Tag Archives: Leland Yee

Bay Area, San Francisco

A friendly reminder of the power of incumbency

(Updated…with pictures before and after the flip – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

UPDATE: I’ve now posted the image of the flyer. Personally, I’m of the mind that it gives the media far too much credit.  Incidentally, the SF Chron story that was attached quotes only one person as to how divisive the election will be quotes only Don “I must have another 4 years” Perata and political ally, but generally cool dude, Aaron Peskin. ANd in the SacBee story that was attached, Peskin seems to be mourning the loss of the political machine:

“Since the Jerry Brown-John Burton machine has retired, there are no kingmakers left in San Francisco,” Peskin said. “There’s nobody to knock anybody’s heads together to say who should and who shouldn’t run.”

Uh sure, them was some great days for democracy. Look, I have enormous respect for BOS President Peskin.  But he’s just wrong on the fundamentals here.  (oh…and I have a cool picture from SFPride with both leno and peskin over the flip)…

The SFYD endorsement apparently means quite a bit. Enough to send out some friendly reminders from political allies on why  incumbency ROX!! Woohoo!

Apparently, two electeds in the City haven’t been reading Calitics enough. You see the thing is “incumbent” alone isn’t enough anymore. Nobody owns a seat, you get what you earn, nothing more, nothing less. Our community is plenty strong. We can handle a little politics.

So, over the flip, I repeat my top 5 reasons, and I invite everybody to read my piece in Capitol Weekly.

Top 5 Reasons Primaries are Important

1) Primaries get the grassroots growing and are great training grounds for new leaders.
2) Primaries are, in many CA districts, the only real election at all.  Voters should get the chance to vote where it means something.
3) Primaries get people to register in a party (yay, more registered Democrats).
4) We get a real debate in places where that is frequently missing. Electeds should be held accountable to their constituents to explain their views.
5) Primaries force electeds to be more responsive to their constituents and to better represent the interests of those constituents.

Photo: (from left) Aaron Peskin, Hank “Mister SF” Donat, Wes Culwell, Mark Leno, and Brian Leubitz

Uncategorized

Sen. Leland Yee talks CSU/UC Executive Pay

Sen. Leland Yee (D-SF) introduced SB 190 a while back. It brings a sense of transparency to the Executive Salary system. And a whole lot of sunshine.  I’m not actually sure that I’m really that appalled by UC Executive Pay, but some sunshine would sure be welcome.

Over the flip, you can read the press release about the “faculty and students uniting to support SB190”.  You know, I really love press releases. I mean, the language is always so grand. You just feel like the campuses are demanding this action.  How much you want to bet that next time I go to Berkeley, that I could go around asking on campus all day about it, and nobody would have heard of this bill.  Maybe a few will have heard of the executive pay “scandal”, but I bet most of those are concentrated in the polisci department and the student government.  But sure, I’ll go with it: they united to support SB 190. 

At any rate, flip it to let the sunshine in…

Faculty and Students Unite to Bring
Transparency to UC, CSU Executive Pay Scandals

Senate Education Committee to vote on Yee’s SB 190

SACRAMENTO – Just weeks after the both the University of California (UC) and the California State University (CSU) handed out exorbitant executive compensation packages, the Senate Education Committee today approved legislation to bring greater transparency and public access to such actions.

Students, faculty, and public access advocates urged the committee to approve Senate Bill (SB) 190, legislation authored by Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco/San Mateo) that will require all executive compensation packages to be voted on in an open session of a subcommittee and the full board.  The bill will also require full disclosure of the compensation package with accompanying rationale, public comment on the specific action item, and closes a loophole that allows UC Regents and CSU Trustees on advisory groups to circumvent open meetings law.

“We need to end the culture of secrecy at the UC and CSU governing boards,” said Yee.  “SB 190 will bring much needed sunshine to these discussions, provide members of the media the democratic access they deserve, and help restore the public’s trust.”

SB 190 comes after a series of audits, lawsuits and other revelations have found that the UC and the CSU failed to get public approval from the Regents or Trustees for compensation packages and that some top executives were paid more than what was released to the public.

Last week, the CSU faculty announced that 94 percent of its members voted in favor of a strike.  In addition to handing out two excessive executive compensation payouts, the Regents and Trustees also recently significantly increased student fees.

“It seems as if the students and faculty – the backbone of our university – are always left to the bear the burden, while high execs live high on the hog,” said Senator Yee.  “As a graduate of both the UC and CSU, I want to make sure our higher education systems succeed.  We should be investing in instruction, not creating a get-rich factory for executives.”

“SB 190 will give the public an open window into the secret and scandal-ridden compensation practices of the UC Regents and CSU Trustees,” said Tom Newton, General Counsel for the California Newspaper Publishers Association.  “This legislation will not only shine some light on executive compensation discussions, but will allow the public to decide for itself whether UC and CSU pay practices are fair and appropriate.”

“Senator Yee’s legislation will make sure that the University lives up to its public purpose and is held accountable for their actions,” said Lakesha Harrison, President of AFSCME Local 3299.  “This legislation is an important first step in ensuring the accountability of the University to the people of California.”

“Thousands of students turn to this university for the education they need to contribute to California,” said Susan Meisenhelder of the California Faculty Association. “Instead of helping students get an education, the administration caters to elite executives who get huge pay raises and golden parachutes.”

In addition to the California Faculty Association and AFSCME, SB 190 has already garnered the support of California Newspaper Publishers Association, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), University of California Student Association, Council of UC Faculty Associations, Associated Students of the University, California Nurses Association, Californians Aware, State Employee’s Trades Council, and California Federation of Teachers, as well as co-authors from both Democratic and Republican legislators.

SB 190 will also be heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee before consideration by the entire Senate.

California, education

State Senator Leland Yee Calls for Transparency in UC and CSU Executive Compensation

As the California Aggie reported today, State Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) has just introduced a bill, SB 190, that would mandate that the CSU board of trustees and UC board of regents hold public, transparent deliberations on executive compensation. Given the repeated ethical violations and soaring payraises and benefits that the regents and trustees have voted for themselves over the past several years (and that to have the gall to make everyone else fill out ethics questionaires?), given the stagnant wages paid to professors, TAs, clerical and service workers by the same regents and trustees, and given the ever-skyrocketing tuition hikes at both the CSU and UC systems (not to mention the community coleges), I think this is a reform long overdue.

Public universities shoud not just be plum patronage positions for an unaccountable ruling class of free-floating executives, who vote each other raises with public monies. They are intended for the public good, to produce research for the people of the state of California, and to educate the youth of California. The state government and the university regents and trustees have reneged on this intent, and can no longer be trusted to conduct public affairs in private, free of all oversight and beyond reproach.

Thank you Senator Yee. It is time to remind the regents and trustees exactly who they work for, and for whose benefit the public university system is intended to work for.

originally at surf putah

Prisons

Senator Leland Yee on SB999

19 Comments

UPDATE: Oops…I mispelled the Senator’s first name!

I’m expirementing with getting some audio on the site.  And, Sen. Yee has obliged me by sending some audio my way.  Thanks Team Yee!  SB 999 is a bill on sentence reform for minors that would ban life sentences without parole for minors.


powered by ODEO

Press Release over the flip.

Yee Bill would Reform Life Sentences for Minors

Senator Introduces Legislation to Abolish Sentence of Life Without Parole for Youth Offenders

SACRAMENTO – As California gets set to consider major changes to the state’s prisons, today Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco/San Mateo) announced reform legislation to abolish the sentence of life without parole for youth offenders, which is currently the maximum sentence allowed by law.  SB 999, the final bill Senator Yee introduced for 2007, would make the maximum sentence twenty-five years to life.

“Children have an extraordinary capacity for rehabilitation,” said Senator Yee, who is also a child psychologist.  “The neuroscience is clear; brain maturation continues well through adolescence and thus impulse control, planning, and critical thinking skills are still not yet fully developed.  SB 999 reflects that science and provides the opportunity for compassion and rehabilitation that we should exercise with minors.”

In Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), the US Supreme Court confirmed that minors need to be considered differently than adults in sentencing, by prohibiting the death penalty for children due to concerns about brain development.

Nationally, fifty-nine percent of juveniles sentenced to life without parole are first time offenders.

Of the approximately 200 juveniles in California serving this sentence, there are a number of cases that have brought into question this severe sentencing.  One such case involves Sara Kruzan who was raised in Riverside by her abusive mother who was addicted to drugs.  Sara met her father only three times in her life because he was in prison.

Starting at the age of 9, Sara suffered from severe depression for which she was hospitalized several times.  At the age of 11, she met a 31-year-old man named “G.G.” who molested her and began grooming her to become a prostitute.  At age 13, she was working as a child prostitute for G.G. and was repeatedly molested by him until she was 16, when she killed him.  She was sentenced to prison for the rest of her life despite the California Youth Authority and a psychiatric evaluation determining that she was amendable to rehabilitation treatment offered in the juvenile system.

SB 999, also known as the California Juvenile Life Without Parole Reform Act, would amend the Penal Code so that a child who commits a crime could not be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole; instead, a sentence of twenty-five years to life in prison would be imposed.  The child offender would not have the opportunity to request parole until he or she had served twenty-five years in prison.  At that time there would be no presumption of release.  The parole board would consider the request and determine whether the individual deserved to be released or should remain in prison, which may continue to be for life.

“Life without parole means absolutely no opportunity for release,” said Senator Yee.  “It also means minors are often left without access to programs and rehabilitative services while in prison.  This sentence was created for the worst of criminals that have no possibility of reform and it is not a humane way to handle children.  While the crimes they committed caused undeniable suffering, these youth offenders are not the worst of the worst.”

“As a society we’ve learned a lot since the time we started using life without parole for children,” said Elizabeth Calvin, Children’s Rights Advocate, Children’s Rights Division of Human Rights Watch.  “We know now that this sentence provides no deterrent effect.  While children who commit serious crimes should be held accountable, public safety can be protected without subjecting youth to the harshest prison sentence possible. This bill would punish youth but give them the opportunity to prove they have turned their lives around.”

The United States leads the world in the practice of sentencing juveniles to life without parole, claiming 99.5 percent of all youth globally serving this sentence.  In fact, there are only twelve such cases outside of the US.  The oldest human rights treaty to which the US is a party, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, prohibits this sentence.  Nationally, eleven jurisdictions have prohibited this sentence including New York, Colorado, and the District of Columbia.

California also has the worst racial disparity rate in the nation for sentencing life without parole.  Black youth are given this sentence at twenty-two times the rate of white youth.

“California is out of step with international standards of justice,” said Michelle Leighton, Director of Human Rights Programs at the Center for Law and Global Justice at the University of San Francisco.  “The international community is urging the U.S. to abolish unjust sentence immediately.”

“California’s juvenile sentencing laws can certainly be made more just,” said Senator Yee.  “Sentencing youth who commit horrible crimes to life in prison is one thing, but prohibiting even some cases from the possibility of parole is plainly unacceptable.”

The public appears to agree.  A poll conducted of Americans living on the West Coast found that eighty-six percent disagree with the idea of children who commit crimes are beyond redemption.

“As a society, can we really decide that a sixteen year old is absolutely unredeemable,” said Javier Stauring, Co-Director of the Office of Restorative Justice for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles.  “That’s what a life without parole sentence does-there is no chance for redemption, no real opportunity for rehabilitation.”

Uncategorized

Leland Yee introduces No More Hospital Sticker Shock Bill

Senator Leeland Yee has introduced SB 389, which attempts to take the patient out of fights between dueling medical groups and hospital associations.  When a doctor from a non-contracting group ends up on your case at the hospital, the patient ends up getting stuck with a huge bill.  Often times this will occur at a hospital that contracts with the insurance plan of the patient, but the patient may never know, or be given a choice, until after the service has been provided.

I haven’t yet studied the law in detail, but from what I do know, it seems to be a common sense addition to insurance regulation in the state. Full press release over the flip.

Yee Announces Bill to Protect Patients from Surprise Medical Bills

SB 389 Removes Patients from Payment Disputes between Healthcare Companies and Doctors

SACRAMENTO – While California appears poised to pass legislation this year to overhaul the state’s healthcare system and provide health insurance coverage for millions of uninsured, it may still fall short of preventing unreasonable medical bills for some patients because of a practice known as “balance billing.”

Each year, thousands of patients who already have healthcare benefits receive surprise medical bills following hospital visits, also known as balance billing.  These bills can range from $100 and under to upwards of $20,000 or more, and come even though a hospital contracts with a patient’s health insurance plan.

In many cases, health plan enrollees face collection agencies and threats of court judgments from hospital-based medical professionals who do not contract with a patient’s insurance plan.  For these unsuspecting consumers and others who may fall victim in the future, Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco/San Mateo) has introduced Senate Bill 389.

“It is simply unfair for any patient to be caught in the middle of payment disputes between health plans and physicians,” said Senator Yee. “It is like two parents who are fighting and using the child as a pawn. Everyone knows who the victim is in these circumstances.”

Specifically, SB 389 states consumers cannot be billed by hospital-based physicians when the patient’s health plan contracts with the hospital in which the physician has privileges to practice. The bill does not prevent doctors from getting paid for their services, but simply requires health insurers and physicians to handle billing disputes without putting the patients in the middle or on the hook for the bill.

If physicians or healthcare companies are unsatisfied in a particular payment dispute, SB 389 also requires a dispute resolution system be in place, and current law allows for filing a complaint with state regulators, such as the Department of Managed Health Care, or a lawsuit in court.

“There are plenty of options available for doctors and insurance companies to get their money,” said Senator Yee. “Without this new law, however, there are little options for consumers.  Regardless of whether a bill is $10 or $10,000 far too many patients are unfairly put in the middle of these disputes.  This can destroy their credit and future, often at an already vulnerable time in their life as they are dealing with life-threatening health problems.  While we clearly need to pass comprehensive healthcare this year, it is imperative that we also protect the consumer by ending the practice of balance billing.”

“As a physician, I understand the importance of receiving appropriate and just compensation for services provided in good faith,” said Brian C. Roach, MD, President/CEO of the Mills-Peninsula Medical Group. “However, the patients should not be caught in the middle of the fight between non-contracting physicians and medical groups/IPAs. SB 389 will keep the patient out of the fight and require non-contracting physicians to use other remedies and deal with the health plans and physicians organizations directly.”

“We have heard numerous reports that our members have been billed for charges in excess of what has already been paid by their health plan and that some physicians have sent these bills to collection,” said Barry Broad, Legislative Representative for the California Teamsters Public Affairs Council.  “Physicians should not be permitted to try to obtain payment from patients for the costs of services which those physicians know are not owed by those patients. Sending out such claims for collection, with the resulting loss of credit, is simply unconscionable.”

Bay Area

Terrible ads all over the place: Prop 82 and SD-8

The good folks over at No On 82 are creating some very nice little ads featuring teachers, principals, and parents stating how Prop 82 would create a massive bureacracy, a “parent tax”, and generally be disastrous for the state b/c uh, rich people would be a little less rich…and uh… well, you get the jist.

The problem is: they are all fake.  Yup, all actors.  Those “teachers” that you’ll see, uh, maybe they taught a summer stock class.  From Matier and Ross:

Take, for example, the new ad opposing actor and director Rob Reiner’s universal preschool initiative, Proposition 82. It warns of a costly new bureaucracy and even the possibility of a “parent tax,” and features a school principal, teachers and kids.

They’re all actors. According to the call that went out from Ava Shevitt Casting in Santa Monica, these were the requirements:
***
Teacher: “Female/Asian, Caucasian, 40-45 … professional manner, warm & engaging, authoritative but gentle.”
***
Student: “Female, multi-ethnic, 13-15 … dark hair, appealing, warm & engaging, bright, adorable, thoughtful, insightful, poised, inspirational.”
***
California Teachers Association officials, who support the preschool initiative, aren’t amused by the fake school crew.  “Using actors to portray teachers is misleading and deceptive,” sniped Sandra Jackson, spokeswoman for the union. (SF Chron 5/21/06)

The fact that the No on 82 folks are stooping to using fake teacher is more than a little funny/ironic.  Can’t they find one teacher who doesn’t like 82?  Well perhaps not…

As an aside, check out that article for a funny Jerry Brown story. 

Moving to Dem on Dem ads and back to a subject I touched on earlier: SD-8’s bizarre ads.  Mike Nevin wants to appear again on these pages.  This time he tries to tie Yee to Schwarzenegger.  Well, ok, but then he takes a page out of “Girly-Man” Schwarzenegger’s book.  He puts a picture of Yee’s head onto a Hans and Franz picture with Ahnold. I think it’s funny that we get in a huff when Arnold uses this stuff, but then we do it to each other.  Meanwhile Lou Papan is running clean ads on TV and in mailers.

Here it is, click on the ads to make them bigger.

Mike Nevin’s Pump You Up Ad

Pump You up ad  Back of ad

Uncategorized

SD-8: A primary campaign descending into the muck

3 Comments

As you can probably guess from my username, I live in San Francisco.  More specifically, I live in SD-8, so I’m currently represented by Sen. Speier.  She’s termed out and is running for Lt. Gov.  However, the race to replace her has gotten really, really ugly in the last few days.  In the last week, I received about 10 mailers.  However, these 2 stuck out for their ugliness.  First I received Nevin’s attack on Yee, which was soon followed by Yee’s attack on Nevin.  Click on them to see them in greater detail.  There’s more on the flip…

Nevin on Yee

   

Yee on Nevin

Both of these mailers are negative garbage.  Both make me want to vote for Lou Papan.  Oh yeah, did they not mention that there is another candidate running.  Yeah, Lou Papan, the longime assemblyman from San Mateo county, is also running for the seat. 

Personally, I’m not totally sure why Nevin decided to go so negative with this attack on Yee.  It’s easily debunked.  Yee has received only one contribution from the oil companies, and his record certainly doesn’t indicate that he is beholden to BigOil.  But, that even being said, I’m not sure high gas prices are the most important issue in such progressive district.  For one, I’m sure you could find many evironmentalists that aren’t that upset by high gas prices.  Personally, I’d rather that money go to the oil companies in a windfall, but perhaps the high prices will begin to ween our state (and nation) off the bottle.

The prescription drug issues that Yee focused on are a bit easier to understand.  Nevin has worked in a firm that does some lobbying.  That immediately opens up the door to imputed positions.  Nevin is just the victim of that.  Whether Nevin actually worked against Prop 79 is unclear, but it’s certainly an overstatement to say that he is beholden to drug interests.

Of course, once again, we waste our time with meaningless attacks.  Perhaps both of these candidates would be better off by saving their money for mailers that inform the candidates who they are, not attack their opponent.

Capitol Weekley says this of the race:

SD 8 – This district includes parts of San Francisco County and most of San
Mateo County.

There’s been bad blood between Lou Papan and Mike Nevin since the 2001 redistricting, when Nevin accused Papan of drawing him out of an Assembly district to ease the path for Papan’s daughter, Gina. Papan denies the allegation, and even if it were true, it didn’t work, as Gina Papan lost to Gene Mullin. Conventional wisdom has Papan in the race to help draw votes away from the other San Mateo candidate, Nevin. But Nevin did pick up the endorsement of Leland Yee’s hometown newspaper, the San Francisco Chronicle. Capitol Weekley 5/18/06

For more about this nasty race, see [Around the Capitol], which has lots of articles about the race.  Three taped debates will be airing on PeninsulaTV (Ch. 26), beginning on May 23.  Check the website for showtimes.