California's media likes to play up Tom Campbell as some sort of "moderate" or "sensible" Republican. As compared to Attila the Hun this might be plausible. But even a cursory glance at his alternative budget solutions shows that he is a typically conservative politician. Sure, his conservatism seems to be of the Ronald Reagan sort as opposed to the Grover Norquist sort. But there never was much difference between the two, except in tone, which is apparently all that matters to the media.

Campbell's proposed budget claims to want to solve a "systemic" crisis in a way that doesn't hurt our ability to recover from the economic crisis. Yet his budget merely offers a different method to achieve the same downward spiral that has afflicted the state - particularly Campbell's total ignorance of the revenue drop and the negative impact of spending cuts on consumer spending.

Tom Campbell believes the budget can be balanced by hammering social services, even though there is unprecedented need for these services. An example of his proposals:

•15% salary reduction for state workers OR 15% layoffs of state workforce

• $156.7 million savings in Cal Works by implementing Federal work participation requirements.

• $248.5 million savings by reverting to federal minimums on Supplemental Security Income and the State Supplementary Payment.

• $114.1 million savings by reducing compensation to in-home supportive service workers to the state minimum wage.

• $882 million savings in Medi-Cal, provided California receives a federal waiver from terms of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

In other words, he's offering a mixture of attacks on the poor and attacks on Obama's stimulus. His rationale:

1. California must, in large part, return to national standards on welfare and health care; we cannot afford to provide more than the national average in areas where we have long exceeded those levels;

2. California must ask those capable of taking care of themselves to do so;

3. California must not undercut its ability to bounce back when the national recession ends. This means being careful about cutting education, especially Community Colleges where much workforce retraining takes place.

This is complete nonsense. First, the national standards on welfare and health care are woefully insufficient. Campbell acts as if there is no national health care problem, as if there is no issue with the working-class finding and holding jobs. Campbell is a typical Republican - identifying with the wealthy and totally ignorant of how everyone else experiences life in California.

Second, how the heck are people supposed to "take care of themselves" in a recession like this?! Campbell is the sort of guy who drives through a poor community in his Jaguar (or whatever he drives) and shakes his head saying "why don't they just get a job?" That statement alone is proof that Campbell is intellectually unfit for office by virtue of his unwillingness to understand the challenges facing most Californians.

Campbell also proves he has no clue about modern economics - otherwise he wouldn't so blithely ignore the work of Nobel Laureates who point out that if you cut social service spending, folks have to replace that lost money by curtailing consumer spending, hammering jobs and tax revenues.

Third, Campbell's whole budget blueprint is designed specifically to *prevent* California from enjoying economic recovery. How are people who have no health care benefits supposed to find work? How are people supposed to find work period if you're scaling back Cal-WORKS? How are small businesses supposed to open when the state is laying off workers or cutting their salaries?

Campbell's also internally inconsistent. He states he wants to be "careful about cutting education" and then proposes:

$150 million unallocated cut to UC and CSU (I realize this would require further increases in student fees, or improved fund-raising).

Tom Campbell isn't some kind of new Republican. He's no moderate. Instead, he is the *same exact kind of Republican* that the party has offered dating back to Herbert Hoover. He is a man of the upper class, determined to protect the wealth and privileges of the upper class at the expense of everyone else.

Campbell's economic policies are no different than Reagan's, or Bush's (either one, 41 or 43). Campbell offers the vast majority of this state only reduced services and less money in their wallets. His Hooverite policies would merely make the recession worse, and ensure that when economic recovery does come, only Campbell's rich friends see any of its benefits, while everyone else is left behind. Which will apparently be just fine with Campbell, since everyone else should just take care of themselves anyway.

We've all seen this movie before. We know how it ends - we're living through it right now. Californians will reject Campbell's Hooverism. But will the media report on exactly what Campbell offers? Or will they continue to lie to their readers and claim he's some kind of "moderate"? I'm not exactly holding my breath.

As last night's budget deal makes clear, California's fate is being dictated by the Zombie Death Cult that was once known as the California Republican Party. And it is the 2/3 rule that is primarily responsible for this. Since 1996 Californians have rejected Republicans by ever-increasing numbers, with only Arnold Schwarzenegger being able to break through - and even then he had to run against his own party.

Like their federal counterparts, California Republicans have a shrinking regional base and are dominated by ideologues. No amount of redistricting can make inroads on these safe regions without even more intensive gerrymandering than what has previously been attempted. Instead the Republicans feel accountable to their own internal purity tests, administered by KFI radio's John & Ken and carried out by the Senate caucus when necessary.

The only way out, and the first reform that we must undertake - the tree blocking the tracks, the door that opens the path to all other reforms - is eliminating the 2/3 rule that gives conservatives veto power over the state and turns the majority Democrats into a minority party on fiscal matters. It's been talked about frequently on Calitics and in what remains of the media's coverage of state politics. So it seemed time for an in-depth discussion of the issue and the prospects for restoring majority rule to California.   Read More »

Today the Courage Campaign sent out an action alert to our members asking them to call Republican Senator Abel Maldonado and telling him to vote for the budget. His number is (916) 651-4015.

That raises the question, of course, of whether this budget deal is a good deal. It is not. It has numerous flaws - it relies on too many cuts to services and too much borrowing. The tax increases, while overdue, don't always make sense. Shouldn't a gas tax increase fund more public transportation, not less? Why a sales tax over taxes on the wealthy and oil companies?

Unfortunately, 30 years of conservative misrule has brought California to a point where we have two bad choices - a bad budget deal, or financial collapse. The longer California goes without a budget, the more workers that will be laid off, the more debt the state will rack up, and the deeper into a severe recession we will slide. Before we can fix the state, we have to stop the bleeding.

Today 20,000 public workers got pink slips because the state does not have the money to pay them. Tomorrow 38,000 workers will be laid off when 276 infrastructure projects are shut down because of the budget delay. At this point our choice is between more of this, and a flawed budget deal.

We have come to this point because of conservative ideology. In 1978 conservatives pushed through a radical fix to the property tax problem, ensuring that California would eventually run out of money to pay for its core services - health care, schools, buses. That day of reckoning was postponed through gimmick after gimmick, whether it was borrowing or the long credit bubble promoted by Alan Greenspan and the Republicans. But eventually, it would catch up with us.

Even worse, in 1978 Proposition 13 extended the 2/3rds rule for passing a budget to all taxes, both state and local. Even when 60% of voters want to pass a tax increase to pay for schools, that's not enough. And so California slowly bled money, as the structural revenue shortfall grew year after year.

What Republicans have effectively done is sentence California to 30 years of slowly decaying finances - and when the inevitable crisis comes, have given themselves a veto over the solution.

This situation is intolerable. The 2/3rds rule is a primary reason why the current budget deal is so flawed. Without it we could pressure Democrats to pass a much fairer budget instead of having to try and force Republicans to do the right thing (which as you know is not exactly easy).

The true solution to the budget mess isn't the deal currently up for vote, although it will stop the worst from happening. The only way we can fix California and provide economic recovery is to change the way the state is governed. We need to eliminate the 2/3rds rule and call a Constitutional Convention to return power to the people.

Below is the full text of the email we sent to our members regarding Senator Abel Maldonado's obstructionism.   Read More »

When we watched the helicopter carry George W. Bush away from our nation's capital many of us hoped we had finally seen the end of lawlessness as governing policy by Republicans in our country. And though President Obama has moved to restore the rule of law in Washington D.C., California Republicans are demonstrating the problem persists here in the Golden State.

David Dayen has written about how Mike Villines' insistence that Republicans would only vote for a budget deal by trading votes on new taxes for votes to gut labor and environmental protections were a likely violation of Section 86 of the California Penal Code:

Section 86. Every Member of either house of the Legislature...who asks, receives, or agrees to receive, any bribe, upon any understanding that his or her official vote, opinion, judgment, or action shall be influenced thereby...or offers or promises to give, any official vote in consideration that another Member of the Legislature shall give this vote either upon the same or another question...is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years and, in cases in which no bribe has been actually received, by a restitution fine.

The Courage Campaign is joining the California Labor Federation, the Sierra Club, and other groups in calling on Attorney General Jerry Brown to investigate the Republicans for violating Section 86 by offering to trade votes. Please sign our petition, to be delivered to the Attorney General's office next week.

Republicans believe they can make whatever demands they want, regardless of their impact on the state's economy, on its services, on its future, and without regard to the law, because the public hasn't yet mobilized against them. It's time we built a movement to stop Republican lawlessness. Sign the petition and join the Facebook group Bob Brigham created to generate the necessary public outcry.

If Republicans want to negotiate on the budget, they must do so without violating the law - something the Sacramento Bee seems to misunderstand. Their editorial against this investigation call seems to miss the fact that vote trading *is already criminalized* via Section 86.

Over the flip is the email we sent to our members this morning.   Read More »

As it becomes clear even to the state's corporatists that the blanket anti-tax stance is untenable, they are moving to ensure that any new taxes affect someone else, but leave them escaping their obligations to help protect economic and social stability as well as provide for California's future:

California Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Allan Zaremberg said this week that his group is "not opposed to all taxes" in the current budget environment.

"There's going to have to be a combination of revenues and real spending reductions," Zaremberg said. "But there are certain taxes that are going to hurt the economy worse than others, and those are targeted taxes that impact one industry disproportionately."

Zaremberg said the state chamber, which represents 16,000 businesses, opposes a proposed 9.9 percent tax on each barrel of oil extracted in California. It also opposes extending the sales tax to a number of services that the state currently does not charge, such as veterinary care, car repair and amusement parks.

The article from the Sac Bee also showed that the Cal Chamber has been relying on the Kamikaze Party to do their dirty work for them:

During the holiday break, business lobbyists were particularly concerned that Schwarzenegger negotiated alone with Democrats on a $18 billion majority-vote budget plan that used a controversial legal maneuver.

Schwarzenegger ultimately vetoed their plan. But the fact that he entertained their idea made businesses nervous about the possibility of enacting tax hikes on a Democratic majority vote rather than the two-thirds vote required in the state constitution. Businesses felt it would set bad precedent that Democrats might rely upon in subsequent negotiations.

Republican leaders boycotted those talks because they said the deal was unconstitutional. But that also meant Republicans had no say in which taxes the governor and Democrats were negotiating, which left business interests vulnerable. For instance, both Schwarzenegger and Democrats support the tax on oil extraction.

It is worth asking why anyone takes the Cal Chamber seriously (outside the governor's office, which is full of Cal Chamber acolytes). Their anti-tax, anti-regulatory policies have been dominant in California for at least the last five years and have had successes before that as well - yet they did not avoid dragging California into economic crisis. The Cal Chamber and the Kamikaze Party are two peas in the conservative pod, united by their shared attachment to that core conservative dogma - being right-wing means never having to say you were wrong.

The article goes on to note that Republicans are hinting that they might be open to taxes, but only if there is a hard spending cap (read: destroy what remains of government over time instead of all at once) and only if environmental and labor protections are gutted. That should suggest the Kamikaze Party isn't serious about a deal to avert the looming IOU crisis.

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 excellent points, 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.

Earlier today Brian at Calitics wrote about Bill Bagley's take on the problems with California government - which were of the typical "oh gee why isn't there more bipartisanship?" sort. Bagley offered some specific points, but his commentary is part of a familiar refrain in this state that assumes the Legislature, the parties, and ideologues are all to blame, regardless of party.

This is simply not true, and those promoting that line of argument are doing the public a disservice by misinforming Californians about what is really going on.

Democratic legislators cannot be credibly described as unflinching ideologues who refuse to cut a deal. This statement was sent by Speaker Karen Bass yesterday before Arnold announced his budget veto. See if you can find the inflexible hard-left ideology that makes compromise impossible:

Additional changes will include:

*Even greater authority to enter into so-called "public-private-partnerships" and "design-build" arrangements for state construction projects;

*More modifications to environmental laws to speed up road construction;

*A tax incentive to keep film production in California;

*A moratorium on home foreclosures;

*Some additional budget cuts and modifications to the revenue package so that the package contains more in expenditure reductions than new revenues.

In contrast to these compromise moves - many of which were bitter pills for Democrats to swallow - Republicans spent the day joining the Howard Jarvis Association in suing to block the Dems' budget deal.   Read More »

The dominant theme of the 2008 campaign - from the presidential race on down - has been lies. Republicans and conservatives have resorted to an unprecedented amount of outright lies to try and defeat progressive campaigns and policies. There has been a marked uptick lately in the amount of false advertising especially on the propositions, so I thought I'd collect some of them here.

• Prop 1A: The Reason Foundation, swimming in oil money, has been flooding the state's newspapers with misleading claims against high speed rail. The worst example was in a recent issue of the LA Times when Adrian Moore of the Reason Foundation made totally false claims, including that global HSR lines are subsidized (all turn a profit and France's TGV subsidizes other rail lines) and that HSR doesn't take passengers from airlines (in fact, they all do - to the point that Air France is going to enter the HSR market itself). More on these lies at the California High Speed Rail Blog.



• Prop 4: Planned Parenthood is facing a malicious attack from Prop 4 proponents. From an email sent out to the No on 4 list yesterday:
  
  

  A new ad from the proponents of Proposition 4 twists a tragic case of a teen trapped in an incestuous situation, and falsely claims that Prop 4 would have helped. What is most outrageous is that Prop 4 would have put that teen in an even worse and more desperate situation. It would not have helped this teen in any way yet the anti-choice extremists behind Prop 4 continue to use tragic events to lie to California voters.

  
  
  Visit No on Prop 4 to donate and find volunteer opportunities to help defeat this attack on teen safety and abortion rights.



• Prop 8: Brian explained yesterday the most recent falsehood being peddled by the Yes on 8 folks. Even though Mormon legal expert Morris Thurston exposed these claims as lies and demanded the church stop spreading them, the Mormon Church is still helping pay for these ads. Visit the No on 8 campaign to volunteer your time or your money to defeat these liars and protect marriage rights.

Why all the lies? Partly because if we had a discussion on the actual merits of the issues, Prop 1A would pass and Props 4 and 8 would fail by large margins. The media plays a role here as well, letting groups like the Reason Foundation or the Mormon Church spread false claims without pushing back for the truth. Stenography has replaced journalism, as media outlets just report what "both sides" have to say regardless of whether or not there's any truth to the claims. And the op-ed pages and TV ads exist in a zone of truthiness, where nobody holds the liars accountable.

Except us. California progressives, the blogs, the grassroots. All the more reason for us to Stay For Change and save California from the liars on the right who wish to set this state back decades instead of help us embrace a better future.

It's really refreshing to see an article like this in a California newspaper. From today's LA Times comes a story with the headline California's next budget battle could get easier:

Democratic gains of even a couple of seats on Nov. 4 could ease California's annual struggle to match spending with revenue. Eight Republican votes are now needed to pass a budget by the required two-thirds majority of lawmakers. If voters reject Republican candidates in some districts, Democrats may have a smaller anti-tax bloc to battle and fewer arms to twist to pass a budget.

The media typically resists speaking this particular truth to the public. Instead they prefer to blame "partisanship" or some unknown budget god for creating this crisis. Of course the budget problems are a direct cause of Republicans, whether it was Prop 13, or their reckless 1998 tax cuts, or Arnold's VLF and budget balancing bonds, or recent Yacht Party-induced budget delays.

Yet another reason for California progressives to Stay for Change - don't travel to swing states, travel instead to the key swing districts in the Assembly and the Senate, races that will be the difference between a sane and fair budget and another crippling Republican-induced delay.

Last week I had the honor to speak at a No on Proposition 8 event in West Hollywood.  Thirty people joined together share their passion for equal rights, donate their money and learn how they can help defeat the discriminatory measure to eliminate the right of marriage for gays and lesbians in California. 

This was the third such event I had attended in 2 weeks, but this one was different. This event was to raise money to support Republicans Against 8, a PAC created to mobilize republicans to vote no on proposition 8.

In the weeks preceding the event, I invited dozens friends and acquaintances to attend, but only one joined.  Friends know I am a proud democrat and I was repeatedly asked why I was involved with an event supporting republicans.  Many used the conversation as an opportunity to put down our LGBT brothers and sisters who are affiliated with the GOP.

At first I wasn't bothered by their reactions or shunning of our Republican counterparts because it has become so commonplace, but as the conversation repeated itself again and again I found myself increasingly agitated.

For years, organizations like The National Gay and Lesbian Taskforce and Equality California have demonstrated that community organizing is the backbone of the LGBT rights movement.  However, to win we need to organize the masses, leaving no ally on the side lines.  So, my friends, how can you be so quick to leave anyone behind who agrees with us on defending the right of same-sex couples to marry?  Are we really willing to alienate our Republican LGBT brothers and sisters at the detriment of our civil rights movement? 

Republicans across the State of California, gay and straight alike, are willing and ready to vote No on Proposition 8.  LGBT Republicans through Log Cabin Republicans and Republicans Against 8 were at the California Republican Convention working to educate fellow Republicans why voting No on Prop 8 is important.  And, LGBT republicans want and deserve all the same rights and privileges as LGBT Democrats, Independents, Green Party members, etc., and we can't afford to leave them out of our civil rights fight.

All across California, openly LGBT Republicans are fighting for equal rights as they change hearts and minds by educating members of their party.  They are helping to defeat Prop 8 and ensure a win for equality in CA.

This is about people.  This is about legal equality.  This is NOT about party politics.

Embrace ALL of our allies and brace for the celebration of victory in defeating Proposition 8 on November 4th.

To expand on the voter fraud in San Bernardino County that the CDP alerted us to yesterday, funded by would-be governor Steve Poizner, Carol Robb of the San Bernardino County Democratic Central Committee has provided more details, including Republican DA Mike Ramos' unwillingness to even return Democrats' calls:

Here's what has happened:

·Immediately after the Labor Day weekend, we saw a large increase in San Bernardino County in Republican Registration, as compared to Democratic, for the first time in 14 months

·The office of the Registrar of Voters was alerted to this situation by Carol Robb.

·The Secretary of State's office was also alerted by a phone call from Carol Robb.

·Knowing that voter registration fraud was taking place in Riverside County, Carol Robb got a list from the Registrar of Voters, containing new registrations and re-registrations between Aug. 18 and Sept. 3. That file was used to identify over 400 voters whose registration changed from Democrat, or "declined to state," to Republican.

·Calls were made to about 100 randomly selected voters from the 400+ on the list. Because of incorrect phone numbers, only 33 interviews were completed.

·Phone interviews determined that 27, of the 33 voters reached had been "slammed" -- their party affiliation was improperly changed.

·The advice of the California Democratic Party was sought, and Bob Mulholland was designated to assist us.

·Carol Robb, Patrick Kahler, Sam Clauder, and Phil Robb (Carol's husband, retired Deputy DA) met with Kari Verjil and her key staff on Friday, September 12. The Registrar was given all information, including copies of our 33 telephone interview forms.

·Carol Robb also filed an on-line complaint with the DA's Public Integrity Unit.

·Carol and Sam kept in close contact with Bob Mulholland, who constantly urged us to "go public."

·When our calls to the DA's office were unreturned Monday and again Tuesday morning, Mulholland took matters into his own hands, and sent out a press release from the state party linking San Bernardino's situation to State Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner's repeated press releases, about his personal funding of Republican voter registration bounty programs.

·In the meantime, the Registrar's office has handed over all information to both the District Attorney and the Secretary of State, with her request for immediate investigation.

·Congressman Baca was asked to call DA Mike Ramos to urge immediate action.

·Supervisor Josie Gonzalez has pledged to contact the DA's office and urge immediate action.

·A copy of our press release and other information has been shared with a representative of Assembly Speaker Karen Bass. Karen Bass will be meeting with both Secretary of State Debra Bowen and Attorney General Jerry Brown in the next day or so, and will share our information directly with them.

SBD Republicans are trying to cast this as Democratic sour grapes but it's clear that there is something worth investigating here. Democrats held a press conference at 11 AM today to explain the matter to local media and demand an investigation and accountability.

It's worth keeping in mind that this isn't just about the 2008 cycle - but that the involvement of Steve Poizner, a leading candidate for the GOP gubernatorial nomination in 2010, suggests this could be a long-term strategy for Republicans in California. Certainly the track record of YPM, the Republican firm at the center of the scandal and with many years of voter registration fraud dating back to at least 2004, suggests this to be the case.

According to the LA Times Don Perata is ready to wave the white flag and give in to Republican anti-tax demands:   Read More »

For the last seven years, today is usually a day I spend alone or with close friends reflecting on the horrific occurrences 7 years ago.

As a 9/11 survivor, it's deeply personal. I usually call the people I worked with that day, who I evacuated with that day, who I feared I would never see my loved ones again with that day.

Today, seven years later, I simply emailed them. Instead of being able to reflect and mourn what once was, I find myself furious as the Republican party continues to exploit this National tragedy for political gain.

McPalin says they are very different Republicans who will change Washington. What's so different? The rhetoric is all the same and it is as simple as..

1. Make people relive and relive and relive 9/11 with repeated comments and visuals to create fear
2. Talk about their national security prowess
3. Claim that Dems will make us more vulnerable
4. Count their millions of moderate votes

Enough already! Last I checked, the Republicans, not the Democrats were running this country when we were attacked. The Republicans, not the Democrats, haven't found Bin Laden. The Republicans, not the Democrats brought us into a needless war crippling our economy.

Not that any Republicans read this site, but to the GOP, "Stop exploiting a National tragedy for political and professional gain!".

I'm a 9/11 survivor. I am and always have been against the war in Iraq. I support our troops. I CONSISTENTLY VOTE FOR PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATS WITH GREAT PRIDE.

To our progressive electeds...take the GOP on head-to-head on their exploitation and show them the Democratic party is better for national security and don't need to scare the public into voting for us!

That's what the Correctional Officers are considering, according to Matier and Ross:   Read More »

The primary reason Republicans continue to hold the state hostage and deny us a budget is they are afraid that if they vote for a necessary tax increase, they will face a primary challenge from within their party, either for their current seat or for another office in the future. All such a challenger would have to do is say "Joe Blow voted for a tax increase" and the challenger, flush with money from the Club for Growth, the Howard Jarvis Association, and the other usual suspects will take out the incumbent.

The only way to challenge that calculus is to suggest that these Republicans will face a greater backlash from voters than from other wingnuts. California voters, especially those in districts represented by Republicans, hold the most leverage in the current budget stalemate.   Read More »

It's 1995 all over again, as Republican-induced government shutdowns are all the rage. Congressional Republicans are planning a shutdown in September if they don't get their way on drilling, which looks to be their core electoral strategy going into November.

Here in California the possibility looms as Republicans show no sign of budging on the budget. Saturday is the deadline for adding propositions to the November ballot, and as most budget solutions proposed have involved going to voters - whether it's Arnold's lottery bonds, his sales tax plan, or the Republicans' spending cap demands, the deadline becomes all-important:   Read More »

That's what California Republicans are planning this summer, according the LA Times:

GOP lawmakers hope to use their leverage over the state budget, which cannot pass without some of their votes, to roll back landmark policies implemented by Democrats and the governor. Among them are curbs on greenhouse gas emissions, regulations banning the dirtiest diesel engines and rules dictating when employers must provide lunch breaks for workers.

   Read More »

Here in the dog days of April, as the state awaits the governor's May Revise, frustration seems to be setting in over the budget. The real political battles will begin in earnest after the May Revise, but the jockeying for position has been going on for some time, including in the state's media. Unsurprisingly, the media wants to spin the budget crisis as a failure of all Sacramento politicians, when in fact the current impasse is the responsibility of one group alone: the Republicans.

As an article in Sunday's Sac Bee would have us believe, there is "scant support for budget changes." But a deeper look shows that while Democrats have already proposed budget fixes, such as closing the yacht loophole and creating an oil severance tax (as exists in nearly every other state), it is the Republicans alone that have blocked meaningful budget action.

And why have they done so? Republicans want us to believe that *any* revenue solution is economically damaging:

However, Sen. Dave Cogdill of Modesto, the GOP's incoming leader, said the state should not take away credits at a time when the economy is struggling.

Other ideas that have yet to gain traction would raise income taxes on high-wage earners or amend Proposition 13 to assess businesses in the same way as residential property. The latter, known as "split-roll" property tax, would require that commercial and industrial properties be reassessed more regularly, bringing the state an estimated $3 billion annually.

Cogdill dismissed all as non-starters.

"We should help the general fund by stimulating the economy and be a more beneficial partner with industry, rather than stifling them," Cogdill said.

But whose economy is stimulated by revenue cuts? Who actually sees this so-called economic growth? And who suffers from the spending cuts that are forced by the revenue cuts? A closer look at the overall situation shows that the Republicans' claims are nonsense. Tax cuts provide economic growth for a wealthy few, but cause economic distress for pretty much everyone else - *especially* when those tax cuts come at the expense of education. More below.   Read More »

A new political advocacy group, California Forward has been established to further the pie in the sky notion of governing from the center. Its websitesays its charting a new path to more effective state governance and helping the state overcome political gridlock and improve government performance. All of this is counter to 158 years of state history.   Read More »

The back and forth between the candidates, the fights over pastors and passports, is feeling less and less relevant and important. Especially for those of us here in California, where nearly 20,000 teachers got a layoff notice. Arnold Schwarzenegger and legislative Republicans want to balance the budget on these teachers' backs, and refuse to even consider any tax increase to help close our structural revenue shortfall.

As despicable as that is, perhaps the worst and most telling moment came last month when Republicans voted against closing a loophole favoring wealthy yacht owners. But with your help, we can turn this into the political breakthrough we need to finally turn this state around and beat back far-right ideology.   Read More »