Tag Archives: Bill Whalen

Proposition 89 ends Call-Time

Cross-posted at Daily Kos

With the passing of Labor Day, we have entered the traditional campaign season: a time for politicians to go meet voters. Yet the reality is that — even as you are reading this — many candidates are locked in a small room as part of the daily ritual known as call time. Somewhere along the line, it became conventional wisdom that money equals ads which equals votes, with call-time seen as the most effective way to raise money and thus win elections.

An entire generation of politicians have been evaluated not by their leadership or ideas, but by their discipline when it comes to spending hours on end begging for big checks, one call after another after another after another. It is commitment to call-time that positions a politician as a contender during the primaries, it decides if a candidate is seen as viable in the general election, and it plays a major role in whether a legislator will rise through the ranks into “leadership”. In short, call-time is seen as one of the most critical attributes in every stage of politics.

Wouldn’t it be nice if politicians could spend the next two months listening to voters instead of talking at donors? The answer is public financing, it is working in other states, and this is the year when it can start working in California.

How it Works
Proposition 89 is the Clean Money and Fair Elections Act on this fall’s ballot in California. The initiative would relegate call-time to history and fundamentally reform the political economy in the most populous state by making public financing of campaigns a reality. Prop 89 levels the playing field so new candidates can win on their ideas, not because of the money they raise.

  * Candidates who agree to spending limits and to take no private contributions qualify for public funding
  * $5 contributions from voters required to prove viability
  * Clean candidates receive enough to run competitive campaigns. They can’t raise money beyond public funds

Why Special Interests are Terrified
Prop 89 makes elections about ideas, not about money. Campaigns are measured by people, not dollars. That’s why trusted groups representing your interests —  like the League of Women Voters of California, California Common Cause, the Consumer Federation of California, and the California Clean Money Campaign — support Prop 89. And why lobbyists and special interests —  like big oil, drug companies, insurance firms, HMOs and some unions — don’t.

Just the other day, KQED Forum became a blogger bash (video here) because blogs threaten the ability of “very vested interests in Sacramento” to come together and oppose Proposition 89.

Bill Whalen, a Hoover Fellow and media consultant for the likes of Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bill Jones, Tom Campbell and Richard Riordan said (transcript via Kid Oakland):

I don’t worry so much as a Republican, but as a citizen, and there’s one word: “the blogosphere”  That’s what scares me.  There are angry people on the left and angry people on the right.  And I’m not sure if I want to see that anger harnessed in reforming our government.  I like the firewall, if you will. … Among the leaders opposing [Prop 89] are the California Teachers Association and the California Chamber of Commerce.  Why?  They are very vested interests in Sacramento, they don’t want the rules changed.  But Direct Democracy, to me we have it in effect in the initiative process and I’d kind of like to keep it harnessed.

What You Can Do
Until Proposition 89 passes, politicians will stay hidden away doing call-time and elections will be about money. The “very vested interests” in Sacramento will spend literally tens of million of dollars to preserve their stranglehold over California.

They may have more money, but reform can happen because we have more people. So take a quick minute and sign up for email updates.

—–
For daily updates, bookmark the Proposition 89 Blog.

Why is the Hoover Institution Scared of Me? (And You?)

Cross-posted from Calitics: the progressive community blog for California

Yesterday, KQED’s Forum, ordinarily a program that I enjoy, had a program about the close of the legislative session.  After a discussion of possible reforms, talk moved to the blogs.  I have uploaded the clip here.  

Apparently, Bill Whalen, of the Hoover Institution, is scared by me.  Well, bloggers in generally I suppose. (The transcript is courtesey of Kid Oakland).

I don’t worry so much as a Republican, but as a citizen, and there’s one word: “the blogosphere”  That’s what scares me.  There are angry people on the left and angry people on the right.  And I’m not sure if I want to see that anger harnessed in reforming our government.  I like the firewall, if you will. … Among the leaders opposing [Prop 89] are the California Teachers Association and the California Chamber of Commerce.  Why?  They are very vested interests in Sacramento, they don’t want the rules changed.  But Direct Democracy, to me we have it in effect in the initiative process and I’d kind of like to keep it harnessed. (KQED Forum 9/1/06)

Please see the flip:

Well, this is typical Republican, he’s interested in protecting the entrenched interests. He certainly wouldn’t want the people infecting his government with their petty ideas and nonsensical garbage.  You see, the wise people at the Hoover Instituion know far more about governing the people than that actual people being governed.  It’s blatantly elitist garbage.  nbsp;Chris Lehane, a former White House staffer and one of the contributors to the California Majority Report, first agrees with him(!!) on the substantive blog issue, but eventually calls him out on Prop 89. :

 Lehane: I think Bill makes a lot of good points, I would just sort or challenge the premise that if you’re concerned about Prop 89 and the opposition to it…as the blogosphere evolves and more and more everyday people have access to it it will allow people to transcend some of those historic power centers that have potentially blocked some real reforms that actually do mean something to everyday people. (KQED Forum 9/1/06)

Well, I give Lehane credit for calling Whalen out on Prop 89.  What world does the Hoover Institution live in?  Two entrenched interests fighting against election reform isn’t a sign that it must be bad.  It’s a sign that the entrenched interests like the special access they have.  Sorry, I know the labor people out there won’t agree with me, but I think Prop 89 will be a boon to our government.  We win if the government speaks to the actual people.  Like Bill Clinton said, “When people are talking and listening and thinking, we win.”  

But what upset me more than Whalen’s comments, which come from a Republican, so you expect them, are the comments of Barbara O’Connor, a Professor of Communications at Cal State-Sacramento, who apparently agreed with Whalen completely.  Yes, she doesn’t want any part of our direct democracy infiltrating her little club that she’s got in Sacramento:

Bill’s correct, I read the blogs all the time.  They really do frighten you.  And I don’t want to have that kind of Direct Democracy.  Many of them, by the way, are by journalists.  I don’t want that kind of Democracy either.  But the blueprint thing that I was alluding to harnesses the Sim City game that all of our children use and allows real people to give their priorities to their elected officials.  It’s not taking over government by revolution, it’s an informed citizenry that let’s their views be known.  Clearly, that’s the kind of thing that Chris is talking about where you harness the technology through websites or…we can talk about MoveOn.org and Lieberman a little bit…but I think you have an opportunity as it becomes more mainstream……and I’m hopeful that that kind of thing, and even things like You Tube which frighten people will become more regularized and not so frightening from the far right or the far left…

See, this just doesn’t make sense.  She goes from saying that blogs are “frightening” to saying that she would appreciate citizens being able to let their elected officials know how they feel.  Apparently, that’s not what I’m doing at Calitics.  I’m just angry and extreme.  Huh? I guess Barbara hasn’t actually read Calitics.  I’m neither angry nor extreme. I address issues of electoral politics and public policy issues.  I seek consensus upon a liberal basis. I praise, and scold, politicians of both parties when it is warranted.  Essentially I, the “frightening blogger” am one of these “informed citizens” that Barbara is talking about.  By the way, Prof. O’Connor, I notice you didn’t mention anything about the Right-Wing blogosphere’s attempts on Lincoln Chafee’s career via the Steve Laffey campaign.  I guess it’s only noteworthy when “left-wingers” try to get our views heard.  Lamont is no more extreme than John Kerry, he’s just not part of the in-crowd like Joementum is.  Will Ms. O’Connor be making snide remarks about Chafee?

In the end, I think this bashing is more about selfish self-protection than anything else.  Many insiders, especially Republicans, would like the governing process to remain controlled by the entrenched interests for so long.  They don’t like blogs because they interfere with their power base.  That’s what they are truly scared of.