Kill Phil: Safe-Seat Legislators Virtually Ensure Arnold Win

you need to learn a little more about Angelides and (0.00 / 0)

whether he's running "a campaign for real change" or not.

I remember an earlier comment by you..... OK, I just went and found it, complaining about issues that Angelides wasn't addressing. here's a quote:

"* Reforming the age discriminating tax heist called Prop. 13.
* Reforming our "direct" Democracy sideshow, if not eliminating it.
* Reforming the Legislature, including redistricting, allowing seniority, etc. etc. etc."
....
Angelides is being a chickenshit because he's listening to the insiders that endorsed him that like things the way they are just fine."

1.Angelides has already endorsed the latest bipartisan redistricting proposal.

2. if by "direct democracy sideshow" you mean the ballot proposition mess, from what I read Angelides is expected to endorse Bowen's 1598 which just passed the Assembly and the state Senate, and "would require those gathering signatures to qualify a proposition for the ballot who is bankrolling the effort and whether the person asking them to sign is a volunteer or a paid signature gatherer" (Angelides' endorsement will be no surprise, the bill passed the Legislature on a party-line vote, it's not controversial among Democrats). Schwarzenegger vetoed last year's version of this bill.

3. if by "allowing seniority" you mean overturning term limits, I'm sorry, whether or not term limits have had the effects hoped for by CA voters, in fact, voters intended the limits as a populist effort to reform the Legislature, and there is NOT any great call for reform by getting rid of term limits.  except, no doubt, among the very "insiders" you decry.

4. ditto for Prop. 13. Yes, let's talk about fair taxation in CA, let's work to roll back some tax cuts for the very rich, and ensure corporations pay their fair share -- no way should California be borrowing $43 billion for infrastructure when those at the top are rolling in money right now, money that they wouldn't be able to make w/out such infrastructure -- but why the hell should we start with property taxes? Homeowners are voters, and there's nothing "populist" about campaigning to increase property taxes for everyday homeowners.

5. back to "insiders" - what "insiders" are you talking about? The insider pundits who really, really hoped Steve Westly was gonna make it a race? (Westly being just as much of an "insider" in CA politics as Angelides, look at their histories) The insiders who've been telling us since right after the primary that "Angelides can't win" and have continually praised Schwarzenegger's "repositioning."

Or maybe the insider big money Democratic donors? -- oh but they're donating to Schwarzenegger, we read in the papers. The "insiders" at the Democratic Party's executive board meeting in early August who chose NOT to endorse Clean Money/Prop. 89 (after Angelides had already endorsed it and after strong support from rank-and-file Democrats at the state party convention early this year)? These same rank-and-file Democrats supported Angelides strongly, too. Are they the "insiders" you speak of? Or is it the unions? Big, influential Dem donors, the California Teachers Association, came out early against Prop. 89 -- did that stop Angelides from endorsing it? no.

anyway, I'm not suggesting Phil Angelides is a revolutionary, or even a Matt Gonzalez -- he's running for governor of CA, not mayor of SF.  How else do you propose that a Democratic candidate for California can be elected, if he doesn't have any connections/history/record with "insider" California politics? Are you one of those who would've liked to have seen a celebrity with no experience in governance run against Schwarzenegger? Or are you sitting around waiting for some magical charismatic leader to emerge out of nowhere to lead you to victory?

sorry, the rest of us (including Angelides, who according to his communications director has been holding town hall meetings this last week with college students about the cost of tuition) are out there working, bit by bit, step by step, comment by comment, conversation by conversation, to elect Phil Angelides and send Schwarzenegger back to Hollywood, where he belongs.

---

by: jennifer poole @ Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 18:15:28 PM UTC

Just a quick note on Prop 13 (8.00 / 1)

There are all sorts of reasons that property taxes should not be capped the way that Prop 13 does it, but I'll leave most those for another discussion.  Suffice it to say that Prop 13 is not really populist -- it rewards the rentier pull-up-the-ladder class more than anyone else.

Were you aware that Prop 13 caps commercial property taxes too?  And that commercial property rarely changes hands because it's generally held by corporations?  Corporations live forever unless they're bankrupted, and the way that commercial property changes hands is usually by a change in ownership of the holding company.  So commercial property is never reassessed.  Prop 13 is a straight-up wealth transfer to commerical real estate investors.

So maybe reforming the commercial property cap of Prop 13 might be a good start.

---

by: jsw @ Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 18:53:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm not defending Prop. 13, (0.00 / 0)

nor denying it should be reformed or dumped -- I'm just disagreeing with attorney at arms' assertion that it would be a better campaign issue for Angelides, than what he's running on now.

and I'm questioning the idea that "making the ask" (as Angelides puts it) around ensuring sufficient and fair taxation in CA should start with Prop. 13 -- which is, in fact, "populist" according to at least one strict definition, because it was passed by the people! thanks for your reply.

---

by: jennifer poole @ Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 19:26:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

my feeling (0.00 / 0)

is that CA democrats are happy to have a republican governor, in that it frees them from having to explain to their constituents that they aren't really interested in curbing corporate power or helping out regular people, because they can blame the lack of progress on the governor's threatened veto.

they aren't fighting ahnold because they want him there.

---

by: wu ming @ Sun Sep 03, 2006 at 20:03:08 PM UTC