All posts by Brian Leubitz

Uncategorized

California’s Violent Video Game Legislation Falls to First Amendment Jurisprudence

3 Comments

Given the recent first amendment jurisprudence, especially this doozy of a decision protecting the rights of corporations to doctors’ individual prescription history, the decision to strike down California’s violent video game legislation should come as no surprise.  Yet, I’m sure that won’t soothe Sen. Yee (the author of the legislation) all that much.

The Supreme Court on Monday struck down California’s ban on the sale of violent video games to minors.

In a ruling closely watched by other states and the entertainment industry, the court in what amounts to a 7-2 ruling determined that California’s 2005 violent video game restrictions violated free speech rights protected by the First Amendment.

“Even where the protection of children is the object, the constitutional limits on governmental action apply,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the majority. (SacBee)

While I do admit to being a nerd, I’m not all that much of a gamer.  Yet, I was never a huge fan of this legislation.  Penalties were rather harsh, but a strong argument could be made on both sides.  Sen. Yee and Gov. Brown, however, did support the measure quite strongly.  Brown, as Attorney General, pressed the case to the Supreme Court.  And now, well, we lost.  That’s not necessarily a bad thing on this particular issue, but it raises other questions.

So what have we learned from this episode? Well, it certainly confirmed that the Supreme Court believes that the First Amendment is really First. It has become monumental in its authority.  It now controls political funding to medical data, “speech” that the founders would never have envisioned at their time of the drafting of the Constitution.  I do not really care to psycho-analyze Madison and Hamilton, the Court already has that covered far too well, but how are we really to address the issues of the nation if we have a view of the Constitution that is so inflexible for modern times.

Perhaps you like this decision, or perhaps you don’t.  But when speech related issues come before the Legislature again, you can bet they will be chastened by this decision.

Budget, Jerry Brown

Jerry Ever-so-slyly Hints at An Attack on Prop 13

6 Comments

You don’t have to dig too hard in the Calitics archives to find our disdain for Prop 13. Or for that matter, I doubt many astute observers of politics would be surprised at the position repeated here many times.  However, it has been so sacrosanct for so long, that few have dared to touch it.  Sure, there have been a few haphazard attempts to tweak it, or even “split the rolls” by allowing reassessment of commercial property.  The one that comes to mind first is Phil Ting’s recent Close the Loophole campaign.

But nothing really took off.  We’ve been stuck with Prop 13 for an entire generation with no real signs of movement. It’s strangled our schools, left us with a wildly variable tax base, and led to many a budget crisis over the years.  

But Jerry Brown understands that it is the third rail. After all, some point the finger to his administration’s slow reaction to the growing anti-tax movement in the 1970s.  And it was Brown who proclaimed himself a “born again tax cutter” after it passed.  So he’s not going to challenge it directly.  But, you know, those mean unions, they aren’t down with the big landlords like he is.  They are really something of a wild card that he can’t really control:

Gov. Jerry Brown hinted Thursday that if the budget talks with Republicans break down, the initiative fight that would follow would not be limited to Brown’s plans to raise sales, vehicle and income taxes. He said he expects labor groups to pursue changes to Proposition 13, tweaking the current caps on commercial property taxes, if no bipartisan deal can be reached.

“I would expect there will be efforts to accelerate the reassessment of commercial property tax,” Brown said. (LA Times)

Of course, such a campaign would be bloody and expensive.  It certainly won’t be taken up lightly.  That being said, if you want stability, and you want tax equity, Prop 13 is the big target on the board.

Budget

On John Chiang and the “Balanced” Budget

25 Comments

Let’s set aside one notion at the front.  Prop 25, the majority vote measure, probably could have won without the legislative pay issue.  I suppose reasonable minds could differ on that one, but given the way the rest of the night went in California, and the weakness of the opposing campaign, it probably passes with or without punishing the legislature.  But, that is speculation at this point, and those who drafted it faced some very serious questions that the legislative pay provision addressed.  So, Prop 25 carried a provision that punishes the legislature for not passing a budget on time.

Of course, the word “balanced” has been read in there by John Chiang.  From the perspective of the long-term power of the Controller’s office, it is something of a boon.  From the perspective of a legislature able to follow their conscience during some rough times, perhaps not so great.  

And, as George Skelton points out in his column today, it might not even be that good of politics.  Sure, kicking the legislature is always a fun sport, but it’s never so simple:

State Controller John Chiang’s conclusion that the gimmicky budget passed by the Legislature and vetoed by Gov. Jerry Brown didn’t merit legislative paychecks heaped pressure on the lawmakers to quickly pass an honest spending plan. Absent a sudden Republican epiphany on taxes, that almost certainly will result in more sharp cuts to public schools.

That, in turn, will infuriate the teachers unions whose financial backing Chiang will need if he ever tries to run for governor. State employees unions also will be livid if there are deeper program cuts and layoffs. (LA Times)

Overnight, Chiang has gone from being the guy who stood up on behalf of state workers to Arnold Schwarzenegger, to being the guy who helped to enable a nasty budget.  That won’t do any good for your popularity in the general session of a CDP convention.

But, there’s something else here.  Kicking the legislature, especially the Democrats that tried to pass some sort of real-world budget (well…almost).  Thing is that while some of the Legislators can afford to be without a month of pay, this will be a serious strain on others.  Whether they would be willing to put their name on a lawsuit is another question, but this sort of thing matters.  Their salaries have already gone done by almost a quarter over the last few years, and this adds insult to injury.

The pay provisions might make a budget happen sooner, but how much do you want to bet who gets pushed more on this.  Democrats need every vote, while only a few Republicans need to vote yes.  The pay provision will only push us towards a scary cuts-only budget faster.  Demonizing the Legislature is fun, but in the end, counter-productive.  We need a legislature with the strength to stand up to bad budgets and not be forced to agree to something on the basis of their mortgage payments.

Budget, Jerry Brown

Alterna-Plan

5 Comments

Well, Jerry Brown’s original plan to let the people vote on tax extensions has apparently been scuttled by the Republican minority, and the Governor is going back to the drawing board.  It is not pretty:

Gov. Jerry Brown told Democratic lawmakers Tuesday that he was preparing an alternative to his budget proposal and would present it to Democratic leaders as early as Wednesday.

Brown’s statements were confirmed by multiple lawmakers who attended closed-door meetings with the governor and his senior aides Tuesday. Brown spokesman Gil Duran said the administration had no immediate comment.

Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, described Brown as “fairly circumspect” about this alternative proposal, which is expected to include deeper cuts to state programs in place of the higher vehicle, sales and income taxes Brown originally proposed. (LA Times)

The breadth and depth of these cuts is still unclear.  Also unclear is whether there will be private attempts to get some sort of revenue into the system.  Of course, the legislature and Governor would have to call a special election to get anything done before next year’s primaries, but that only requires a majority vote.

I’m not sure how we manage this exactly.  Perhaps the cuts will be of such a public and visible nature that we can win a revenue measure next year?  At any rate, it is hard to argue in any way that a cuts only budget is in any way a good solution.

Uncategorized

DiFi Under 50% Again

7 Comments

When Sen. Feinstein came in under the 50% back in the spring Field poll, most figured it was something of a fluke.  But today we find out that, no, those numbers appear to be pretty accurate.  Today’s Field poll show her again under 50%:

As Feinstein prepares to run for re-election next year, California voters are inclined to support her, 43 percent to 39 percent, according to the poll.

That four-point margin – the same as Feinstein posted in a Field Poll earlier this year – is her smallest ever in a pre-election year. First elected to the Senate in 1992, her margins of pre-election year support ranged from 19 percentage points to 29 percentage points before, the poll said.

Yet Feinstein’s public approval rating remains favorable, with 46 percent of voters approving of the job she is doing, according to the poll. Thirty-one percent disapprove, and 23 percent have no opinion. ()

Now, before you read too much into this, there are still a lot of questions before thinking that she’s actually vulnerable.  First, no prominent Republican candidate has really emerged for the race.  Second, a primary challenge under the Top-2 system is virtually impossible. Given that voters can vote for anybody, the chance that a Democrat could defeat Feinstein and not just win the right to a rematch seems pretty slim.

Perhaps it is worth to keep a bit of an eye out on this race, but until I hear of a credible candidate, this looks to be Sen. Feinstein’s race to lose.

Uncategorized

Chiang: No Pay for You!

9 Comments

Well, the legislators sort of assumed that the budget that they passed last week would be sufficient to keep their paychecks coming under Prop 25.  It is something of an interesting legal question as to whether the passed budget has to be “balanced”, but that’s the way Controller John Chiang is reading it.  So, unless a legislator wants to challenge him (good optics there), that’s how it is going to be.  And, today, Chiang said that the majority vote budget from last week was not balanced to satisfy Prop 25:

In doing so, the Democratic controller is exercising unprecedented authority Tuesday, establishing a new role for his office under Propositions 25 and 58 to determine whether a legislative budget is “balanced.”

“My office’s careful review of the recently-passed budget found components that were miscalculated, miscounted or unfinished,” Chiang said in a statement. “The numbers simply did not add up, and the Legislature will forfeit their pay until a balanced budget is sent to the Governor.”

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

“The Controller is, in effect, allowing Legislative Republicans to control the budget process and I believe that’s a very unfortunate outcome that is inconsistent with the intent of Proposition 25,” said Speaker Pérez, D-Los Angeles. “In the coming days, we will be taking additional budget action informed by the Controller’s analysis, and consistent with the values of the budget we passed last week.” (SacBee)

Two things are clear, this “balanced” requirement gives the Controller a hefty new power, and it also restores some of the power that Prop 25 took from the Minority.  While the daily well-being of the legislators isn’t likely to be on the line anytime soon, this move does give the Republicans a small bit of additional leverage over the process.

It’s a gimmick, but perhaps a gimmick that changes the playing field just enough to actually make a difference.

UPDATE: Sen Steinberg was no fan of the decision as well, saying “he Controller’s decision today sets a dangerous precedent. The impact on legislative members is real, but it pales in comparison to the impact on school children, the elderly, and the men and women who protect our safety. This decision will not change our commitment and obligation to stand for the people we represent.”

Uncategorized

Woolsey to Make Announcement Next Week

8 Comments

Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey has long been rumored to be a possible retirement.  No matter how the lines are drawn, the Marin-Sonoma centered seat will be a safe Democratic seat.  She criticized the draft maps for removing Santa Rosa from the Marin-Sonoma based district that she represents.  In fact, she was really the most outspoken elected official on the maps.  The criticism rose a few eyebrows.

So, with that speculation running high, I got a little message in my inbox today:

WOOLSEY ANNOUNCEMENT

Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Petaluma), joined by Rep. Barbara Lee and friends and

family, will make an announcement at her home next Monday.

TIME: Monday, June 27, 2011 3:00pm

We’ll keep you updated with more details next week.  Rep. Woolsey has always been an outstanding champion of progressive goals. If she does choose to retire, we must hope for a leader with dedication as strong as hers.

Prisons

A Chance to Change 3 Strikes?

6 Comments

Undoubtedly, “3 strikes” as a concept remains popular.  But dig a little deeper and there are a lot of questions:

The San Jose Mercury News reported last week that a group is crafting ballot language and seeking high-profile endorsements for an initiative that would require that a third strike result only from a serious or violent felony conviction. Under California’s law, a third strike can be assessed for any felony, at times bringing sentences of 25 years to life prison for those convicted of crimes like petty theft.

On the same day the Mercury News article published, the Field Poll released survey results (PDF) showing 74 percent of registered voters would support altering the three-strikes law.

Thing is, back in 2006, Prop 66 had similar support before a horde of DAs and “ToughOnCrime” folks decided that discretion for judges just wasn’t necessary.  Apparently we need a hard and fast rule that locks up thousands of people for sometimes rather petty crimes.  The current 3-strikes prison count is at about 6% of the prison population, or about 8800 prisoners.

We should hear something about this proposed change to the policy, and then we can proceed on whether it is a step in the right direction.  But at this point, it is hard to see how anything could be worse than what we’re doing.

Uncategorized

Will There be A Congressional Frenzy Next Year as the Music Stops?

6 Comments

With the draft redistricting maps, all of the members of Congress are busy trying to figure out where they will run.  The musical chairs as Reps. shift down the street or to another area entirely won’t really be complete until we get a real map.  At this point, it looks like the commissioners are working pretty well together, and may actually get a map. (Oh, and if that happens…well, I was wrong about them not being able to agree. But I’m still waiting to admit anything yet.)

But as the musical chairs progresses, a few folks who didn’t have a seat before are looking for one now.  And the Top-2 system might play in here.  In an area mainly represented by Ken Calvert (R-Corruption and Riverside Cty.), who is looking towards shifting to a different district, a sitting Supervisor thinks it might be time to launch a campaign from the center:

Five-term Riverside County Supervisor John Tavaglione said Thursday he would run for Congress in a newly proposed district that overlaps much of his current territory. … As currently drawn, that seat would contain slightly more Democrats than Republicans and Gov. Jerry Brown bested his Republican challenger, Meg Whitman, by 6 percentage points last year.

Tavaglione, who lives in Riverside, described himself as a moderate Republican with a record of working across party lines.

“I believe we need to see balance — and strong balance — within our legislative offices in order to get things done,” he said. “That takes strong leadership and I’ve proven myself in that regard.” (Riverside P-E)

Now, that district could, and really should, be a Democratic district.  If the presidential election is a blowout for Obama in California, this seat will probably ride the coattails.  Otherwise, who knows.  However, it is no sure thing that a “moderate” like Tavaglione will be the GOP standard bearer, and Dems are likely to find somebody with a similarly “moderate” record. But there are so many variables here with Top 2.  How many Dems run, how many Republicans run?  The Dem bench is a little thin in this area, so it would be surprising to see more than a couple competitors.  However, at least one other Republican, Asm. Jeff Miller, who is not a “moderate” announced he is in for the seat.  Expect others.

Of course, this process is playing out in other districts across the state.  The North Coast will likely be looking for a new Congress member, and the rumors of Noreen Evans running might not work as her Santa Rosa base is now in a seat that Mike Thompson will likely pursue.  Norman Solomon and a Jared Huffman are also looking at that one.

With the Top-2 system, both June and November will carry much weight as these races sort themselves out.  Now we just wait on the Commission…

UPDATE: More intrigue, with Asm. Isadore Hall saying he’s running for one of the new seats, but only if Maxine Waters doesn’t want it.  You’ll find his release over the flip.

Assemblymember Isadore Hall Announces Campaign for Congress                                                    

Compton, California – California State Assemblymember Isadore Hall announced his campaign for Congress today.  Hall intends to run in a new Congressional District, which according to the first draft of maps released by the California Citizens Redistricting Committee on June 10th, might include the cities of Compton, Carson, Lynwood, Hawthorne, Gardena, Lawndale, portions of the City of Los Angeles and Unincorporated Los Angeles County.

“As a local School Board Member, Councilmember and Assemblymember, I have worked tirelessly to make a difference in this community,” said Hall. “Our district needs a representative that will fight cuts to education and gang prevention programs, protect critical frontline services, and partner with President Obama to create family wage jobs.”  

“I have spent the past few days talking with friends and community leaders about running for this new seat,” Hall added.  “The response has been overwhelming and I am energized by the grassroots support we have already received.”

Hall is a former two term President of the Compton Unified School District Board of Trustees. He was elected to the Compton City Council in 2003 where he served in various leadership positions including Mayor pro Tempore.  Hall was elected to the California State Assembly in 2008 and served as Assistant Speaker pro Tempore during his first term. He currently serves as a member of the Appropriations, Elections and Redistricting and Human Services Committees. He chairs the Assembly Committee on Government Organization.

The youngest of six children, Hall was born and raised in the City of Compton.  Hall holds a bachelors degree in Business Administration, a Masters Degree in Management and Leadership from the University of Southern California, a Masters Degree in Public Administration from National University and will be conveyed his Ph.D. from Next Dimension Bible College later this summer.

No incumbent member of Congress currently lives in the proposed Congressional District; however, Hall will not seek election to Congress in the event that Congresswoman Maxine Waters seeks to represent the new district.