Tag Archives: Peter Schrag

Peter Schrag: Cuts In Red Districts Could Make Sense

Last week, Treasurer Lockyer and Senate President Pro Tem Steinberg each called for targeted cuts in Republican districts.  They were both non-specific, but the clear target was to both shake the trees for a few Republican votes and to make voters in the district hold their leaders accountable.  The generality of the threat made it political rather than policy.

But that’s not Peter Schrag’s style.  Schrag, the longtime columnist for the Sacramento Bee and author of several books on California governance, knows his policy.  So, rather than just saying cutting in red districts, he has some ideas with specifics.

The obvious first question: are these serious ideas or just threats? And to what extent could the legislature’s Democratic majority do it even if they wanted to? But in some instances, targeting Republican districts might be good policy even if it’s not unequivocally good politics.

The most obvious example is the state’s costly class-size reduction program (CSR). Ever since Gov. Pete Wilson, in a blatantly political maneuver intended to punish the teacher unions, arm-twisted the legislature into the hasty adoption of CSR in grades K-3 some fifteen years ago, there have been serious doubts about its effectiveness. … Nonetheless, despite the program’s erosion under the budget pressures of the past couple of years, it still costs the state over a billion dollars a year. CSR probably shouldn’t be abandoned, but it should be focused on the low income students and English learners who most need the additional attention and who, according to most research, are the most likely to benefit.

That change of focus would hit affluent Republican districts harder than those represented by Democrats, but it would almost certainly be the more effective use of resources that conservatives always demand. (CPR)

Another idea he has is to reform sentencing, particularly 3 strikes to reduce the size of the “Central Valley prison archipelago.”  This one, in terms of sound policy, is really a no-brainer.  Politics, well, that’s another story.  Unlike CSR, there should be no serious argument about this on pure policy perspective.  Undeniably we are warehousing prisoners that should not be in the system.

In the end, as Schrag points out, this might score a few points, and save a few billion.  However, we can’t balance the budget that way.  We need revenues, no matter how you slice or dice the problem.

The Airbrush Of Human Beings From The California Budget Crisis

Peter Schrag is one of the few columnists left in this state who consistently makes sense, and today he attacks that silly NYTimes article about California, in particular the elements of conventional wisdom:

In his passing references to California’s serious issues, many of which have major implications for the nation as a whole, Leibovich collects pieces of the conventional wisdom, even when, as in his facile summary of the causes of gridlock in Sacramento, it’s wrong. Since Democrats have again and again agreed to multi-billion dollar cuts, it is not, as he thinks, just a matter of “‘no more taxes’ (Republicans) and ‘no more cuts’ (Democrats).”

And while Jerry Brown, in his prior tenure as governor was indeed labeled “Governor Moonbeam” (by a Chicago columnist) for his space proposals, as Leibovich says, the label applied much more broadly to his inattention to the daily duties of his office and, most particularly to his dithering while the forces that produced Proposition 13 began to roll.

Brown later acknowledged that he didn’t have the attention span to focus on the property tax reforms that were then so urgently needed to avert the revolt of 1978. But to this day, almost no one has said much of Brown’s role in creating the anti-government climate and resentments that helped fuel the Proposition 13 drive.

It was the Brown, echoing much of the 1970s counter-culture, who, as much as anyone, was poor-mouthing the schools and universities as failing their students and who threatened to cut their funding if they didn’t shape up. It is Brown who spent most of his political career savaging politics and politicians, even as he ran for yet another office. Now this is the guy who wants to be governor again. But Leibovich doesn’t tell his readers that long history. Maybe he doesn’t know it.

The line about how those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it can be inserted here.  But Schrag hits on the most important failing of the article, and indeed of a good chunk of the political media here in California – they airbrush out the people who suffer for the failures of the politicians.

Where are California and the people who are feeling the pain – the school kids and teachers in hopelessly underfunded schools, the children who are losing their health care, the minimum-wage working mothers struggling to pay their child care, the students who are losing their university grants? Is all this really about nothing?

To far too many, the answer is yes.  It’s politics as theater, as a sporting event, where winners and losers are checked on a board, and whether or not a leader will keep their position is made the story rather than the principles he or she represents.  And yet it’s not Governor Hot Tubs and Stogies who will feel the pain of an economic downturn and massive budget cuts, nor well-heeled consultants or columnists who make up the scorecards.  It’s people.

People like the students in the Cal State system who may see their fees raised 20%, just months after a 10% hike approved in May.  This will effectively block higher education for a non-trivial number of students, as will proposed enrollment reductions of 32,000 students.

People like LA County homeowners who have defaulted at twice the rate in May as they have in the previous month, as a foreclosure backlog builds up due to various moratoriums and an increase in repossessed homes entering the market.

People like IOU holders who may have to turn to check-cashing stores to get less-than-full value for their registered warrants after Friday, when most major banks (who have all been bailed out by the federal government, by the way) stop the exchange of the notes.

And people like the elderly, disabled and blind, who rely on the in-home support services that the Governor is trying to illegally cut in contravention of a contempt-of-court citation, at least in Fresno.

These are the great unmentioned in this California crisis, the people who Dan Walters tries to smear in his column today by turning every Democratic concern for the impacts of policy as a sellout to “public employee unions.”  Behind those unions are workers, and the people they serve need the help the provide, in many cases, simply to survive.  But it would be too dangerous to Walters’ beautiful mind to consider those faces, so he chooses to make political hay out of the violation of people.

This is the point of the People’s Day of Reckoning Coalition.  They refuse to have their existence denied any longer.

…THE Jerry Brown commented in Schrag’s post:

Mr. Schrag’s latest screed is a good example of why politics in Sacramento is so dis-functional. Instead of trying to find the truth in the Leibovich article, he mocks both the writer and each of the subjects. In recent years, Schrag has become increasingly bitter. That’s very sad because he once was an open-minded person with real insight into the predicaments of modern society. Finally, his memory is not serving him well regarding Propistion 13 and the factors that constituted the ethos of that period. In fact, there was a long and hard fought battle to get property tax relief that got all the way to the state Senate but foundered just short of the necessary two thirds vote. There is much to say about government, schools and taxation in California. But to get anywhere it requires a degree of empathy and engagement with opposing perspectives that no longer seems congenial to Mr. Schrag.

Posted by: Jerry Brown at July 8, 2009 08:41 AM

Wow.

Finally, Someone Points Out the Elephant in the Room

That someone is Peter Schrag in yesterday’s LA Times, calling the Yacht Party California’s Kamikazes – a party in terminal decline in the state but determined to take everyone else down with them:

In a state where whites have been just another minority for the better part of a decade, and where Latinos will in another generation be an absolute majority, it may not be surprising that that GOP narrowness leads to a gritty sense of besiegement and a kamikaze mentality that seems ready to take itself over the cliff, and the rest of the state with it….

But in the current crisis, the Democrats have in fact agreed to major cuts; the Republicans remain adamant on revenue. That resistance, as most people must know by now, is made possible by California’s nearly unique constitutional provision requiring a two-thirds majority in the Legislature to enact a budget or increase taxes. If five Republicans — two in the state Senate, three in the Assembly, both of which have Democratic majorities — broke ranks, there’d be no gridlock.

But that’s only part of the story. In a survey last year by the Public Policy Institute of California, 52% of the state’s Democrats identified themselves as liberals, 31% as “middle of the road” and 17% as conservative.

Republicans were far more rigidly conservative: 67% called themselves conservative, 21% called themselves middle of the road and 8% said they were liberal.

So Democrats are not quite as hard-line as the folklore suggests.

One wonders if the LA Times editorial board read Schrag’s column closely. Schrag is making many of the points we have been making here at Calitics, but he makes them especially effectively, and hopefully the rest of the state’s media will listen and stop lying to their readers that the problem in Sacramento is that legislators won’t negotiate – that instead the Yacht Party is determined to claw back some political relevance at the cost of the state’s viability.

The Republicans in California are the equivalent of a failed state. The party hasn’t been viable on a statewide basis since 1996. 2002 and 2003 saw some momentary gains but those faded, and the only Republican with meaningful statewide success – Arnold – has made distancing himself from his own party a key to his electoral victories. So they exploit the 2/3 rule to maintain a semblance of power and arrest their slide into irrelevance – the Libertarian Party with a few more votes and some actual seats.

Schrag recognizes that the only way this death cult’s death grip on the state will be ended is by eliminating the 2/3 rule:

The fastest way to restore responsibility all around is to rejoin the rest of the democratic world and bring back straight majority votes to enact budgets and raise taxes. That would break up the GOP cult, make both parties more responsible to the voters as a whole, force them to make the tough choices and take the heat for the consequences, and — most important — get on with the business of governing.

This is an eminently sensible conclusion. It’s a shame it’s taken weeks, if not months, for the LA Times op-ed page to start making sense on this, but they couldn’t hide from reality any longer. The Yacht Party are now the Kamikaze Party, determined to sink the ship of state out of spite and desperation.

Wednesday Random Thoughts

Oh how I love bullet points:

  • The LA Times launched a cute little interactive primary calendar along with a presidential primary blog. Oh, and a message to Rudy. If there's a story about how you're arguing with Alan-freaking-Keyes, well, you might as well fold up shop.
  • Anthony Wright is one of the most astute observers of the health care industry. The dude just understands it in ways that I'm pretty sure I never will. Well, yesterday he had a great post on the topic of the individual mandate at the national level.  Edwards and Clinton include one in their health care plans, and Obama has recently indicated that he'd be willing to include one. Although I suggest you mosey on over there to read the whole thing in its entirety, the post centers around the concept of a mandate as a challenge not to just the citizenry but also to the government to ensure affordability. But if the government fails, as is happening in Massachusetts, what then?

    Wright sums the argument up concisely: “The mandate muddle masks the real question: how much actual help does the health plan provide people?”

  • For the time being, the Arnold Prison Papers are being held back from our prying eyes. The 3 judge panel stayed the order to the Governator to relase the papers pending a hearing tomorrow. These papers could be quite interesting.
  • You want more words from smart people? Well, Peter Schrag fits that mold. In his column today he talks about the real story behind the PPIC forum in Sacramento with Willie Brown, Pete Wilson, Jim Brulte, and Fabian Nunez. Read it. He's smart.
  • Somehow I forgot to mention that Warren Furutani won the special election to replace Laura Richardson in the Assembly. However he missed the 50% by 134 votes. That's actually a bigger number than it sounds as only 17507 votes were cast. That's just about 10% turnout. He'll face the American Independent Party winner and the Libertarian winner in the February 5 runoff whereupon he will become the next Assemblyman from the 55th District.

July 2, 2007 California Blog Roundup

Blog roundup from over the weekend is over the fold: A couple more week-in-review posts, a couple health care posts, land and water in the Central Valley, Peter Schrag on the recent gutting of Brown, and a couple more items. If I missed something nifty and lefty over the weekend, toss it into comments.

A Couple More California
Weeks-in-Review

Health Care

Environment

More California Stuff

Blog Roundup 3/7/07

Lots of cool events all over the state today. Check them out in [today’s event page https://calitics.com/eventDay.do?eventDayId=02072007]. So far we have a SF 4 Democracy meeting in SF. DFA meetings in SD and OC, a Chicano Dem Club meeting in National City, and a Clean Energy meeting in Novato.

So, in the roundup today, we have primary thoughts, health care, attorneys, and a whole lot more.

State Politics

  • Yup, the February primary bill is on Schwarzenegger’s desk. http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/03/post_25.html

  • Over at Working Californians, Julia compares Spitzer and the Governator. http://workingcalifornians.com/blog/julia_rosen/2007/03/06/spitzah_and_the_governator_twins
  • Bob Hattoy, a longtime leader in environmental and gay rights issues, died of complications related to AIDS. He will be sorely missed for his wit and wisdom.  Suring the 1992 Dem Convention, Hattoy became the first HIV positive gay man to address a national party convention.  http://blog.cadem.org/partyline/2007/03/a_personal_reme.html
  • AB 1654 would allow for elections entirely by mail. http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/03/bill_to_expand.html
  • One of many CSU strike vote posts. http://terryfaceplace.blogspot.com/2007/03/cal-state-faculty-to-vote-on-strike.html
  • Steve Maviglio really, really dislikes Arnold’s ballot proposal on lobbying reform.  Frank agrees. http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/03/_by_frank_d_rus.html http://www.camajorityreport.com/index.php?module=articles&func=display&aid=1530&ptid=9
  • Peter Schrag praises the $500 savings account plan in SB 752. http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/03/party_of_fear_i.html

Wars

  • LAist features the letter of an Air Force pilot in Al Anbar Province. Unfortunately, the pilot blurs the line about supporting the troops and supporting the cause.  You can do one without doing the other. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Laist/~3/100025169/in_a_soldiers_words.php
  • In fact, Representative Lynn Woolsey is a leader in supporting the troops.  Specifically, she wants to support the troops by providing for a fully funded withdrawal. https://calitics.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2051
  • In a post that was cross-posted at Calitics, Fever Swamper Pete tells Jane Harman she has a real way to oppose escalation. http://fromthefeverswamp.blogspot.com/2007/03/opportunity-to-oppose-escalation-in.html

Health Care

  • Anthony Wright says we need more federal funds for children’s health care. http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/03/federal_funding.html
  • Frank Russo has a story about Former Sen. Jackie Speier’s report out on the cost of medication errors.  Let’s get IT moving in the health care industry!! http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/03/medication_erro.html

SoCal Elections

  • The Liberal OC tracks Ballot Box Apathy in the OC and LA.  Apparently LA doesn’t much care about their school board? http://www.theliberaloc.com/2007/03/07/ballot-box-apathy-who-cares/
  • 7 Percent. Really, that was the turnout. 7 Percent. http://camajorityreport.com/index.php?module=articles&func=display&ptid=9&aid=1538

Legal Matters

  • The Heretik comments on Abu Gonzales and the US Attorneys. http://theheretik.us/2007/03/07/the-personnel-is-political/
  • C&L has video of those US Attorneys testifying. http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/03/07/fired-prosecutors-testify-about-political-pressure/

Everything Else

  • Backstabbing in progressive radio? Never…except no so much.  In LA, it’s KTLK and a Joe Lieberman type. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/3/6/10225/48004

  • Free MUNI in SF? The Gav asked Muni officials to see whether it would just be easier to scrap all the payment processing crap and go free. http://leftinsf.com/blog/index.php/archives/1706

  • Is LA “Not very pretty?” http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2007/03/is_la_not_very_pretty.php

  • A former Migden staffer calls Mark Leno “The Kiddie Porn King”. Disgusting. http://leftinsf.com/blog/index.php/archives/1697

  • Skippy sends mad props to FDL for Libby coverage. http://xnerg.blogspot.com/2007/03/lets-hear-it-for-firedoglakers.html

  • The Broad View notes that gas prices are insane. Or, they are insanely low considering the external costs of the crap coming out of our tailpipes, but you know, high compared to 15 years ago.  http://www.thenewpolitics.com/2007/03/gas_prices_are_.html
  • Berkeley Bubble has a review of John Edwards’ appearance in Berkeley. http://www.berkeleybubble.org/2007/03/05/recap-of-john-edwards-speech-in-berkeley/

Last 15 Calitics posts

Subscribe to RSS headline updates from:
Powered by FeedBurner

Prop 90: Peter Schrag on the Trojan Horse

Peter Schrag has a great column in today’s Bee about Prop 90. It articulates the real problem with the initiative, which is that it goes too far:

In fact, if you look at the politics of Proposition 90 from a distance, it looks a lot like Proposition 13. Like Proposition 13, it starts with a legitimate worry — also about homeownership — and ends with a sledgehammer remedy. It’s a Pandora’s box of trouble.
***
California law requires that only blighted properties can be condemned, but that hasn’t kept some redevelopment agencies from seizing good homes and small businesses in the search for new development that will yield higher tax returns. As Proposition 90 supporters point out, “blight is a broad term.” The law, as even League of California Cities Executive Director Chris McKenzie concedes, needs fixing.
***
But Proposition 90 isn’t just about eminent domain. Buried in it are “takings” booby traps that throw into question a wide array of future regulations, zoning decisions and other actions that “result in substantial loss to private property.” The initiative allows regulation to protect public health and safety, but says nothing about protecting the environment or public welfare. It also says that if private property is taken “for any proprietary government purpose … the property shall be valued at the use to which the government intends to put the property if such use results in a higher value for the land taken.” That appears to mean that slumlords must be compensated not at the value of the condemned housing, but at the value of the property under the convention center or affordable housing units that replace it. Nor could a city turn the housing over to a private agency — say a church or social organization — even if such an agency was a more efficient operator of the project. Even backers of Proposition 90 concede that there’ll be plenty of litigation to clarify the ambiguities and apparent contradictions in the law.
***
But will the initiatives really put voters “back in charge,” …? Or will it be lawyers, slumlords, speculators and polluters? (SacBee 7/19/06)

Not much else to say.  The article is worthy of your time in its entirety as well.  Prop 90, however, is not.