After introducing herself and asking the crowd if they were ready for a female speaker, Nancy’s speech went into iraq, civil liberties, and homeland security. She also said that a D congress would repeal oil tax subsidies. 

Also, the party is webcasting the convention. Check it out at ca-dems.org 

I apologize for any typos,but I’m on my cell.  This morning started off with a typical Willie Brown speech. You gotta give it to the man, he does outrage really well.

The convention continued with a panel of Karen Bass, Barbara Lee, and Diane Watson speaking about the future of black Californians. It was an interesting discussion about a  lot of issues that are frequently ignored.

The flood season is over, or so it seems:

Typically, flood season runs from the first of November through about mid- April, Hinojosa said; this year, heavy storms continued right up to Easter, and the threat along the San Joaquin River has lingered.

Now, however, the Sacramento River system is running well below the “monitor” and “flood” stages, with plenty of room to accommodate water from snow melting in the Sierra.
***
Sacramentals need not fear a flood from all the melting snow, Hinojosa said. Reservoirs and river channels in the Sacramento River system, which includes the American and Feather rivers, have plenty of space for conveying the oncoming water flows.(SacBee 4/28/06)

Now, the only remaining question is whether the state and federal governement will return to its ostrich-like stance on the levees (“Uhh…sure they’ll hold…let’s talk about my plan to ban E-D drugs from the prisons”).  They still need work so that we don’t have the “next New Orleans” on our hands.

Listening Governator Schwarzenegger?

(Bumped with new material – promoted by SFBrianCL)

UPDATE: Bill Bradley said today that he believes Angelides is close to getting the endoresement:

The two Democratic candidates for governor, Controller Steve Westly and Treasurer Phil Angelides, go into the state Democratic convention that begins today in Sacramento with Westly leading in public and private polls and at odds with Angelides over an independent expenditure advertising drive funded by Angelides’ campaign finance co-chair and former business partner. While calls around the party indicate that Angelides is on the verge of winning the long expected pre-primary endorsement of the state party he once ran, a private Democratic poll of primary voters shows a 10-point lead for Westly.(NWN 4/28/06)

Now, I’m sure Mr. Bradley has good sources for this, so I’m sure it’s pretty good info.  Overall, the post is mostly about Westly and Angelides whacking each other over the head with campaign finance allegations.  (Just one more reason for publicly financed campaigns.)  However, Mr. Bradley prefaces the tale of the cross-allegations with this:

Neither Democratic candidate is ready for the prime time of running against an incumbent governor who was once the biggest movie star in the world.

Not only does he write this, but he bolds it.  (Mr. Bradley is a fan of highlighting what he thinks is most important for the reader.  Actually, it’s quite a time-saver, but it seems like it might be a bit insulting to some readers.)  So, what is meant by that?  Well, he goes on to explain:

Republicans around the former action superstar scoff at Westly’s one term as state controller, saying he has “left no footprints in the snow.”…As for Angelides, while they say they don’t care which Democrat Schwarzenegger ends up facing, his tax-and-spend liberalism and developer background clearly offers them what one calls “a target rich environment.”

So, they don’t think Westly can beat Schwarzenegger because Westly doesn’t have enough gravitas?  Are you kidding me?  Arnold, the action movie star…has more gravitas?  If they want to play a gravitas game, I’m thinking…”It’s not a tumor.”…Arnold in drag going to Mars…He just screams gravitas.

And Angelides has given California a plan to fund education.  Yes, it involves tax increases.  But if there is one thing that Californians are willing to absorb tax increases for it is education.

Personally, I think both matchups give us some great talking points for June-November.

See the flip for the old post…

2 months ago, this was a simple question.  Angelides had the 60 percent of delegates wrapped up.  Well, times have changed.  With Westly’s lead and his continuing money edge, Westly might have the votes to block Angelides from getting the nod.

An estimated 1,800 Democratic delegates will decide Saturday at the Sacramento Convention Center whether the state party should officially endorse one of the candidates before the election. A winner would have to secure 60 percent of delegate votes.(SacBee 4/27/06)

Angelides has a large lead over Westly in the “party insiders” category.  But I think there are enough delegates getting a little queasy about Angelides and sensing the advantage in having a candidate that can compete financially with Gov. Schwarzenegger.  In my mind, the race is still quite tight, and it won’t be easy for Angelides to get people to jump off the fence at thihs point.  But, ultimately, the question is, does the party’s endorsement even matter?

The state Democratic party has not endorsed a gubernatorial candidate in a contested primary since state Attorney General John Van de Kamp beat Dianne Feinstein in 1990. Van de Kamp reached 60 percent only after a recount found he cleared the hurdle by six votes out of 1,544 cast.

But an official party endorsement is no guarantee: Feinstein ultimately won the primary.

Prop 82 held a huge lead in the February Field Poll. In that poll, 82 was up by a 21-point margin (55-34). In last week’s poll, 82 had only a 13-point lead (52-39). Yes, that is still a sizable lead, but losing that much support that quickly can’t be a positive for its supporters. But, I think there is another worrisome number hidden in the bottom of the big table of statistics in the poll. If you scroll down to the bottom of that table there is a breakdown by whether the respondent had heard of 82 before the survey. Respondents that hadn’t heard of 82 (44 % of respondents) strongly supported it (55-33-12). However, respondents that had heard of it gave a support/opposition ratio that was within the margin (49 46 5).

The reason that this is worrisome for the future of 82 is that there will be lots of “education” in the next 6 weeks. 82 sounds good on a ballot, but it can be spun negatively. Its costs are uncertain. Its public face (Reiner) is enduring some challenging times and can be villified by the right. In other words, what I’m saying is that Prop 82 is in a classic position of vulnerability to a media campaign.

UPDATE: PPIC’s statewide education survey is out. They have a 11 point lead for 82 as well, but at only 50% support, passage is still in doubt.

Proposition 82 – which would fund voluntary preschool education for all four-year-olds in California through a
tax on wealthy state residents – is currently supported by 51 percent of likely voters, with 40 percent opposed. Democrats (64%) are more likely than independents (50%) and Republicans (38%), and Latinos (63%) are more likely than whites (47%), to back the measure. Is access to preschool perceived as a problem in the state today?
Seven in 10 likely voters express at least some concern that children in lower-income areas may not be able to attend preschool.

More on the flip…

So, yes, it appears that 82 has lost its momentum. Of course there are the numerous politicians who have removed their support. Schwarzenegger couldn’t endorse it due to the radical right wing of his party.  But the SF and LA Chambers of Commerce are taking a little bit of a risk supporting 82, especially as the statewide Chamber is basically now the lead opponent.  By the by, is Rob Reiner running for governor?  No?  Really, Becuase you would sware that he is based upon the website name for the opposition to Prop 82: www.stopreiner.org.  I mean WOW!  That’s some serious pandering to the right.  They always need somebody to hate…this time it’s Reiner.  It’s actually quite unfortunate.  Prop 82 should be judged on its merits…not some BS about Reiner.

But at least part of the progressive shift away from 82 is due to the fact that elected officials are growing tired of legislation bypassing the traditional channels. Would Perata support a preschool program if it was brought in the legislature? Probably? Would it pass? Hell no. Unless the money can be found without taxing, the supermajority rules allow the Reps to block progressive legislation like that. While Burton isn’t in the legislature anymore, that must be part of his logic as well. With the current wave of initiatives, the legislators began quite supportive. They supported the mental health bill that passed a few years ago, they supported the stem cell initiative (for the most part), but now they are realizing that if this tide doesn’t turn, their budget will be eaten alive by the initiatives. Of course in this case, preschool won’t be taken out of the general fund, but rather this new tax on the wealthiest Californians. But, at least in the case of Angelides, this is a tax they already plan on using for other purposes.

Preschool is a worthy cause. And 82, while somewhat flawed, is the best chance of that happening anytime in the near future. Until we reform our governance system to remove these unreasonable obstacles to majority will, we are left with the second best choice. In this case, that is 82.