I’m on a mission to restore the American Dream – and I know that to do that, we’re going to have shake things up in Washington. It’s time we fundamentally change our priorities; and that starts by putting pressure on our leaders to act on creating good jobs and stop protecting unnecessary tax breaks for the wealthiest one percent.

I have a deep faith in this country that we can solve any problem that comes our way, but we have to be willing to put partisan politics aside and make the tough decisions. Washington needs to do that; and that’s why today I’m launching an online petition aimed at Congress demanding they start focusing on creating jobs now.

This broken mentality in Washington that has lead with inaction on the economy and believes the best plan is one that keeps the status quo in place has to end if we’re ever going to guarantee an America where everyone can achieve their highest hopes and dreams. That, my friends, is why I am running for United States Congress.

I’ve seen first hand that people are hurting with a national uneployment rate stuck at 9.1% and our district’s unemployment rate is at a staggering 16%! Congress cannot wait until the next election to take action; not with those numbers. Too many families are desperately waiting for them and the longer they wait the worse it gets – and the further we move away from being able to reach the American Dream.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to solve the problems that we face, but it does take leaders that fundamentally understand what is at stake and are willing to make the tough choices. Rather than cater to the will of the rich few, it’s about time Washington realign it’s priorities and help restore the American Dream for millions of people.

I need your help to put pressure on Congress. Sign my petition demanding Congressional leaders and all Washington politicians change their priorities right now and start focusing on creating good jobs!

If we can collect 2,500 grassroots petition signatures by Tuesday, October 25th, I will personally deliver the petition to Congressional leaders. I will tell them it’s time to restore the American Dream.

Thank you for joining me on this important journey,

– Jose Hernandez

(Welcome to Mr. Hernandez! Check out his website! – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

In the midst of economic and political turmoil, it is difficult to imagine and embrace the fundamental values that we as Americans believe in; the things that make our country the greatest nation on earth. Sadly, these tough times have made far too many middle class families believe that the American Dream is far from reality.

But I can tell you it does exist. And I am living proof of it’s incredible promise.

The son of migrant-farm workers, I was able to rise from the fields of California and touch the sky on the Space Shuttle Discovery as an Astronaut, a lifelong goal I was able to achieve thanks to the promise of the American Dream. Now retired, I feel it is my obligation to help others achieve the American Dream just like I did.

That’s why today I am proud to officially launch my campaign for United States Congress in California’s 10th Congressional District.

But before we talk about that, I want to tell you a little more about who I am and why I care so much about preserving the American Dream…

When I was a boy, my family and I would make the journey from La Piedad de Cavadas in the central Mexican state of Michoacan to California every spring. We would work our way northward with the crops until November, when the harvest was over, then it was back to Mexico until the next March. It was never easy, but our parents insisted that my siblings and I always attend school.

Eventually, with hard work and encouragement from my parents and teachers, I found my way into a government program known as Upward Bound, a Federal Trio program that prepares underprivileged kids for college. While in college, I was involved in the Mathematics, Engineering, Science Achievement (MESA) program, an academic preparation program that provides support to students from educationally disadvantaged backgrounds so they can attain four-year degrees in science, technology, engineering or math (STEM) fields.

Thanks to these programs, I earned a B.S. In Electrical Engineering from the University of the Pacific and an M.S. in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the University of California at Santa Barbara.

I was very proud of my accomplishments, but the dream of traveling into space, the dream that I first had as a 10 year-old boy in the field, was still pushing at me to strive further. But it was not easy to accomplish; many outstanding and well qualified people strive to become a part of NASA’s Astronaut Program, so only a select few are admitted each year. In fact, I applied for 11 years to the astronaut program and 11 times I was not accepted.

But I had learned some lessons in the hot and dusty fields of California: never quit on your dream. Never.

On my 12th attempt, I was accepted into the astronaut program and, after more work and training, I earned a spot on the Space Shuttle Discovery STS 128 in August of 2009. My dream of flying into space had been realized.

I didn’t achieve my dreams alone. I was lucky enough to have the support of loving parents and find a program that would help me earn a college education. It was through that program I came to understand the important role government has in fulfilling the American Dream for millions of underprivileged kids.

That’s why I am running for Congress. I understand that we must start fighting for middle class families and protect vitally important programs like Upward Bound, Social Security and Medicare. I also understand that Congress must start focusing on creating good jobs if we’re ever going to prove the American Dream stills exists.

But these days all we hear from Washington is how important it is to cut these program so we can lower taxes for the wealthiest one percent. That’s the kind of unacceptable mentality that exists among our elected leaders and it’s just one of the many ways the American Dream is under attack. It’s time we do something about that.

Sign-up to get involved in my campaign for U.S. Congress today and watch our introduction video here: http://joseforcongress.com/

I know that if we work together, we can finally start creating jobs and restore the American Dream for millions of middle class families who deserve the same opportunities I had. I hope that you will join me in this journey.

Thank you,

Jose Hernandez

I’ve been pretty up front in questioning whether or not the next Governor matters compared to the structural reforms needed to get California back on a sustainable course.  Nevertheless, the off-year CDP convention in Sacramento does traditionally kick off the following year’s gubernatorial race, and this year was no different.  Given what we know right now, I think it’s highly probable, actually, that the Democratic primary will feature only two candidates.  Jerry Brown and Gavin Newsom were the only two with any visibility whatsoever in Sacramento, and while Antonio Villaraigosa may still feel he can jump in late and capture a healthy share of the Latino vote in any primary, his awkward exit from the festivities does not lead me to believe that he will bother with the race.

If that is the case, we have a virtual mirror-image of the 2008 national Democratic primary, with a candidate positioning himself as looking to the future against a candidate firmly implanted in the past.  That’s the general belief, anyway, and there’s quite a bit of truth to that.  Clearly, Mayor Newsom’s convention speech continually framed the choice for voters as “whether we’re going to move forward in a new direction or whether we’re going to look back.”  Clearly, each candidate has a profile that fits that general mold.  And the general mood of each candidate’s signature event, with Brown lolling at the old Governor’s Mansion with his 1974 blue Plymouth in the driveway, literally an historical set piece, while Newsom closed off a street and held a block party featuring Wyclef Jean (and got what amounts to an endorsement from Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson when he introduced Newsom as “the next Governor of California”), could not have been more different.

And yet Jerry Brown has always been something of a political futurist, someone who was mocked in his time for being unrealistic and silly, on issues which are now firmly in the mainstream of the American political debate.  And as CalBuzz points out, Brown’s presentation to the convention may be closer to the zeitgeist than Newsom’s right now:

While Newsom (a Hillary supporter, BTW) spent the weekend trying to position himself as Obama to Brown’s Clinton, General Jerry delivered a Jim Hightower-like jeremiad to the convention, filled with rips and roars at financial insiders and white collar criminals. In tone and substance it seemed closer to tapping the populist zeitgeist of these financially troubled times than did Newsom’s effort to fight the last war.

Voters fed up with Governor Arnold’s shattered promises to “blow up boxes” and sweep clean the mess in Sacramento may well be in the mood for less “change” and more common sense, which happens to be Brown’s political meme du jour.

Ultimately, I don’t cotton much to these popularity-based views of major elections, preferring to judge on substance.  The primary electorate is older, but that means there’s more potential for increasing turnout among youth, so we’ll see where that leads.  But ultimately, I’m going to judge on the basis of substance, particularly with respect to structural reform.  And while Brown gave a fairly nice speech, highlighting his high-profile work as Attorney General suing the likes of Wells Fargo, in essence he left unanswered the charges that he is an apostle for fantasyland in thinking he can just bring Democrats and Republicans in a room together and get them to work everything out.  On the other hand, Newsom, in a meet and greet with bloggers, came out once again in favor of a Constitutional convention to put all of these contradictory and hobbling budget and governing ideas on the chopping block and work from scratch to figure out a way to organize the state that makes sense.  You can ague with his somewhat rosy picture of his record – as I have – but you cannot argue that he has a forward-looking view of how to finally blow up this insanely dysfunctional structure.

On the near-term issue of the special election, Brown has appeared on stage with Arnold Schwarzenegger to tout the Yes side on all measures, while Newsom has not.  In fact, he expressed his opposition to Props. 1C, 1D and 1E, saying “I can’t get my arms around balancing the budget with lottery money” and that 1D and 1E would raid successful and cost-effective programs.  Now, what I can’t get MY arms around is Newsom’s support for 1A, particularly because he explained that his first instinct was to oppose, but that he “had to be responsible” and look at the impact on city budgets.  However, 1A would provide no budgetary relief for two years, while 1C, 1D and 1E, which he opposes, would.  In clarifying this, Newsom spokesman Eric Jaye explained that the impact on city budgets could be made worse by the bond markets seeing the failure of 1A and raising their interest rates, but there’s definitely a tension there.  Perhaps Newsom thinks that he can fix whatever damage is done by a constitutional convention, but a voter-approved spending cap would be hard to cancel out within a the space of a year or two.

(More on the Newsom blogger meetup in a later post.)

I think there’s room to be critical of both candidates, as well as room to be praiseworthy.  But rather than framing this election along cultural or generational lines, I think it’s necessary to frame it along the policies they would both bring to Sacramento and whether they make sense for progressives to get behind.  So it’s not past vs. future for me so much as success vs. FAIL.

Let’s face it, now is a good time for populism. While it didn’t get John Edwards the nomination, it was a significant factor in the presidential race this year. (Despite being somewhat of an Edwards supporter initially, hindsight says that was probably for the best.) Of course, populism always has been successful, from the dawn of politics. Dollars to donuts there were populists running to be cave leader when we were crafting our first bronze tools.  And don’t get me wrong, I’m into the populism. I think if the 90s had been a bit more populist, perhaps we wouldn’t be dealing with much of the disastrous effects of a free trade policy run amok. Speaking out for the will of the populace shouldn’t be seen as a bad thing.

So, in that frame, we have AB 53, the experiment in populism referenced in the title.  Assemblyman Portantino (D-La Cañada Flintridge) knows that there is an odor of scandal surrounding the compensation of some of the state’s higher earners, especially some of the university executive, and oh yeah, the state is running on financial fumes.  AB 53 would impose a strict, categorical prohibition on any compensation increase for state employees earning over $150,000.

There’s a provision to allow the Governor to make an exemption for state employees that  are “necessary for protecting the safety and security of the people of California.”  Of course, there are a whole slew of exceptions for employees covered by a collective bargaining agreement, or other MOU. And of course, nobody can touch any of J. Clark Kelso’s minions at the prison receiver’s office, or any employees of the Dept. of corrections for that matter.  

All of this sunsets when the calendar rolls over to 2012, so nothing is permanent here.  I believe Portantino’s logic goes something like, we’re in a big financial mess, we shouldn’t be giving raises to those doing well already. And when we swing into another boom cycle, this provision will sunset.  Well, anyway, here’s what he says:

California stands at the edge of a budgetary cliff and will fall into a recessionary abyss unless we act immediately. At a time when we are asking our seniors, our students, and our poor and infirm to bear the budget burden year after year, the least we can do is ask those state employees who are most well-off to forgo any salary increases for the near future.  Together, the shared sacrifices will help put California back on track.

To be sure, we are living in dangerous budgetary times.  While it’s not clear how much money this legislation will save us, it’s clearly going to be a nonzero number.  This is probably as reasonable of a cost-savings measure as, say, cutting medi-cal payments or cutting teachers. I honestly don’t know whether this legislation will be a net positive for us right now.  I can, however, tell you that if this legislation is still with us during better job times, we are putting ourselves at a significant disadvantage.   That’s why I think the sunset provision is particularly important. Given that the legislation probably wouldn’t go into affect until Jan 1, 2010, we are probably only looking at an initial term of two years for this measure.

And I certainly won’t argue about his take on the budget; he’s, unfortunately, dead on.  But, playing populist with our civil servants seems a risky road to set upon. Sure, those making over $150K are easy targets, but targeting those who have selected to work for the state government is inherently risky.  While the job market is soft right now, we are taking a risk.  The people who make over $150K are, for the most part, worth more in the private sector than they are making with the state.

Executives at Cal, investment managers at CalPERS, and a slew of other highly educated public employees voluntarily work at a discount for the state. The downside risk here is that if we become even more un-competitive on salary, we won’t be attracting top talent. In fact, that’s already a problem even in this recession.  On Thursday, Capitol Alert had a story about the Accounting Board having problems attracting CPAs to inspect other CPAs.  The salary of slightly over $70K just wasn’t sufficient.  While those folks will not be affected by this legislation, it does illustrate that the state does, in fact, operate in a greater job market.

But, on the other side, we can be sure that there will be considerable opposition to this bill. If nothing else, you can say that Asm. Portantino is willing to take on a fight. Who knows if this legislation has a chance to get through, and what it would end up looking like if it does, but this experiment is surely one to watch.