

California Watch investigates another flaw in the ad, her statement of fact that the LAO has called 150 employees at the Department of Education superfluous.  Of course, they have now changed that to 70 people, months before the ad went on the air, and even that number is heavily disputed by SPI Jack O’Connell, who has said that cuts on that scale would stop the Dept. of Education from carrying out the tasks assigned to it under law.  

The whole ad is feeding into the theory of government is not supposed to do anything, shutting down our infrastructure, and stopping the cycle of investment that worked so well for us as we made California into the truly Golden State. Meg Whitman’s future is a grim future, where there is no such thing as a fair share, where everybody is left to fend for themselves, and the governor’s gig is just a stop on the way to the top for her and her right-wing policies.

San Francisco has a lot of courts, and a lot of litigation is done here.  So, there is always a need for jurors.  I’ve been called several times, and a word for the wise: Hope for the civil courts: the facilities are much nicer as you wait there.

But, it seems that Queen Meg Whitman deigned to join the common folk for jury duty yesterday:

Her campaign said Whitman was called, showed up, filled out the questionaire today — and is actually still in the jury pool. She may still be called to return later in the week, they said.

The funny part: the judge actually asked the former eBay CEO if she had any hardships, or scheduling problems with serving. That’s when she informed him that…uh, she was running for governor of California.

Darrel Ng, spokesman for Whitman, issued this statement: “Meg Whitman was called to do jury duty today. She enjoyed meeting her fellow potential jurors this afternoon, but looks forward to returning to the campaign trail where she can continue to tell Californians about her plans to create 2 million jobs during the next 5 years.” (SFGate)

Isn’t it sweet that she introduced herself to the fellow jurors? Super sweet! I wonder if she introduced herself to the court employees that she hopes to fire as well. But, you know, she’ll tell them how she’d definitiely, totally, going to create a new job for them (perhaps as her private plane pilot?!) once they are laid off. It’s going to be great. Seriously!

Props to Carla Marinucci and the SF Gate crew for the follow-up joke: at least we know she is registered to vote now.

But that brings up the larger question, doesn’t it?  For years she hadn’t even registered to vote.  Of course, that generally means no jury duty as well. But what else does Meg Whitman not do because she is…umm…Meg Whitman?

Oh, the possibilities when you are uber wealthy!

Pete Wilson has a long and sordid past in this state.  Casting aside some of his early work in San Diego, his run as Senator left something to be desired, to say the least. He considered himself a “fiscal conservative”, going so far as to go by the moniker of “Watchdog of the Treasury.”  Yet all the while, he was one of the bigger supporters of the Strategic Defense Initiative (“Star Wars”) in the Senate, despite the fact that SDI never showed any glimmer of actually being able to do anything.

And then, as he comes back to California to be governor as some sort of victory lap, where he proceed to well and truly make the situation worse.  He never met an insurance reform bill that he wouldn’t veto for a bit of campaign cash from the industry, and apparently couldn’t find room in his heart from a plea from Mother Theresa on a death penalty case.

Besides his cruel veto of a workplace discrimination protection measure for gay and lesbian Californians, he went on to pass the vile Proposition 187 along with his re-election bid of 1994.  He used the measure to beat Kathleen Brown over the head with the issue, despite the fact that the measure was unconstitutional on its face.  That it was later ruled as such by federal courts didn’t really make a difference for Wilson. After all, he had been re-elected.

Toss in a few anti-labor measures, and there you have a quick summary of Wilson’s career. I suppose at this juncture, I should point out the work he did for reparations for Japanese internment victims, but his record is hardly one of a lifelong commitment to civil rights.  So, this is where he re-enters the game in a big way.  He is now the co-chair of the campaigns of both Meg Whitman and Steve Cooley. And he’s doing everything he can for both of them.

To reduce Wilson’s role in Whitman’s campaign to the immigration issue or to one “tough as nails” radio ad, however, is to miss the significance of his involvement.

Early in the contest, Wilson’s support was significant in signaling to GOP insiders that Whitman, with no political experience, could run a credible campaign.

He came with a Rolodex full of donors and consultants, many of whom helped Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger win election. He also had the perspective of being a former two-term governor and U.S. senator. If Whitman cared to talk strategy, he is the the only Republican to have defeated her Democratic opponent in an election.(SacBee)

You think that’s some big involvement? How about the fact that Steve Cooley has said on numerous occasions that it was the former Governor that recruited him for the AG’s race, rather than the other way around.  Wilson has taken to the role of elder statesmen (or Obi-Wan as the article called him) of the GOP.

But this course is not without risks.  Californians should not forget his role in Prop 187, and his cynical use of families as a wedge issue. Or his fight against the right to organize through his so-called “paycheck protection” measure.  Wilson had it all planned out, and he is still trying to pull the strings on the marionettes. One can only hope we are better at seeing through Whitman than we were cutting through Wilson’s bull.