I’ll be joining Your Call Radio on the Friday Media Roundtable today at 11. It airs on 91.7 KALW in San Francisco and KUSP in Santa Cruz and the Central Coast. If you miss it at 11, you can catch the replay at 5 PM today or download the podcast at the Your Call Radio website.
We’ll be discussing a range of issues, from Afghanistan and other foreign issues, down to some of Arnold’s vetoes. Check it out!
I’m about to be on today’s Your Call at 11 AM. You can stream live or nab the podcast at the Your Call website. This week’s programs are all focused on the budget, and today’s subject is what should we cut.
It would be easy to say nothing. And that would be valid, however given the circumstances we are currently facing, that seems unlikely. So how do we prioritize? How do we put state parks when compared to CalWORKS? How do we stack up K-12, higher ed and in-home support services? AIDS Drugs that literally keep people alive and dialysis for kidney patients that has the same effect?
It is like a giant, and terrifying, game of comparing apples and oranges. But honestly, the question is a bit loaded to me. I just saw the new Star Trek movie yesterday, and I feel like I want to reprogram the Kobayashi Maru.
The simple answer is that we should tread very carefully about exposing one area without demanding that at least the corporate tax cut go first. But if I were to start with one area, it would have to be prisons, and then move along from there. So, any and all suggestions are welcome in the comments. If you have a chance, check out the Your Call show at 11 today. (Picture from WhyBeNormal)
At a hearing last week of the California State Lands Commission, which I chair, we passed a resolution critical of an effort to bypass our independent jurisdiction in approving new oil drilling proposals.
An editorial in last weekend’s Los Angeles Times buttresses my position and explains what’s at stake:
“[In late January,] the Lands Commission rightly rejected the plan on a 2-1 vote, and that should have been the end of it. […]
Admittedly, the state could use the money. But that’s not a good enough reason to subvert the authority of the Lands Commission, sell California’s coastline in exchange for empty promises, ignore the wishes of Santa Barbara residents and dismiss the outcome of a long process of analysis and public hearings. The Lands Commission, in fact, was created in 1938 to bring more transparency to the awarding of oil leases after a scandal involving the Department of Finance.”
National and state implications over the flip…
The precedent set by allowing this “dubious deal” to move forward also has dangerous national implications. In comments to a post I wrote last week on the Daily Kos, Linnaeus said something that I think is worth repeating:
“I’m not a Californian, but these resources are treasures for us all. In case I wasn’t clear, yes, protect the coastline.” (minor edits for formatting)
What happens in California has a habit of spreading to other states, and if the proposal moves forward, the Golden State will be on record in support of offshore oil drilling and in favor of bypassing decades-established environmental regulations when Big Oil comes knocking with a quick buck. That’s not a precedent that’s healthy for California’s fragile natural wonders, and it can only serve to undermine environmental protection efforts in other states too.
In a wall post in the Facebook group created in opposition to the Department of Finance proposal, Assemblymember Pedro Nava, a member of the Assembly Coastal Caucus, explains what he expects will happen if the oil lease moves forward:
“We can’t forget this important fact. The Secretary of the Interior is right now evaluating off shore oil lease plans for California. If the PXP deal is approved through the budget, it will mean that the coast of California is for sale and decades of hard work to protect our coast will be compromised. The impacts will be first felt in Santa Barbara and then spread like an oil spill north to Mendocino and south to San Diego. We have worked too hard for too long to allow this to happen.”
And Brian Leubitz on Calitics wrote today of the potential environmental impact of the Department of Finance’s proposal. His words are worth repeating:
“California was, once upon a time, the leader in offshore drilling. In fact, the first submerged oil wells was in the Santa Barbara Channel. Public acceptance can change rapidly when you spill 200,000 gallons of crude oil into the ocean. And change it did.
In many ways, that day in 1969 was the time when the environmental movement came of age. It had a real, tangible event to show the world of how quickly we can turn a once beautiful strip of coast into a toxic mess. […]
Drill, Baby, Drill is a recipe for disaster in both good and bad economic times. We should not be compromising our goals of a clean and sustainable energy future for a few hundred million dollars. I’ll be working to provide more depth on this issue, but in the mean time, consider emailing your legislator or joining John Garamendi’s facebook group to support the State Lands Commission’s position against drilling. We simply cannot afford another to turn our backs on 1969, the devastating consequences of a spill are just not worth the price.”
I’m not prepared to see decades of environmental safeguards undermined, and I don’t think you are either. The impact goes far beyond a single oil lease off the coast of Santa Barbara; at stake is a precedent-setting showdown on the legitimacy of environmental protection in the country’s most trendsetting state. We must not catch a wave toward environmental ruin.
Please, if you live in California, call and e-mail your state legislators and voice your opposition to this deal. They are expected to vote on the issue in a few weeks. And no matter where you live, join our Facebook group and invite your friends. We’ve made good progress in the past week, and with your help, yes we can stop “a dubious deal on offshore oil drilling.”
John Garamendi is the Lieutenant Governor of California, chair of the California State Lands Commission, and a former Deputy Secretary of the U.S. Interior Department. He also sits on the Ocean Protection Council and is the founder of the Clean Seas Coalition.
As I mentioned a few days ago, I attended the East Bay DFA meeting last night. It was great to hang out with some folks who are regular contributors to Calitics.
The meeting began with a recap of the CDP convention, where a member of the group, Hilary Crosby, was elected to the position of CDP Controller. Several other members of East Bay DFA were elected to caucus positions, including Karen Weinstein to Women’s Caucus Chair. This is really a remarkably successful club.
Once all the collective high-fives were issued and the pizza was devoured, the CA-10 candidates got up there and did their thing. You might want to check Matt Lockshin’s twitter feed for the live tweeting action.
Joan Buchanan began, pointing out that No Child Left Behind is still vastly underfunded. But, once she finished up with her schpiel, the first question was from a supporter of Nancy Skinner. Skinner, the progressive Assembly Member from AD-14, sent her volunteers over the East Bay Hills to get Buchanan elected. It seems many of these progressive folks are a smidge bitter that she’s ready to run for another office so soon after a bitter fight to get her elected in AD-15. She handled it fairly well, saying if she won, she would do everything to ensure that AD-15 stays in Democratic hands.
John Garamendi went next, and gave a patented John Garamendi speech. It was fiery and passionate. He addressed the issues of why he is running for the seat, why he would be the most effective candidate, and all the people he knows. He’s been in this game for a while. Which is a contrast to…
Anthony Woods, who went next. You could tell Woods wasn’t quite so seasoned. He spoke off of notes, which I think did him a bit of a disservice. He knew the issues, and in a small room like that, getting people to feel like you are really addressing them is more important than getting every word right. That being said, he did get pretty much every word right. The speech was great, people liked his story and his positions. Whether he wins this race or not, Woods is well positioned to be a leader in the area in the future.
Finally, Sen. Mark DeSaulnier mentioned how Reps. Tauscher and Miller both called him about running for the seat. How he had all the big name endorsements. He’s really quite progressive, from the Constitutional Convention bill he’s carrying in the Senate to his legislative scorecards.
In the questions, we got views on Afghanistan, the death penalty, and a range of issues. I’m sure the voters will hear quite a lot from these four going forward.
Finally, I had a little debate with Sen. DeSaulnier about the propositions. I will grant him that it was a friendly room to me; the people in DFA strongly oppose Prop 1A and the rest of the package. And DeSaulnier recognized that, and to his credit acknowledged that it was a result of extortion. He admitted it was not his idea of good policy, but said that it was the best deal they could get in the Legislature. I of course disagree, but props to him for being honest about. More props to him for pushing Prop 1C over the rest of the measures while still acknowledging that he didn’t think that there was actually $5 billion to be had in lottery liquidity.
Several months ago, I announced that I was running for Vice Chair of the California Democratic Party. That was quite a while ago, it seems like ages now. That was before the incredible convention that nominated Barack Obama, before the election that brought us President-elect Obama, before I got married, before the passage of Proposition 8, before the upsurge of a populist movement to repeal Prop 8, and so on and so forth. It turns out that four months is a lifetime in an election year.
Also since then, we have seen the true validation of the 50 state strategy. Heck, not only did we win in North Carolina and Indiana, we took an electoral vote from Nebraska. Nebraska! It turns out that if you build it, they will come. And when we build local Democratic parties that speak to their areas, it turns out that Democrats win. Dr. Dean knew a few things, didn’t he?
And so while running for the vice-chair position, I pointed out that the CDP would be well served to flesh out and fully implement the 58 county strategy. After doing some work in some red counties this cycle, I know we can win anywhere in this state. And seeing this budget disaster, I know we must win in areas outside our comfort zone.
All that being said, things change. The dynamics of these races are, in fact, quite dynamic. When I got in this race, I did so not simply to make a point. I believed, and continue to believe, that I would do an excellent job as the vice chair of the CDP. And with these changes, it is clear to me that I will not have the votes come April in Sacramento. While I am not afraid to run a race that is merely to make a point, I believe the goals of competing in every race and building the party throughout the party will be made.
So, I will not be running for Vice Chair at the April convention in order to pursue other priorities. However, I will continue to be as involved as possible. I will work with the incoming chair and all of the officers, and hope to be an asset to the party. The CDP has been more effective than it has been credited for, but not as effective as it could be. We still have a ways to go in terms of our abilities in online, and offline, organizing.
If we are to make the changes that both the party and the state need, we need grassroots leaders stepping up both inside and outside traditional power structures. I am sure that in whatever capacity I serve, I will be able to help this party going forward.
I want to thank everybody who supported me when I announced my run and since then. Rather than naming people individually, just know that I deeply, deeply appreciate it. And on we go…
Today, Field released their final poll for the 2008 presidential election. (For those of you wondering, that means at least some of the Props will be coming out tomorrow.) In this poll (PDF), Obama leads McCain in California by 22 points. According to Field pollster Mark DiCamillo, this would represent the largest margin of victory for a presidential candidate since WWII. Of course, that depends on turnout. So, people, don’t let up on turnout efforts just because of this one poll. There is too much at stake down ballot here in California to let up one iota.
That being said, I’ll be joining a really interesting panel here in San Francisco discussing the election results next Thursday (11/6) from 6-8 PM. Facebook event page here. The moderator for the evening will be Pulitzer-prize winning, former Boston Globe reporter Marty Nolan. Panelists tentatively include Doug Souvern (KCBS Radio), Carla Marinucci (SF Chronicle) and Calitics.com blogger Brian Leubitz.
Now, back to the business of thoroughly trouncing Republicans…
For the last few years, I’ve been quite involved in the CDP. I care deeply about the California Democratic Party and the tactics and policies that it pursues. I know that this Party can be a vehicle for real fundamental progressive policy change at all levels of government. However, we have a wide range of obstacles in front of us in the coming years to ensure that we strengthen our Party for the challenges of the next generation. That is why I have decided to run for vice-chair of the California Democratic Party.
As Democrats, we are fortunate. We needn’t concern ourselves with suppressing any voting blocs or hiding from our positions. The simple truth is that when the people come out to vote, we win. But turnout operations require people, thus we must become a truly people powered party. In word and deed. We need to continue the work of the neighborhood leader program, and build upon our recent successes. We need to register more voters, and then make sure they get to the polls. That much we all know, but getting all that done requires a people-powered machine of volunteerism.
We must engage the grassroots of the party, and throw open the doors of the California Democratic Party. It is increasingly clear that if we are to truly build a people-powered party that we need more transparency at all levels within the CDP. If we are to ask people to volunteer for our campaigns, shouldn’t they know what they are signing up for? It’s simply a matter of motivation, people are more likely to dedicate their time, effort, and resources to a party that explains their strategy to them. This CDP should be of, by, and for grassroots Democrats as we attempt to ensure our collective success.
This people-powered party shouldn’t simply exist to serve a legislative caucus or any particular donor, but rather to ensure that the collective action of thousands of grassroots Democrats can be heard. This means truly opening up ourselves to introspection. It means reviewing our processes to ensure that we are an institution that is seeking the best solution rather than the easy solution. It means recalibrating ourselves to overcome inertia in the service of positive change. After all, if there is one thing that term limits have taught us, it is that incumbency is ephemeral, values are permanent.
But reform is a two-way street. In order to build a truly people-powered party, we must follow up by building a program to increase donations to the party from grassroots activists. As transparency can increase activism, it can also increase fundraising. While nobody expects to compete with presidential candidates, the growth of online donations from Howard Dean to Barack Obama shows that there is money there for those who speak clearly and openly of their beliefs. The same is true of the CDP . Grassroots donations will not come until the grassroots activists are completely assured that their money will be spent wisely and for their intended purpose of supporting Democratic values. This is not an overnight process, but rather a long process of growing relationships and building trust.
One way of supporting those Democratic values is to invest resources to expand the reach of our Party and fully implement our 58-County Strategy. Despite any conventional wisdom to the contrary, we are capable of growing the Party all across the state.We should encourage the growth of our Democratic County Central Committees and support their party-building efforts, whether they be volunteer voter registration drives or the hiring of regional field organizers. Furthermore, we need to field candidates everywhere, because, as Howard Dean said, we can’t expect votes unless we ask for them. We needn’t limit ourselves to the Coast, because despite the attacks that our leveled against us, we are right.
We are right that we can’t sell our civil liberties for a false promise of Big Brother providing us security. We are right that we all deserve access to health care without the concern of going broke (and then losing our homes to foreclosure). We are right that climate change presents to us a major and immediate challenge. We were right that Iraq was a war that should have never been authorized and never been waged. And we are right to provide the troops with all that we have promised, including quality health care and quality education when they return. Because despite the foolhardy nature of the mission, they have served admirably. We are right that California, and the nation, need clean, publicly-owned, and trustworthy elections. And we are right that all Californians should be free to marry the one that they love.
We already have the capacity to make this a people-powered party. All the tools are already here. It’s simply a matter of will. Together we can build this CDP into our CDP . Over the coming months I hope to talk to any delegates and as many interested Democrats as possible to discuss these challenges to the CDP in more detail. I do not take this lightly. I have considered this for a long time, and feel that I can provide value to the CDP in the role of vice-chair. My experience with Calitics has given me a catbird seat view of the issues presented to the CDP. And I am confident that my education and experience as a lawyer and a policy analyst will be an asset to the party. I have experience working for and against statewide propositions, and understand the good, bad, and ugly of California politics. I have high expectations for this party and know that we will always have more work to do. I’m ready to do some of that work. If you have questions, let me know. Email me at brian AT calitics dotcom, and I’ll get back to you promptly. And if you’re going to be in Denver, well, I’ll do my best to speak to as many Californians as possible.
Bio: Brian Leubitz runs Calitics.com, the leading California progressive blog covering California politics and policy. He holds a law degree from the University of Texas and a Master of Public Policy (M.P.P) from the Goldman School at The University of California, Berkeley. After practicing law in San Francisco, Brian transitioned into politics and launched Calitics .com in 2005. He has worked on several campaigns in the state, including the Yes on 93 (term limits reform) and the No on 98/Yes on 99 (eminent domain and property rights) campaigns. He currently is a member of the Democratic State Central Committee, serves on the CDP’s resolutions committee, and is on the boards of the San Francisco Young Democrats and the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club.
Hey, all you people in the Bay Area? Have you ever wanted to hear me blather on about politics and the internet? Well, tonight you have the chance to hear not just me, but also Frank Russo of the California Progress Report and Paul Hogarth of Beyond Chron. We’ll be chit-chatting about how we use politics as a way to promote progressive ideals.
The SFYD meeting is tonight, 7PM, at the State Building, 455 Golden Gate Avenue. And of course, this event is in the events section.
The Hotline interviews Brian Leubitz and D-Day is up tomorrow. Recently, Capitol Weekly profiled Frank Russo. Props guys, thought this deserved more than a Calitics Quickies. Consider this an Open Thread.