All posts by Brian Leubitz

Arnold Schwarzenegger

Skelton Sees Recall Folly

6 Comments

Oh, the heady days of 2003; there was a perfect storm brewing that Gray Davis could do nothing to stop. Darrell Issa was busy tossing around his car security cash around in order to be elected governor in the recall election.  Of course, that never happened, as Arnold Schwarzenegger jumped in to the race, and the rest is history.  But what is the CW on that?

Well, if there is a source of Sacramento CW, certainly George Skelton is your man.  And today, he declares that the recall was folly:

One thing should now be evident as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger packs up his office: It was a mistake to recall Gray Davis.

Davis didn’t deserve it. He had just been reelected the year before. He would have been out of office in three years anyway.

Schwarzenegger wasn’t an improvement except for, briefly, providing entertainment. He didn’t make the state’s money mess any better. In fact, it has gotten worse. (LA Times)

Of course, seeing where he is now in the polls, and the position the state is in right now, this takes no great source of conventional wisdom.  During the last seven years, Arnold made some pretty important moves.  But, ultimately, he was a failure because he didn’t understand the system, and his only attempts to change it were at the margin where it is safe and cuddly.

He billed himself as a reformer, and the only reforms he could get through were do-nothing reforms like redistricting and Top 2.  He billed himself as somebody who could sweep away the debt and deficit, but really, he was in no position to do either.  And he never even seriously tried to work for real change on the budget system.  He was content to further aggrandize the Big 5 system, making the system even more closed than it was in the past.

Gray Davis got rolled, but as we learned from Prop 8, the voters of this state can make mistakes.  Some they learn quickly, and others it takes a few years.  It seems with the Mistakinator, it took about 6 years.

Uncategorized

All Supreme Court Justices Recuse Themselves From Building Case

1 Comment

Yesterday I noted that the Supreme Court would likely try to deal quickly with the appeal on the building case, as Schwarzenegger was practically begging for action.  If the 6th district’s stay isn’t overturned shortly, the ball will be in Jerry Brown’s court.  Apparently, Arnold isn’t too down with that, as well, Jerry Brown seemingly opposes the sale.

One problem: the Supreme Court is housed in one of those buildings, and so they have an interest in the litigation.  And under the ethics guidelines, that means that they should recuse themselves from the litigation.  They’ve now done that:

All seven state Supreme Court justices have removed themselves from participation in a lawsuit seeking to block the sale of 11 state buildings. They did not offer a formal reason, but it is safe to assume they did so because their court is housed in the San Francisco Civic Center Complex, one of the properties up for sale.

Because the Supreme Court justices recused themselves, the state will call upon seven appellate court judges to serve in their place, according to Judicial Council spokeswoman Lynn Holton. To select them, the Supreme Court will go down an alphabetical list of judges. That could happen as soon as this week.(SacBee)

Of course, because the 1st and 3rd districts are also housed in the buildings, the pool of judges is a bit thinner than otherwise would be the case.  With all this wrangling, Arnold is rapidly running out of time for his little corporate endeavor here.

Also in that SacBee article was the fact that Schwarzenegger has just named the San Francisco Civic Center the “Ron George Civic Center.”  You’d think that he would confer with the city, but no dice. The whole complex, mind you, not just one building. But lest you be worried, the deal requires the new owners to retain the names of all of the facilities.

Arnold Schwarzenegger, Budget, Jerry Brown

Schwarzenegger is Desperate to Get His Gimmicky Giveaways

4 Comments

Arnold Schwarzenegger has been pressing pretty hard for the sale (and subsequent lease-back) of state buildings.  He thinks it nets us $1.2 Bn in short term dollars, and that’s true.  But long term? Well, the other side is a business, so they understand that it is a long-term win for the corporate interests financing this little ploy.  So, needless to say, Schwarzenegger was miffed when the California Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District blocked the sale from going forward.

Well, the administration has now filed an appeal, and clearly they are worried that Governor Elect Brown will not be nearly as interested in this gimmick:

Schwarzenegger’s attorneys, in a legal brief filed Monday, asked the high court to step in “because time is of the essence and the transaction must close by year end or probably be lost forever.”

*** **** ***

The state Legislature approved the sale in 2009, and Schwarzenegger has vigorously pursued it since.

“For those who say that California is ungovernable, this litigation should serve as Exhibit A,” Schwarzenegger’s lawyers wrote. “This court must act now to prevent this abuse of the legal process by those who put their own petty grievances above the will of the people and the needs of this state.” (LA Times)

If the Supreme Court does not remove the stay from the appellate court, the sale will have to be ultimately concluded by the Brown administration. Brown has previously declined to defend the actions in court, so he’s obviously not a big fan of the plan.  As to whether he wants to dig out another $1.3 billion of debt, well that’s a good question.  However, Brown now seems inclined to stare headlong into the abyss of the budget, and completing this sale seems pretty much the opposite of that.

Expect a ruling from the CA Supreme Court very soon.

Jerry Brown, Prisons

Maybe Now for Prison Reform?

1 Comment

In case you hadn’t noticed, we are pretty much at the moment of perfect storm for the prisons.  They are wildly overcrowded, and generally wild. They are the subject of Supreme litigation to release 40,000 prisoners. They are costing us more than we are spending on our higher education systems, and oh, yeah, there’s the fact that we face about $30 Billion of debt.

So you would think that this would be a super fantastic opportunity to try to do something about the prison situation.  For years, the voters and politicians of the state have been scared of doing anything other than trading on fear.  Rather than working on new solutions was considered too risky.  Thing is, while I was working for Kamala Harris’ campaign, I learned that somebody forgot to tell her that.  Instead, she has throughout her career as SF DA been willing to look at new ways to make this a safer world, rather than just the politically safe ways of locking up every offender and trying to keep the keys far away.

And perhaps we are seeing more Californians noticing that we, in fact, have a few problems here.  From today’s LA Times:

“Smart on Crime” is something of a Harris franchise, the name of her 2009 book. In it, and during her campaign, Harris argued that criminal justice money is wasted on the “revolving door” that prison has become as 70% of the 120,000 convicts released annually end up being caught committing new crimes.

She believes that prison should be the punishment for serious offenders and that greater pains should be taken to prod milder offenders with education, counseling, probation and other community-based support.

“I firmly believe in and advocate accountability and consequences when you are talking about rapists and murderers and child molesters – you’ve got to lock them up,” she said. “But you’ve also got to look at the fact that crime is not monolithic.” (LA Times)

However, we can’t really think that whatever changes are going to be either quick or easy.  At the same time this story (entitled “The time may be right for Kamala Harris”) was published, we get a story of Jerry Brown’s fealty to the prison guards union (CCPOA).

Jerry Brown is preparing to dance with the ones who brung him, specifically 31,000 members of the California Correctional Peace Officers Association. … In a speech that was closed to the public, Brown warned union members that there may not be much if any pay raise. But he also talked about his strong relationship with the union’s leaders and declared that he intends to work out a labor pact with them once in office.

“He reached out to a large segment of his employees and gave them hope,” said Chuck Alexander, the union’s second in command. “It made people feel a little bit better.”(SacBee)

CCPOA has been in a near constant war with Schwarzenegger. It occasionally was helpful, but more often what they were fighting was any attempt at reform. The target of their ire was sentencing reform primarily, as they would prefer to keep more people in prisons (and more guards in jobs).  The relationship with Brown will certainly be different. That’s probably a good think initially, but CCPOA is going to have to open up to reforms, or face some far more drastic options.

The court decision is still looming, but even a “victory” would only be a temporary for our prison and its history of letting people die in their own cesspools.  Everybody is going to need to make some changes in their thinking if we are to really tackle the prisons issue.  CCPOA is going to have to open up to reform.  Politicians, particularly Harris and Brown, are going to have to get really friendly with that third rail in order to provide the leadership our state needs.  And most importantly, our voters have to realize that their is a high cost of the “tough on crime” mantras, especially when not backed up with sensible rehabilitation procedures.

Big change is coming, but whether its delivered through democratic processes, through a court order, or some sort of disaster, well, who knows?

Uncategorized

The Dirty Tricks Initiative is Back

5 Comments

Remember back to 2007.  It was the days of George W. Bush, and you had your mullet. Well, maybe not the mullet, but there were some serious Republican Dirty Tricks going on.  In the continuing effort to a) steal power for the Republicans and b) do some seriously dirty tricks, right-wing initiative filer extraordinaire Ted Costa has brought back the Dirty Tricks Initiative.  He filed it with the AG’s office last week. More from Dan Morain:

With no fanfare, Costa last week submitted to the attorney general’s office an initiative he calls the “Electoral College Reform Act.” On its face, the populist proposal would play to voters’ sense of fairness and desire for competition among candidates.

In reality, this initiative would be a Republican power grab with national implications. The change contemplated by Costa and other consultants could push a Republican to victory in a close presidential race.

“It is the kind of thing that puts the metal to the grindstone and sparks fly,” Costa told me.

Under the proposal, California’s 55 electoral votes no longer would go to whoever wins the popular vote. Rather, they’d be apportioned based on the candidate who wins in particular congressional districts(SacBee)

Here’s the thing. Costa loves to put these initiatives out there, and see what he gets.  Normally, it’s nothing.  But on occasion, see the 2003 recall, he catches lightning in a bottle and he’s off to the races.  The scarier part is that if President Obama doesn’t have any challengers in the primary, we are looking at a very Republican electorate in the presidential primary.

It could be something of a perfect storm, if Costa can get Darrell Issa or some other rich Republican to fund this one.  It was a nightmare last time, and it will be a nightmare again.  If the Republicans take 15-20 electoral college votes from California, it becomes extremely difficult to challenge them.  

At this point, there is a long way to go, but if it does grow, we’ll need to rally again to kill the Dirty Tricks once again.

Uncategorized

Chucky D – I’m Not Leaving Yet

10 Comments

Chuck DeVore was never one to run only when he thought he could win. After all, even were he to get past Carly Fiorina, that matchup with Sen. Boxer would have looked pretty tough. But, never one to ride off into the sunset, Chucky D from the OC has other plans:

“I’m considering a number of interesting opportunities right now, with an eye towards continuing to impact public policy,” he wrote. “But in the long run, I remain passionately committed to returning our government to its founding principles. To that end, I expect to run for office in 2012 — what office remains a question.” (LA Times)

As Shane Goldmacher of the Times points out, the Senate race is really the only statewide race up in 2012.  If DiFi is the Democratic nominee, well, DeVore might outpace Dick Mountjoy’s campaign in 2006.  Now, if there is a different competitor (Gavin Newsom and Debra Bowen are among those rumored to be interested if DiFi retires), well, he still looks a very long shot.

But, that’s ok, for Chucky D, he’s all about the message. It isn’t a message that Californians are anywhere near buying, but he’ll be selling it as long as their is wind in them there pipes.

Budget, Jerry Brown

Jerry Brown as Jacob Marley

16 Comments

In case the education forum didn’t provide enough signs of this, Sen. Alan Lowenthal gave his take on the Governor-Elect’s objective with his budget plans.

Like many observers, Lowenthal predicts Brown will propose a dire budget in January, then push voters to approve a tax increase to preserve services that would otherwise be cut.

“My guess is he will present an austerity budget,” Lowenthal said. “And I think then he will go to the public and say, ‘This is your choice.'”(SacBee)

As Robert posed earlier, it looks increasingly likely that Jerry Brown plans on shocking the California electorate into action. With a budget deficit that is going to be somewhere between 25 and 30 billion dollars, and Brown planning to present a “clean” budget, that is, free of any budget gimmickry or other one-time fixes, any budget that he presents will be truly awful.  CalWorks and CalGrants both probably gone.  The possibility of the elimination of all funding for higher education could also be in the cards, along with sweeping cuts to K-12. You would imagine there would also be continued cuts to transportation and social services.  In-home support and possibly even full-time nursing homes on the chopping block.

In other words, the proposed budget might actually propose a future with the mentally and physically handicapped forced on to the streets, our children lacking on all but the most bare educational resources, and our parks shut.  It’s not really a future that you would think that most Californians would support, but it just might be on the ballot come 2011.

The election will be in the summer, but it might be that Jerry Brown is our Jacob Marley, in that he is offering us a chance of hope. Showing the sins of our past, explaining our budget present, and offering us a way out to build a California for the future.

Uncategorized

Court Blocks State Building Sale Pending Appeal

2 Comments

Last week, a state court judge said the sale of state buildings could proceed as scheduled.  

Today, however, that sale has been postponed as the California Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District, has issued an Order staying the sale of eleven state-owned office complexes to a private investment consortium — California First.  The Court of Appeal has invited the parties to submit briefs prior to the end of the year.  Today’s order means that the Schwarzenegger Administration can no longer move forward with the sale of the properties, which was slated to close on December 15, 2010.

Looks like the sale of the state buildings is just one more ball that landed in Jerry Brown’s court.  We’ll see what he does with it.

Uncategorized

What becomes of Big Reform?

5 Comments

Remember all that talk of a Constitutional Convention? Well, the talk has quieted down as Sacramento waits to see what happens with our once and future Governor Brown.  But despite the majority vote budget measure (Prop 25) passing, there are still many structural barriers between us and a functioning government.

Of course, we still don’t have a real majority budget, because there is still the 2/3 revenue rule.  That now includes a more expansive definition of fee/tax that bars most of the majority vote revenue methods.

Others will tell you that we just aren’t moderate enough, that our legislators would work together more if we just got more “competitive” districts. We’ll see about the best districts that money can buy in 2012, but my strong hunch is that little will change. After all, why should it?  Legislators are only in their positions for 6-8 years, and then they will have to run for some other position.  Even with a top-two system, strong stances play better in soundbites than nuanced compromise. So, we get a legislature that represents their constituents, that is the people who vote for them.  We shouldn’t expect something that we ourselves don’t support.

Despite the lack of real solutions from those really willing and able to fund them, we still have many parties willing to offer up some untried and untested “good government” reforms.  You know the type of reforms that bring us something new, and further away from the representative democracy that worked for so long before Prop 13.  And, of course, the suggestions always come from somebody with a pretty good size personal wealth, who just wants to do right by his/her home state.  Sounds just like the Whitman campaign that we just finished repudiating, doesn’t it?

Robert already mentioned Nicholas Berggruen, and I’m pretty comfortable with his take on the situation.  

Now, that isn’t to say that we won’t see additional attempts at reform, some better than others.  Newly inaugurated Asm. Mike Gatto has a bunch of constitutional reforms that he has built into a package that he introduced as soon as he hit the legislature.  Getting them out of Legislature will be a pretty monumental task, but you can’t win if you don’t play. And these reforms are all pretty common sense.  They won’t fix everything, but certainly a good start.

So, where does reform go from here? Well the likely answer is that it goes back to where it’s always been, limping along on the back-burner.  Maybe we’re waiting for some shocking event to really change the atmosphere, but even the troubles that we’ve had over the past few years haven’t really been enough to shake any positive reform into action. We’ll see if the upcoming shock doctrine is any better.