I was going to mention the deal that was struck last week to restore the San Joaquin River, but, other things arose.  However, I would like to point out the arrangement, and not my head vigorously in support of the pact.

This week there was good news from farther afield in the South Bay’s “back yard,” the vast San Francisco Bay watershed that extends from the Sierra to the Golden Gate. On Wednesday, environmental groups, Central Valley growers and the federal government announced an agreement to settle an 18-year-old lawsuit and restore the San Joaquin River, dewatered more than a half-century ago by the construction of Friant Dam near Fresno. (SJ Merc 9/14/06)

Think about this.  There are going to be salmon there! Probably.  The river should eventually flow all the way back into the Bay Delta.  This is a river right now that well…underwhelms.  A viable San Joaquin River benefits everybody along its path. 

Bill Lockyer is leading a charge to seek damages from major car companies for the pollution that automobiles emit.  It’s the first such suit. :

California Attorney General Bill Lockyer sued the six biggest U.S. and Japanese automakers Wednesday, claiming their cars’ greenhouse gas emissions contribute to global warming that harms the state.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Oakland, claims human-induced global warming has reduced California’s snow- pack and the fresh water it provides; raised sea levels along the California coast; increased smog over cities; and boosted the threat of wildfires. This collective public nuisance has cost the state millions for assessments and preparations, it says.

“Defendants, by their annual emissions in the United States of approximately 289 million metric tons of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, are substantial contributors — among the world’s largest contributors — to global warming, and to the adverse impact on California,” the suit says.

Named as defendants are General Motors Corp., Toyota Motor North America Inc., Ford Motor Co., Honda North America Inc., Chrysler Motors Corp. and Nissan North America Inc. (OakTrib 9/21/06)

Of course, if you asked me who was the problem, I’m not sure that I would point solely to the car companies.  The real problem is that the prices of both cars and gas do little to internalize the externalities of the ecological damage that they wreak upon the environment.

I think the suit is a valid one.  The car companies are enablers for our oil addiction. The car companies claim it’s a political stunt by Lockyer.  But let’s be honest here.  Claude Parrish?  Who? yeah, that’s Lockyer’s opponent for Treasurer.  To say that Lockyer is a VERY large favorite is a bit of an understatement.  I don’t really think Lockyer really needs this kind of stunt.

Rather, I think this is an attempt at a novel legal tactic. Like the gun manufacturers, car makers must own up to their responsibility for our oil-addicted economy.

So, just in case you haven’t heard about the drama involving the LA Times, Marc Cooper gives a nice little recap:

Some have called it an “Alamo strategy.” The editor of the L.A. Times, Dean Baquet, has boldly drawn a line in the sand against his own employers, saying he refuses to make $10 million in cuts being demanded by the Tribune Company.BaquetDean_L.jpg

The general public may shrug it shoulders, but this battle is indeed of titanic proportions for journalists and for the future of journalism. Baquet has been joined in his public defiance by none other than publisher Jeff Johnson. And by an ad hoc group of 19 L.A. luminaries who suggest that the best thing to do is for the Tribune Co. to back off and maybe to relinquish control of the Times to local entrprenuers (several local billionaires including David Geffen have already volunteered to make the buy).(Marc Cooper 9/19/06)

First of all, I must admit that I have a little bit of a grudge against the Tribune Co.  As a lifelong Cubs fan, why the hell can’t you people field a winner!?!  You know why? It’s because of their corporate philosohpy, “Put the bare minimum in, and not a penny more.”  The LA Times isn’t exactly the greatest paper in the world, but it’s sure as hell far better than the Chicago Tribune.

These staff cuts would hobble the Times, and prevent it from gathering the stories that it should be gathering.  The Times should be the paper of record on the West Coast.  The Tribune Co. would abdicate that role faster than the Cubs swoon in June.

So, everybody, write letters to the editors of the Times, supporting them for their principled stance.  We need the Times more than the Tribune Co. needs a few more pennies.

Charlie Brown’s candidacy is no longer some little joke in the district.  Brown’s internal polling (via TPM) (so take it with a grain of salt) shows a dead heat on name recognition alone.

Charlie Brown (D) 39
John Doolittle (R) 49
Neither  3
Don’t Know 17

Now, once you give positive campaign statements for each candidate, Brown has a sizeable lead. (positive and negative)

Charlie Brown (D) 47 (45)
John Doolittle (R) 39 (38)
Neither  3 (6)
Don’t Know 11 (12)

So, it’s pretty obvious what needs to happen in the next few weeks, huh?  We need to make sure that as many people as possible know Charlie’s background, his beliefs, and his ethics. Of course, all that takes money, so check out the Calitics ActBlue page too.

Schwarzenegger has signed Villaraigosa’s LAUSD control bill, and thus, Antonio’s Big Gamble^TM is on.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger handed Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa a much-anticipated prize Monday, signing a law that will give the mayor substantial control over the Los Angeles public schools.

Appearing together for a bill-signing ceremony at the Los Angeles Central Library, the officials said the change would bring new accountability to a system that fails students, teachers and parents.
{snip}
“I’m asking for people to hold me personally accountable for leading improvement in the schools,” the mayor said. He urged school board members to drop their challenge. “Accept the will of the people,” he said. (LA Times 9/19/06)

You know, this is really a huge gamble on Villaraigosa’s part.  The weakened bill that ultimately passed gives him only moderate power over the schools.  He has some authority, but it’s quite tempered by other mayors outside of the 3 high schools he will control. What can he accomplish? Schools can take a long time for improvement. Will he really be able to get results in time for his next election?  Additionally, it’s possible that the state courts might invalidate this whole deal.

But on the other hand, it appears the weakening could provide him with an escape route. If schools don’t improve, he can point out that he wasn’t given all the power he requested.

This is all quite uncharted territory.  It really is his Big Gamble^TM.