All posts by Brian Leubitz

Uncategorized

Majority Vote: Was It Worth It?

4 Comments

PhotobucketTimm Herdt at the VC Star has a great profile of Kenneth Burt (a really sincere, good guy) of the California Federation of Teachers and his idea for a majority vote measure focused only on the budget.  There is a lot of background here.  As we’ve been trying to get majority vote for both revenue and budget for a long time, the story is a complicated one.

But, for the more recent history, you have to look back to at least 2004, when Prop 56 took a beating as it tried to change the threshold for both budget and revenue to 55%.  Say what you want about how that initiative was managed, and there could really be a book about that, but it went down in flames.  Chapters could include 55% vote vs simple majority, media strategy, and ads, to name a few.  That being said, it did put a whole chunk of fear into left-leaning organizations vis a vis reducing the supermajority measures at the ballot.  Burt and AFT, along with AFSCME, were not deterred and think it was an overall success:

Over the objections of progressive Democrats who wanted to take another shot at a majority-vote-for-everything initiative, Burt and his allies stuck with the art-of-the-possible approach.

He is the first to admit that the majority-vote budget signed by Gov. Jerry Brown last week isn’t pretty. The spending reductions it includes are painful and regrettable, he says.

But the majority-vote budget allowed two important things to happen, Burt argues.

First, it allows school districts and local governments to make their plans for the coming year without being placed in a summer-long limbo, guessing what the state budget might look like.

Secondly, he says, “It prevented Republicans from demanding more special-interest corporate tax breaks in return for their votes.”(VC Star)

Success is best judged more than a few weeks out from the process, but I think it is pretty hard to argue that that budget is any kind of success.

I was at an event a few years ago where Alberto Torrico and Loni Hancock were debating the merits of a majority vote measure, but they differed on the question of whether to include revenue.  As we’ve seen, the budget part was clearly possible, but what really happened is that Democrats now did the Republicans dirty work.  

Republicans just sit on the sideline, demanding crazy stuff, and then proceed to do pretty much nothing.  Meanwhile, the Democrats have to do what they didn’t want to do all along, with no support outside the party.  So the Republicans got the cuts-only budget they’ve been wanting for years, and had to lay nothing on the line.  And then when election time comes around, they rally against the cuts to county services, demanding that the state return money to the counties.  Or, some idiot wants to secede because his County lost some Vehicle License Fee money.  Interesting that said idiot wasn’t calling for secession when we cut the VLF under Schwarzenegger and couldn’t pay for it.

So, for the short-term, Prop 25 got us a budget. An ugly budget, but a budget nonetheless.  Whether it was good for California in the long-run is still to be decided.

Uncategorized

Online Voting Registration Inches Forward

SB 397 (Yee) basically tells the State of California to haul its backward IT practices into the 21st Century.  Online voter registration is not really that difficult of a technological problem.  We have all the necessary data (including your signature from the DMV) that we could possibly need, so why the hold up?

Well, have you see the state’s various websites? They all scream 1998, and that’s probably being generous. The daily records for both houses are nearly impossible to find, and then bewildering once you do.  And online voter registration, well, you can print it out and mail it in.

But, should this law pass, that would be a thing of the past.  The measure would require counties to allow online voter registration well before the current 2015 deadline.  The bill just passed out of the Assembly elections committee and will hopefully be on the Governor’s desk in no time.

Maybe next we can get him an online veto pen.

Health Care

AB-52 Comes Up For a Committee Vote

5 Comments

(Seneca Doane has a great diary where he is keeping track of the votes and one here with all the phone numbers. If you know somebody in these districts, be sure they call in. Local opinion matters!  Sens. de Leon, Alquist, Hernandez and Rubio should all be top targets.   – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

Last week, I had a brief chance to speak with Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones, and before he and I had to attend to other matters, he briefly stressed the importance of AB-52’s pre-increase rate regulation.  The first thing that you have to consider, of course, is that AB 52 would greatly expand the Insurance Commissioner’s power.  Now, Jones has been pushing the bill even when Poizner was calling the shots, so there must be something else.

That something else is the poor division between the Department of Insurance, which Jones heads, and the several other departments in the executive branch that manage health insurance.  When it comes down to it, the elected Commissioner, under the current system, actually has relatively little power in that whole process.  AB 52, at its core, is a simple regulation that would give the Dept. of Insurance the power to block unreasonable rate increases.

For an industry that has some rather unclean hands, it unsurprisingly fighting this tooth and nail.  It is a majority vote measure, so they must rely on a few Democrats to hold up the process.

Tomorrow’s vote is the Senate Health Committee, and under normal circumstances, with two co-authors of the bill on the committee, would likely get at least a party line vote.  But these are hardly normal circumstances, and many of these Democratic Senators have a insurance money habit that is quite hard to break. nyceve has a diary up at dKos with the names and numbers of the Senators on the Committee, which you can also find below the fold.  If I had to prioritize my calls, I would go Hernandez, Alquist, Rubio, de Leon, Wolk, DeSaulnier, in that order.  But, if you are a constituent of any of these Senators, please, please call them right away.

There will be more work to go to get this through the Senate, and then pressuring the Governor to sign it.  However, this important first step should not be neglected.  Get those phone calls in as soon as possible.

  Senator Ed Hernandez (Chair) — 916-651-4024

  Senator Elaine Alquist — 916-651-4013

  Senator Kevin de Leon — 916-651-4022

  Senator Mark DeSaulnier (AB 52 co-author) — 916-651-4007

  Senator Michael Rubio — 916-651-4016

  Senator Lois Wolk (AB 52 co-author) — 916-651-4005

Budget, Jerry Brown

The Budget is “Done,” Now What?

18 Comments

(I hope you had a Happy 4th! I’ll be on KPFK today to talk about the budget around 8:40 or so.  You can listen live anywhere, or in LA, tune into 90.7FM. – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

PhotobucketYou see that picture on the right? Notice anything missing? Well, Republicans for one.  And, you know, they typical fanfare for these things, as only three media folk were allowed in.  Hardly the big campaign-starting event that Jerry had hoped for.

So, what now? The Republicans, through their own obstinacy continue their slide toward irrelevance.  And what of Jerry Brown? Hardly a progressive champion that some had hoped, or even the good ol’ fashioned dealmaker that he had sold.  Not for lack of trying, but today’s Republicans are a different breed than those of a generation ago.

What can we do to build any sort of long-term plan for California’s budget. I’ve heard many plans over the six years that I’ve been running Calitics, but none have really come to pass.  Maybe the next one?

I’ll be on Your Call Radio today at 10 AM eastern.  You can listen at 91.7 in San Francisco, or stream it live (or podcasted) at YourCallRadio.org.

Budget, San Francisco

Local Sales Taxes are Coming

7 Comments

While the legislators are getting paid again, California’s budget wrangling is not yet over.  Or, more properly, the dominoes are now falling.  Yesterday, I mentioned that we would likely see some local sales taxes appearing on budgets soon.  And, well, it didn’t take long for that to happen:

But San Francisco voters might be asked on Nov. 1 to enact a local half-percent sales tax on April 1. The half percent raises the sales tax to 9 percent, still cheaper than consumers are paying until July 1. However, the benefit is that San Francisco retains all the money raised by the hike.

Mayor Ed Lee, who is proposing the increase, says the half-cent tax would generate about $60 million annually for The City’s coffers and be used to pay for rising costs of police and firefighter salaries, as well as public health and social services. (SF Examiner)

The measure would void itself if the state sales  tax were increased again, and then sunset in 2022.  However, given the Republican obstinance over revenue, a legislative sales tax increase seems unlikely. In San Francisco, this stands a decent shot of passing, but the 2/3 vote requirement on the November ballot still puts a high hurdle.  However, as of right now, it looks like there will be near universal support for the measure from elected officials in SF.

The bigger question is whether other municipalities will be able to accomplish this.  Certainly in some of the redder areas, this is pretty much off the table.  But as local budgets start bleeding a little bit more, don’t be surprised to see more of these in 2012.

Budget

Amazon.com Ditches California

11 Comments

You may have heard something about the tax situation in the budget.  There aren’t any real increases, as you know, no Republicans voted for it.  But there are a few things that do attempt to increase revenue.  Most publicly, there is the so-called “Amazon tax”, which isn’t really a tax at all.  All it does is instead of depending on Californians to keep track of their purchasers from major online retailers and then pay use tax, and puts it on said major online retailers.

You’ve been paying your use tax dutifully every year, right? Right?  Well, if that was the case, then Amazon wouldn’t be going to lengths that it has gone to avoid charging sales taxes to California residents.  Because here’s the news on that front, they’ve decided to terminate their affiliate program in California due to the new requirement to collect sales taxes:

For well over a decade, the Amazon Associates Program has worked with thousands of California residents. Unfortunately, a potential new law that may be signed by Governor Brown compels us to terminate this program for California-based participants. It specifically imposes the collection of taxes from consumers on sales by online retailers – including but not limited to those referred by California-based marketing affiliates like you – even if those retailers have no physical presence in the state.

We oppose this bill because it is unconstitutional and counterproductive. It is supported by big-box retailers, most of which are based outside California, that seek to harm the affiliate advertising programs of their competitors. Similar legislation in other states has led to job and income losses, and little, if any, new tax revenue. We deeply regret that we must take this action.

As a result, we will terminate contracts with all California residents that are participants in the Amazon Associates Program as of the date (if any) that the California law becomes effective. We will send a follow-up notice to you confirming the termination date if the California law is enacted. In the event that the California law does not become effective before September 30, 2011, we withdraw this notice. As of the termination date, California residents will no longer receive advertising fees for sales referred to Amazon.com , Endless.com , MYHABIT.COM or SmallParts.com . Please be assured that all qualifying advertising fees earned on or before the termination date will be processed and paid in full in accordance with the regular payment schedule.

Of course, they have no proof that job losses are arising from anything but their own obsitancy from paying their fair share.  They use government services heavily, after all, their packages go across interstate highways and city roads maintained by the government, and that whole internet thing? Yeah, that was originally a project of the government.  But they don’t give a crap about any of that.  They are about one entity and one entity alone, and that’s Amazon.com.  

They like that they get this unfair advantage on price.  Sure, big box retailers aren’t exactly notorious good actors, but at least they pay their freaking taxes.  Amazon complains that it is just too hard for them, or they can’t process it.  Frankly, that’s BS.  They manage to maintain a catalog of millions of products, I’m pretty sure they can handle the few lines of code and a few checks for sales tax.

So, with that, as a former “affiliate” of Amazon, I have now switched to Barnes & Noble, who pay their taxes.  You can find that link in the upper right corner.  Furthermore, there are these other institutions.  You can walk in to them, and actually see the products IRL.  Crazy, but true.  Please, consider supporting your local businesses first before you give the money to an unsupportive partner like Amazon.  

Budget, Jerry Brown

Instability Reigns

(I’ll be on Friday’s episode of Your Call Radio to discuss the budget. More info at http://yourcallradio.org – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

A few posts below this, you’ll see a post from a member of the press team of my former employer, Kamala Harris, arguing against the cuts to the AG’s office.  And it won’t take you all that much Googling to find similar complaints from other quarters.  Most interestingly, the Chief Justice of the State Supreme Court is blasting it:

“The cumulative impact of the cuts to the courts in the last three years will have the effect of court closures, fewer services to court users, and the spectre of more furloughs and layoffs for employees,” she said in a prepared statement. “It will affect everyone and anyone connected to the courts in civil cases, criminal cases, family law, probate, and small claims.”

*** *** **** **** ***

“These cuts are unsustainable and incompatible with equal justice for all,” Cantil-Sakauye warned. “This is a sad day for justice in California.”(Fresno Bee)

The Courts were handed $350 million in cuts, and another $100 million was raided from their building funds.  Not exactly the way to win friends in the judiciary if any of your legislation comes through, I suppose.  But the cuts to courts are really more pernicious than that, as you can end up with criminal defendants denied their rights to speedy trials and other consititional protections.  I have faith in the courts to work some magic to try to balance their competing interest, but this is a very worrisome cut.

On something of a tangent, it might be worthwhile to look at ensuring that all court costs are properly being paid by all parties in litigation.  I don’t blame the courts for this, but on occasion, you’ll find defendants can get off without paying their share of court costs depending on timing of a settlement or other proceedings.  

But really, this budget is filled with worrisome cuts.  Deep cuts to higher education that will force higher taxes tuition for students.  Delays to K12 funding that will challenge our teachers and hurt our next generation.  And, as noted already, some very real cuts to law enforcement.  As Sen. Steinberg has pointed out several times in the press, we are now at one of the most austere budgets in a generation or more.

But even with this austerity, we have not arrived at anything representing stability.  There are a plethora of reasons for that, but the biggest of all of these is clearly Prop 13’s insistence on a preference for income and sales taxes over the more stable property tax.  Sure, this budget includes the Amazon tax provisions championed by Sen. Hancock and Asm. Skinner, but these revenue sources are hardly sufficient to overcome the loss of the taxes at the end of the month.

As the dominoes fall from this budget, expect instability to continue to raise its head.  Already several counties have discussed applying a local tax to recover some of the cuts from the loss of the sales tax.  Expect such a measure to appear to show up as soon as the November ballot in San Francisco, and perhaps elsewhere next year.

These funding levels themselves are unsustainable for the long haul.  Eventually things fall apart. Infrastructure crumbles, the mentally ill are exposed through homelessness and crime, and the state becomes a less welcoming place for rich and poor alike.  And when you talk about business friendly climates, stability is always at the top of the list.  For so long we have been able to balance the act through super glue, chewing gum and duct tape.  And so it goes this year, with the “triggers” being this year’s duct tape.

But for all the drama of the past few months, the Republicans have to look back at this process with some fondess and some regret.  Ultimately they got what was their stated goal of drastic cuts. But because of their obstinacy, the rest of their ransom note got essentially nowhere.  Perhaps that can be some consolation to progressives as we try our best to make do with what is pretty much a disaster budget.

This was supposed to be the year that we got some breathing room for the budget that allowed us to do some long-range planning and to drastically reduce some of this instability.  Clearly that didn’t happen, but don’t be surprised to see some sort of revenue measure on the November 2012 budget.  

Uncategorized

Woolsey Makes Retirement Official

4 Comments

With the budget news and the San Francisco redistricting hearing, I never got to the retirement of a progressive champion in Congress:

Rep. Lynn Woolsey confirmed Monday what many had suspected for some time — that she will retire from Congress when her 10th term ends in 2012.

In a press conference in the backyard of her Petaluma home amid a crowd that included family members, local officials, news reporters and political supporters, Woolsey said, “I will turn 75 years old just before the next election and after two decades of service to this wonderful district it will be time for me to move on.

“So with enormous gratitude and not one ounce of regret,” Woolsey said, ”I am announcing that I will not run for re-election in 2012. I will retire at the end of this current term.” (BayArea News Group)

If there’s one thing that you can say about Rep. Woolsey, it is that she never failed to follow her conscience.  She has pursued social justice throughout her tenure in the house, and her voice will be sorely missed.

One can only hope to find another strong progressive to fill that seat, whereever its boundaries may be.  Dick Spotswood had a good overview of the potential competitors last week.  Depending on turnout, we may just see a Dem-on-Dem general election in November.

Environment

Why are You Fracking Around With My Water?

3 Comments

We interrupt your regularly scheduled budget crisis to bring you this message about your water.  Perhaps it is just me, but I like my water to be free of all sorts of undisclosed chemicals. But the oil and gas companies? Well, they drink Evian of course, so what does it matter?!  Toss some random hydrocarbons in there, it is ALL good.

Fortunately, Asm. Bob Wieckowski has introduced, and passed out of the Assembly, AB 591 to force the energy companies to disclose their chemicals.  You see Dick Cheney, never know for his love of transparency, thought it a great idea to keep a bunch of chemicals that will enter our water table secret.  Our friends over at Credo and the CA League of Conservation Voters are working to make sure that bill passes the Senate. They have a petition that you should probably sign on to letting your Senator know about your support for the measure.  

California’s water is threatened by toxic, carcinogenic chemicals — and we don’t even know what they are.

High Pressure Hydraulic Fracturing (or fracking) is a dangerous method of drilling for oil and gas that is responsible for contaminating water across the country. The practice is spreading at an alarming rate, and California’s huge Monterey Shale formation is one of the top prizes for frackers.

Astonishingly, thanks to the work of Dick Cheney and his secretive, industry-friendly 2005 energy policy, fracking has been exempted from EPA regulation, and as such, companies can largely conceal the long list of chemicals they pump deep underground, through our water table.

A vital new state law would change that, and set the strongest standards in the nation for fracking chemical disclosure.1 The bill, AB 591, has passed the Assembly, and is now in the State Senate, where the oil and gas industry’s numerous allies are working to stop it. We can’t let them. Please urge your senator to pass AB 591.

After you have signed the petition, consider going one step further by contacting your Senator’s office and letting them know that you think disclosure is important.  Now, we only need a simple majority, but Democrats occasionally need a bit of spine stiffening when the lobbyists descend.  And on this they will surely descend.

Budget, Jerry Brown

Trigger of Doom?

4 Comments

I was at the San Francisco redistricting commission hearing, so I missed a rather major breakthrough in the budget negotiations: a deal between the Legislature and the Governor.  

Gov. Jerry Brown and Democratic legislative leaders announced today that they have reached an agreement on a new majority-vote budget plan.

“We’ve had some tough discussions, but I can tell you that the Democrats in both the Senate and the Assembly have now joined with the administration and myself and we have a very good plan going forward with the budget,” Brown said at a press conference in his office this afternoon.

The proposal, outlined in this post, assumes that the state will bring in an additional $4 billion in revenues in the upcoming fiscal year, based in part on higher-than-expected revenue figures in recent months. If those revenues fail to materialize, steeper cuts to programs including K-12 schools, higher education, public safety programs and In-Home Supportive Services would occur later in the year.

“We have severe trigger cuts that will be triggered and go into effect (without the projected revenues),” Brown said. “And those are real.”(SacBee)

The cuts are very real and very substantial.  However, they were cut by an additional $4b in extra revenue that wasn’t previously accounted for.  The “trigger” makes Ana Matosantos quite a powerful person as she has to certify how much of that revenue has actually shown up. I guess you could play with semantics for a while to determine whether this is actually a “gimmick,” but it does push off some of the really hard decisions until next year.

Ultimately, this budget does what our previous budgets have done, it gets us into next year.  And the cuts are simply devestating. At some point, we have to address the structural deficit, and this doesn’t do it.  Whether that is through a long-term reform like Prop 13 changes, or through a more temporary tax program, something has to change.

More details of the budget should come out tomorrow.