January PPIC poll shows majorities support current financial path

by Brian Leubitz

For years, we were told that the people wanted divided government. That we couldn’t mess with the 2/3 requirements because they were somehow sacrosanct.  But that little chart on the right tells us otherwise.  

To be honest, I’ve always felt that PPIC was a little soft on the Legislature. I mean, could you really find one in four people that really approved of the legislature a few years ago? But since we ditched the 2/3 budget requirement, and Democrats were forced to deal with the disaster themeselves, we’ve moved on.  The finger pointing had to stop, and for the most part it has. The Republicans, having lost on Prop 30, and lost even their marginal relevance by failing to garner a third of the legislative seats, are simply trying to get attention any way they can.

With everything that happened last year, Prop 30, and the grassroots field campaign around Prop 32, Brown is now in a better position than most thought he would be after inheriting Arnold Schwarzenegger’s mess.  Yet on the most toxic of issues, the budget, somehow he has built the consensus that many doubted he could create:

When read a brief description of the governor’s overall plan, 69 percent of adults say they favor it and 22 percent are opposed. Across parties, 79 percent of Democrats, 72 percent of independents, and a slim majority of Republicans-51 percent-are in favor. Brown’s 2013-14 budget, which projects a small surplus for the first time in many years, proposes increasing spending on K-12 schools, higher education, and health and human services, as well as paying down the state’s debt and creating a reserve. Support was far lower for Brown’s budget plan in January 2012 (50%).

Of course, with the budget, the devil is always in the details. And summaries, by definition, skimp on those. Yet, the fact remains that Jerry Brown, and his allies, have somehow charted a middle path that eluded Gov. Schwarzenegger.

On other issues, California support for gun control grew substantially after the tragedy in Newtown, CT. From March 2012 to this poll, the number of Californians supporting additional restrictions grew from 53% to 65%. There is a lot more data on gun control at the PPIC site, especially if you care to dig down into the cross-tabs.

While you’re there, you can also see that the President also maintained his popularity here, with a 65% approval rating overall, and a broad other swath of data. Go check it out.

Brown looks to the future in annual speech to legislature, outlines plans for water, education, and jobs

by Brian Leubitz

State of the State speeches are always remarkable, if only for the purpose of marking another new cycle of budget disputes, legislation and strife. Yet, with last year’s passage of Prop 30, giving the government some breathing room on the budget, perhaps we’ll be in for something new. Like some optimism? Well, yes:

The message this year is clear: California has once again confounded our critics. We have wrought in just two years a solid and enduring budget. And, by God, we will persevere and keep it that way for years to come.

After pointing out the big success of Prop 30, and those who made that success possible, labor, business and the people of California, Governor Brown moved on to outline some of his plans for the future. Like his prison realignment plan, he is pushing for greater local control throughout government. In particular, he called for a streamlining of governmental regulations on educators and empowering local districts.

The speech is fairly short, and you can read the whole thing over the flip. It’s definitely worth the quick read, but you probably won’t be shocked by anything that you read. He still wants to do something about the delta, mainly by building massive tunnels around the delta. The governor is trying his best to work some sort of compromise with environmentalists on this one, but this is a tough sell. Southern California just doesn’t have the resources to maintain such a large water load, and the balance to sustain that won’t make anybody happy. The billion dollar question that remains is whether the tunnels will allow enough water to flow to the delta to maintain its viability. Oh, and funding, and … In other words, there are a lot of questions remaining about California’s water situation.

But Gov. Brown also recommitted himself to fighting climate change and pursuing the dream of high speed rail. Brown admits the difficulty in getting as far as we have, and knows there is a lot of work to be done, but posits that the state will be in a better position for the future with rail travel in place.

And so, we come back to where we started, whether in 1978 or 2013, Brown is looking to the future.

This is my 11th year in the job and I have never been more excited. Two years ago, they were writing our obituary. Well it didn’t happen. California is back, its budget is balanced, and we are on the move. Let’s go out and get it done.

Full text over the flip. Photo by Randy Bayne.

The message this year is clear: California has once again confounded our critics. We have wrought in just two years a solid and enduring budget. And, by God, we will persevere and keep it that way for years to come.

Against those who take pleasure, singing of our demise, California did the impossible.

You, the California legislature, did it. You cast difficult votes to cut billions from the state budget. You curbed prison spending through an historic realignment and you reformed and reduced the state’s long term pension liabilities.

Then, the citizens of California, using their inherent political power under the Constitution, finished the task. They embraced the new taxes of Proposition 30 by a healthy margin of 55% to 44%.

Members of the legislature, I salute you for your courage, for wholeheartedly throwing yourself into the cause.

I salute the unions–their members and their leaders. You showed what ordinary people can do when they are united and organized.

I salute those leaders of California business and the individual citizens who proudly stood with us.

I salute the teachers and the students, the parents and the college presidents, the whole school community. As the great jurist, Oliver Wendell Holmes, once said when describing what stirs people to action: “Feeling begets feeling and great feeling begets great feeling.” You were alarmed, you stirred yourselves to action and victory was the outcome.

That was 2012 and what a year!

In fact, both 2011 and 2012 were remarkable.

You did great things: Your 1/3 renewable energy mandate; the reform of workers compensation; the reorganization of state government; protecting our forests and strengthening our timber industry; reforming our welfare system; and launching the nation’s first high speed rail system.

But, of course, governing never ends. We have promises to keep. And the most important is the one we made to the voters if Proposition 30 passed: that we would guard jealously the money temporarily made available.

This means living within our means and not spending what we don’t have. Fiscal discipline is not the enemy of our good intentions but the basis for realizing them. It is cruel to lead people on by expanding good programs, only to cut them back when the funding disappears. That is not progress; it is not even progressive. It is illusion. That stop and go, boom and bust, serves no one. We are not going back there.

The budget is balanced but great risks and uncertainties lie ahead. The federal government, the courts or changes in the economy all could cost us billions and drive a hole in the budget. The ultimate costs of expanding our health care system under the Affordable Care Act are unknown. Ignoring such known unknowns would be folly, just as it would be to not pay down our wall of debt. That is how we plunged into a decade of deficits.

Recall the story of Genesis and Pharaoh’s dream of seven cows, fatfleshed and well favored, which came out of the river, followed by seven other cows leanfleshed and ill favored. Then the lean cows ate up the fat cows. The Pharaoh could not interpret his dream until Joseph explained to him that the seven fat cows were seven years of great plenty and the seven lean cows were seven years of famine that would immediately follow. The Pharaoh took the advice of Joseph and stored up great quantities of grain during the years of plenty. When famine came, Egypt was ready.

The people have given us seven years of extra taxes. Let us follow the wisdom of Joseph, pay down our debts and store up reserves against the leaner times that will surely come.

In the midst of the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt said: “There is a mysterious cycle in human events. To some generations much is given. Of other generations much is expected. This generation has a rendezvous with destiny.”

We –right here in California– have such a rendezvous with destiny. All around us we see doubt and skepticism about our future and that of America’s. But what we have accomplished together these last two years, indeed, the whole history of California, belies such pessimism.

Remember how California began.

In 1769, under King Charles III, orders were issued to Jose de Galvez, the Visitor General of Baja California, to: “Occupy and fortify San Diego and Monterey for God and the King of Spain.´

Gaspar Portola and a small band of brave men made their way slowly north, along an uncharted path. Eventually, they reached Monterey but they could not recognize the Bay in the dense fog. With their supplies failing, they marched back to San Diego, forced to eat the flesh of emaciated pack mules just to stay alive. Undaunted, Portola sent for provisions from Baja California and promptly organized a second expedition. He retraced his steps northward, along what was to become El Camino Real, the Kings Highway. This time, Father Serra joined the expedition by sea. The rest is history, a spectacular history of bold pioneers meeting every failure with even greater success.

The founding of the Missions, secularized and sold off in little more than 50 years, the displacement and devastation of the native people, the discovery of Gold, the coming of the Forty-Niners and adventurers from every continent, first by the thousands and then by the hundreds of thousands. Then during the Civil War under President Lincoln came the Transcontinental Railroad and Land Grant Colleges, followed by the founding of the University of California. And oil production, movies, an aircraft industry, the longest suspension bridge in the world, aerospace, the first freeways, grand water projects, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Venture Capital, Silicon Valley, Hewlett Packard, Apple, Qualcomm, Google and countless others, existing and still just imagined.

What is this but the most diverse, creative and longest standing mass migration in the history of the world. That is California. And we are her sons and daughters.

This special destiny never ends. It slows. It falters. It goes off track in ignorance and prejudice but soon resumes again–more vibrant and more stunning in its boldness.

The rest of the country looks to California. Not for what is conventional, but for what is necessary–necessary to keep faith with our courageous forebears.

What we have done together and what we must do in the coming years is big, but it pales in comparison to the indomitable courage of those who discovered and each decade thereafter built a more abundant California.

As Legislators, It is your duty and privilege to pass laws. But what we need to do for our future will require more than producing hundreds of new laws each year. Montaigne, the great French writer of the 16th Century, in his Essay on Experience, wisely wrote: “There is little relation between our actions, which are in perpetual mutation, and fixed and immutable laws. The most desirable laws are those that are the rarest, simplest, and most general; and I even think that it would be better to have none at all than to have them in such numbers as we have.”

Constantly expanding the coercive power of government by adding each year so many minute prescriptions to our already detailed and turgid legal system overshadows other aspects of public service. Individual creativity and direct leadership must also play a part. We do this, not by commanding thou shalt or thou shalt not through a new law but by tapping into the persuasive power that can inspire and organize people. Lay the Ten Commandments next to the California Education code and you will see how far we have diverged in approach and in content from that which forms the basis of our legal system.

Education

In the right order of things, education–the early fashioning of character and the formation of conscience–comes before legislation. Nothing is more determinative of our future than how we teach our children. If we fail at this, we will sow growing social chaos and inequality that no law can rectify.

In California’s public schools, there are six million students, 300,000 teachers–all subject to tens of thousands of laws and regulations. In addition to the teacher in the classroom, we have a principal in every school, a superintendent and governing board for each school district. Then we have the State Superintendent and the State Board of Education, which makes rules and approves endless waivers–often of laws which you just passed. Then there is the Congress which passes laws like “No Child Left Behind,” and finally the Federal Department of Education, whose rules, audits and fines reach into every classroom in America, where sixty million children study, not six million.

Add to this the fact that three million California school age children speak a language at home other than English and more than two million children live in poverty. And we have a funding system that is overly complex, bureaucratically driven and deeply inequitable. That is the state of affairs today.

The laws that are in fashion demand tightly constrained curricula and reams of accountability data. All the better if it requires quiz-bits of information, regurgitated at regular intervals and stored in vast computers. Performance metrics, of course, are invoked like talismans. Distant authorities crack the whip, demanding quantitative measures and a stark, single number to encapsulate the precise achievement level of every child.

We seem to think that education is a thing–like a vaccine–that can be designed from afar and simply injected into our children. But as the Irish poet, William Butler Yeats said, “Education is not the filling of a pail but the lighting of a fire.”

This year, as you consider new education laws, I ask you to consider the principle of Subsidiarity. Subsidiarity is the idea that a central authority should only perform those tasks which cannot be performed at a more immediate or local level. In other words, higher or more remote levels of government, like the state, should render assistance to local school districts, but always respect their primary jurisdiction and the dignity and freedom of teachers and students.

Subsidiarity is offended when distant authorities prescribe in minute detail what is taught, how it is taught and how it is to be measured. I would prefer to trust our teachers who are in the classroom each day, doing the real work – lighting fires in young minds.

My 2013 Budget Summary lays out the case for cutting categorical programs and putting maximum authority and discretion back at the local level–with school boards. I am asking you to approve a brand new Local Control Funding Formula which would distribute supplemental funds — over an extended period of time — to school districts based on the real world problems they face. This formula recognizes the fact that a child in a family making $20,000 a year or speaking a language different from English or living in a foster home requires more help. Equal treatment for children in unequal situations is not justice.

With respect to higher education, cost pressures are relentless and many students cannot get the classes they need. A half million fewer students this year enrolled in the community colleges than in 2008. Graduation in four years is the exception and transition from one segment to the other is difficult. The University of California, the Cal State system and the community colleges are all working on this. The key here is thoughtful change, working with the faculty and the college presidents. But tuition increases are not the answer. I will not let the students become the default financiers of our colleges and universities.

Health Care

California was the first in the nation to pass laws to implement President Obama’s historic Affordable Care Act. Our health benefit exchange, called Covered California, will begin next year providing insurance to nearly one million Californians. Over the rest of this decade, California will steadily reduce the number of the uninsured.

Today I am calling for a special session to deal with those issues that must be decided quickly if California is to get the Affordable Care Act started by next January. The broader expansion of Medi-Cal that the Act calls for is incredibly complex and will take more time. Working out the right relationship with the counties will test our ingenuity and will not be achieved overnight. Given the costs involved, great prudence should guide every step of the way.

Jobs

California lost 1.3 million jobs in the great Recession but we are coming back at a faster pace than the national average. The new Office of Business and Economic Development — GoBiz –directly assisted more than 5,000 companies this past year.

One of those companies was Samsung Semiconductor Inc. headquartered in Korea. Working with the City of San Jose and Santa Clara County, GoBiz persuaded Samsung to locate their only research and development facility in the world here in California. The new facility in San Jose will place at least 2,500 people in high skill, high wage jobs. We also leveled the field on internet sales taxes, paving the way for over 1,000 new jobs at new Amazon distribution centers in Patterson and San Bernardino and now Tracy.

This year, we should change both the Enterprise Zone Program and the Jobs Hiring Credit. They aren’t working. We also need to rethink and streamline our regulatory procedures, particularly the California Environmental Quality Act. Our approach needs to be based more on consistent standards that provide greater certainty and cut needless delays.

California’s exports are booming and our place in the world economy has never been stronger. Our ties with The People’s Republic of China in particular are deep–from the Chinese immigrants crossing the Pacific in 1848 to hosting China’s next President in Los Angeles last February. This year we will take another step to strengthen the ties between the world’s second and ninth largest economies. In April, I will lead a trade and investment mission to China with help from the Bay Area Council and officially open California’s new trade and investment office in Shanghai.

Water

Central to the life of our state is water and one sixth of that water flows through the San Joaquin Delta.

Silicon Valley, the Livermore Valley, farmers on the East side of the San Joaquin Valley between Fresno and Kern County and farmers on the West side between Tracy and Los Banos, urban Southern California and Northern Contra Costa, all are critically dependent on the Delta for Water.

If because of an earthquake, a hundred year storm or sea level rise, the Delta fails, the disaster would be comparable to Hurricane Katrina or Superstorm Sandy: losses of at least $100 billion and 40,000 jobs. I am going to do whatever I can to make sure that does not happen. My proposed plan is two tunnels 30 miles long and 40 feet wide, designed to improve the ecology of the Delta, with almost 100 square miles of habitat restoration. Yes, that is big but so is the problem.

The London Olympics lasted a short while and cost $14 billion, about the same cost as this project. But this project will serve California for hundreds of years.

Climate Change

When we think about California’s future, no long term liability presents as great a danger to our wellbeing as the buildup of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

According to the latest report from the World Bank, carbon dioxide emissions are the highest in 15 million years. At today’s emissions rate, the planet could warm by more than 7 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century, an event unknown in human experience. California is extremely vulnerable because of our Mediterranean climate, long coastline and reliance on snowpack for so much of our water supply.

Tipping points can be reached before we even know we have passed them. This is a different kind of challenge than we ever faced. It requires acting now even though the worst consequences are perhaps decades in the future.

Again California is leading the way. We are reducing emissions as required by AB 32 and we will meet our goal of getting carbon emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.

Key to our efforts is reducing electricity consumption through efficiency standards for buildings and appliances. Over the last three decades, these pioneering efforts have saved Californians $65 billion dollars. And we are not through yet.

We are also meeting our renewable energy goals: more than 20% renewable energy this year. By 2020, we will get at least a third of our electricity from the sun and the wind and other renewable sources–and probably more.

Transportation and High Speed Rail

In the years following World War II, California embarked on a vast program to build highway, bridges and roads.

Today, California’s highways are asked to accommodate more vehicle traffic than any other state in the nation. Most were constructed before we knew about climate change and the lethal effects of dirty air. We now expect more.

I have directed our Transportation Agency to review thoroughly our current priorities and explore long-term funding options.

Last year, you authorized another big project: High Speed Rail. Yes, it is bold but so is everything else about California.

Electrified trains are part of the future. China already has 5000 miles of high speed rail and intends to double that. Spain has 1600 miles and is building more. More than a dozen other countries have their own successful high speed rail systems. Even Morocco is building one.

The first phase will get us from Madera to Bakersfield. Then we will take it through the Tehachapi Mountains to Palmdale, constructing 30 miles of tunnels and bridges. The first rail line through those mountains was built in 1874 and its top speed over the crest is still 24 miles an hour. Then we will build another 33 miles of tunnels and bridges before we get the train to its destination at Union Station in the heart of Los Angeles.

It has taken great perseverance to get us this far. I signed the original high speed rail Authority in 1982–over 30 years ago. In 2013, we will finally break ground and start construction.

Conclusion

This is my 11th year in the job and I have never been more excited. Two years ago, they were writing our obituary. Well it didn’t happen. California is back, its budget is balanced, and we are on the move. Let’s go out and get it done. (Gov’s Website)

PPIC Poll shows support for some Prop 13 Reforms

by Brian Leubitz

There’s good news and bad news in yesterday’s PPIC poll. The bad news first, Prop 13, or at least that branding, is still popular. When asked if they felt whether Prop 13 has mostly been a good thing or a bad thing for California, a strong majority said “good thing.” 60% of Californians generally, and even 55% of Democrats say that Prop 13 has been good for the state.

Yet, that doesn’t really tell the whole story. When it comes to the particulars of our messed up taxation system, Californians are very amenable to change. Take the 2/3 vote that is required by voters on local special taxes. When asked whether they would support the threshold going back to 55%,  54% of Californians said they would support it.

Fortunately for us, we at least have a start on that.

Today we officially introduced SCA 3, which would remove roadblocks to local approval of school parcel taxes. twitter.com/MarkLeno/statu…

— Mark Leno (@MarkLeno) December 3, 2012

So, this doesn’t even go so far as the PPIC poll tells us that voters are willing to go. It is a modest reform that would allow community colleges and K12 school districts put parcel taxes on the local ballot with only a 55% threshold. That would simply put taxes at parity with bonds, as voters already made that change in the early part of the last decade.  

With the pending supermajority, we will have the opportunity to put many measures on the ballot. Perhaps we should be thinking bigger, about totally overhauling our the taxation system. Surely we can’t be giving the voters measure after measure with tweaks.

But Prop 30 bought us a bit of time. We have five years to come up with a sustainable revenue system. A system that can see us through the booms and the busts. Whatever that may be, starting with a simple change in 2014 seems a good place to start.  And if we can’t pass Senator Leno’s measure, we have to question what use the supermajority is at all.  So, let’s get SCA 3 passed quickly and move on from there.

I close with a passage from Federalist 58 on the subject of thresholds:

As connected with the objection against the number of representatives, may properly be here noticed, that which has been suggested against the number made competent for legislative business. It has been said that more than a majority ought to have been required for a quorum; and in particular cases, if not in all, more than a majority of a quorum for a decision. That some advantages might have resulted from such a precaution, cannot be denied. It might have been an additional shield to some particular interests, and another obstacle generally to hasty and partial measures. But these considerations are outweighed by the inconveniences in the opposite scale. In all cases where justice or the general good might require new laws to be passed, or active measures to be pursued, the fundamental principle of free government would be reversed. It would be no longer the majority that would rule: the power would be transferred to the minority. Were the defensive privilege limited to particular cases, an interested minority might take advantage of it to screen themselves from equitable sacrifices to the general weal, or, in particular emergencies, to extort unreasonable indulgences. Lastly, it would facilitate and foster the baneful practice of secessions; a practice which has shown itself even in States where a majority only is required; a practice subversive of all the principles of order and regular government; a practice which leads more directly to public convulsions, and the ruin of popular governments, than any other which has yet been displayed among us.

UPDATE (11:19 AM PT): After issuing a dispersal order to remove all students from the room, the Regents are voting on the budget now.

Cross-posted from Firedoglake and Dog Park Media:

About 500 students are currently blockading entrances to the University of California Board of Regents meeting at UC San Francisco this morning, where the Regents are scheduled to vote on a budget that presumes a 24 percent across-the-board increase on UC tuitions over four years. Picketing students have pledged to shut the meeting down.

According to Charlie Eaton, one of the organizers of the protest and co-author of a report released this week that charged the Regents with employing exotic financial instruments that doubled the UC system’s debt load over three and a half years, as of 8:45AM PT only a third of the Regents have made it inside the building. About 100 students are inside, according to Eaton.

At Governor Jerry Brown’s prompting, yesterday the trustees of California’s State University system postponed a decision on fee hikes and the Regents backed off a plan to raise fees on UC professional school students. But major tuition hikes for all UC students remain on the table. The Regents have voted to increase tuitions in all but two of the last eleven years, this year being one of the two.

Last week, California voters passed Proposition 30, which raises taxes in part to stem tuition hikes in the state’s UC and CSU systems. Student organizing and activism played a major role in the success of the Prop 30 campaign. Yet in the very first meeting of the UC Regents following the measure’s passage, the battle over tuition hikes is continuing unabated.

“These proposed increases are totally unacceptable, especially given the fact that the Regents leveraged student tuition hikes to enter into reckless interest rate swaps that created a huge part of UC’s financial mess in the first place,” said Eaton. “There will be no business as usual today for the UC Regents.”

Koch Brothers affiliated SuperPACs behind donation

by Brian Leubitz

When the American Future Fund contributed $4 million to a committee supporting Prop 32 and opposing Prop 30, voters knew the money was connected, in some vague sense, to the Koch Brothers. That group at least had some history to look back upon, and while the relationship wasn’t perfectly clear, the Koch connections were there.

However, when an $11 million check floated down from a hitherto obscure group, “Americans for Responsible Leadership,” (ARL) the source was a complete mystery. The group also was in a fight against Top 2 primaries, and some of the board had GOP connections. But, the source of the money was far from clear.  The Fair Political Practices Commission, California’s campaign finance regulator, sued for information on where the money came from.  ARL fought like the dickens, even taking the court to the United States Supreme Court before reluctantly handing over the information this morning.

And here’s what we have: 2 more “non-profits”

The state’s campaign watchdog agency accused an Arizona nonprofit of “money laundering” to donate $11 million this month and announced that two other nonprofits – Americans for Job Security and The Center to Protect Patient Rights – routed the money.(SacBee CapAlert)

Needless to say, FPPC Chair Ann Ravel was none too impressed with this development and called the arrangement money laundering. Here’s an FPPC quote about it:

“Under California law, the failure to disclose this initially was campaign money laundering. At $11 million, this is the largest contribution ever disclosed as campaign money laundering in California history.”

But just who are these groups anyway? Well, OpenSecrets has a pretty nice writeup about the Center for Patient Rights:

And if its donors are unknown, so is much else about CPPR. According to its own 2010 tax return, which was filed last November, it is run by Sean Noble, who is listed as its director, president and executive director. Noble describes himself on his Twitter account as a “PR/Political consultant, conservative strategist/operative, former GOP Hill chief of staff, blogger, proud father, fighting for liberty.” Noble was chief-of-staff to former Republican Rep. John Shadegg of Arizona, for whom he worked for 13 years, and since then has worked as a political consultant and in public relations. …

Noble did not return our calls seeking comment. But in a piece last year, Politico described Noble as a “Koch operative,” referring to the wealthy conservative brothers from Koch Industries who have been instrumental in funding a conservative network of groups. … (OpenSecrets)

And guess who received over $11 million in support from CPPR in the 2010 cycle? Why, none other than the American Future Fund. And everything comes back around. Quite the campaign finance merry-go-round in support of a measure that purports to be campaign finance reform.

However, as leading good government groups, like the League of Women Voters and Common Cause have said, Prop 32 is not real political reform. And so instead, strange money continues to flow to fight for a deceptive measure, and against a measure that is vitally important to our schools. Layer after layer…

Note: Brian Leubitz, the editor of this blog, works for the No on 32 campaign. Please like the campaign on facebook or follow on twitter.

Yes, I admit it, I’ve been a Sutter Brown fan for years now, well,  since he set up shop on Facebook at least.  He’s the First Dog here in California and he’s been touring the Golden State to “Bark out the Vote” for Prop 30.  It’s brilliant really, who doesn’t want to meet Sutter, a well behaved Corgi who has a great sense of humor, is humble and yet takes the people’s business very seriously.

Photo source Sacramento Bee

And today my daughter and I were lucky enough to meet Sutter on one of his stops through California to support Prop 30.  

Sutter arrived to a gift from the Sharon Quirk-Silva campaign which he loved quite a bit.

And not only came to support Prop 30 but took to Sharon right away, letting her hold him for the group photo!

There was quite a turn out to help the Quirk-Silva campaign walk precincts and carry her to victory on Tuesday.  The California Assembly could definitely use someone like Sharon and I am sure Sutter’s Dad wouldn’t mind another Dem in the legislature.  Woof, woof.

But I can tell you, when Charlotte met Sutter, they were fast friends.

And the next thing you know, Sutter has a new body man, Charlotte was clearing the perimeter of dropped food, making sure there were no stray dogs in sight and procuring Sutter some water when he was parched from all the excitement!

But being the sensible dog that he is, Sutter knew when to rest and when to work.  He was gracious and took many photos with his adoring fans and was kind enough to pose with Charlotte.

I don’t have any photos, but he slipped in some sloppy kisses with her too, he must know that she’s an animal love and wants to rescue dogs when she grows up and is trying to figure out a way right now how she can raise money to rescue dogs right now, even though she is only 9.  I’m encouraging her to maybe find a way to use her artistic skills as a means to raise funds to help rescues.  And she also wants to start her own Dog Walking business as well, she’s already called it “Pups and Pals”.

Sutter is an inspiration, to young and old and he’s pounding the pavement to help not only his Dad pass an important Proposition, but to help kids like Charlotte get more funding to her schools.  Charlotte just knows she loves Sutter’s big smile and friendly disposition and just how darn cute he is.

Thank you Governor Brown and First Lady Anne Gust Brown for lending us Sutter, to steal our hearts and remind us that politics shouldn’t be so serious all the time.  From one of my favorite photos (The infamous Eye Booger assist from Mom) to all the Sutter Cuteness in the State Capital, we love that you have let us into Sutter’s world and shown us that there is lots of joy in advocating for the big and the small 🙂

Hanging out in Dad’s office!

Sutter approves this message 🙂

Dictating a letter, so much to do!

And thank you Sutter for being a good sport, it was our pleasure to meet you today!

This is the first part of a series of posts analyzing California’™s propositions.

• Vote Yes on Proposition 30 – Jerry Brown’s Budget Plan

• Vote No on Proposition 31 – Changes to State Budgeting

• Vote No on Proposition 32 – Union-busting

• VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 33 – CAR INSURANCE

California’s Budget Problems

Proposition 30 is the most important proposition on the ballot this year.

More below.

California, as is well known, has a big budget problem. This problem started with the onset of the economic recession and was worsened by a number of factors, ranging from extreme constraints on the legislature’™s power to Arnold Schwarzenegger’™s incompetence.

Things have gotten better lately. Schwarzenegger has been replaced with a governor who knows what he’s doing. The two-thirds supermajority requirement to pass a budget, which was responsible for much of the deadlock, no longer exists.

There are still big problems, however. California has implemented massive spending cuts to balance the budget. Program after program has been cut to the bone. Worse still, the state seems poised to cut far more if this proposition fails to pass.

Take the University of California system:

Since 2008, budget cuts have forced these universities to raise fees by more than 40%, compared with a national average of 15%. If Proposition 30 fails to pass, fees will be raised by 20% more still.

Why is this happening? It’s because the legislature has its hands tied. There are two ways to balance the budget: increase revenue and cut spending. California requires a two-thirds supermajority to do the former, and Republicans have consistently blocked revenue increases. So California has been left to cut, and cut, and cut.

Now, in general you should focus on cutting spending rather than increasing revenue to balance the budget. But California has taken it way too far. We have basically done nothing but cut and cut for nearly half a decade, without any revenue increases. There’™s basically nothing left to cut at this point. But if Proposition 30 doesn’™t pass the state will be looking once again for billions more to cut ($5.951 billion more, to be exact).

What Proposition 30 Does

Proposition 30 comes four years too late, but it’™s still very necessary today.

Yes, Proposition 30 is a temporary tax increase. It falls mainly on families making over $500,000 -“ but the sales tax will increase as well. The sales tax increase lasts for four years; the income tax increase for seven.

But the truth is that in a budget crisis, eventually somebody will get hurt. If it’™s not families making over $500,000 it’™ll be students and teachers and policemen and firefighters. For almost half a decade, budget cuts have again and again shafted these people. If Proposition 30 fails, they’™ll be hit once again. If Proposition 30 passes, the pain will shift to families making over $500,000.

I endorse this proposition knowing that I will sacrifice a bit. Many Californians (perhaps the majority) will vote against this proposition because of this fact. But it’s not as if they’re dodging the pain by voting against Proposition 30. They’™re just shifting it to their children.

–inoljt

Gov. Makes a Pitch for tax measure

by Brian Leubitz

You won’t find a slew of biblical references on Calitics, but that will change for today. Gov. Brown pitched his revenue measure in a WWJD kind of way:

“For those who’ve been blessed the most, it’s only right, and I think the way to go to say, ‘Give some back temporarily, for the next seven years, until our economy finally gets back,’ ” Brown said at a news conference in Oakland, where he accepted a $1 million contribution to his tax campaign from the influential California Nurses Association.

Later, the Democratic governor invoked the New Testament explicitly.

“Those who we’re asking to pay more, I think they can,” he said. “And I think it says in the New Testament, ‘For those whom much is given, much will be asked,’ and that’s what we’re doing today.”(SacBee)

This is really one of the big Right-vs-Left fights in America right now. Those who claim to honor their religion, but then ignore the parts that are expensive or inconvenient, and those who see the morality of a more equal society. Religion needn’t be a big part of that, but there are parts of the Bible which specifically speak to these issues.  It is hardly a new thing for them to be ignored, after all, hypocrisy abounded in the feudal era with respect to the Church.

And so, here we are again, looking to find a way to fund our long-term needs. I can’t imagine that calling into question the sense of charity of the Rich is the way to win this fight for the long haul. But it might score a point or two in this battle.

Cross-Posted at California Progress Report and America’s Voice Education Fund.

By Frank Sharry, Executive Director, America’s Voice Education Fund:

Years ago, California tried to take the punitive and xenophobic approach to immigration with Prop 187 — a 1994 ballot initiative whose stated goal was to keep undocumented immigrants from receiving public benefits, but would have essentially turned California into a police state for immigrants. Fortunately, Proposition 187 was invalidated by the courts.  But instead of learning from California, states like Arizona, Alabama, and a handful of others are repeating the same mistakes and passing similar laws designed to turn anyone who looks or sounds “like an immigrant” into a suspect and make them feel unwelcome in their own homes.

But last week, the California State Senate showed just how far the state has come-by passing Assemblyman Tom Ammiano’s (D-San Francisco) TRUST Act, the antithesis of Arizona’s anti-immigrant SB 1070 law.

Arizona’s law attacks immigrants by making local cops turn them over to the federal government for deportation-destroying the trust between immigrants and local police. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration is also pushing for local-federal cooperation on immigration through its so-called “Secure Communities” program, which turns routine police work into an immigration status check, and has led to record deportations of immigrants who have never committed a crime.  Under “Secure Communities,” undocumented persons are often detained for very minor violations, such as driving without a license, and end up on the path to deportation.  In California alone, more than 75,000 immigrants have been deported since Secure Communities began there in 2009, and more than half of those immigrants were either convicted of no crime or convicted only of minor offenses.

The TRUST Act, which has the support of over 100 immigrant rights groups, police chiefs, and mayors, seeks to restore the public trust police need for community safety. The TRUST Act would address some of the problems with Secure Communities by telling police to only send immigrants who have serious convictions to ICE for deportation.  It would allow hardworking immigrant mothers and fathers to go to work and live their lives with less fear of harassment and deportation, and would mend the rift between immigrant communities and the police that is vital to the success of community policing.  This makes the TRUST Act essentially the opposite of Arizona’s SB 1070: while SB 1070 treats every immigrant as a priority for deportation, the TRUST Act lifts up legitimate threats and zeroes in on true public-safety priorities.

The bill has moved on from the California Senate to the Assembly, which is highly likely to pass it.  Next, it will move to Governor Jerry Brown’s desk, and Latino and community leaders are expecting the Governor to sign it and show the rest of the country what smart and fair immigration policy looks like.

The TRUST Act is simply a common-sense policy-in a world of limited resources and police power, law enforcement should target dangerous criminals for deportation, not hardworking mothers and college students.  And when criminals at large threaten all of us, those with information must be encouraged to come forward-not scared away from doing so. Opponents of the bill are simply relying on their tired talking point that anything short of deporting 11 million undocumented immigrants is “amnesty.” They’ve got nothing else to offer.

We hope that Governor Brown is ready to lead California full-circle, rejecting its Proposition 187 past and sending a message to states like Arizona and Alabama that mass deportation is not the answer.  Immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants is.