Tag Archives: progressive movement

The Health Care Reform Coalition Has Its Epiphany

(Not totally a local issue, but it involves a lot of local players, and continues on a subject that gets a lot of attention around here, so I thought I’d share.  Reprinted from my site.)

There’s something of a consensus that Netroots Nation didn’t offer enough adversarial panels and instead largely consisted of bloggers agreeing with one another.  But that’s not true.  I personally witnessed the most adversarial panel of the weekend, and it was spectacular, because finally, both factions of the debate about health care policy on the left were able to come together and understand the political contours of the brewing fight in the Congress.

over…

The panel was entitled “Time for Action: How the Netroots Can Lead on Healthcare Reform,” and was put together by Eve Gittleson, who blogs at Daily Kos under the moniker nyceve.  There’s a good liveblog of the panel here, but what you need to know is that Gittleson stacked the deck.  She had some great health care activists who are doing great work in different areas of the space: Giuseppe Del Priore, MD, MPH a New York cancer surgeon; Hilda Sarkisyan, whose daughter, Nataline, died after being denied a liver transplant by Cigna; Rocky Delgadillo, Los Angeles City Attorney, who is pursuing civil and criminal investigation into insurance practices; Geri Jenkins, RN a member of the Council of Presidents of the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee.  And then Ezra Klein, associate editor for The American Prospect and a health care policy guru, appeared at the end of the panel.  The aforementioned speakers were all powerful advocates.  Sarkysian, whose family HAD health insurance and still couldn’t get their daughter what she needed, said bluntly “This is not a good country anymore.”  Del Priore discussed the need for doctors and patients to handle questions of care and the need to arrest insurance executives for their crimes in denying coverage.  Rocky Delgadillo outlined the schemes, like rescission (even based on spousal applications), that insurers are engaging in to maximize profit at the expense of patient care.  He also mentioned how California regulators ignored a million-dollar fine to Blue Cross because they feared they would lose the case if it went to court, which is just unbelievable.  And Jenkins argued that the insurance industry will play no role in reforming health care, and we need to move immediately to a not-for-profit system.

Good points all.  And then Eve turned to Ezra:

Eve: Ezra, why does HCAN want to condemn Americans to this kind of system? I get confusing emails from Elizabeth Edwards and MoveOn talking about the atrocities of the insurance industry, then marginalizing the only viable solution. Can you explain this new Edwards HCAN initiative, the TV commercials, etc. . . What’s it all about? What are they trying to do? It seems there are three initiatives on the table–676, Wyden  and HCAN.  What’s wrong with Wyden and Edwards? And a follow-up…what can we realistically expect from President Obama?

I hope you don’t mind that I’m sand-bagging you. I love you, really, Ezra. I just don’t agree with you on this point.

This apparently startled Mr. Klein.  But for him to not know the position of Eve and the CNA and an activist like Hilda Sarkysian speaks a lot to his cloistered state in Washington.  Because I know all about this fight.  I made one positive comment about HCAN upon their launch and took massive amounts of crap for it.  I was called a defeatist and admonished for not being true to the cause.  My only point was that having an organization with $40 million dollars to spend on calling out health insurers on their garbage is going to be tremendously helpful to whatever reform we get through the Congress, and furthermore I didn’t see them having much of a place at the table in the policy debate.  In other words they were finally an organization concerned with moving public opinion and playing the health care debate out on political grounds rather than policy grounds.  And on the panel, Klein echoed the importance of politics over policy:

You can take a lot of approaches to health reform. You can emphasize policy, politics, principles, or some mix thereof. Judging from the panel, Health Care for All, and the California Nurses, could use a bit more politics in their approach. It was a panel about “health reform” — not care or policy, but “reform” — at a conference of engaged politicos that never mentioned the Senate, or votes, or the conditions required for presidential signature.

There was a lot of talk about “fighting” insurers and other special interests, but not much about what that fight will look like, or where it will take place, or who decides the winner. My argument, was that, for reformers, insurers aren’t the real enemy. Setting them up as the opponent actually gives them too much credit. Insurers are stupid, profit seeking beasts — the enemy is American politics, and in particular, the structural feature of the US Senate that have repeatedly killed health reform in the past. No matter what your policy preference, that’s where your organizing has to be focused, because that’s where the actual fight happens: In Congress. Not on panels, or on blogs, or among the Left. In the US Senate, where you have to get to 60, or at least figure out how to get rough Democratic unity for using budget reconciliation and then convince Kennedy and Carper to vote “aye” on the same bill.

This is basically the same argument Ezra makes continuously on his site, but it appeared to hit the audience like they never heard it before.  And considering that it’s largely the correct analysis, it was generally well-received, I thought.  I spoke later with Eve, who told me that she had a conversation with someone from HCAN and “they are not the enemy.”  What a concept – all elements of health care advocacy on the left working together, for a change, toward a common goal.

Now granted, this week they all had a big juicy target.  AHIP, the health insurance lobby, put together a fake grassroots front group called The Campaign for an American Solution.  Of course, that “solution” involves funneling more cash and customers to the same broken insurance system we have now.  Now, who was the very first group to coordinate a counter-attack on this front group on the first stop of their listening tour in Columbus, OH?  That’s right, HCAN

Well, that didn’t take long.

A day after Politico reported the health insurance industry is launching a health care reform campaign next week, the progressive reformers are firing back.

Health Care for America Now announced Friday that it plans a news conference and a rally next week to counter the insurance industry’s Campaign for an American Solution, which launches in Columbus, Ohio, on Tuesday with a roundtable discussion among uninsured locals.

“They’re pretending that the health industry represents the American public, and we need to make it really clear to them and the public that all they represent are their own profits,” said Richard Kirsch, national campaign manager for Health Care Now.

Indeed they did attend the launch, and got to ask some tough questions, confronting the head of AHIP and asking her how an insurance industry group could possibly be objective in pushing for lower rates and higher quality coverage when they are concerned solely with the profit motive.  It got heated, and I’m glad they did.  And all of a sudden, Daou’s Triangle started closing.  Rep. Pete Stark came up with a great quote:

“America’s Health Insurance Plans’ new ‘Campaign for an American Solution’ rings as true as the tobacco industry’s efforts to end smoking. There is nothing grassroots about it. It is designed, financed, and coordinated through their Washington trade association with the singular goal of protecting their profits.

“I hope it is true that these companies intend to be a positive force in health reform efforts, but I tend to be cautious when the fox starts drawing up plans for a new henhouse.”

HCAN called up the hotline for the Campaign for an American Solution that they set up for the public to provide input… and they got an answering machine.  They’ve trickled this out one by one and pretty much ruined the launch of AHIP’s front group.  That’s REALLY important for the future of health care reform.  Because on the policy the views are far closer on the left than most people imagine.  Everyone knows that whatever system is ultimately put forward can be paid for in a far better manner than the current wasteful, inefficient system.  So expense should never be a deterrent, meaning we can build whatever system we choose and it is extremely likely to go revenue-neutral very quickly once we eliminate the shoddy budgeting of the current broken system.  We know that health insurers will not jeopardize their profit margins unless they’re forced to.  Once you recognize these two realities, the policy goals become fairly clear.  The political goals have to include attack dogs pushing back on the false memes of the right and the insurance industry, and pressuring the Senate to do the right thing.

Now Obama’s plan includes some better regulation toward insurers (including guaranteed issue and community rating) and a public option to compete with the private insurance market and take the step toward a sequential single-payer.  (His latest addition to the plan, a tax credit for small businesses who offer quality health care, is borrowed directly from the Clinton plan, raising hopes that eventually he’ll just borrow all of it, as he should).  Despite this being a fairly modest set of reforms, McCain and the right are going to denounce it as government-run “Hillarycare” anyway.  So it’s vital to have a broad coalition to give as good as they’ll get from the right and give the lawmakers backbone to push the policy forward.  Matt Stoller writes:

Coalitions are strange beasts, with multiple moving parts, but they are also the only way anything gets done.  A coalition has a core of organizers behind it, and a variety of groups out in front who each take different roles.  Some people can talk to Republicans, some people can talk to Democrats, some people threaten, some people cajole, some people talk to businesses, etc.  HCAN is driven by labor in the form of SEIU, the NEA, AFSCME, and United Food and Commercial Workers, as well as groups primarily funded by labor such as Americans United for Change and the Campaign for America’s Future.  It is also driven by direct mail and Foundation based organizations,  such as La Raza, Planned Parenthood, Center for American Progress Action Fund, Center for Community Change, and the National Women’s Law Center.

Stoller goes on to make the point that HCAN should broaden their mandate and make this a fight about general health, and I agree.  Going after convenience stores that sell fatty, sugar-laden food to kids sounds like it could be a part of their mandate.  The farm bill, the transportation bill (more mass transit and more livable, walkable cities means healthier lives), and others could be brought onto the field of battle.  But the larger point is that coalitions of this nature are built because they work.  And the benefit is that they give lawmakers breathing space to do their job and the spine to do it right.  This moment in health care demands that everyone understands the political spade work necessary to reach the desired outcome.  So out of the ashes of that contentious NN panel came something pretty special.  Groups across the center-left ideological spectrum working together to end the health care crisis in America and restore treatment as a basic human right.

Thanks Progressive Movement!

A lot of people are talking today about Sen. Obama’s stance against Prop. 8; it’s a recommended diary on Daily Kos.  We had this on Calitics two days ago and nobody noticed.  The Sacramento Bee reports on it and suddenly it’s on everybody’s lips.

I don’t begrudge the Bee writing about the issue; it’s newsworthy, and the result of a letter read to the Alice B. Toklas Democratic Club, not some secret.  I’m glad they picked it up.  But I’m very disturbed by the fact that progressive media is not supported to the point of being ignored, but when a dead-tree source goes with the same information it becomes a top story.  I expect that out of the traditional media, but not the blogosphere.  There is no question that Brian was the first person anywhere to report on Sen. Obama’s letter to the club.  And I can tell you that I did at least some behind-the-scenes work to promote the scoop to progressive media and blogosphere leaders.  Didn’t work.

I don’t care that the Bee didn’t report that Calitics was the first source to break this; would have been nice, but not totally necessary.  But could bloggers at least note that we had this two days before the traditional media?  If we aren’t self-reinforcing we’re never going to get anywhere.

AD-80: Perez’ Statement of Victory

Your next Assemblyman from the 80th District:

Coachella, CA – Early this morning Manuel Perez declared victory in the Democratic primary in the 80th Assembly District. Perez won an overwhelming victory by building a strong multi-ethnic and diverse coalition in Riverside County and Imperial County.

“People power made the difference in this election,” declared Democratic nominee Manuel Perez. “My message of hope and values resonated across both counties as voters yearned for new leadership, new energy and common values.”

Progressives around the state could really learn from this guy.  I met Manuel Perez almost a year ago and was really thrilled by the transformative nature of his candidacy, someone who understands the issues facing California but can also put together the progressive argument in a broad and powerful way.  Plus he can reach out and help build a new generation of Hispanic leadership in the desert area that will leave its mark long after he’s out of the picture.  Mark my words, there’s a leadership position in this guy’s future, sooner rather than later.

The great thing is that the best chance we have for a pickup in November is not a Lou Correa-type Democrat but a real fighter for progressive values.  You don’t have to be afraid of your beliefs, you can speak to them and win.  That’s what Perez’ victory signifies.

(and a little labor money didn’t hurt either)

BREAKING: Dennis Morris To Run As A Write-In Candidate In SD-15

A few months ago, observers were shocked when no Democrat filed to run in the 15th Senate District against Abel Maldonado, despite the fact that the district is plurality Democratic.  One such observer was Dennis Morris, a local resident who got his ballot in the mail and saw that he had no Democrat for which to vote.  Instead of shaking his head and moving on, Morris decided to do something about it.  And so today he is mounting a last-minute write-in campaign to get his name on the November Ballot.  From the SLO County Dems:

The San Luis Obispo County Democratic Party endorsed Dennis Morris on May 14th in his write-in bid to run against Republican Abel Maldonado for the 15th Senatorial District which includes all of San Luis Obispo County as well as parts of several neighboring counties. The Party is urging all Democrats in San Luis Obispo County and elsewhere in the 15th Senatorial District to WRITE-IN “Dennis Morris” for that office on their JUNE 3rd BALLOT.

There are TWO steps to the process. First, the bubble to the left of the write-in line MUST be darkened. Second, the name “Dennis Morris” without quotes, must be written in on the write-in line provided on the ballot.

If enough Democrats write-in on their June 3rd ballot, Dennis Morris will be able to appear on the November ballot as the Democratic Party candidate for the 15th District Senatorial Seat.

This is crucially important.  With the possible demise of the Denham recall and an unopposed Maldonado seat, Democrats were missing out on two of their best opportunities to achieve a 2/3 majority in the State Senate.  Morris’ bid at least provides the opportunity for a real race in one of them.  Don Perata allegedly prevented top local Dems from running in this race.  But this is a people-powered action that could actually be more impactful.

My spies tell me that Morris would make a good candidate.  He’s a non-politician, a former legal scholar who retired to grow grapes on his vineyard.  There are parallels to Jerry McNerney’s first candidacy, accomplished through a write-in ballot in 2004.  That ended well.  Maybe this will too.

I’m scrambling to get more information from Morris and hopefully set up an interview.

Obama’s Register For Change Drive Nets 600+ Voters in LA

In order to rise from a relative unknown who lost to Chicago legend Bobby Rush in 2000 to the cusp of a Presidential nomination today, Barack Obama did not only have to court all elements of the varied coalitions that rule over politics in Chicago, he had to build the pie of voters large enough to be someone all those coalitions wanted to rally behind.  In 1992, Obama, working as a community organizer, registered 150,000 residents throughout Chicago to vote in what ended up being a landmark election, as Carol Moseley Braun became the first female African-American ever elected to the US Senate.

This weekend I attended an Obama Vote for Change rally in South LA which ended up registering 615 new voters.  It was one of over 100 events all over the country; here’s a report of another one in Birmingham, Alabama.  Over 400 volunteers attended the Los Angeles event, heard from a few speakers, were trained in voter registration (most of them were doing it for the first time), and sent out into the surrounding area.  Now, 600-some new voters in the LA area isn’t going to sway much politically or ensure an already-fairly-assured Democratic victory in California.  But it does build the tent, not only for the general election but beyond.  I’ve written at length about how Obama’s gamble is to build an electorate that’s so big that he has a serious, almost insurmountable advantage for both his election and his agenda.  A nationwide effort maximizes resources, keeps that army of volunteers excited and doing work, and builds that base to be dispatched for the general election.  In addition to voter registration, the volunteers were signing up registered voters to volunteer later in the campaign.  We could see a million people on the ground all across the country in November.  That’s special – and different.

John Kerry outsourced the field and mobilization to ACT and other outside groups and it was a stupid way to go.  Obama thinks he has a better idea that will work long beyond the election, and I support that aspect of it.  I worry about his shutting out the outside groups that have come out of the progressive movement since Bush’s first election, but I will note that yesterday’s event was at the campaign offices of Mark Ridley-Thomas, a progressive running for LA County Supervisor, and the event in Huntington Beach doubled as the kickoff event for Congressional candidate Debbie Cook.  So there is a layering effect, where the local candidates are benefiting from Obama’s work at the national level.

Bottom-Up Change Comes to California

Over the last three days, organized labor has been working in solidarity with one another in a project called Hollywood to the Docks, a three-day march and protest involving both Change to Win unions and AFL-CIO members, from the Teamsters to SAG, from the ILWU to the Coalition for Clean and Safe Ports.  They’ve literally walked from the heart of Hollywood to the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach for the last three days, concluding with a concert on the docks tonight and appearances by Speaker-Elect Karen Bass and LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

Next Monday, April 21, will be a day of action across the state put together by a coalition called Students for California’s Future, representing 3.2 million students, with major rallies planned in Los Angeles and at the state capital.  They are rallying against cuts to education and the university system, and this will be just the beginning of a year-long effort to call attention to education funding.

And tomorrow, at 4:00 at the ABC/Disney headquarters in Burbank, in protest of the historically awful, content-free Democratic debate aired on ABC last night, the Courage Campaign and local LA activists are going to offer lapel pins to Disney employees.  Otherwise, their network news anchors George Stephanopolous and Charles Gibson will think they hate America, which they obviously wouldn’t want. (We’ll have a lot more on this later)

Angered by eight years of conservative failure and inspired by a fiercely contested Democratic primary, a rejeuvenated grassroots is building all over the country and in California.  Find an organization that speaks to you.  Participate.  Organize.  And inch by inch, we’re going to take this state and this country back.

Early Morning, April 4

(While it’s not state-based, I thought I’d cross-post this from my site and Hullabaloo due to the importance of this day.  Also, Dr. King was shot at 6:01pm on April 4, so blame Bono and U2 for the technical error…

– promoted by David Dayen)

…shot rings out, in a Memphis sky,

free at last, they took your life

but they could not take your pride…

And then I got into Memphis. And some began to say the threats, or talk about the threats that were out. What would happen to me from some of our sick white brothers?

Well, I don’t know what will happen now. We’ve got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn’t matter with me now, because I’ve been to the mountaintop.

And I don’t mind.

Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I’m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land!

And so I’m happy, tonight.

I’m not worried about anything.

I’m not fearing any man!

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord!!

Just to contextualize, Martin Luther King was in Memphis working with striking sanitation workers who wanted a fair contract from the city.  He was a civil rights leader but understood civil rights as an economic justice issue, as an issue of equality, not just of humanity but opportunity.  The workers were threatened and attacked and kept on marching for their rights.  King’s fight was for freedom of assembly, for equal protection, for justice in all its forms.  To me, this was actually the most powerful portion of that speech:

Now the other thing we’ll have to do is this: Always anchor our external direct action with the power of economic withdrawal. Now, we are poor people. Individually, we are poor when you compare us with white society in America. We are poor. Never stop and forget that collectively — that means all of us together — collectively we are richer than all the nations in the world, with the exception of nine. Did you ever think about that? After you leave the United States, Soviet Russia, Great Britain, West Germany, France, and I could name the others, the American Negro collectively is richer than most nations of the world. We have an annual income of more than thirty billion dollars a year, which is more than all of the exports of the United States, and more than the national budget of Canada. Did you know that? That’s power right there, if we know how to pool it.

We don’t have to argue with anybody. We don’t have to curse and go around acting bad with our words. We don’t need any bricks and bottles. We don’t need any Molotov cocktails. We just need to go around to these stores, and to these massive industries in our country, and say, “God sent us by here, to say to you that you’re not treating his children right. And we’ve come by here to ask you to make the first item on your agenda fair treatment, where God’s children are concerned. Now, if you are not prepared to do that, we do have an agenda that we must follow. And our agenda calls for withdrawing economic support from you.”

And so, as a result of this, we are asking you tonight, to go out and tell your neighbors not to buy Coca-Cola in Memphis. Go by and tell them not to buy Sealtest milk. Tell them not to buy — what is the other bread? — Wonder Bread. And what is the other bread company, Jesse? Tell them not to buy Hart’s bread. As Jesse Jackson has said, up to now, only the garbage men have been feeling pain; now we must kind of redistribute the pain. We are choosing these companies because they haven’t been fair in their hiring policies; and we are choosing them because they can begin the process of saying they are going to support the needs and the rights of these men who are on strike. And then they can move on town — downtown and tell Mayor Loeb to do what is right.

The power of collective action.  The power of bottom-up organizing.  The power of seeing a world where everyone is in it together, where everyone has a stake in one another.  The power of fighting for justice and fairness and right, and moving mountains just by walking together.  We get cynical in this medium a lot, and maybe we have a right to; after all, forty years ago they shot Dr. King for leading such a movement.  But the legacy lives on, and I believe in his aphorism that “the long arc of history bends toward justice.”  This movement, this place where we’ve all gravitated, is but a small kernel of that legacy.  But it’s growing, and regardless of the President or the Congress or whoever it will continue to move forward.  And one day, we will get there.

…oh yeah, just so you know, and want to tell a friend, John McCain voted against making Martin Luther King’s birthday a holiday in 1983.

CNA Forces Insurer to Buckle, Provide Life-Saving Care for Sick California Teen

The CNA has been in the headlines for other reasons lately, but I don’t think anyone can discount the incredible activism they have engaged in on behalf of patients being denied life-saving medical treatment.  Word now comes of another victory against the “murder by spreadsheet” insurance industry who felt like saving a kid’s life wasn’t good for business.

In the face of a national campaign on behalf of Nick Colombo, insurance giant PacifiCare has reversed its decisions and agreed to critically needed cancer treatments for the 17-year-old from Placentia, Calif.  The decision came after the company was overwhelmed by calls organized by Nick’s friends and family, along with RNs from the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee, and netroots activists.

Over 100 of Nick’s classmates, friends of the family with their young children, and nurses protested in front of the insurance company headquarters this morning to demand that the approval be put in writing, which a PacifiCare representative, surrounded by T.V. cameras, and  promised to do.

“I am extremely happy about PacifiCare’s reversal, said Ricky Colombo, Nick’s 19-year old brother.  “The goal was to get treatment for Nick, and CNA/NNOC and other allies helped us with that.  We decided to go through with the rally in order to get their decision on the record and make sure they back up their words-and also because there are thousands of others in similar situations who can’t get the care they need.  We feel blessed to have this community supporting our family.”

In the fight for universal health care, all sides of the debate on the left are going to be instrumental.  The CNA’s tenacity and effectiveness in organizing “patient revolts” like this is very valuable, particularly to show the inequities in the current broken health care system.  Activists shut down PacifiCare’s phone system on multiple occasions before they capitulated.

To beat the powerful interests that want to maintain the status quo you’re going to need every activist and every strategy you can find.  And we’re going to win this fight, one patient at a time.

California Yachting Association Call-a-Thon: Day 2

Yesterday we got almost a thousand views of this video message from the California Yachting Association, and we shut down the California Republican Party’s phone linestwo days before their state convention.  But I’m not certain that the CRP got the message yet.  They need to hear from us again today.

916.448.9496.  Please call.  Operators are standing by!

In all seriousness, this visibility campaign is of a piece with some contemporaneous attempts at legislative activism.  Yesterday seniors and the disabled descended on the Capitol to protest cuts to the In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program.  Low-income community groups are organizing against what they believe is an insufficient state cap-and-trade program that would allow polluting industries to buy the rights to continue to pollute (I’m not sure if I totally agree with them, but it’s an interesting article).  This entire year is going to require this kind of activism if we want to wind up with a state government that doesn’t dismantle its public education system, make health care less accessible and preserve tax avoidance strategies for the wealthy like evading the sales tax on yachts.  These people have to be watched, vigilantly, and through that sunshine will come eventual change, whether they accede to it themselves (unlikely) or we go ahead and take their seats away (likely if we work our butts off).

Why I Can’t Support 93

Today I’m headed out to the OC for the Democratic Party of Orange County annual convention, where I’m participating on a panel about Prop. 93 (and debating Tim Steed of the California Young Democrats).  I respect the opinion of those on this site and elsewhere who support Prop. 93.  I can’t join them for the following reasons:

I think that it’s important to look at this in three respects: the short-term, the medium-term, and the long-term.  In the short term, the Governor, who is supporting this proposition, has outright said that he endorsed it because “I don’t want these guys to leave.”  The charitable interpretation of that is that he has a good working relationship with Speaker Nuñez and President Pro Tem Perata and doesn’t want to jeopardize that.  The uncharitable interpretation is that he’s already housebroken these two and he doesn’t want to housebreak anyone else.  I am unfamiliar with the rule whereby the Governor gets to pick the leaders of the opposition party he wants to work with, so that disturbs me.  But also it’s important to look at what this good working relationship has yielded: a $14 billion dollar budget deficit, endless borrowing and passing debt onto children and grandchildren, the worst prison system in America with no leadership on how to address it, a failed health care overhaul with no alternative on the horizon, and so on.  The bargains between the governor and the legislative leaders, and the entrenched power of that relationship is not beneficial for the citizens of the state, either, have not proven to be all that salutary.  So before we extend it, we should think about the value of a less accommodationist leadership stance that rewards the fiscal inanity of the Schwarzenegger era.

Of course, that’s a short-term look, the least important, in my view.  But in the medium term, the rule that keeps current legislators in office does impact the real opportunities Democrats have to make meaningful gains in the legislature.  Term limits are certainly not the only reform necessary in Sacramento, or even the most important.  I think eliminating the absurd stranglehold the minority has on budgets and taxes by reducing the 2/3 requirement on those votes is of paramount necessity.  And the only way we’re going to get that is by actually getting a 2/3 Democratic majority in both chambers.  And it’s a realizable goal, considering the excitement in 2008 with our game-changing Presidential candidate who will bring new voters into the process, whoever it is.  I think we can get 54 Assembly members and 27 Senators by 2010.  But it’d be a hell of a lot easier if we can run Democrats in rapidly bluing areas in open seats, instead of against incumbents like Bonnie Garcia and Shirley Horton and Tom McClintock and Abel Maldonado.  We have a much better chance of winning those seats and getting real budget reform and tax fairness if this proposition does not pass, and those lawmakers get termed out of office.

But we’re told in all of the advertising and literature that we should really focus on the long term.  Never mind the back door for sitting lawmakers, this is about a better and more well-prepared legislature for our future.  Well, I hate to break this to everyone, but that statistically doesn’t add up. Prop. 140, which set current term limits, passed in 1990.  Before that there were no term limits at all.  Yet the average length of legislative experience was 10 years.  That’s actually pretty much what it is today.  And the reason is that California has a lot of structural churn in their legislature, and for good reason.  You may have noticed that politicians are ambitious folks, and in this state there are simply a great deal more desirable political offices than in any other state.  We have the biggest Congressional delegation, we have enormous cities with city and county boards of supervisors that wield tremendous power, and politicians desire those positions.  The idea that suddenly all the ambition is going to be boiled out of lawmakers and we’re going to be able to bolt them into their seats for 12 years is frankly not borne out by historical precedent.  The case of Richard Alarcon is instructive.  He was a state Senator who ran for mayor and lost in 2005, then he ran for Assembly in 2006, and after just getting there he ran for LA City Council in 2007.  The mayor’s office, and LA City Council are very desirable posts, and they drew him out of the legislature.  And that’s not because of restrictive term limits.  I hear a lot of talk about how we are possibly going to lose Sheila Kuehl, my state Senator, from the legislature, and who is going to carry the banner of universal health care, and this is why we need to change term limits.  Sheila Kuehl is leaving whether Prop. 93 passes or not.  She wants to be on the LA County Board of Supervisors because she wants to be closer to home.  Nicole Parra of Bakersfield just announced that she won’t run again despite being eligible if Prop. 93 passes.

Another part of this is the fact that this only extends time in office if you make the decision, at the beginning of your career, to run for either Senate or Assembly, and then stay there.  Right now, 85% of all State Senators have at least 2 terms of Assembly experience and only 2 have none.  That’s simply not likely to change, or else you’re going to have a far MORE inexperienced State Senate than you do right now.

What term limits did accomplish is it got rid of the longtime Willie Brown types, the old hands who steered the legislature in their direction and maintained all the committee chairs through seniority.  I don’t see how giving Senators one extra term, or 3 in the case of the Assembly, is going to fix that.  You’re going to have the same legislative churn as ambitious pols seek better positions of prestige, and none of the benefits of a relaxed term limit structure, which is increasing institutional memory.

Now, personally I don’t think there should be any term limits.  Ultimately, the only limit should be we the people.  But that has to be coupled with an overhaul in our campaign finance system, so that challengers have the opportunity to compete on a level playing field.  I simply think there are better ways to reform the system than with something that fails what I believe should be the short-term, medium-term, and long-term goals of the California Democratic Party.  So I can’t support Proposition 93.