Uncategorized

Pan’s Resolution for Equal LGBT Veteran Benefits Gets Bipartisan Majorities

1 Comment

Dr. Richard Pan for AssemblyResolution gets a few Republican votes

by Brian Leubitz

Republicans don’t go out of their way to support LGBT Californians. That being said, it is hard for them to vote against veterans, no matter the cause. So, it was quite the conflict when Richard Pan’s AJR 19 rolled through the Legislature. The resolution calls on the federal government to provide equal benefits for LGBT veterans. But the measure got several Republican votes in both houses.

“Today California is united in recognizing the service of every veteran and correcting the injustices our LGBT veterans have endured for so long,” Dr. Pan said. “I applaud recent efforts by the Obama Administration to provide equal benefits for all veterans, but there is still much work to do.  I am hopeful that our leaders in Washington will heed this bipartisan call for equality and do right by the veterans who have put their lives on the line defending our country.”

“AJR 19 raises all of California’s voice in demanding that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender veterans be treated equally,” said John O’Connor, EQCA executive director. “These veterans risk their safety to defend all of our equality, and California has a duty to demand equal treatment for them. We hope the rest of the country will follow.”

The biggest issue here is the punishment handed out under DADT, and its even harsher predecessor, while it was in effect. From 1980 until the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in 2011, over 32,000 service personnel were separated from the Armed Forces of the United States under DADT and its predecessor policies. Because these discharges were sometimes characterized as “dishonorable” or “other than honorable,” many of these service personnel and their spouses became ineligible for veterans benefits.

In 2012, the legislature passed Dr. Pan’s AB 1505, establishing that that if the federal government acts to reinstate benefits to discharged veterans who were denied those benefits solely on the basis of sexual orientation serving in the Armed Forces of the United States, California shall also reinstate to those veterans any state-offered benefits.  The federal government has yet to broadly reinstate such benefits.

Environment, Jerry Brown

Split No More: Environmentalists Say No to Brown Supported Fracking Bill, Call for Moratorium.

Fracking map photo California-fracking-map-791x1024_zps4f0a6586.jpegEnvironmentalists balk at Assembly amendments to Fran Pavley’s SB 4

by Brian Leubitz

Once there was a real split in the environmental community over fracking legislation. The National Resources Defense Council, CLCV and a number of other organizations were supporting Sen. Fran Pavley’s SB 4 to regulate the process. Others were calling for a complete moratorium to gather sufficient data to ensure safety.

It seems that bifurcation has ended upon the oil and gas friendly amendments made to the bill in the Assembly. The only remaining California bill this term to address fracking (SB 4) passed through the Assembly yesterday morning with new amendments by the oil and gas industry that undermine the bill’s original intent. The Natural Resources Defense Council, California League of Conservation Voters, Clean Water Action and Environmental Working Group no longer support SB4 due to these amendments.

“Californians deserve to have their health and drinking water sources protected from oil and gas development. Last-minute amendments, added due to oil industry pressure, threaten to weaken the environmental review required by CEQA,” said Miriam Gordon, California Director of Clean Water Action.

“This unfortunate turn of events should give Governor Brown even more reason to immediately put in place a moratorium on fracking and well stimulation while the state evaluates the risks,” said Damon Nagami, senior attorney for NRDC.

Prior to the introduction of the new amendments that compromise the bill, NRDC, CLCV, CWA and EWG had been working to put the critical safeguards that SB4 contains – new permit requirements, groundwater monitoring, public notification, inter agency management and independent hazards study – in place to protect Californians from risky fracking activities.

The bill has now passed the Senate concurrence as well, and is as good as on the Governor’s desk. For better or worse, it looks like he is leaning toward signing it:

“The administration has worked collaboratively with the Legislature to craft a bill that comprehensively addresses potential impacts from fracking, including water and air quality, seismic activity and other potential risks,” Brown spokesman Evan Westrup said in an email.(Bee)

education, Jerry Brown

Jerry Brown Stands Up to Arne Duncan

2 Comments

Governor said he supports a transitional curriculum year without mandatory testing

by Brian Leubitz

School “reformers” in DC really love testing. Looooooovvvve it. Testing for good reasons. Testing for bad reasons. Testing to see what kids know of the subject matter. Testing to see how well kids can take a test.

But with the change to the new “Common Core” curriculum, the designers of the California STAR tests haven’t been able to keep up. The new tests that teach to the new curriculum won’t be available until next school year. So, no reasonable person would be pushing testing on an old curriculum, right?

Well, see the first paragraph. Arne Duncan, the Secretary of Education, really loves testing. Loves it so much that he wants the STAR tests to continue, despite the fact that our students are being taught different material. Asm. Bonilla’s AB 484 would allow school districts to opt out of the testing for a year while the curriculum changes. It would also set up an opt-in program for computerized testing for the common core standards.

Really, testing for the current curriculum seems quite simple, but it never is. That being said, it looks like the Governor is undeterred by DoE threats to hold back money:

U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said California’s request for a one-year reprieve from using STAR tests in math and English for the current school year is unacceptable and may force his department to “take action.”

“No one wants to over-test, but if you are going to support all students’ achievement, you need to know how all students are doing,” Duncan said in a statement Monday night. …

“There is no reason to double-test students using outdated, ineffective standards disconnected from what’s taught in the classroom,” (Brown spokesman Jim) Evans added.

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson, who is sponsoring Bonilla’s bill, was in the Capitol on Tuesday talking to lawmakers about the importance of AB 484. The former legislator said it is a better investment to redirect the $25 million used to give the outdated STAR tests to instead allow more students to try new computer-based assessments.

“I’m disappointed someone in Washington would want to interfere in the legislative process in California,” (SSPI) Torlakson told The Bee. (SacBee)

Look, the testing will be back next year. But can’t we just agree that we should be testing on what we are teaching our students? Will one year really make or break the whole system?

California, Environment

Take Action Now — Stop Sacramento’s 11th Hour Assault on Environmental Protection

Take ActionWe need your help! In the last week of the legislative session, polluters may be getting a big gift if last minute legislation is not amended.

Californians can look forward to hazardous waste being “left in place” instead of removed and sent to specially constructed and licensed facilities under last minute amendments to Speaker John Perez’s Assembly Bill 1330. The legislation now calls for meeting environmental targets by “reducing the disposal of hazardous waste.”

That’s like “cleaning up” Prince William Sound by letting Exxon leave oil in the Bay.

Will you help us stop this outrageous power grab by polluters by calling on your legislators for amendments today?

The toxic amendment appears to be the brain child of polluters and Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Director Debbie Raphael. The DTSC has been the subject of whistleblower and consumer complaints that it is falling down on the job, but the last minute amendments would let polluters have a pass on cleaning up their pollution. Among the beneficiaries are Boeing, Chevron, KB Homes, Lockheed Martin and Waste Management, all prolific donors in Sacramento.

No doubt major industry players from Boeing – with its radioactively contaminated Simi Valley land – to KB Homes – and their plans to build on radioactive sites next to industrial factories without adequate clean up, are rubbing their hands together. This legislation disposes of the need for disposal, saving them millions of dollars and making official what the DTSC has already been quietly sanctioning.

Waste that is not removed continues to expose the public to toxins via different pathways from breathing it in to ingesting it through food or water.

Please take a minute to weigh in with your state lawmakers and stop this power grab by polluters.

Posted by Liza Tucker, Consumer Advocate and Author of the Golden Wasteland Report. For more information on Consumer Watchdog and our Toxics Watchdog project, follow us online on Facebook and Twitter.

Uncategorized

Ammiano’s Trust Act for Local Discretion on Immigration Detention Headed to Governor

2 Comments

Tom AmmianoTrust Act would allow discretion to enforce ICE requests

by Brian Leubitz

As if to show just how polarized our nation is, California is moving towards a more humane program for immigration enforcement, just as other states are rushing past the boundaries of sanity (and the Constitution) to show how anti-immigrant they truly are. On Monday, the Senate passed Tom Ammiano’s AB 4, the so-called Trust Act, to allow local officials discretion on enforcement of voluntary ICE requests.

The bill – passed Thursday on a 24-10 vote – seeks to reduce the deportation of Californians under the discredited S-Comm program. The federal program, ostensibly designed to expel people with serious convictions, has instead resulted in the deportation of more than 95,000 people. More than two-thirds of those had either never been convicted of any crime, or convicted only of low level offenses.

The bill allows local jails to detain people for extra time after receiving requests from Immigration and Customs Enforcement if the person has been convicted of a crime designated as a severe or violent felony. Local officials will still have the discretion to hold people, or grant release on bail, as the severity of charges warrant. These ICE requests are voluntary, according to the California Attorney General.

There are many problems with the status quo, but to really understand why it is so dangerous, consider this. If you knew that you were not in the country legally, would you call the police if you were involved in a domestic violence incident? Or just a plain old robbery? Recent research confirms that the program has led to decreased confidence in the police in Latino communities, where residents report being much less likely to contact law enforcement.

This is dangerous, flat out. End of statement. If we do not allow members of our communities, no matter what their immigration status, to communicate freely with our police officers, we are making their jobs more difficult. And we are making our communities less safe as crimes go unpunished. We are inviting criminals to a whole community of silent victims. It is a toxic brew no matter how you stir it.

Now, Asm. Ammiano tried with a similar bill last year, AB 1081, but that was vetoed. In his veto message, Brown makes a case for the use of discretion at the local level:

…Until we have immigration reform, federal agents shouldn’t try to coerce local law enforcement officers into detaining people who’ve been picked up for minor offenses and pose no reasonable threat to their community.

But I am unable to sign this bill as written. Under the bill, local officers would be prohibited from complying with an immigration detainer unless the person arrested was charged with, or has been previously convicted of, a serious or violent felony. Unfortunately, the list of offenses codified in the bill is fatally flawed because it omits many serious crimes. For example, the bill would bar local cooperation even when the person arrested has been convicted of certain crimes involving child abuse, drug trafficking, selling weapons, using children to sell drugs, or gangs. I believe it’s unwise to interfere with a sheriff’s discretion to comply with a detainer issued for people with these kinds of troubling criminal records.

The significant flaws in this bill can be fixed, and I will work with the Legislature to see that the bill is corrected forthwith.

This bill represents that compromise Brown wanted. It allows sheriffs and police departments to hold violent or dangerous undocumented immigrants under the ICE requests, but also allows communities the flexibility they need to enforce the law. This is still far from the perfect answer, that would require an overhaul of the federal S-Comm program at the very least. In the end, real solutions lie in comprehensive federal immigration reform, something the Republicans in DC seem intent on blocking.

The bill will go back to the Assembly to concur on a few Senate changes, and then back to the governor shortly thereafter.

Photo credit: Tom Ammiano at SF Progressive Convention 2007 by flickr user Steve Rhodes.

Jerry Brown, Prisons

Gov. Brown Wins Compromise from Steinberg on Prison Transfers

2 Comments

Brown’s plan basically holds, with hope held out for greater reform

by Brian Leubitz

With time running out on funding and planning prison transfers, Sen. Steinberg has compromised to something appearing very similar to Gov. Brown’s original plan:

A modified version of Gov. Jerry Brown’s prison housing plan appears headed for approval after Brown and Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, the plan’s chief critic, announced today they reached a compromise.

The state will proceed with Brown’s plan to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to reduce California’s prison population by moving thousands of inmates to local lockups and out of state, but only if federal judges overseeing California’s prison overcrowding case do not give the state more time to address overcrowding.(Sac Bee)

That “but only if” is the compromise that Steinberg was able to get from the Governor. It also represents the great hope of his own plan that perhaps the court would grant the state additional time to deal with the overcrowding and get back to 137.5% of capacity. That delay is still quite speculative at this time. If it is ultimately denied, this plan looks pretty close to what Gov. Brown offered up originally. If there is a delay, perhaps we can really work on some of those needed reforms.

Prisons

California’s First Attempt to Send Prisoners Out of State: The Videos

1 Comment

State has been trying to send prisoners out of state for a long time

by Brian Leubitz

Back in 2006, in the midst of another budget crisis, the administration offered up voluntary transfers to prisoners.  For your Friday edification and enjoyment, I’ve posted some promotional videos from 2007 highlighting the “opportunities” in these facilities for prisoners. The quality is a bit, well, terrible, but you can pretty much catch the drift.

Prisons

Prison System Preparing to Move Prisoners Out of State, With or Without Legislature

2 Comments

Corcoran State PrisonI’ll was on KPFK today at 8:40 to discuss the prison situation

by Brian Leubitz

Well, this is interesting, the Brown administration is allegedly planning to move prisoners to out of state prisons with or without the Legislature’s permission.  The LA Times got a memo sent out on Tuesday showing that the state was going to start preparations to move prisoners to private (mostly out of state) prisons:

“Every potentially eligible offender will be screened for transfer…. While a transfer may cause a hardship to you or your families, it is an action the state must pursue in order to comply with a court order,” reads a memo distributed Tuesday throughout the state prison system, signed by corrections secretary Jeffrey Beard.

In addition, the corrections department is reducing the time prisoners have to challenge such moves, a separate internal memo distributed Tuesday shows. Previously, inmates identified for transfer out of state were given the chance to consult a lawyer before the classification became official. Now, to expedite moves, legal consultations will not be offered until after a prisoner’s move has been approved. (LA Times)

Moving close to 10,000 prisoners is a very difficult logistical process, so no matter what happens in the Legislature, it shouldn’t surprise anybody that these preparations have begun. Yet, the optics are still not good, especially in the executive branch’s relationship to the Legislature. However, one hopes that this doesn’t stall any real progress towards a solution that everybody can live with.

That being said, the Senate’s plan is clearly the best situated at this point to press for long term reform of the system. Whether this case is the beginning of that overdue process is still in the air.

Uncategorized

Leno’s SB 649 Drug Sentencing Reform Passes Assembly

Measure would bring discretion back to sentencing

by Brian Leubitz

At the height of the war on drugs, while Nancy Reagan was leading the charge to “Just Say No”, the federal government and most states passed some harsh legislation punishing drug offenses. That worked to crowd our prisons, but hasn’t really changed much in the fight against illegal narcotics. Some of the laws were blatantly racist, and have already been removed. Other reforms are pending, with the notable example of the Attorney General’s strongly symbolic speech in San Francisco.

Three weeks after AG Holder announced the nation’s plan to scale back prison sentences for low-level drug crimes, the California Assembly has passed legislation authored by Senator Mark Leno that reforms California’s drug sentencing laws for simple possession. SB 649 allows counties to significantly reduce incarceration costs by giving prosecutors the flexibility to charge low-level, non-violent drug offenses as misdemeanors or felonies (known as a wobbler). The bill, which passed the Assembly with a bipartisan vote, also gives judges discretion to deem a non-violent drug possession offense to be either a misdemeanor or felony after consideration of the offense and the defendant’s record.

“We know we can reduce crime by offering low-level offenders rehabilitation and the opportunity to successfully reenter their communities, but we are currently doing the opposite,” said Senator Leno, D-San Francisco. “We give non-violent drug offenders long terms, offer them no treatment while they’re incarcerated, and then release them back into the community with few job prospects or options to receive an education. SB 649 gives local governments the flexibility to choose reduced penalties so that they can reinvest in proven alternatives that benefit minor offenders and reserve limited jail space for serious criminals.”

If signed by the governor, SB 649, the Local Control in Sentencing Act, will significantly reduce jail spending and allow local governments to dedicate resources to probation, drug treatment and mental health services that have proven most effective in reducing crime. It will also help law enforcement rededicate resources to more serious offenders. The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates reducing penalties for drug possession will save counties about $159 million annually.

This legislation is a good, common sense start to drug sentencing. It gives both prosecutors and judges some discretion over sentencing, and allows them to take in context for those decisions. And when you add in the context of the prison overcrowding crisis, some common sense is very helpful.

Jerry Brown, Prisons

Prison Proposals Get a Senate Hearing

4 Comments

I will be on KPFK’s Uprising tomorrow at 8:20 to discuss the prison mess, as the legislative session draws to a close with no clear plans to comply with the court order.

by Brian Leubitz

Right now, the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee is holding a hearing on the prison proposals. Suffice it to say there is a lot of political posturing going on right now. You can watch now on the CalChannel.

The committee will hear testimony on AB 84, the Senate Democrats’ Safe, Sustainable and Fiscally Responsible Plan to Reduce Crime and Settle the Prison Overcrowding Crisis. The plan, which avoids any early releases of inmates, offers settlement of a federal court order to reduce California’s prison population by approximately 9,600 inmates by December 31, 2013. The committee will also review the Governor’s proposal – which is in included in SB 105 in the Assembly – which relies solely on temporary expanded prison capacity. More details of the plan are available in this post.

However, here are a few numbers from a recent David Binder poll that should probably factor into the decision:

Proposal Sacramento and Northern CA Bay Area Central Valley Los Angeles Area San Diego and Inland Empire
Support Oppose Support Oppose Support Oppose Support Oppose Support Oppose
Public safety commission 70 16 75 13 76 12 73 14 81 11
Provide treatment for mentally ill 78 17 83 10 80 14 80 12 79 12
Incentives for Evidence Based Programs 60 29 60 25 61 25 58 30 60 23

These goals are the heart of the Senate plan, and they are nothing but laudable. However, as the Governor and supporters of his plan are quick to point out, the Senate plan requires a quick settlement with the plaintiffs as well as approval from the courts for a three year delay. And that’s where you get much of the tussling in today’s hearing.

There is no question that our prisons are overcrowded. We are locking up unheard of percentages of our population, and not coming up with any good solutions on how to reduce these numbers. Perhaps the Senate’s plan is a bit of wishful thinking, but our previous attempts have been simplistic and led directly to our current crisis.

But hey, on the bright side, the prisons are going to allow same sex marriages. So, that’s something…