California Food Safety & Health

There is nothing quite like pulling over to the side of many California roads and highways to purchase and enjoy fresh picked Strawberries! When I do so, rarely do I make it home with any strawberries left.  Like me, it is a pretty good bet that you know little of serious potential health hazards that may be looming from something that tastes so good.  

Informational Hearing

What Are the Alternatives?”

Senate Majority Leader Dean Florez, D-Shafter, who has become the defacto Legislative leader of food safety and consumer protection in the California State Senate, and is also a candidate for California Lt. Governor, will hold a hearing of the Senate Food and Agriculture Committee on Monday morning in Sacramento. The hearing will focus on investigating safe alternatives to the strawberry pesticide methyl iodide – a carcinogen which is believed to induce miscarriages and which poses a threat to groundwater – as state regulators prepare to decide if the chemical should be allowed for agricultural use in California.

Methyl iodide is proposed as a replacement for the fumigant methyl bromide, an ozone-depleting pesticide which is being phased out under the Montreal Protocol, an international agreement.

While methyl iodide is better for the ozone than methyl bromide, many argue that it is actually much worse for farmworkers and local communities.  Its use had been linked to cancer, miscarriages and neurological problems.  Last year, twenty-seven members of the State Assembly wrote to the Administration urging caution and calling for a commitment to outside review before approval.

Florez will convene a panel of researchers, regulators, farmers, farmworker advocates and concerned residents to discuss the risks to human health and the environment posed by methyl iodide, in anticipation of the Department of Pesticide Regulation’s consideration of plans to allow its use on California fields.

“It’s my understanding that there are much healthier alternatives on the table, for which there are even funds available to make them cost-effective to growers,” said Florez.  “I can’t imagine how we can ignore those alternatives when communities and human lives are at risk.”

Monday’s hearing will be held at 10:00 a.m. in Room 3191 of the California State Capitol Building.

In what has to be a major embarrassment to LT Governor candate and LA City Councilwoman Janice Hahn, when it comes to campaign fundraising, it appears she does not have the support of many high profile SOCAL residents she has served and/or live “in her own back yard“. While she heads out of town this week headed for Oakland for two campaign fundraisers, Candidate and State Senator Dean Florez, has not not one, but TWO MAJOR campaign events in the Los Angeles area.  

The two campaign events in Oakland for Hahn, both arranged by Oakland City Attorney John Russo, are for a $150 per person breakfast at the Cathedral Building Gallery and a $300 a head luncheon at Leavened East, both on Thursday December 10.

Meanwhile, candidate Florez supporters will have a show of force on Monday, December 14th, when top luminaries in their field, from real estate, medicine, and the arts show their support at The Regency Club in Los Angeles.

Billionaire philanthropist and healthcare visionary Patrick Soon-Shiong, M.D., is inviting Florez supporters to join him and a who’s-who of California success stories for a reception honoring the candidate at The Regency Club in Los Angeles. Co-Hosts for the event include actor Martin Sheen, Janet and Jerry Zucker (who directed the movies  “Ghost” and “Airplane”). David Geffen, the billionaire record executive, film and theater producer and philanthropist, who cofounded “Dreamworks” and medical luminaries Dr. Richard Merkin, and Dr. Gary Michelson, and Ed Roski and Rick Caruso, noted real estate developers also known for their philanthropic activities. Tickets start at $2000 and range up to $13,000.

A second campaign event for Florez, ONE HOT DECEMBER NIGHT, again in Southern California (Los Angeles), will be held on December 17 at The Myan. Fundraising tickets are running $20. to $6,500.

I don’t know about you, but it seems to me a candidate for Statewide office surely would have the strong support of those in his or her own area, especially those who are high profile and known for supporting Democratic candidates for statewide and national office. One single donation to Florez at his first event could wipe out the entire event donations at the Hahn fundraisers. This turn of events (all to happen in the span of a week or so) surely cannot be a good omen for the Hahn campaign, especially this early in the campaign for LT. Governor.  

Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, back in July:

The 2/3 requirement that we have in this state. I know it’s a tired old saw. But when you really think about, that is the cause of so much of the dysfunction in the legislature. you have a minority party that obviously worked in tandem with the governor that cost the state 6-7 billion dollars tonight for no good reason. To somehow improve your negotiating position. It is without question the most irresponsible act that I have seen in my 15 years of public service…I hope that the significance will truly capture enough attention that the people will decide it is time to change the system that allows the minority to essentially rule the day. That’s not just the Senate Republicans, it was the Governor too, who was apparently out to prove a point. And he proved a point.

Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, today:

State Senate Leader Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) released a statement expressing “grave doubts” about the choice. Maldonado needs the approval of the Democratic-dominated Legislature to take the post.

Steinberg cited the $2-million cost of the special election that would be required to fill Maldonado’s Senate seat, suggesting the money could be better spent scaling back recent fee hikes at state colleges and universities.

The Senate leader, under pressure to keep the post open for Democrats running for lieutenant governor themselves in next year’s election, also suggested he would like to see the job left vacant.

“It may be both fiscally and politically prudent to permit the people to make their own selection for this statewide office next year and avoid the expense of a costly special election,” his statement said.

Once again, we see that the State Senate is unwilling to actually do what it takes to overcome the 2/3rds rule that has crippled our state. Instead of seizing a golden opportunity to win one of the two seats we need to get a 2/3rds majority, Steinberg prefers to help coddle a fellow Democratic Senator’s unwillingness to face Maldonado in a general election.

Steinberg and other Senators are starting to put out the talking points to defend their weakness. But none of them hold water. The election to replace Maldonado here in SD-15 can be combined with the June primary, saving money. But even if it weren’t combined, the $2 million or so is statistically negligible when compared to the billions of dollars in cuts Steinberg is apparently willing to accept by refusing to take the chance to win a 2/3rds majority next year (along with the race to replace Jeff Denham in SD-12, a district with a D+12 registration advantage).

Additionally, voters themselves are going to have the chance to pick the next Lt. Gov., and confirming Maldonado will not change that fact, as Steinberg implies. If Steinberg believes Maldonado is a formidable candidate in the GOP primary or in the general election, he is badly misreading the political landscape.

Another argument we’re hearing is that Maldonado’s seat isn’t all that winnable:

Capitol Democrats said there was a more calculated political reason for not wanting to let Maldonado go. Democrats were humbled by this year’s election results in New Jersey and Virginia, and fear that 2010 could be a bad Democratic year. In addition, a low turn-out special election may make it tougher for a Democrat to win the 15th Senate District seat currently held by Maldonado.

Democrats have a slight 41-35 percent registration advantage in the district. Nearly 20 percent of the district’s voters are decline to state.  The district has been home to moderate Republicans like Bruce McPherson, and overwhelming voted for Schwarzenegger over Phil Angelides in 2006 – 61 percent – 34 percent. But in 2004, John Kerry narrowly carried the district over George W. Bush – 52 percent – 46 percent.

What the article doesn’t note is that Obama carried the seat by 20 points last year. And if it is turnout they’re concerned about, a candidate like John Laird will have no problem generating enthusiasm from progressives and Democrats across the state, who will gladly spend a late spring here on the Central Coast to put a good progressive in the State Senate.

More damning is the basic philosophy behind this “gee, winning the 15th is gonna be hard” nonsense. If Democrats are scared of winning a seat where they hold a 6 point registration advantage, a seat Obama won by 20 points, then they really have a serious problem providing the leadership this state needs.

Next year we’ll hear Democratic legislators exhorting us to help them in other Assembly and Senate races, saying that we have to help them win 2/3rds. But by refusing to actually go for 2/3rds when given the chance, they’re showing the California Democratic base that the Senate is fundamentally unserious about restoring majority rule.

The only conclusion one can draw from this is that Senate Democrats don’t actually care about the 2/3rds rule. That they prefer the status quo to having to actually take the opportunities they are given and take a winnable seat, or to set up a hated rival (Maldonado) to spectacularly fail when he can’t get elected Lt. Gov. next year.

UPDATE: The Courage Campaign, where I work as Public Policy Director, released this statement today on the Maldonado appointment:

“The best thing we can do right now is to remove Sen. Abel Maldonado from a position of importance where he can do great damage, the California State Senate, and place him in an irrelevant post, the Lt. Governor’s office,” said Rick Jacobs, Chair of the 700,000-member Courage Campaign. “For once, we agree with the Governor – Abel Maldonado should be demoted to Lt. Governor.”

As the Governor has tried to hijack the budget crisis to serve his own ends of punishing union workers and shredding the social services net, over the last couple days we’ve seen Democrats fighting back.  For example, Dean Florez surgically took apart the Governor’s idiotic smear attempt on legislators for doing their job of legislation.  Considering that the Governor has never invited all 120 lawmakers into his smoking tent for a pow-wow, I think there’s room for multitasking here.  But understanding that would involve basic knowledge about how government works, as Florez said:

Assembly bill 606 creates a commission to serve the marketing interests of the blueberry industry. Another bill defines “honey” to mean the natural food product resulting from the harvest of nectar by honey bees, and a third bill adopts regulations establishing definitions and standards for 100-percent pomegranate juice.

“Look, we’re pro-condiment, we’re pro-fruit, but the focus needs to be on the budget crisis,” McLear said.

Senate Majority Leader Dean Florez (D-Fresno) called Governor Schwarzenegger’s criticism “childish” and said he is fed up.

“The governor’s turned from an action hero into just another politician,” Senator Florez said. “He should really, really take a course on fundamental government on how the legislature works.”

“The fact that he doesn’t understand these things worries me,” he added.

Asm. Nancy Skinner held a press event with small business owners, again using the imagery of Arnold Antionette smoking a stogie in his Jacuzzi to contrast with the state’s struggles:

Skinner called a news conference at the corner of Solano Avenue and The Alameda in Berkeley, outside the vacant storefront formerly occupied by A Child’s Place. Near her podium was a poster of Arnold Schwarzenegger with a cigar in his mouth, with the headline “While the state drowns in IOUs ARNOLD DOESN’T CARE” and featuring a quotation from this past Sunday’s New York Times Magazine article on the governor’s method of coping with the stress of the budget crisis: “I will sit down in my Jacuzzi tonight. I’m going to lay back with a stogie.”

Skinner said that’s pretty cheeky talk for a governor who nixed bills that would’ve helped solve the state’s cash crisis, avoided the need for the IOUs now going out and kept the deficit from growing by another several billion dollars. And it’s particularly distasteful, she said, to small businesses that are struggling through this recession even as Schwarzenegger proudly talks about vetoing a plan to collect sales tax from large online retailers doing business through California-based affiliates.

You can debate AB 178, the plan to collect sales tax on affiliate sales (I don’t sell enough in affiliate sales to have much skin in the game, but there are decent arguments on both sides), but aligning with small business to attack a supposedly business-friendly Governor has good optics.

For the wonks, the Assembly produced an analysis of the Governor’s so-called “reform” agenda, showing that most of it would be completely irrelevant to the current budget year, and all of it uses math that magically eliminates implementation costs but assumes outrageously oversized savings years down the road.  These are cuts to social services pretending to be reform.  I guess it’s a step up from completely eliminating programs like CalWorks, but it’s fundamentally dishonest.

Moments after the Governor’s press conference yesterday about CalWorks “reform” (fact-checked here by the CBP), welfare advocates held their own press event that made most of the news items:

“I’ve never liked when people pick on the poor because they haven’t got the ability to fight back,” said John Burton, the state Democratic Party chairman and former Senate leader known as a fierce advocate for the poor. “It’s a Republican syndrome. It isn’t tough for Republicans to beat up on poor people. When finances are terrible, they go after the poor and blame the poor. Republicans constantly use that and don’t worry about all the benefits government gives to businesses.” […]

Welfare advocates countered that nearly two-thirds of recipients are working or participating in training, and that half are making some kind of income. They also said that the governor’s own May revised budget proposal estimated an annual savings of $100 million with that reform.

“He’s reinforcing negative stereotypes and scapegoating people for the failure of his own administration,” said Frank Mecca, executive director of the County Welfare Directors Association of California. “It’s a reflection of a bully mentality, to go after the problems of struggling families when he doesn’t get his way. The last thing those families need is to have a powerful figure accuse them of fraud, of not trying.”

Furthermore, the CA Democratic Party has collected budget horror stories to highlight the human cost of the crisis.  Here’s one picked at random:

I am on Social Security Disability and with the amounts allowed to get SSI having been cut, it has also cut my income. Also, my medical coverage is being hit as well as so many of the social programs all of us depend on. Fortunately, I am not homeless yet, but it is a good possibility. I just do not understand how you could make all Californians suffer, especially those of us who are very low income, in favor of giving a huge tax break to oil and tobacco. This is not just or right and I believe that the solution is to sign the compromise bill, and tax the big corporations that are not now paying their fair share! – Christine, Victorville

The structural barriers in the state are so high that I’m not sure any of this can work.  One thing is certain, however – this aggressive strategy creates energy in the grassroots, inspires changes to the system and can leverage public opinion far better than desperately seeking some compromise behind closed doors.

I am thrilled to report that EQCA-sponsored legislation is moving right along, with two bills passing their first key committee votes yesterday, one to establish Harvey Milk Day, and one to protect LGBT victims of domestic violence.

SB 572, the Harvey Milk Day Bill, passed the Senate Governmental Organization Committee by a 9-4 margin. Introduced last month by Senator Mark Leno (D — San Francisco), it calls for a “day of special significance” to recognize slain civil rights leader Harvey Milk.

The far-right wants to stop this bill. The Traditional Values Coalition and Capitol Resource Institute lobbied against it in the hearing, saying it would teach youth about a “controversial lifestyle.”

Sen. Dean Florez from Bakersfield countered by asking where the opposition witnesses were from – they responded Inland Empire, Roseville and Sacramento. He then requested to become a co-author of the bill to demonstrate that people living in more conservative parts of the state also support the measure.

Debra Jones, who served alongside Cleve Jones as an intern for then Supervisor Milk in 1978, also testified: “There are some who say that Harvey's contributions to the civil rights movement should merely be acknowledged locally. With that perspective, Dr. Martin Luther King's legacy would not be known outside of Atlanta, and the legacy of Cesar Chavez would not be known outside of the Central Valley. Hope doesn't know geographic boundaries.”

I couldn’t agree more.

The legislation was originally introduced last year by then Assemblymember Leno, but Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed it, claiming Harvey Milk was not well known enough beyond San Francisco. Since that time, however, Harvey Milk has become a focal point of national conversation following the release of the successful biographical film Milk, for which both Penn and screenwriter Dustin Lance Black received an Academy Award. You can use EQCA’s Action Center to urge the governor sign it this time once it reaches his desk.

AB 1003, the LGBT Domestic Violence Services Bill, introduced last month by Assemblymember John A. Pérez (D-Los Angeles), passed the Assembly Public Safety Committee by a 5-2 margin.

The rates of domestic violence in same-sex relationships are equivalent to the rates in opposite-sex relationships. Unfortunately, though, service and support for LGBT survivors of violence still lags far behind that provided for their non-gay counterparts. The LGBT Domestic Violence Services bill corrects this inequity by expanding access for LGBT service providers to funding within a state agency responsible for responding to domestic violence. This bill will both support innovative, proven program models assisting survivors and will also help decrease the overall rate of domestic violence within the LGBT community.

We’re also waiting on bills to protect LGBT prisoner safety, provide accurate ID documents to transgender individuals (possibly a moot point after a recent court victory), make mental health treatment more accessible for LGBT youth, prevent unfair property tax increases and end discrimination against gay men in blood donations. More information can be found at EQCA’s Legislative Center.

Stay tuned for the unveiling of our full 2009 legislative package, coming soon…  

–Alice

Alice Kessler is the director of government affairs for Equality California.  She blogs for the California Ripple Effect. 

This is the idea that Sen. Dean Florez included in a letter sent to Treasurer Bill Lockyer.  The two now plan on bringing the idea to the two largest pension funds in the country: CalPERS and CalSTRS. From the Bee:

Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, has proposed that the California Public Employees’ Retirement System purchase the state’s looming debt. The money would keep California operating – including paying state employee payroll and funding schools – into next year.

Florez outlined the plan in a letter to state Treasurer Bill Lockyer on Friday. Lockyer spokesman Tom Dresslar on Monday said his boss will also float the idea to the California State Teachers’ Retirement System. Lockyer sits on the boards of both funds.(SacBee 10/7/08)

With the market still in the tank and below 10,000, and the credit markets still extremely tight, our long budget feud didn’t make things easy. We need to sell these revenue anticipation notes (RANs) or we won’t be able to pay our bills. It is that simple.  Having CalPERS and CalSTRS do that seems a reasonable idea, save one minor catch.

Both pension plans have a fiduciary duty first to their clients, that is those whose money they hold.  Both have lost substantial sums of money over the last 3-4 months, and so both are probably very nervous about their investments.  Now, the legislature and governor could get some legislation requiring the purchase of the RANs, but barring that, CalPERS must do what is in the best interest of their shareholders. Or, as the Bee gets an investment guy to tell them:

It’s possible that the funds will take a pass, said Keith Brainard, research director for the National Association of State Retirement Administrators.

“If the state can’t borrow money from the credit markets, why would CalPERS be interested?” Brainard said.

Yup, that’s where it is folks. Welcome to the Aftereffects of the Bush Legacy, where even California pensions don’t want our debt. You’ll be seeing these effects for a while.  If this ploy doesn’t work, it looks like Schwarzenegger will have to go to DC, hat in hand, for $7 Billion. Oh, and the Feds are going to get back to us any day on that. Just keep holding your breath, Governor.

As we brace for the Governor’s executive order slashing state employee salaries, the Senate Governmental Organization committee wants some answers.

Anticipating that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger today will sign an executive order to cut state worker pay and terminate about 22,000 temporary, part-time and contract jobs, the Senate’s Governmental Organization committee has called on Schwarzenegger to explain his rationale. The committee, chaired by Senator Dean Florez (D-Schafter), has scheduled the hearing for Monday at 10 a.m. Schwarzenegger is invited. Controller John Chiang and leaders of state worker unions will testify, according to a press advisory.

Florez, who sought the advisory opinion from the legislative counsel about this move (which showed that John Chiang has more than enough constitutional authority to deny the wage cut from going through), said in his press statement: “I think the Governor owes the public a full explanation as to why he has singled out the state’s workforce with his executive order to cut their salaries.”

Right on.  Which is why you should keep calling Arnold and ruin his birthday by demanding an explanation of your own.

This is a good move by Florez, both from the standpoint of policy and politics.

The state of California owns land and structures nearly twice the size of Los Angeles County.   Most of that we need, but it turns out that we have a significant amount of surplus property that can be sold off.  These are parcels like land CalTrans purchased for roads that were never built.   Four years ago the Schwarzenegger administration estimated that we could bring in $5 billion from selling the surplus land.

This is something both Democrats and Republicans are interested in exploring.  CCTimes

Sen. Dean Florez, a Fresno-area Democrat who heads the Senate government committee, said he would rather “sell our surplus property, before we sell or lease the lottery.”

“We are going to be looking at every single asset and asking the question of whether there is any longer a use for these properties,” said Florez.

Republican Sen. Jeff Denham, of Merced, said that “we want to see what can be sold to deal with this year’s budget crisis,” as well as those of any future years.

There is absolutely no way that the state can or even should try and sell off all of these properties quick enough to raise billions of dollars to help with this year’s budget deficit.  Rushing would lead to mistakes, ones that could be costly if the state sells off property it turns out we need.  Plus, rushing for quick sales will reduce the revenue back into the state.

It is important to point out that this is absolutely an attack by Republicans on governmental bureaucracy.

But lawmakers said they are ready to get tough with departments, slashing even more than proposed amounts, then letting officials fill in the revenue gap with land-sale proceeds. Currently, proceeds must go to pay off deficit bonds.

Legislators said that, in essence, they want to force departments to justify retaining land.

However, there may be a there there.  Departments right now do not have any incentive to put resources into selling the land owned by them.  They do the work to sell the land and then never see the money.  That appears to be the main cause for the holding of so many parcels that they do not need.

If we are slashing services and our education budget, we do need to examine closely proposals like this one.  There is no way we will get close to $5 billion this year, nor do we have a good estimate if that number is a real one, given the fluctuations in the real estate market.  Basically, we need more information before the legislators proceed.  However, of all of the paths to increasing revenue to the state, this seems like a relatively uncontroversial one that could bear some fruit.