Oil is a big issue these days.  For some reason, people seem to think that it is overpriced.  But if you ask me, it’s still cheaper than Evian ($1.85 for a half gallon at Safeway!).  I’m sorry, but until gas is more expensive than bottled water, I can’t be all that concerned.  To me the problem isn’t so much the gas prices as the way our economy is built to rely on cheap gas.  Personally, after having seen An Inconvenient Truth I think we need to dramatically reorganize our economy to interalize the costs of oil. 

But that’s not how either candidate for governor sees it, so we go with what we got.  The populist feeling is that gas is too expensive, and that the oil companies are responsible for that.  According to a Field Poll from last August,

The recent big increases in gasoline prices are viewed by 71% of Californians as a serious matter, particularly by those with lower levels of income. The run-up in fuel prices has forced a sizeable segment (40%) to cut back on other areas of spending, and to some extent, change their driving habits in ways that reduce gasoline consumption.

A majority of Californians (58%) places a lot of the blame for the current surge in gasoline prices on the oil companies. More than four in ten also ascribe a lot of the blame to the Bush administration (47%) and to foreign oil-producing countries (41%). (Field Poll)

Both candidates have responded to these sentiments.  Schwarzenegger ordered an investigation to see if oil companies were price-gouging. Angelides has countered by supporting Proposition 87, which would charge oil companies for every barrel of oil extracted in California and then spend the money on alternative energy.  Now, California itself has little power to truly affect the gas price situation, but when TV cameras are rolling, why would a lack of authority stop a gubenatorial candidate from pontificating?

At an Earth Day beach cleanup in April, Schwarzenegger said he was prepared to go after oil companies if he found they engaged in price gouging. He noted that “some people have to make a choice between having money for food or putting more money into gas.”

Schwarzenegger in April directed state agencies to work toward having California produce 20 percent of its own biofuels by 2010 and 40 percent by 2020. In 2004, he called for a “Hydrogen Highway” that would place hydrogen stations every 20 miles in California on major roadways.

State Treasurer Angelides said Californians “are ready to find ways to cut their gasoline use, save the family budget and help the environment.” He has pledged to reduce fossil fuel use by 25 percent over the next decade in California and wants all vehicles sold in-state to be capable of running on ethanol or other alternative fuels.
***
Angelides said the November initiative would give Californians much-desired alternatives to oil while cutting into record energy profits. Schwarzenegger campaign spokeswoman Katie Levinson said the governor opposes it because it imposes a new tax, though she carefully described his position in a statement. (SacBee 7/3/06)

Angelides has been taking the position that Republicans in general, especially Bush, are to blame for the gas crisis.  And connecting Shwarzenegger to Bush isn’t really that hard (I’m talking to you Steve Schmidt).  The presence of Prop 87 means that there will at least be plenty of discussion about oil prices as we head into the election.  If gas prices continue to rise, it might become even bigger.  The issue can get wrapped up with the environmental and coastal protection issues that have been getting plenty of attention as well.  But if we see $4.00, get ready for lots of talk on the subject.

Arnold Schwarzenegger has promoted his record of bringing enrollment in Healthy Families to record levels.  And when running for governor in the recall election, Schwarzenegger promised to provide health coverage for every child.  This much is true, more than 90% of California children now have some form of health coverage.  Now, his claims of credit are a bit more misguided:

“Frankly, I think kids’ health care in California is close to being a success story because 92 percent of all kids are now insured,” said Kim Belshé, Schwarzenegger’s secretary for Health and Human Services.

But state data compiled by the California HealthCare Foundation show programs that cover children grew much faster under Democratic Gov. Gray Davis than under Schwarzenegger. Davis was recalled, in part, because the state ran up a record budget deficit under his watch. A lot of that money went to expand the same health care programs that Schwarzenegger is now touting.

The governor’s own efforts, meanwhile, have been slowed by factors ranging from the deficit he inherited — in his first budget Schwarzenegger tried unsuccessfully to cap enrollment in Healthy Families — to resistance from his fellow Republicans in the Legislature. With their votes needed to pass a state budget, Republicans succeeded last week in forcing Schwarzenegger and Democrats to drop proposals to extend health insurance programs to all children, including illegal immigrants. The governor had earmarked $23 million to provide coverage for children in 18 counties who do not qualify for Medi-Cal or Healthy Families because their families are not poor enough or are illegal immigrants. (SacBee 7/3/06)

The governor has used the Davis boom-time legacy of spending on child health insurance to build his own record.  He has done little to actually accomplish anything that brings up the rate of enrollment, as the slowing enrollment has shown.

So, health care supporters are forced to turn to the initiative process to get something done.  The tobacco tax, Prop 86, that will appear on the November ballot will provide funds for coverage of all California children.  Now, I have some remaining questions about Prop 86, but the fact that we can’t get universal child healthcare done is a sad statement.  The GOP has chosen to make children thier pawn in this immigration game that they are playing.  It’s not right, and it’s not fair to the children of California.  All of our children deserve quality health care.

Why is Arnold Schwarzenegger’s office spying on you?  Arnold is releasing a bucketload of documents for reporters to review, and claims it was an oversight by an independent contractor:

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s office said Saturday he was ordering the release of dozens of intelligence reports prepared for the state Office of Homeland Security — a step that comes as lawmakers from both parties are denouncing a practice in which state intelligence agents compiled information about political and antiwar protests and rallies.

Schwarzenegger administration officials say there were only two cases in which state homeland security agents collected material on political protests in recent months. Releasing the full trove of intelligence reports will prove that point, assuring the public that the practice was not more widespread, according to those officials.
(LA Times 7/2/06)

More on the flip…

So, you ask, just who is he spying on?  Well, George Miller, the Alameda County Congressman, for one.

Rep. George Miller (D-Martinez) said in an interview that there should be a “very, very high threshold” for removing anything and that the reports should not be sanitized. The congressman attended an antiwar rally in Walnut Creek in March that was listed in one of the intelligence reports, in a section called “Upcoming California Protests.”

You would think that this is an outlier. A one-off bad incident.  It will never happen again.  Except that it’s happened before, and the department assure the legislature that it wouldn’t happen again.

State Sen. Joe Dunn (D-Santa Ana), who led the hearings on the National Guard, said the homeland security episode is fresh proof of the need for greater oversight.

Dunn said he wants to create a special legislative intelligence committee that would monitor California’s fast-growing homeland security apparatus. Lawmakers serving on the committee would receive a special security clearance. He said he has broached the idea with the Senate leadership.

“I am very pleased that they’re willing to share all the reports,” Dunn said. “However, I was assured after the one spying incident in May 2005 by the California National Guard that the practice was not more widespread at the state level. We now discover that those assurances were patently false. I hope the current assurances are a little more truthful than the ones of a year ago.”

First of all, I’m more than a little bit troubled that we have some outside private contractor conducting spying missions on the people of California.  Isn’t that the job of this “homeland security” infrastructure?  And then, of course, there is the general idea of spying on anti-war protesters.  Is there a reason for this at all?  Assumptions of anti-Bush positions?

Arnold himself needs to promise that this will never happen again.  Dunn’s idea of legislative oversight is an important first step to assure the privacy of all Californians.

Arnold Schwarzenegger headlined the Log Cabin Republicans annual fundraising dinner.  This group of self-loathing gays heard Arnold deliver that they were darn close to being just as human as heterosexuals.  And they deserved most, but not all, of the rights:

Schwarzenegger spoke at a fundraiser for the Log Cabin Republicans, the first time he’s addressed a gay and lesbian audience since becoming governor. Some in the audience hailed his record on gay rights and cheered as he took the stage, chanting “Four more years!”

Critics in the audience said they wanted to hear why they should support a politician who vetoed a same-sex marriage bill and who has promised to veto another high-profile bill that would add gay and lesbian history to California’s public school curriculum. (SF Chronicle 6/30/06)

Yes, why indeed?  Is there a reason that you would support a governor who rejects your relationships?  Well, the Governator didn’t have much to say on that front:

But the governor said relatively little during the speech, mostly thanking Log Cabin members for their work and saying they were his friends and he loved them. He did address gay rights, though not directly.

“In our society, we need a higher level of understanding, not a lower one. And we need an understanding of tolerance that is stronger, not weaker,” the governor said. He never mentioned his veto of the same-sex marriage bill beyond saying that he and the group might not always agree, but they share the same values.

Ah yes, the same values, except the one about equality of our relationships.  That one…yeah he doesn’t share it so much.

From Marc Cooper:

More good news: Not all Democrats, apparently, are pantywaist apologists for the current epidemic of flag immolation. The stalwart Dianne Feinstein, the U.S. Senator from California who is virtually unchallenged in this fall’s election, took a bold public stand by forthrightly stating:

“I rise as the main Democratic sponsor of this amendment. I have given this a lot of thought for a long time. I believe what we have before us is language that is essentially content neutral. It is on conduct–not speech.”

Yeah, yeah, she’s a decent Senator in that she’s no Joe Lieberman, but she’s no Barbara Boxer either.  And thankfully, this is more than likely the last time she will run.  Picture it, the year is 2012, Phil Angelides is halfway through his second term, and California’s two Senators, Villaraigosa and Newsom, are working for passage of Universal National Healthcare.  Sounds good, huh?

The Jerry Lewis scandal looks like it could be worse than the Duke-Stir Affair.  Sure, Duke was taking bribes. Lewis, however, is actively running a corruption organization.  He seeks to spread bribes around the SoCal GOP Congressional Delegation, past and present.  And he’ll take a taste every now and again.

Redlands-based ESRI has received a federal subpoena as part of an ongoing investigation into Inland Rep. Jerry Lewis and his ties to a Washington lobbying firm, a company official said Wednesday night.  The company, which specializes in mapping and geographic information system technology, is one of more than 28 Inland companies, local governments and institutions that are clients of Copeland, Lowery, Jacquez, Denton & White. (Riverside Press 6/29/06)

More on the flip…

ESRI has received millions of dollars of non-competitive contracts from the House Appropriations Committee, which, oh by the way, Lewis is chairman of.  The Appropriations Committee under Lewis has become corruption central, with earmarks flying fast and furious with little regard to the cost of anything or the capabilities of the companies.  These no-bid contracts end up getting subcontracted out repeatedly so that the government barely knows, if it does know at all, who it’s working with.  The failure of Katrina bussing is a direct result of such a subcontracting.  The original contractor subcontracted out, who in turn subcontracted out again.  When crunch time came, the busses were nowhere to be found and FEMA could do little but look on as people were left in squalor at the Superdome.  But don’t worry, Jerry Lewis gets plenty of money for the Inland Empire!

Lewis has helped secure more than $1 billion to the Inland area in recent years, including more than $90 million to ESRI for projects that include work on reconstruction plans in Iraq.
***
But ESRI has received earmarks — the special projects inserted by lawmakers into federal legislation and often without public debate.  In a letter to employees in May after media accounts about a possible investigation into Lewis, ESRI president and co-founder Jack Dangermond said the non-competitive awards the company has received support the government in times of emergency.
***
Copeland Lowery clients have received millions of dollars in congressional earmarks, a practice under increased scrutiny by federal authorities. Firm partner Bill Lowery is a former congressman and a close friend of Lewis, R-Redlands. The firm has also employed former Lewis staff members. … [N]o charges have been filed against Lewis or Copeland Lowery.

Yet.