As soon as Jerry Brown’s State of the State was finished, like clockwork, the Republican responses deploring Brown’s call for voters to have a voice on whether we extend existing taxes or cripple public education and other vital services started pouring in. The temerity of this governor, suggesting voters should have a say in how we solve the state budget crisis! they said. Voters told us in past elections what they wanted so we don’t have to ask again, they reasoned. It’s all the unions’ fault! they cried.
Edit by Brian for space. See the extended for more.
Every year when the budget comes around, there is always some sort of "hostage" that the GOP gets together and decide that's they want to take out. In previous years it was things like workplace safety regulations, lunchtime regulations, and on and on. You name a piece of progressive legislation, and there has been an attempt on its life during the budget season.
Well, on the plus side, we'll be seeing fewer of those under the new Prop 25 simple majority vote on the budget. But, as you likely know, we didn't get the whole enchilada with Prop 25. So, if we are going to go the easy route on getting taxes on the ballot, that is to say getting 2/3 vote to place them on the ballot, then we are once again open to the annual hostage situation.
Now, this year, it seems that the wizards of the GOP caucus(es) have once again focused on pension reform. A reasonable subject to discuss. After all, we have an enormous outstanding pension obligation, much of which is underfunded. But, a cordial conversation, some committee hearings and the like isn't how Mimi Walters wants to roll. Oh no, it's going to happen by the middle of March or there will be no GOP votes for putting revenue on the ballot:
Sen. Mimi Walters, R-Laguna Hills, is preparing a package of pension reform bills she said must be addressed before taking up taxes. Among her reforms is legislation requiring all new state employees to enter 401(k)-style benefit plans.
"We want reforms in place before there's any discussion about tax increases," said Walters, the GOP's nominee in the fall for state treasurer who was trounced by incumbent Bill Lockyer. "I do know there's not support at all to even put it on the ballot without significant pension reforms." (MediaNews/Steve Harmon)
Now, you see the framing there? That's classic move the goalposts framing. If you are a Democratic leader at this point, your ears should be perked up, just waiting for the next demand. See, there's no support for placing the measure on the ballot sans pension reforms. And after you get your way? What then? Notice that she's hardly promising any votes. Of course, she would then cross into the murky waters of vote trading, but you know, that's how the GOP rolls.
Of course, as Dan Walters pointed out a while back, there are ways to put these measures on the ballot sans GOP support. There is certainly a lot of inherent risk in that approach, both politically and policy-wise, but the Democratic legislators will have to make up their minds on which odds they'll take.
UPDATE: One more thing that I wanted to mention. Before the Right pours on about the pension system, let's look at one critical fact. The average annual pension for a state worker is $30,000. While it isn't a pittance, we can't simply portray all state workers as hogs on the system and end the conversation there. We need to ensure a stable future for all Californians, and part of that includes retired state workers.
Of course, the "whore" episode only comes out because a) Jerry Brown didn't properly hang up the phone and b) CSLEA handed that tape recording over to the media. This had to be a very calculated and considered move. You just don't do something that creates that kind of personal attack without considering what you are doing. In other words, CSLEA moved all in by releasing that tape...for the wrong side.
Sure, different interest groups play in politics, and politicians are used to that. And CSLEA did spend a decent amount of money for Whitman, about half a million on Whitman. (And another $100K on the losing AG candidate, Steve Cooley.) Money gets spent against you, and then you have to work with those interests if you overcome it. In a democracy so awash with cash, it happens, and you deal with it. However, it is simply human nature to have a longer memory when it comes to these more personal attacks. One has to anticipate the same thing would have come into play for Whitman, if she had won, with anybody even remotely associated with Gloria Allred.
But CSLEA was in a more compromised position. They haven't had a contract since 2008, and will now have to negotiate with Jerry Brown's team to get that contract. And that's amidst a slew of other labor unions that are looking for contracts that did support him. Heck, even the prison guards (CCPOA) went pretty heavily for Brown. (Think Bobble Head Meg)
The Bee has an interesting article about the political strategist behind the CSLEA efforts, Don Novey. Novey, who has a long background with CCPOA, was one of the godfathers of California's Tough on Crime legislation and ballot measures. He recognized that fear of crime was a powerful tool to get people to vote for measures and candidates that would benefit his ends. And, in this situation with CSLEA, he lost:
Don Novey placed a multimillion-dollar bet on Meg Whitman to become California's next governor and lost. Problem was, he played the game with other people's money. A lot of it.
Now one of the state employee unions that the labor legend advised to oppose Gov.-elect Jerry Brown must negotiate a new contract with the incoming administration.(SacBee)
The article is worth reading, not only for the background on Novey, but the future of collective bargaining for law enforcement will certainly be affected by what happened in the election.
The bigger issue, pension reform, is still hanging out there. Brown seems to be looking at the subject to cement some sort of legacy in this term. He'll have to overcome some very tepid supporters in labor, but certainly his position will be generally stronger than Whitman to shove something down. The big danger here is that we might slam the middle class in the process. If we are going to solve the long-term budget crisis, we will need to stop ignoring the revenue side of the equation.
Jerry Brown is taking his show on the road this weekend. You can find the full schedule here and below the flip.
GOTV WEEKEND! This election is just too important to do anything but win, up and down the ticket. Find you nearest Vote2010 HQ, make some calls, walk some precincts. You can sleep on November 3.
We come from all walks of life. Some of us are students, some are workers, and some are jobless. Some of us are laden with student debt. Some of us work to support our children, some work to support our parents. Some of us have had to postpone starting a family, and some of us have had to move back in with our parents just to make ends meet. But we all have one thing in common -- we are the young voters of California. And it’s time for us to flex our muscle at the polls, take control of California’s future and fight off the right wing’s attempt at a hostile corporate takeover of our state.
Our generation has been hit disproportionately hard by the recession. According to a recent report from the AFL-CIO, a third of all adults under age 35 cannot pay their bills, and 70 percent don’t have enough saved to cover even two months of living expenses. We just can’t afford to sit back and wait for things to get better, because if corporate candidates like Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina triumph on Tuesday, things will undoubtedly get worse.
These Wall Street candidates have spent hundreds of millions in order to buy this election, and if elected, they plan on doling out massive tax breaks to the wealthiest individuals and corporations in California, while at the same time slashing the vital services, education, health care, unemployment benefits, civil liberties and much-needed jobs for young people trying to enter the workforce.
So what’s at stake in this election?
Our jobs. Both Whitman and Fiorina have extensive track records of outsourcing tens of thousands of jobs as corporate CEOs, and Whitman’s plan for California centers around laying off 40,000 state workers, which could cause our unemployment rate to jump a full percentage point. Whitman also believes in the categorically untrue concept that giving tax breaks to the rich will somehow create jobs. It didn’t work when Bush did it, and economists agree that the concept is totally bogus.
Our education. Meg Whitman plans to cut another $15 billion from the state budget, and nearly half of the budget goes to K-12 and higher education, which would inevitably mean more draconian cuts to schools and universities that have already been decimated under Schwarzenegger.
Our health care. Carly Fiorina vowed to repeal the new health care law that has allowed so many of us to go back on our parents’ health insurance while we finish school and look for work in this tough job market.
We can’t allow these extreme right-wing candidates to trample all over our generation. We’ve got to take matters into our own hands, and the best way we can do that is to hit the polls en masse on Tuesday, just like we did in 2008. Let’s not forget, it was the young people – both voters and volunteers -- who secured Obama’s triumphant victory. And we have the power to do it again, if we commit to vote and getting others out to vote as well. As the President said last week to more than 37,000 Californians at a rally at the University of Southern California:
You’ve got to talk to your friends. You’ve got to talk to your neighbors. You’ve got to make phone calls. You’ve got to knock on doors. You have to make sure that you are as fired up and as excited now as you were two years ago - because the work is not yet done.
If you’re like me, you’re sick of the tired rhetoric from the media that young people just don’t vote as often as older adults. It seems like that message has become a self-fulfilling prophecy – many young people mistakenly feel like their votes don’t count as much, and subsequently they’re less inclined to vote.
But with an election as close as this one, our votes are more valuable today than ever before. If we do the expected and stay home on Election Day, we’re essentially handing the reins over to the mega-wealthy corporate shills whose Big Business agenda will make their super-rich friends even richer, while the rest of us are left fighting for the crumbs. It’s on every single one of us to vote, and do everything we can to get out the vote to our friends, family, co-workers, classmates and neighbors.
At today's Women's Conference, Matt Lauer asked both candidates to take down their negative ads. Eventually, Jerry Brown agreed that he would be fine with both candidates just talking to camera in nice positive spot. Meg Whitman seemed to hedge away...
Back in August, Tom McClintock made some not too excited remarks about Meg Whitman. Seems the election approaching hasn't really changed his mind on that front: Meg Whitman is just not loyal enough to ummm...McClintockianism...
McClintock - a tea party favorite with a strong libertarian streak - had particularly hash words for his party's nominee for governor, former eBay CEO Meg Whitman. Asked about Whitman following his remarks, McClintock suggested she is not loyal to the "principles of the American Founders," and said he agrees with her Democratic opponent Jerry Brown as much as he agrees with Whitman:
My loyalty is to the principles of the American Founders. My loyalty to the Republican party and to its candidates extends only so far as they are loyal to those principles. And I don't see that in the current ticket. Two of the people on the Republican ticket were singularly responsible for biggest tax increase by any state in American history. These are Whitman's handpicked running mates. [...]
I look at all of these things and I realize I agree with her maybe 20 percent of the time. I agree with Jerry Brown about 20 percent of the time. I agree with the libertarians about 80 percent of the time. So I'm not making an endorsement, particularly for that!(Think Progress)
Must be hard to live up to the pure principles that exist only in the mind of Tom McClintock, but on the other hand, I'm sure it is an awesome place.
Rather than come clean with the public about her mistreatment of her former housekeeper, Meg Whitman lied to cover it up. When attorney Gloria Allred caught her in a lie, Whitman still refused to apologize. Whitman even stooped so low as to wrongly accuse the housekeeper, Nicky Diaz Santillan, who she employed for nine years and said was a “member of her extended family,” of stealing her mail.
At a time when voters are desperate for their leaders to be accountable for their actions, Whitman has failed miserably to live up to the standards by which we should hold anyone running for elected office. She’s blamed Nicky, Jerry Brown, his allies and others, but has never once admitted any wrongdoing or taken any responsibility for her own actions.
Today in front of Whitman’s East LA office, a group of domestic workers joined SEIU United Service Workers West (USWW) President Mike Garcia, Assemblymember Hector de la Torre and State Senator Gil Cedillo to call on Whitman to open tomorrow night’s debate with an apology to Nicky and the people of California for the mistreatment and hurtful allegations she directed at Nicky, and the lies she told in an attempt to cover up the scandal.
The domestic workers, on behalf of millions of Californians who live in the shadows because of exploitation and mistreatment from the Meg Whitmans of the world, demanded that Whitman own up to her mistakes immediately.
Julia Moreno, who worked as a live-in maid for 25 years:
Everyone who works hard in California deserves to be treated with dignity, but Meg Whitman thinks she can use people when it’s convenient and then turn her back on us when we need help.
The domestic workers also unveiled a new petition demanding that Whitman apologize, and allowing Californians to stand in solidarity with Nicky and all exploited workers. The petition, which can be found at www.ApologizeMeg.org, will remain live until Whitman finally does the right thing and apologizes to Californians for her actions.
Governor Schwarzenegger leaves behind a legacy of devastating budget cuts and huge tax giveaways for corporations. In the last two years alone, Schwarzenegger has slashed $32.5 billion from the state budget-- and now our schools and roads are crumbling, public safety is at risk, and vital state services have been decimated. And while state workers have endured deep wage cuts, corporations have enjoyed massive new tax breaks.
Now, Meg Whitman is on a mission to ratchet up the pain on working people in California -- above and beyond the misery that Governor Schwarzenegger has already imposed.
State Workers' Jobs In February, Schwarzenegger announced two-day-a-month furloughs for state workers, which effectively reduced worker pay but did little to help our long-term economic crisis. In fact, economists report that the furloughs will result in a loss of $503 million over the subsequent years. When asked at the time what she would do to balance the budget, Whitman said that she would double the furloughs to four days a week, even though the furloughs actually caused the state to lose money.
When Schwarzenegger increased the furloughs to three days a month (resulting in a 12.8 percent pay cut and loss of an estimated $2.1 billion in wages and benefits for hundreds of thousands of state workers), Whitman went one step further. She announced that she plans to fire 40,000 state workers because she believes the state is "over-staffed" (In fact, California ranks second to last in the number of state workers per capita, and the ratio of all government employees to population in California is 28 percent below the national average.) This mass layoff would cause unemployment in the state to spike a full percentage point.
Public Employee Pensions Schwarzenegger has made pension takeaways a major issue and has threatened to not sign a budget without reforms. But despite his rhetoric the Governor has been forced to negotiate directly with unions representing state workers to get agreement on any changes to current pension benefits and contributions.
Whitman supports Schwarzenegger's proposals, which include raising the retirement age, increasing what workers pay into the pension and ending defined-benefit pensions for new hires and sticking them in risky 401(k)-style retirement plans. But she doesn't stop there. She's willing to circumvent collective bargaining, and the elected legislature, by putting a pension cuts initiative on the ballot, and using her personal fortune to fund the ballot measure.
What had been billed as the "third debate" between the candidates for governor, Meg Whitman and Jerry Brown, has now seemingly been canceled. From Carla Marinucci:
The big radio debate between California gubernatorial candidatees -- Democrat Jerry Brown and Republican Meg Whitman -- which had been scheduled Tuesday at 10 a.m. on the Ronn Owens' show has been cancelled, the station says.
Sterling Clifford, Brown's spokesman, said the debate was only a "discussion" between the two candidates, and "by mutual agreement,'' the two have decided not to pursue it.(SF Gate)
No word yet of any additional joint appearances, but if this is it, then this is it. Back in 2006, we had only one debate, so I'm sure we'll something about a step forward for democracy for the Whitman camp. Although, with Brown seemingly opening up a lead in the polls, perhaps a change in position might be brewing on debates?
UPDATE: As pointed out in the comments, there is one more debate scheduled for Oct. 12 in San Rafael at Domincan University. It is scheduled to be moderated by former NBC News Anchor Tom Brokaw.
This is really classic GOP. Insensitivity bordering on the farcical, connecting dots that aren't really there and a whole lot more. Really good stuff. Here's the story, apparently an aide to Asm. Hector De La Torre had some documentation problems. Mr. Hogue, who is something of a nativist from his perch in Sacramento minor radio personality land, decides that this is a great opportunity to bash Jerry Brown.
Why? Well, because Asm. De La Torre has endorsed Jerry for the governorship. So, you know, every Democrat's problems are Jerry's problems now. But it gets better. Hogue tries to increase the connection by showing that De La Torre was quoted on Brown's website. The only problem? It was actually Asm. Kevin De Leon who was quoted. Hogue has since changed the site, so here's a screen grab that I took:
As I said, the post is still up, but it has now been changed. Unfortunately, they didn't really clean up after themselves, and now it just doesn't even make sense:
Southern California Latino leaders today joined together to announce their support for Jerry Brown's campaign for Governor and decry Republican Meg Whitman's anti-Latino positions and deceptive campaign tactics.
I guess when you are trying to spin this hard, sometimes you are going to confuse yourself. Or maybe to Hogue "Hector de La Torre" = "Kevin De Leon"? Who knows, but this immigration story just continues to control the media narrative.
Over the flip, find a screen grab with more of the post.
At some level, you really have to feel for the woman at the center of the Whitman "housekeepergate" story, Nicky Diaz Santillan. She is an undocumented immigrant, and she has now exposed herself to the world, and ICE. It's not an easy thing to do. But at another level, the story is deeply intriguing, from both personal and political standpoints. Today, Meg Whitman, and Gloria Allred, Ms. Diaz Santillan's attorney, held back to back press conferences. And, as this is the kind of stuff that makes gossip rags crazy, TMZ.com streamed both live.
I'll just summarize Meg's press conference: "Gloria Allred is a liar and a tool of Jerry Brown. Nicky is being manipulated by that shystress. Oh, and I'm so certain that Gloria Allred is a liar that I'll take a polygraph."
And Allred's response? Well, I'll let TMZ summarize
But today, Gloria produced the letter with what she says is a written command from Meg's husband -- "Nicky, please check this."
Earlier today Whitman said she would take a polygraph test -- but Gloria says Nicky doesn't have to take a polygraph test because she has the letter as proof, and "the evidence speaks for itself."
As for Whitman's claim that Gloria is working with Jerry Brown to engineer a smear campaign -- Gloria says she has not made any contribution to Brown's current campaign and hasn't had any contact recently with Brown or his people.
Take a look at the letter that the Whitman residence received. Allegedly, the handwriting down at the bottom is that of Dr. Griff Harsh, Whitman's husband. (yes, for real) So while Whitman said she didn't receive the letter, apparently her husband did.
Of course, there is the other question that will be on the minds of Californians. If she thought of Nicky as family, then why did she treat her like somebody that could simply be tossed out. You know, members of my family have done things that I really don't like, and vice versa, but I'll do everything that I can to stick up for them. That's what family is for.
It's a sad statement about our immigration system to be sure. It provided a very poor choice for Meg once she had the entire situation displayed in front of her. But she took the easy way out. And that says a lot about her character.
A bit of news on the horse race front today. A new poll from CNN has good numbers for Brown and Boxer:
According to a CNN/Time/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Wednesday, 52 percent of likely voters in the Golden State say they support Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, with 43 percent backing Republican challenger Carly Fiorina. ...
In the fight for governor, the poll indicates that 52 percent of likely voters back California Attorney General and former Gov. Jerry Brown, the Democratic nominee, with 43 percent supporting former eBay CEO Meg Whitman, the GOP nominee.
The interesting thing to note here is that both candidates are now over that magical 50% figure. The last week has been kind to Democratic candidates across the nation, as Democrats are beginning to wake up from their slumber and realize that there is an election about to happen. Here in California, Boxer and Brown have both fairly well consolidated their bases, and the big push now is to get them to the polls.
With Meg Whitman having a lovefest with Texas on the debate last night, and Carly Fiorina hanging out with the Tea party at every conceivable chance, the question is how the two Republicans plan on getting the middle. They simply cannot win with the base alone in California. They are each rapidly turning off California's middle.
Meg Whitman keeps reciting the same misinformation about job loss resulting from California's bad business climate, claiming that businesses are leaving California because of "over-regulation". But the truth is, we have lost fewer jobs than neighboring states that have fewer worker protections and lower taxes on corporations and the wealthy. Arizona, Nevada and Oregon had over 6.5% job loss, while California had 4%.
The "bleeding of jobs" -- the notion that a large number of jobs are businesses are fleeing California -- is a familiar talking point in state politics these days, especially among Republicans. But in the only broad, longitudinal nonpartisan study out there, the numbers don't match the rhetoric.
The annual net employment change in California due to relocation -- a loss of about 9,000 jobs -- represents only 0.05% of California's 18 million jobs.
Not only is Whitman wrong on the big picture, the specifics she cites aren't credible either. She continually points to aerospace giant Northrop Grumman's relocation from Long Beach to Virginia as evidence of businesses fleeing the state. Which would make sense... except that Northrop Grumman didn't actually leave California. They moved their corporate headquarters, which amounts to just 1 percent of their workforce, while over 30,000 employees remain here in California.
Meg Whitman is trying to shoot the moon with her latest announcement of a position on Prop 23:
Whitman has said she would suspend the law, AB 32, for at least one year, and in a written statement this morning she called the law a "job killer" and said it needs to be revised.
However, Whitman said Proposition 23 "does not offer a sensible balance between our vital need for good jobs and the desire of all Californians to protect our precious environment."(Sac Bee)
Here's her math here: Prop 23 is trailing in the polls, and Democrats are generally bludgeoning the Republicans on this issue. Boxer used it effectively against Fiorina at the last debate, and Jerry Brown has been hammering at Whitman for her failure to announce a solid position.
But, this isn't a solid position. Now, it will be enough to convince a few folks perhaps, but anybody that is really voting on the candidates based upon environmental concerns is hardly going to love this position. That one year moratorium isn't really that hidden as a means of killing AB 32.
Whether the political tradeoff for whatever centrist votes she can get for whatever Right-wing votes she lost was a good one for her is an open question, but expect some additional anger on the right. But hey, they like that sort of thing.
Well, after a few weeks of up and down in the polls, Meg Whitman and Jerry Brown are now at a dead heat in the latest Field Poll. Each is sitting at 41 percent of likely voters (MoE +/- 4.1%) with 6 weeks to go. The numbers break down how you would generally expect these things to go, Whitman gets 75% of Republicans, Jerry Brown gets 69% of Democrats, and they split the DTS vote at 38% each. Now, what Meg Whitman has got for her $111 million is that split down the middle in DTS vote, which you wouldn't normally see absent the unprecedented ad buy, as well as her capturing 15% of the Democratic vote compared to Brown's 9% of the Republican vote.
But like everything else in California politics, it seems people don't particularly like either of the candidates:
"This race is boiling down to a tough decision," said Field Poll director Mark DiCamillo. "More voters hold negative than positive impressions of the candidates, and that contributes to the situation."(SacBee)
Whitman has a minus 5 favorable (40/45) while Brown sports only a minus 3 (44/47). These aren't numbers you would typically love to see an inspired electorate. But, with the barrage of ads from Whitman, and the smattering of efforts on the left, people know that they just shouldn't like these candidates. They aren't exactly why, but it's what they've been told on the TeeVee, the radio, and on the internet. And so, shockingly enough, all that money is having an impact.
Over the next 5+ weeks, while surrogates and the campaigns continue to wail on each other in every media outlet available, the candidates themselves will be trying to give the state some reason to vote for them. In the end, however, the Field numbers indicate about half of all voters will be choosing the lesser of two evils rather than somebody they believe in. Only 49% of Whitman voters and 53% of Brown voters are voting for their candidate rather than against the other one. This is unfortunate on many levels, not the least of which is that the state needs a leader who has some political capital (read: not Whitman's millions) to make something happen in Sacramento.
All things considered, Jerry Brown has to like where he is sitting right now. He'll nearly match Whitman in ad spending the rest of the way, and will hope that Democrats start returning home when they hear a message from their candidate. At any rate, this is clearly shaping up to be one of the tightest elections in recent memory. Progressives will need to focus on turning out and getting their networks to turn out for the Democratic ticket this year, the idea of a Whitman/Fiorina victory party is too difficult to process.
Call me shocked, just shocked to find that there's gambling with California's future in this election.
The state legislator responsible for placing Proposition 23, the anti-climate measure, on the ballot is...a climate zombie. And one of Proposition 23's out of state dirty energy supporters, Koch Industries, Patient Zero of the climate zombie infection is holding a fundraiser Thursday night for climate zombie Senate wannabe Carly Fiorina.
WWMWD? Will Meg Whitman endorse Proposition 23 and its oil-soaked supporters, or will she join the forward-thinking California businesses who urge a no vote?
Meg Whitman was greeted at a fancy high-falutin' $1000 a person fundraiser by a crowd of protesters, angry over her supposed "plan." By plan I mean corportization of our state government combined with a subtle effort to just get rid of the whole thing. But, she did her best to rally the base with the noted War Hawk and architect of failure, Condoleeza Rice.
[T]he Republican candidate, speaking to the audience, said she was confident she will turn out the Republican base, noting they are already "carrying pitchforks and torches..and saying "which way to the castle?"
And the former eBay CEO also vowed to turn out Latinos, small business owners, and women, boasting she is working to build "the largest women's coalition ever in American politics."
Whitman also predicted she will attract 18-29 year old voters who supported President Barack Obama in the election of 2008, because she said they are now concerned about one issue -- jobs.(SF Gate)
Everything is bigger with $150 Million dollars! But her underlying facts are dead wrong. Not only are voters between 18-29 strongly going towards Jerry Brown, after all, this is one of the most progressive generations in quite some time, but her "coalition" is a paper tiger. It's a lot of pretty posters and posturing, but where will she be when the rubber meats the road.
I should add what is the deal with candidates calling their own supporters an angry and out of control mob. Way to fuel the fire. As Arnold Schwarzenegger learned (just see his latest poll numbers) the outsider card only works for so long, eventually, when real results are required, her big talk will amount to even less than what we've gotten with the Governator.
Even if you aren't a fan of Meg Whitman's management, you still have to admire eBay. It is a company that brought together people to buy and sell from across the country, then across the world. Any way you slice it, the big idea of an online auction, started by Pierre Omidyar was an idea that helped accelerate the digital economy. Millions of small businesses, and all that we've been hearing Meg Whitman promote.
Thing is, Meg Whitman wasn't the one who came up with that idea. She helped foster the idea from a small operation into an international collussus, and on the way certainly did a better job than CEO flame-outs like Carly Fiorina, but the ideas that she was building were never her own.
So, why not ask Pierre Omidyar what he thinks of Meg Whitman? Certainly there are few people that know her better than he. And they have each other to thank for their respective fortunes. So, would Omidyar vote for Meg Whitman? In a word, No.
"Now I have not endorsed her because we have some differences on some of the political issues," Omidyar, who is now based in Hawaii, told Bloomberg TV in an interview that will air Wednesday on "InBusiness with Margaret Brennan." "I was disappointed in her not-correct decision, in my view, to support Proposition 8 in California. I was disappointed in her alignment with former Governor Pete Wilson on immigration issues, who I think took some very extreme views years ago about denying benefits to illegal immigrants. And so because of those types of issues, I think we are a little bit apart, and I can't quite support her because of that." (LA Times)
Omidyar does well to call attention to Whitman's new-found love affair with Wilson, the godfather of Proposition 187, the measure that stripped away benefits from immigrants that he rode to re-election in 1994. Wilson is also the chair of Steve Cooley's campaign for Attorney General. Through these two, Wilson is attempting to extend his influence, with all the concurrent hard feelings that brings.
Whitman is wrong on immigration. And she is wrong on Prop 8. She's just wrong for California.
You know the days of Hiram Johnson, when he hoped to create a system that wasn't controlled by the railroads, or whatever interest was dominating at the time? Well, we're past that whole industry domination now, and have moved on directly to power of the person. Not of the people, just the person. In our current case, that person is Meg Whitman and her eBay warchest.
Republican gubernatorial nominee Meg Whitman said Monday that she would place pension cutbacks on the ballot if negotiations with state workers fail and would consider using her personal fortune not only to win office but to advance her agenda if elected.
Taking the issue to voters is "not my first choice," she told The Bee's editorial board. "But if we have to ... this is an issue we have got to take up."(SacBee)
She went on to say that she opposes collective bargaining for state employees. Period. End of sentence. Now, she's not likely to make friends with the California Statewide Law Enforcement Association that just gave her its endorsement on the condition that she say that pension reform doesn't apply to law enforcement. But, that was painfully transparent in its say what you need to say attitude; this statement calls for the end to collective bargaining (and thus, all unions) in the public sector. The CSLEA board is going to have a fun time explaining that one.
Returning to where we started, California politics hasn't yet gotten to the point where it is completely owned by just one interest. Part of that is the competing interest groups pushing back against each other, but that part can be easily overwhelmed by a new influx of cash, tipping the balance towards the corporate dollars.
Of course, there is one side of the political power equation that isn't so vulnerable to Whitman's money binges. The people, if we found the time, could be an informed decision maker. However, as of right now, we seem to wait back for what the TeeVee ads tell us/scare us/yell at us. One can only hope that this is the year that we say no to the purchasing of our statehouse for good.
