Arnold’s redistricting proposition, Prop. 77, has brought together some very disparate groups and politicians.  Redistricting NEEDS a reformation process, but 77 is the wrong way to go about it.  It would lead to the possibility of voters using several different maps, with massive headaches ensuing if the first map doesn’t pass.  Now, the reasons aren’t always consistent, but a wide range of politicians have come out against Prop 77.  Notable names include Hillary Clinton, Dick Armey (yes, the former GOP Majority Leader), and Nancy Pelosi.

Lest you doubt me on the Dick Armey count: From National Journal’s Hotline (subscription required)

Ex-Maj. Leader Dick Armey (R) also sends a
letter, urging no votes on 77. Armey: “By voting for
Proposition 77, you may actually be voting to put
Congress back in the hands of liberal Democrats”
(Hotline sources, 11/3).

Now, unsuprisingly, Armey is only concerned about getting warm conservative butts in House seats.  What Armey is likely insinuating is a reference to Ohio’s Reform Ohio Now.  While Prop 77 would likely mean a slight pickup of seats for the GOP, Ohio’s redistricting would likely yield up to 5 new Democrat seats.  Armey and many other GOP leaders are concerned about this.  Who isn’t? Arnold.  He officialy supports Reform Ohio Now.

And as for Ms. Pelosi? Well, that boils down to the “No on 77” Committee’s advertising on a GOP slate card. From Capitol Weekly:

A new slate mailer produced by the Citizens for
Good Government urges GOPers to vote yes on 3 of
Schwarzenegger’s initiatives, but not Prop 77
(redistricting). The No on 77 cmte contributed which
has $610K to the mailer, with only $50K coming from
other groups. House Min. Leader Nancy Pelosi (D)
herself has donated $25K to the No on 77 cmte, “and
helped corral donations from” other Dem Reps. No on 77
spokesperson Stephanie Williamson: “We are a committee
for No on 77 and our main concern is defeating
Proposition 77. We are trying to exercise the most
effective means to doing that.” Asked if that means a
Dem-funded cmte “is willing to subsidize a mailer”
urging GOP votes on other initiatives: “I wouldn’t say
we paid for it. I would say we bought on to that
slate.”
 From the mailer: “Governor Arnold
Schwarzenegger’s Reform Agenda will bring a breath of
fresh air to Sacramento. … Arnold deserves our
thanks and gratitude. But Republicans should fear 3
randomly selected volunteer retired judges (with
political prejudices) having all the power. No on
Proposition 77!!”

In the election post-mortem we need to look into the question of whether our resources were being used in the most efficient manner and that our efforts were integrated to a sufficient manner.  Helping to support some of the propisitions while harming others seems a little counter to our best interests.

Great news on Props 73 (parental notification) and Prop 78 (insurance-friendly drugs) from the most recent Field Poll (PDF):

Prop 73:
No  49 (43)
Yes 41 (45)

Prop 78:

No  45 (38)
Yes 36 (39)

Unfortunately, Prop 79, which would actually give some real health care benefits to folks who could use them, is also now trailing:

Prop 79

No  43 (39)
Yes 37 (37)

With one week to go, things are looking good overall for California, although I would like to see 79 pass. Hopefully the GOTV efforts succeed, we win, and then shift attention to 2006 and the replacement of Arnold.

The USA Today published a story describing the Wal-mart connection to the Governator:

SAN FRANCISCO — Wal-Mart (WMT) and its founding Walton family have emerged as big backers of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, giving about $1 million in the past year
***
Wal-Mart and the Waltons now rank No. 15 on its list of the 100 biggest donors to Schwarzenegger-controlled campaign committees, says the Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer Rights, a non-partisan government watchdog group.

And why might the Waltons and Wal-Mart want to give so much money to Ahnold’s campaign committee’s?  Oh, yeah, because they get a nice quid pro quo…

First, Ahnold vetoed a bill which would require release of statistics about forcing labor onto public assistance:

One union-backed bill, which Schwarzenegger vetoed early in October, would have forced the state to disclose names of companies whose workers get government health services meant for poor residents.

So, Wal-Mart doesn’t want the citizens of California to know about the way they treat their workers and how many of them are being subsidized by the state.  There have been several stories about that issue, including a story about Wal-mart contributing to the bankruptcy of Tenn-Care, Tennessee’s Medicaid program. This practice allows Wal-mart to subsidize their business by raising costs for the state.  Thus, their prices are not so cheap after all.  

Ahnold then vetoed another anti-Walmart bill:  

A second bill, vetoed last year, would have stopped employers from locking workers inside workplaces — a policy Wal-Mart has when employees stock shelves and clean floors after closing hours.

The bills reflect issues creating a public relations nightmare for the USA’s biggest private employer, with 1.3 million workers, as it expands in California, the USA’s biggest market. Critics including Wake-Up Wal-Mart accuse it of endangering workers by locking them in stores, and of reducing its health care costs at taxpayer expense.

In other words, Wal-Mart is putting the lives of their employees at risk in order to save a few bucks.  Now, I know that’s not a huge surprise, but this practice is an egregious violation of both personal dignity and decent working conditions.  Apparently, Ahnold is really opposed to the idea of…uh…shoplifting?  Well, maybe, or perhaps it could be this:

The Wal-Mart and Walton political gifts appear in new public campaign finance documents. They show that the same day Schwarzenegger vetoed the health care disclosure bill — Oct. 7 — his California Recovery Team logged a $250,000 gift from Christy Walton. She is the widow of John Walton, a Wal-Mart director who died four months ago. In the next three weeks, the Schwarzenegger-backed Proposition 77 campaign got $250,000 from Wal-Mart Chairman Rob Walton and $100,000 from Wal-Mart. Those gifts and others followed $200,000 to the Recovery Team last year from John Walton about two weeks after Schwarzenegger vetoed the lock-in bill.

This is just another example of Ahnold’s devotion to the special interests.

Enough is Enough!

Scooter Libby,not only directly connected to the Veep but also not well reported a special assistant to the President, is headed to the Slams. The Veep is under investigation. Rove is not only under investigation but is forming his own legal team and has retained a PR firm from Colorado that is expert in crisis management.

Tom Delay apparently has a hair stylist, makeup artist and smile coach for his arraignment mug-shot and acts as if he is still in charge of the House of Representatives.

Senator Bill Frist, a Doctor, makes diagnosis via video and now has a ‘blind’ trust whose Trustee’s report directly to him at least once. And he’s under investigation.

David Dreier, CA-26, is supposed to succeed Delay until his supposed gayness gets too public and he’s shoved down the row for a man, Roy Blount, who himself may soon be under investigation for a series of fundraisers that wound up benefiting a charity that employed his wife and others. Jack Abramoff and Jim Ellis, both recently having legal problems are in that picture too. Story here.

At least 154 dead in New Orleans hospitals and nursing homes…Jeb Bush trying to take the heat for the poor performance Florida performance after Hurricane Wilma….

Enough is Enough

Reform, reform and reform has to be our bywords in these next elections.

In CA-48, Steve Young, Democratic nominee issued this statement:

“It is time to stand against those who have lost their moral compass in the pursuit of partisan advantage.   Republicans object that investigations are criminalizing politics,but the indictments of Tom DeLay and Scooter Libby, and investigations of Representative Duke Cunningham, Senator Bill Frist, and others in the most powerful positions in the Executive branch prove the charge.  The assailants are still on the march, threatening to undermine our democratic ideals.

We need leaders in Washington who understand that our nation’s needs are more important than the politics of personal vendetta. The Republican Party has lost its way.  There can be no excuse for endangering the secret life of a loyal public servant to settle old debts.  When I am elected to Congress, accountability to my constituents will be more important than partisan politics.”

These are some of the reasons that Steve Young continues a vigorous fight in a Distict that many consider unwinnable. Yet we on the inside of the campaign know of the multiple plans, operating simultaneously, to bring voters to the polls and swing this election.[Excuse me if I don’t reveal our strategic plans in detail in public.]

This is the last Congressional Election of 2005. Why wait for 2006 to start the massive change in Congress needed to overcome this culture of corruption?

The Steve Young for Congress Campaign believes that those who are, in their hearts, pro-choice, pro-reproductive rights, who want to end the Iraq War as soon as possible, who are anti-corruption and pro-medical research can be motivated to vote on December 6th. And majority of those will be Democrats and Independents but there will also be disaffected, disappointed Republicans.

Just today, Oct 29, 2005, in the Orange County Register is a front page news story
of the former State GOP Chairman saying, with other things, “I think his base is alienated”.

With a projected District turnout for the final General Election, on the heels of the Statewide General Election November 8, of less than 22%, simply achieving a final vote that would normally be considered awful will win this race.

Don’t give up on the CA-48 regardless of the Primary numbers or the Conventional Wisdom. Non-conventional planning, hardcore execution and a motivated Candidate gives Democrats in CA-48 a real chance for change when change in most needed. Support us with good thoughts at least and more if you can. We have 38 days to go…and we will use every one of them.

Our motto? Enough is Enough!

(Me likes cartoons! – promoted by SFBrianCL)

Yesterday afternoon, Consumers Union posted its new animation in support of Prop 79. We hope everyone enjoys it.

http://www.consumersunion.org/MedicineCity

More than that, we hope it comes in handy as a way to share information about Prop 79 with folks you know before election day. There’s plenty of information, and a quick link to the Prop 79 campaign’s response to all the TV ads that Pharma has been buying over the last few weeks.

Thanks for taking a look!
Kathy Mitchell
Consumers Union

(Grover, and not the good one, is insidious… – promoted by SFBrianCL)

When I notice the Governor blaming Davis or the Democratic Legislature for the ‘mess’ or the ‘broken system’, I get really ticked off mostly because I think there’s more to the dynamic than just the Dems. Just as bad: his idea of ‘reform’ as the solution to the ‘broken system’. Yeah right.  

One example too late: now we know ‘taking it to the people of Cah-li-for-nia’ means putting on a special election for corporate interests at taxpayer expense.  Let’s not fall for that one again.

As is my wont, I think it’s time to shine some light on two strong Norquista influences having a lot to do with our mess/broken system/dysfunction. I won’t disagree this mess/broken system/dysfunction exists; my purpose is to call attention to these other elements.

Item One: The Norquist Pledge, which renders bipartisanship a farce.

I first heard about this Pledge from State Senator Sheila Kuehl in a speech she made once. You are kidding, was my short reaction.  She said every Republican must sign this Pledge before they run for office as a Republican.

But it’s real. Here it is straight from World News and Report, not just in a paper by some obscure partisan academic hack:

This winter, Kentucky State Rep. Stephen Nunn considered doing what would have been unthinkable a decade ago: supporting a tax hike. So, having signed antitax crusader Grover Norquist’s “no new taxes” pledge during his 1996 race, Nunn wrote Norquist to rescind the pledge. He quickly discovered that it wouldn’t be that easy. Norquist replied by outlining the arduous process for getting off the pledge list maintained by his group, Americans for Tax Reform. Nunn would have to hold a press conference with Norquist–and win re-election on a pro-tax platform. “I do not have the power to release you . . . ,” Norquist wrote. “Only your voters can do that.”

This threat of the Pledge means there is no room for bipartisanship. Some of you may recall the vividly angry quote by Norquist describing bipartisanship as the equivalent of date rape.  

BTW, Sheila Kuehl suggested the way to get around the pledge is to vote in as many Dems as possible everywhere.  Excellent point.

As for the Governor’s frequent threats about raising taxes if we don’t pass 76, well, what a very interesting thing to say. Do you think he’ll raise taxes given his pledge to Norquist? Nah. Doubt it. More likely the Governor is misspeaking his talking points again. It would blow my mind if someone asks him to clarify this at a press conference or at a town hall.  

Item Two: The 2/3 Majority Vote to pass a tax

Oh, another Norquist coincidence! Well, that’s alright because I’m a coincidence theorist.

The 2/3 majority vote happens to be part of another Norquist 50 state agenda (the so-called paycheck deception scheme is another).  In fact, they’d like to see a super-majority vote in all the states.

The equation: when you add the Norquist Pledge plus the 2/3 majority vote into the Sacramento equation, you get total legislative gridlock.

So the next time you hear about the “Broken System Needing Reform” refrain from the Governor, remember the Norquista elements: the Pledge and the 50 state campaign to shut down legislatures everywhere. The Governor is painting the problem as being the hapless hopeless Democratic dweebs in the Legislature. For the record, I don’t buy into this characterization of our Democratic legislators but, believe me,  I know many many many many others who believe this about our Dems in the Legislature.  No wonder their popularity is so low.

The Norquista influence has made a difference in California politics. Unfortunate we’re not hearing about it.

Even more to the point: if the Governor’s initiatives win in California’s very Special Election, it will become even more difficult for the real people’s voice be heard as the public interest unions become diminished in their voice (esp. Prop. 75 and Prop. 74) and as the Governor gains amazingly scary powers to cut the budget without any adult oversight, which is Prop. 76.

Instead, it’ll be government by the Rich People, for the Rich People and by the Rich People after this special election. And, darn, we even paid for this election, hoisted on to us by the Rich People.

If you’re ticked off as I am, please get your britches into an Alliance phone bank or join the local California for Democracy office to help get out the vote.

It’s a bummer we paid for this corporate election but we might as well show up and vote.

( – promoted by SFBrianCL)

A new PPIC poll comes out tomorrow.  There’s a summary of the poll at the LA Times:

A new poll to be released Friday by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California is expected to show that Schwarzenegger’s ballot propositions have made no appreciable gains in recent weeks, despite heavy TV advertising by the governor.

None is drawing support from a majority of likely voters.

Well, here here to that!  That is great news.  PPIC is generally far more reliable than S-USA, and apparently, Stanford. But here’s some specific good news.  

Prop 75

And the fate of one measure, the anti-union Proposition 75, now seems a tossup after having been favored by a 25-point margin only two months ago.

The importance of defeating Prop 75 can not be underestimated.  It’s a vile wretch of a proposition that would require massive new efforts from labor organizers, essentially silencing most unions.  And in return, what do we get for that? Well, “paycheck protection” of course.  Not that employees already have the option of opting-out or anything.  It essentially takes the voice away from workers while allowing the corporations to go on singing.  Now, on Monday, Ahnold announced that he intended to support a bill which required express permission of stockholders for corporations to give money to political causes.  I’ll believe that when I see it.

It’s coming down to the wire now.  I’ll follow up with the PPIC poll tomorrow.

( – promoted by SFBrianCL)

It turns out Phil Angelides is running a funny campaign.  Now, not that bad kind of funny, I mean actually funny.  His campaign put out a cartoon mocking the Governator called Arnold’s Neighborhood, playing off Sesame Street.

And speaking of Funny, the Governor himself is quite the jokester!  At the beginning of yesterday’s town hall meeting, The Governator’s sound was having some issues. Perhaps, but it also could have been some planned joke, that we’ll never know.  Anyway, Ahnold joked that “it must be Perata somewhere in the back messing with my sound.”  Yet another helpful comment from the man who was going to work with both parties.

And on to the meeting itself.  I recorded it and was going to stream some clips, but FOX 2 took care of that for me. They’ve provided a page with links to several clips.  Hopefully it will be up until the election is over.  A classic line from Ahnold: “I’m not smart enough to understand all of this and the history of all this.” in reference to Prop. 74’s requirement for 5 year teacher tenure.

In my estimation, Perata won this debate.  However, Ahnold’s star power still has some strange hold over Repuplicans that I can’t really understand.  Polls are all over the place, so who knows how the Propositions are doing.  It was nice, though, to have an informed discussion about the special election.  It would have been better to have both Perata and Ahnold on stage at the same time, but I’m guessing Ahnold’s handlers wouldn’t have any of that.

(As I said, all 77, all the time – promoted by SFBrianCL)

Not that it should really affect the outcome either way, but there was an article in the LA Times about the actual nuts and bolts of getting the state ready for Prop 77.  However, I think the more important part comes later (see the bold)

It’s hellacious for us,” said Stephen L. Weir, Contra Costa County registrar. “The rules under which we’d have to operate are pretty much impossible.”

Proposition 77 would require three retired judges to redraw California’s political districts “for use at the next statewide primary and general elections,” presumably June and November 2006.

The drawing of new districts wouldn’t take long. Some experts say it could be done in a few days with computer mapping software.

But for the people who oversee county elections, getting new boundaries for 120 Senate and Assembly seats, 53 congressional seats and four Board of Equalization districts would merely be a first step. They would have to redraw 25,000 precincts to fit the new districts, reassign polling places and tell voters how to find them.

All of that would have to be done by March so sample ballots could be prepared and mailed before the June election. Officials probably wouldn’t get new maps until late December.

Political districts are usually redrawn by the Legislature once every decade, based on new census data, and then county officials have months to update their systems to match the maps. Opponents of Proposition 77 say that pattern should continue, because an estimated 3 million residents are new to California since lines were last drawn in 2001.

As I’ve said before, I support the concept of reform of the redistricting process (i.e. Reform Ohio Now), but how this is accomplished through Prop 77 is wrong.  However we do draw the map, whether it is through the new retired judge panel or whatever, it should be done after 2010.

(Wanted to bump this back up, as there’s some good conversation in the comments. – promoted by SFBrianCL)

When was it decided not to dredge up from the past into our conscious awareness the legacy and consequences of Prop. 13? I’m not sure who can be blamed for this, whether it be the media or ourselves, but I regret we collectively are clueless about the legacy of Prop. 13.  

Prop. 13 laid the groundwork for this special election in California on November 8th.  Passed in 1978, Prop. 13 was something most people in CA knows simply as the one which froze property taxes.  

Another thing it did, something we should have seared into our brains, is this: because of Prop. 13 (and resulting developments), we lost local control over our property tax money. And this loss of control has had huge political implications.

From a Rand report:…local voters lost some of their incentive to spend so much on schools, thus precipitating a substantial decline in statewide school spending relative to that in other states. The decline in spending likely led to larger class sizes and, perhaps, to lower achievement levels for students in California compared with those across the nation…

Our tax money goes to Sacramento, to be stirred into one huge pot and then to be divvied out to those who have the most power; prior to this, much of that money went to a local pot, where local control and access ruled.

But so what, you might ask?  

Prop. 13 legislated learned helplessness, used colloquially. We, the moms and dads, the regular people in California, now had to literally learn a whole new skill set if we wanted to effectively compete with corporate lobbyists and other professionals who literally live in Sacramento to lobby for our state money.  Learned helplessness, btw, is the response, in experimental settings, of creatures such as rats, who find they no longer have any control over outcome and so they give up.

Now did we rise up to this challenge and learn a whole new skillset so we could go and lobby for our interests in Sacramento?  Uh. No.  It’s asking a lot, and we just haven’t risen to this challenge.

One consequence has been erosion of funding to the schools.

Prop. 13 made it infinitely more difficult for parents to have any say in money for school funds. And to reiterate, we know the cold reality is the average parent does not have the political savvy, time, money or skillset to wander over to Sacramento and advocate for school funds for our kids.  Prop. 13 thus ended up fostering a sense of complacency, and we’ve ended up supremely disconnected from the politicking going on in Sacramento.  

According to Governor Schwarzenegger, Sacramento is this mythical place where special interests have taken over California.  He’s simply calculating people don’t understand what’s going on in Sacramento.  By calling unions a special interest group and denigrating their important role in the whole fight against corporate interests, he’s hoping he can skunk us.

The unions representing public workers, under clear attack in this election in Prop. 75, the anti-union bill, have stepped up to the plate to protect the public interest. The rest of us, the parents, have really taken a back seat in Sacramento; we aren’t organized, with the ability to fund people to help us advocate, unlike corporate interests.

Prop. 75 backers hope to castrate public worker unions with this bill, thus setting the stage for unfettered big business access in Sacramento for our money.  When the Governor states the special interests are the problem, he’s really saying the unions are in the way of his agenda.

Along with Prop. 76 which gives amazingly wicked budget-cutting powers to the Governor, a Prop. 75 win will allow corporate interests to win.

It’s all about power and money in this special election, with Prop. 13 setting the stage decades ago.  

This election will be won by the side with the most votes.  Getting out the vote will make the difference. Email your friends and family. Get involved in your local Democratic party and with the Alliance to get out the vote.