This proposal has been floating around for a while, but it now looks to be concrete. As reported by the SacBee, Speaker Núñez is proposing to raise taxes on oil companies to help reduce education cuts:

Núñez, a Los Angeles Democrat with close ties to education unions, is proposing a two-pronged approach by levying a 6 percent tax on all oil produced within the state, and imposing a 2 percent tax on windfall oil profits.

Together, the taxes would generate an estimated $1.2 billion a year for a cash-strapped state that still faces an $8 billion deficit for the fiscal year starting in July. Under the speaker’s bill, ABX 9, oil tax revenues would be dedicated for schoolteachers, who are facing potential layoffs under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s across-the-board budget cuts.

This is basically Prop 87 again, and it’s a worthwhile proposal. The article goes on to note that the bill is likely to be opposed by Republicans. Which is probably the point here – to further expose the Yacht Party as out of touch, elitist, and defending the wealthy at the expense of schools.

Sure, this is low hanging fruit, and it’s not exactly a permanent solution to the structural revenue crisis. But I like the politics. Even though, as David notes below, we’re seeing a remarkable movement come together to protect education, the Republicans remain obstinate, and not as many Californians as we’d like see the need to raise taxes to finally fix our 30-year old revenue shortfall. Calling out the Republicans like this, and forcing them to make a public defense of unpopular companies at the expense of children is a great way to lay the groundwork for what will be a long struggle.

So-called Pres. George W. Bush initiated a war of aggression and limitless occupation against the sovereign nation of Iraq in order to exact revenge on Sadaam Hussein over Hussein’s assassination attempt on former Pres. George H.W. Bush and to secure Iraqi oil for Bush’s Texas oil cronies.  Sen. John McCain and Rep. Mary Bono Baxely Mack, absentee Congresswoman, have supported every Bush war policy without reservation.  In fact, McCain is prepared for the U.S. to continue the occupation of Iraq ‘for 100 years.’

The U.S. Army recently released a study on the impact of the Bush war of aggression on the mental health of U.S. troops (The Associated Press, by Pauline Jelinek, dated March 7, 2008).  The findings of the report are devastating to the Bush occupation efforts and reveal the harmful impact on a significant percentage of U.S. troops.

More below the flip…

More than 27% of U.S. troops on their third or fourth combat tour suffered anxiety, depression, post-combat stress and other problems.  More than 12% of U.S. troops on their first tour suffered similar mental health problems

Suicide rates “remained elevated” in both Iraq and in Afghanistan.  Four suicides occurred last year in Afghanistan and 34 either confirmed or suspected suicides in Iraq.  If all suicides are confirmed, this would be the highest suicide rate since the Bush war of aggression began

The percentage of soldiers reporting depression in Afghanistan was higher than that in Iraq, and mental health problems in general were higher than they had previously been in Afghanistan.  The adjusted rate in 2007 for depression in Afghanistan was 11.4% compared with 7.6% in Iraq

83% of U.S. troops in Afghanistan reported exposure to traumatic combat events, a key risk factor for poor mental health among the troops

Spreading U.S. troops out in Afghanistan tended to isolate troops and made it more difficult for them to obtain mental health services in Afghanistan

About 29% of U.S. troops in combat outposts in Iraq reported that it was difficult to obtain mental health services in Iraq.  About 13% of U.S. troops not at outposts reported similar difficulty

U.S. troops receiving “Battlemind” training reported fewer mental health problems than those who did not.  The training teaches U.S. troops and families what to expect before troops depart for the Bush occupation of Iraq and what common problems to look out for when troops readjust to Stateside life following deployment

29% of U.S. troops feared seeking mental health services would harm their careers, down from 34% in 2006.  Fears of seeking mental health services would prevent many from getting help for anxiety, depression, and post-combat stress and would exacerbate the symptoms

89% of U.S. troops reported that their unit’s morale was neither high nor very high, down from 93% in 2006.  79.4% reported neither high nor very high individual morale, down from 81.7% in 2006.

In Iraq, 72% of soldiers reported knowing someone seriously injured or killed

U.S. troops reported an average of only 5.6 hours of sleep nightly in Iraq, significantly less than that needed to maintain optimal level of performance.  This puts U.S. troops at greater risk for harm.  Officers appear to significantly underestimate the impact of sleep deprivation.

Almost 33% of U.S. troops in Afghanistan were highly concerned that they were not getting sufficient sleep, and about 25% reported falling asleep during convoys last year thereby increasing their risk for harm.  16% of U.S. troops reported taking psychiatric medications during 2007 (there was no figure for the percentage of troops who were prescribed psychiatric medications and who were not taking them), and about half of those were sleep medications

The AP has the goods, it seems:

Ca. Fire Documents Conflict With Reports
By AARON C. DAVIS – 1 day ago

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) – Several aircraft were able to fly in strong winds on the first full day of last month’s Southern California firestorms, contradicting officials’ earlier claims that the weather had grounded virtually all aircraft, according to documents released Saturday.

Twenty-eight of 52 aircraft the state was tracking for firefighting efforts remained grounded that day, and high winds were not listed in the documents as the reason.

The documents obtained by the AP and other news providers under the California Public Records Act answer some questions while raising others. They also reveal a more detailed and at times different version of events than previously provided by the state’s top fire and emergency officials.

For example, state fire officials last month said high winds had grounded virtually all aircraft in the first two days after the flames broke out. Therefore, they reasoned, it would not have mattered whether additional state fire spotters had been available to ride in the military choppers.

The documents show that although pilots were hampered by strong winds, a dozen air tankers and five helicopters flew more than 70 hours Oct. 21, the first full day of the firestorm. Those aircraft would have been flown by pilots who – unlike military pilots – are trained specifically for fighting wildland blazes and would not necessarily have required state fire spotters.

The papers also reveal that the number involved in the aerial attack was a fraction of the tankers and helicopters available in the state during the fires’ opening days.

Twenty-eight of 52 aircraft the state tracked for firefighting efforts remained grounded. The total would include a combination of aircraft operated by the state, U.S. Forest Service, the military and private contractors.

They remained on the runway not because of high winds, but because state officials had not requested them or they were being kept in other parts of the state in case fires broke out there, according to the documents.

Again and again and again, we’re reassured after a given disaster that the government “did all it could,” that while “mistakes were made,” this disaster “could not have been forseen,” and that they will start thinking about how to prepare for “next time.” And yet when the news trickles out, long after the spin cycle has passed, it reveals that for all the subcontracting and bloviating and excuses, the government simply is not taking its job seriously.

So let me ask this now, to the ether:

What are the capital region’s local governments and the California state government planning to do if the Sacramento or San Joaquin river levees bust out this winter?

What are the Bay Area governments and the California state government planning to do if the Hayward fault slips and wrecks the Bay Area?

What are the SoCal local governments and the California state government planning to do if this year’s fire season stretches into yet another year of tinder-dry drought?

Because if they aren’t thinking about it now, and actually plannning out how to respond in real time to a bad situation instead of just issuing a report and calling it a day, we’re all going to take it on the chin collectively when they look into the cameras like deer in headlights when things go wrong.

It is only a matter of time with these sorts of things. We cannot prevent disasters from happening, but we do have some say about our response to them.

And if you botch something as simple as not allowing fire fighting planes to fly when SoCal burns, or you sit on your hands for hours while tens of thousands of gallons of carcinogenic bunker fuel glugs into a delicate coastal environment, at least have the decency to break out your wakizashi and announce your resignation on camera, instead of offering up lame excuses in hopes that noone will find out what you botched.

originally at surf putah