By Jakada Imani

Executive Director of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights

Time and again we see, when we come together and focus on a shared vision, we make a difference. Real progress only happens when people move together; that is why we call it a movement. On Tuesday, millions of us pulled together. Through our work with Communities United Against the Dirty Energy Prop, communities of color and our allies made history, again, by soundly defeating Prop 23.

Polling in early August told us that our communities could be tricked by the slick lies and dirty tricks of Prop 23 backers. That changed when Communities United launched its statewide mobilization drive reaching over 350,000 voters. The Dirty Energy Prop started to lose the minute our coalition of 130 justice-minded organizations took to the streets and air waves reminding voters that California is strongest when we choose health, jobs, and the planet- together. On Tuesday, Proposition 23 was soundly defeated in 8 of the 10 counties where we focused our work. Even the two most conservative counties –Kern and Orange– passed Prop 23 with a shockingly narrow margin.

Our strength as an organized movement is also seen in our partners Oakland Rising and the California Alliance who were key in the passing of Proposition 25 (a simple majority vote for the state budget) and threw down to defeat of Prop 23. Oakland Rising, an electoral alliance of which we are an anchor member, filled over 400 door knocking shifts in election season- the highest number in the State and IDed a record number of voters to stand with us. When we look at the results on all of California’s ballot measures, we can truly see that our collective effort on 23 and 25 made a difference — bucking the otherwise conservative trend of the night.

Nationally, even the successes of the Tea Party across the country, while a true setback, bear a valuable lesson for us — people working together change the game. Let us hold that truth in our hearts and know, more than ever, that our work to bring people together to make change is crucial in building a brighter future where all people and communities thrive.

Another critical lesson hammered home Tuesday night: people don’t base their votes on facts- if they did, millions of Americans would not vote against their own best interests. Our votes are more likely based on emotion, often fear or anger. With our economy in the dumps, people have a right to be angry and it’s easy for folks to be confused as to who is to blame- letting hate mongers point a blaming finger at everyone from immigrants to the Government to people who believe that everyone should have health care.

We, however, are not confused. The problem isn’t any one party or politician or even any one corporation. Instead of basing policies and our election day decisions on fear, we want to build a society where decisions are made based on love and our common concerns. When Proposition 23 first showed up, people feared they had to choose between good jobs and the environment. Fear drove support of the Dirty Energy Prop. We worked to trigger different emotions — the feelings of love and protection that folks of color and our allies have for our children, our environment and our economy. That helped us ensure that the future of California is one that puts people and the planet ahead of Big Oil’s profits.

Despite dismaying election results across the country, we celebrate that California swung back to its roots as a Blue State. As Meg Whitman learned, money alone can’t buy you victory. We look forward to working with Governor Elect Jerry Brown to implement AB32, close the state’s abusive and costly youth prison system, and bring peace and prosperity to all Californians.

The election, while a mixed bag of wins and losses, is just one short trailmarker in our march toward justice. Money and elections alone don’t determine the future. People-powered action, fueled by hope and the knowledge that things should and can be better, is how change happens. The Ella Baker Center knows the future is one where every person can thrive and we look forward to working with you to make that vision come true.

There were nine measures on the statewide November ballot and NRDC took positions on four of them: we supported Propositions 21 and 25, and opposed Propositions 23 and 26.

Proposition 23 was the largest public referendum in history on climate and clean energy policy, with almost 10 million voters, and is a decisive victory for California’s clean energy future. The measure was rejected by almost a two to one margin, with over 61 percent voting against Proposition 23. NRDC and a broad bipartisan coalition of environmental and public health advocates, businesses, labor unions, the NAACP, Latino organizations, community groups, utilities, consumers — and yes, even some oil companies – fought Proposition 23 together. This coalition represents the new face of the environmental movement and promises a clean energy future for California. We will continue to work together to foster policies that provide multiple benefits, including a prosperous economy and improved public health.

Voters also passed Proposition 25, which will help end budget gridlock by allowing passage of a state budget with a simple majority vote rather than the two-thirds vote currently required. Budget gridlock and the supermajority budget vote requirement was threatening the very foundation of state government; in recent years, a handful of legislators have been able to hold the entire state budget hostage as they pushed to weaken or repeal critical environmental policies in exchange for their budget votes.    

Then voters turned around and voted for Proposition 26, a measure funded by oil, alcohol and tobacco interests that will make the budget harder to balance, again. It will shift the cost of public health and environmental damages caused by companies from those responsible to taxpayers and create another $1 billion hole in the state budget. This was a short sighted measure, but this vote will not stop California’s path breaking climate program. Mary Nichols, Chair of the State Air Resources Board which is responsible for carrying out AB 32 said this morning that “Prop 26 does not impair the scoping plan adopted in 2008 or any regulations developed under that plan. AB 32 is on track, with renewed vigor thanks to the resounding defeat of Prop 23 by the voters.”

Proposition 21, went down to a surprising defeat given the popularity of our state parks. This measure would have helped keep our state parks accessible to all and fund sorely needed maintenance.

The defeat of Proposition 23 is much more far-reaching in its significance and impact than any setbacks on Propositions 21 and 26. This victory on climate and clean energy was particularly significant for the Golden State and the rest of the nation. In an election when the economy trumped all other issues, including two wars, it is no surprise why. Jobs in California’s clean energy sector have grown 10 times faster than the statewide average over the past five years, and the clean tech sector attracted $9 billion cumulative venture capital investment from 2005 through 2009.

We hope that this campaign will inspire the nation in another way. Proposition 23 was defeated because Californians are devoted to pragmatism and compromise rather than inflexible ideology. We’ve done it in the past by passing the nation’s most progressive air and water quality laws – regulations that consequently served as models for other states and the federal government.

As we celebrate a victory for common sense, it’s more clear than ever that working together is what makes us stronger. We need the great technical expertise, brain power and vast capital resources of businesses, the workforce of unions, the reach of diverse community groups and the wide sweep of public and private partners to make an efficient transition to the coming clean energy economy. And sooner or later, we will all work together for the common good. We have no other choice.

These Two California Based Factions of the Tea Party Brand Really Don’t Like Each Other Very Much. Think of Tea People Hatfield and McCoys!

Leaders of the Tea Party Patriots organization declared Tuesday’s election results “a victory for liberty,” but blamed a rival Tea Party organization for Senate losses in Nevada and Delaware, saying the group shouldn’t have intervened in those elections by making endorsements in the primary.

The two organizations have a history of feuding over how involved national groups should be in elections. The Tea Party Patriots organization does not endorse candidates, while the California-based Tea Party Express endorsed numerous candidates this cycle.

Asked if Tea Party voters should be more pragmatic in nominating more electable candidates during future elections, Jenny Beth Martin, a national coordinator for the Tea Party Patriots, took a swipe at the rival Tea Party Express.

“One thing that we’ve seen across the country is that in places where the Tea Party people were allowed to nominate their own nominees and were not influenced by top-down political organizations, such as Tea Party Express, the Republicans did win,” Martin said at a Wednesday morning news conference in Washington, D.C.

Grass Valley based Mark Meckler, another national coordinator for the Tea Party Patriots, claimed “the grassroots were not allowed to speak” in races where the Tea Party Express made endorsements. “An outside, top-down organization came in and chose a candidate for them,” he said.

h/t and More at dailycaller.com  If you are not one of the Tea People, you gotta love this stuff. ‘specially, as in my case, it involves some local fellers in NORCAL Sierra Foothills.

Cross-Posted From: FreeFlightNewMedia.TypePad.com, where you will find many items of interest not normally covered at Calitics as they may not all be California specific. Some Post From The Last 24 hours include:

Election results confirm House Democratic Caucus in 2011 will be smaller, but more PROGRESSIVE

Tea Party Patriots swings at rival Tea Party Express for losses in Nevada, Delaware

Audio: Post 2010 Election Conference Call With Supporters of President Obama

If California Could Ever Have This Law – Now is the time: Florida Voters Pass Milestone Measures to End Gerrymandering

Yes There Is A God and Silver Lining To The Vote Yesterday: The sad tale of the Democrats who hated the unemployed – War Room – Salon.com

Bill Moyers: “Welcome to the Plutocracy!”

Foreclosuregate Explained: Big Banks on the Brink

Class-Not Publicized Until After The Election: U.S. Government Bookstore:Insights into the Shadowy World of Armed Groups

Oh, You Are So Fired: Donald Trump Tells Fox 5 He is ‘Seriously Considering a Run’ for President – FishbowlNY

The Day After: From the White House to Obama’s House and Each State and County, Too

November 2, 2010 – The Day The USA BeGiNs Apocalypse Again

Rehearsing to be the Obama Antagonist – NYTimes.com

Coverage of Election Like Nowhere Else: t r u t h o u t | Balance of Power 2010: Truthout’s Live Election Blog

DEMOCRATS HIGH AND LOW TAKE NOTES BIG TIME: THERE WILL BE A TEST—MANY OF THEM! “Voice of the opposition”: How Fox News won the 2010 election

The Media Aren’t Liberal – Reason Magazine

DeMint “spits” GOP leaders of his own party in congratulating conservatives

10 Depressing States That Even Illegal Immigrants Are Giving Up On

t r u t h o u t | Tea Party Politics and the Dixiecrats of 1948

Report: Tea Partiers Harrasing Black College Students at South Carolina Polls | AlterNet

Congress — A Record To Be Proud Of

Senator – Barbara Boxer

AKA California’s Good Senator. Boxer is a reliable liberal in a senate full of utterly useless corporate centrists, and quite unafraid to make waves in the service of doing the right thing. In a career that has mostly been dominated by Republican control of the senate, Boxer has distinguished herself by pushing back against a decade of wingnuttery. By contrast, I knew about Fiorina’s awful reputation in silicon valley a decade before she decided to make a vanity run for senate, just from techies I knew heaping scorn upon the CEO who drove HP into the ground and then walked away with millions. Thank goodness Boxer’s a formidable campaigner, and Fiorina appears to be headed for the dusty place where all the gazillionaire right wing vanity candidates go after they lose, right next to Michael Huffington.

House of Representatives

CA-01 – Mike Thompson

Mike’s generally a pretty good guy, and there have been no groaners like the credit card/bankruptcy bill. this time around. Mike’s candidate-for-life in that district, but he does a good job representing his people, and I respect that.

CA-02 – Jim Reed

This district is so gerrymandered for Republicans it isn’t funny, but I have to applaud Reed for making a serious hard run at the execrable Wally Herger, who isn’t even bothering to campaign this time around, much less debate Reed.

CA-03 – Ami Bera

I am thrilled to see Democrats finally start to compete east of the Carquinez, and Bera is certainly giving Lungren a run for his money. As a once and possibly future denizen of the 3rd CD, I really hope Bera knocks off that right wing SoCal carpetbagger. The 80 corridor has changed, and deserves a good congressman.  

Governor – Jerry Brown

I didn’t endorse Brown in the primary because he effectively wasn’t bothering to run, and did not ask for my vote. Since then, Brown has come out and made a very strong case for himself as the right candidate for this moment in time. What seemed far-out 30 years ago turns out to be just what California needs today: energy independence and a healthy green economy, bullet trains and a next-generation infrastructure, efficiency in both energy and the functioning of the state government, and a deep love of the state for who we are, in stark contrast to his opponent, who seems to spend most of her time telling us why we’d be better off making California into Texas.

By contrast, Meg Whitman is basically a failed insider trading CEO reading Pete Wilson’s cue cards, and utterly unqualified to function as governor, both experientially and tempermentally. The choice by the CA GOP to run two abrasive, disgraced CEO-turned-amateur politicians after the state has suffered through a wicked one-two punch from corrupt incompetent CEOs compounded by an amateur millionaire-turned-vanity candidate just blows my mind.

Lt. Governor – Gavin Newsom

I’ll admit it; Lt. Governor isn’t the most interesting position, and Newsom is not my ideal candidate. And yet the Lt. Gov. sits on a bunch of commissions that determine everything from offshore drilling to UC tuition. Newsom has higher ambitions, and will be on good behavior delivering on his campaign promises to hold down tuition and not risk another Deepwater Horizon blowout off the California coast. Maldonado, similarly, has higher ambitions, and will no doubt do everything in his power to impress the usual CA GOP primary voters and fundraisers by throwing monkeywrenches in a Brown administration wherever possible. Additionally, Maldonado’s role in the annual hostage crisis that is the CA budgetary process has been to demand all manner of extortionary concessions before he finally cast his vote to pass it, months late. No way I’d vote to reward that kind of jackassery.

Attorney General – Kamala Harris

I am genuinely thrilled to vote for Harris, who by all accounts has done  an innovative, thoughtful job as DA in San Francisco, trying to prevent crime by studying what makes people re-offend and trying to disrupt that vicious cycle. For well over a generation, California has tried the “lock ’em up and throw away the key!” style of policing, and it has been an utter failure on every level (unless you’re a prison guard, in which case it’s been good for business). Additionally, Harris has vowed not to appeal prop 8, and to defend the state’s carbon trading regime against corporations trying to weasel out of paying for their pollution. Naturally, Karl Rove’s corporate-funded group is gunning for Harris with everything they’ve got, and throwing all manner of negative slogans against the wall to see if anything gets traction. Cooley, by contrast, will waste CA money defending the unconstitutional mess that was prop 8. Easy choice here.

Secretary of State – Deb Bowen

Quite possibly one of my favorite statewide politicians. Competent, progressive, and an effective advocate for the reform of California’s voting machines, Bowen has more than earned her reelection.

Treasurer – Bill Lockyear

I am not a fan of Lockyear, and still hold his endorsement of Schwarzeneggar against him. And yet he has done a good job of keeping the state bonds moving in an awful economy with a lot of speculators determined to create the false image of a California on the verge of a default bankruptcy crisis. I’m not likely to support him in any contested primary, but he’s a whole lot better a treasurer than Mimi Walters would be.

Controller – John Chiang

I really like the way Chiang stood up to the Schwarzeneggar administration’s attempts to screw state workers out of sheer spiteful malevolence, and I hope he has a long career in state politics ahead of him. Definitely earned reelection.

Insurance Commissioner – Dave Jones

I was impressed with Jones in the Democratic primary, esp. his deep knowledge of insurance policy and substantial record as a consumer rights advocate, and continue to support him for those reasons. Lord knows the Insurance corporations will eat us alive if noone’s standing up to them effectively.

Superintendent of Public Instruction – Tom Torlakson

It is beyond question that our state’s public educational system is a mess, after decades of deliberate underfunding and burdensome BS testing that robs class instruction time and fattens consultants and experts while starving teachers and programs. Who you vote for in this race depends on where you think the solution lies. If you think teachers are the problem, and that the state needs to make it easier for administrators to fire them, break their unions, and lower their pay, then you probably will want to vote for the other guy. After all, that’s the mindset of the types who are backing him.

If, though, you think that teachers are the solution, and want to give our schools better funding and treat public teachers like the treasured community servants that they are, than Torlakson is your man. As a product of the CA public school system, and as someone who has taught the kids coming out of the school system, I know the strengths and weaknesses of the status quo, and I know which side I am on. I stand with teachers and Torlakson.

Board of Equalization, district 1 – Betty Yee

She seemed nice enough, although I’ll admit I was tempted for a split second to vote for the candidate named “Borg” out of sheer Trekkie geekiness. Then I remembered that’s how the state got Arnold Schwarzeneggar, and came back to my senses.

Assembly – Mariko Yamada

Mariko did such a good job standing up for the district’s interests that she got locked out of the talks on screwing the Delta and building a peripheral canal, along with Lois Wolk. She has not only voted a solid liberal line on most stuff, but has also been there for area farmers with her votes to save Williamson Act funding, one of the few things keeping back the tide of real estate speculation on Ag Land. Deserves reelection.

Judges

Keep – Carlos Moreno, Kathleen Butz

Reject – Tani Cantil-Sakauye, Ming Chin, and especially Nicholson

No recommendation – Harry Hull

I hate the way that judicial races pose all the candidates with no political or legal information and no campaigning, and then let you vote on them. People whining about the politicization for the Judiciary miss the point – it’s already politicized. On that note, here’s my reasoning for the votes:

Moreno dissented quite beautifully to prop 8 and the various decisions to let it stand. Ming Chin OTOH argued against the decision to legalize same sex marriage, then voted to uphold prop 8 after it passed.

George Nicholson is a grade a right wing activist, who wrote the “victim’s bill of rights” and is a strong proponent of “strict originalism.”

Kathleen Butz, from her information, seemed pretty middle of the road.

As for Cantil-Sakauye, I could not find any information on her legal stances, much less political ones, and I don’t trust Schwarzeneggar further than I can throw him. Better to let the next governor appoint someone else, with more of a record.

Davis School Board

Honestly, I’m still pretty upset with the way the Valley Oak closing went, and am not inclined to vote for any of the incumbants. None are crazies, and all will probably coast to reelection. I voted for Mike Nolan, for his refreshing statement that there comes a point where schools cannot be cut beyond, and that he would go to the public and ask them what they would be willing to pay for, and then float a bond well ahead of time to pay for it. I do not buy the “People in Davis don’t have the money for schools” line, not with so many Lexuses and Mercedes parked around town. Pony up, yuppies.

Ballot Initiatives

For an explanation, vote by vote, check out this diary. In a nutshell, I endorse:

YES on 19 – Let Timmy Smoke!

NO on 20 – beware of trojan horse redistricting schemes

YES on 21 – $18 a year for free entry to state parks is a great deal

NO on 22 – the budget doesn’t need yet another complicated set of restrictions

NO on 23 – Beat Texas Oil and protect CA’s green industry

YES on 24 – repeal the last budget deal’s corporate tax giveaways

YES on 25 – majority rule on budgets

NO on 26 – trojan horse corporate polluter attempt to prevent paying fines

YES on 27 return redistricting to the majority party

originally at surf putah

(Assemblymember Nancy Skinner on why progressives should oppose Prop 22)

Next Tuesday, election day will be an important day for progressives in California. A truly vital issue on the ballot may be one that we haven’t heard a lot about — opposing Proposition 22. I urge you to join the California Democratic Party, Health Access, the California Nurses Association, the Courage Campaign and a host of other organizations in opposition to this poorly conceived initiative.

Proposition 22 violates the agreement forged between stakeholders in 2004 that was approved by the voters as Proposition 1A. That measure protected local resources, but allowed the state to borrow local funds in times of fiscal crisis, fully repaying them within three years. Proposition 22 will reverse that agreement and prohibit loans for public schools, children’s health care, seniors and the disabled.

With the handcuffs Proposition 22 would put on the 2011-12 budget resolution, public schools stand to lose $1 billion immediately, and an additional $400 million a year after that. In Home Support Services that allow senior citizens and the disabled to live with dignity in their own homes and funding for health care, at a time when our safety net for children is already about to collapse, will be at risk of being cut. County health and public safety services will be eviscerated. Now is not the time to cut that safety net even more.

Proposition 22 reprioritizes state budget funding by putting redevelopment agencies in front of education, public safety, the poor, blind and disabled. This change in priorities does not reflect our progressive values.

What California needs to make our local governments, education and social services whole is restoration of the revenues that have been lost during the Schwarzenegger Administration, not guarantees that put one portion of the state’s shrinking revenue pie above another. The California League of Cities, the sponsors of Prop 22, was unable to get agreement from its Board to support new revenues so they have put forward a protectionist measure that puts a host of state services at risk.

I agree with hard protections for locally enacted revenue, but Prop 22 goes much further to the detriment of our values.

I ask that you oppose Proposition 22 to protect our progressive values and the services California’s most vulnerable citizens rely on most.

For information please visit the No on Proposition 22 Website. www.votenoprop22.org