It's part two of our "Netroots Nation Goes To Vegas Piano Bar Extravaganza", and in keeping with tradition that means we are again taking a story request.
This time we won't be talking about energy security or "climate security"; instead, we'll discuss retirement security, keeping your money for yourself instead of paying it out in "mystery fees", and how one of the "usual suspects" is at it again.
It was a compelling scene: Rep Dennis Cardoza and Rep. Devin Nunes brought in a bowl of 3" long smelt and pictures of unemployed farm workers and their families to a House Natural Resources Committee meeting. They were hoping to provide an effective contrast and convince their colleagues to make an emergency exemption to the Endangered Species Act.
The state is in the third year of a drought and it has gotten so bad that in order to protect a federally endangered species a federal judge in 2007 ordered the state and feds to cut down on the amount of water pumped through the delta to save the smelt.
This is not simply about a species of little fish. The smelt, as Kevin Freking at the AP writes "a bellwether for the health of the delta, the heart of California's water-delivery system." More from the article:
With that, he offered to submit a fishbowl filled with nine minnows for the Congressional Record. The fish were rainbow smelt, not the endangered delta smelt, which are illegal to possess without a permit.
Rep. Grace Napolitano, D-Norwalk, responded by asking him to take the plastic wrap off the bowl so the fish could get some air, which Nunes did. Napolitano served as chairwoman for Tuesday's hearing.
I can't just picture that scene in my head. Can't you?
Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, said some of the lawmakers were "cherry picking history" and ignoring that water has been pumped into the valley at rates that exceeded what was appropriate.
That's one of the reasons the judge ordered state and federal wildlife agencies to revise how much water should be pumped out of the delta. Most of the pumping occurs from late spring through summer.
"The judge had no choice because the system was run right down to the margins where in fact he did kick in the protections of the Endangered Species Act," Miller said.
We have lacked a sensible water plan for decades. To allow more pumping risks devastating the entire ecosystem. It is not about just a couple of little fish in a bowl.
The farm workers are devastated right now with the cutbacks to water supplies, but we need long term solutions, not short term actions that cause irreconcilable harm.
The biggest news out of the CA-10 race today is that, according to Lisa Vorderbrueggen, both Ellen Tauscher and friend of Calitics Rep. George Miller have endorsed Sen. Mark DeSaulnier for the future special election. That's a fairly big deal. There are essentially four power structures in the political scene CA-10, and DeSaulnier has swallowed up three - Tauscher, Miller, and Tom Torlakson. Considering that he's the chair of the Senate Labor Committee, the fourth power structure, the local unions, should be his as well.
Nevertheless, other prospective candidates are making news as well. Joan Buchanan's operatives clearly dropped a poll to Politico, showing her leading DeSaulnier narrowly:
The poll shows Buchanan leading DeSaulnier 21 to 18 percent, with Republican San Ramon mayor Abram Wilson at 14 percent and former GOP Assemblyman Guy Houston at 13 percent.
Neither Republican has yet expressed interest in the race.
Despite DeSaulnier's experience representing the area in the state legislature, both Democrats have comparable name recognition, according to the poll. Buchanan is recognized by 34 percent of voters, while 31 percent offer an opinion on DeSaulnier.
That was a survey of 400 voters with a high margin of error (4.9%), so I wouldn't take it too seriously. Buchanan would see institutional support dry up fast, but could leverage an outside group like EMILY's List.
The insufferable California Blue Dog is floating that former Mod Squad member Asm. Joe Canciamilla, who previously announced he was considering the race for Attorney General, might jump in, but DeSaulnier hasn't just beaten him in the past, he's beaten his whole family (DeSaulnier beat Canciamilla's wife in a Senate primary in '08).
Meanwhile, there's "one of SF's top political minds," if he does say so himself, Adriel Hampton, who is intent on dropping a press release a day to get reporters to chase coverage. Yesterday he urged passage of S. 582, the Interest Rate Reduction Act, which is actually a solid policy goal to cap interest rates on credit cards and loans, sponsored by Bernie Sanders. Today he went hard negative against DeSaulnier:
California 10th Congressional District candidate Adriel Hampton (D-Dublin) is not mincing words in his criticism of State Sen. Mark DeSaulnier considering leaving the Legislature just months after being elected. If Sen. DeSaulnier were to resign his seat, it would result in a minimum of 112 day period where an additional Republican vote would be need to pass a budget or raise revenue under California's unique 2/3 requirement.
"When DeSaulnier ran for his office, he signed up for a four year hitch, not a few-month fling," Hampton said. "His fickle recklessness would strengthen the Republican bargaining position and could cost Californians billions in cuts to health care, education, and public safety."
Restaurant-owner DeSaulnier was sworn in to the state senate just last December. If he runs for Congress, it would be the third different office he has run for in as many years. If legislative Republicans believe he has a chance of winning, it would incentivize them to stall a budget compromise until after the election, further extending the period of gridlock that would result in Sacramento by his candidacy.
There's a lot about this that is arrogant and ridiculous ("restaurant-owner DeSaulnier" is kind of a lame epithet to put on a guy who's been elected by these same constituents multiple times), but Hampton raises a point I raised as soon as Tauscher announced she was leaving. The merry go-round of special elections will put Democrats in the legislature down a body or two well into next year, and in the case of Buchanan threatens the loss of the seat. Now, this logic maybe appeals to a junkie like me, but my guess is it will have approximately no appeal to those inside the district, who will want to pick the best candidate for the job. In addition, this is a hard negative message that only argues for someone not in the legislature to be elected, and since the field has in no way assembled fully, I don't see that as a political winner. Not to mention the pose that DeSaulnier is a fickle part-time legislator made by someone who apparently is still working a full-time job and thinking he can run for Congress at the same time.
Oh, and Sully Sullenberger won't run, either. In case you were wondering. But there are more candidates who may enter, FYI.
(Well, I couldn't agree more. - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
Congresswoman Hilda Solis is a strong champion of working families and will be an outstanding Secretary of Labor. Given our enormous economic challenges facing our nation, I urge the Senate to take swift action and confirm her nomination.
(Well, education is as good of a place to start digging ourselves out the Bush whole as anywhere. - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
Yesterday's historic election of Senators Barack Obama and Joe Biden as our next President and Vice President was a true victory for every child, student, worker and family in America. I congratulate Senators Obama and Biden, and I look forward to working closely with them to change the direction of our country and get our economy moving forward again.
During the past two years, the U.S. House Education and Labor Committee has focused on strengthening our nation's middle class – a priority that Senators Obama and Biden clearly share, as demonstrated by their careers and the focus of their historic campaign.
With our country facing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression and our global leadership at risk, this mission is more important than ever.
(Welcome Rep. Miller to Calitics. - promoted by David Dayen)
Today, I chaired a U.S. House Committee on Education and Labor hearing in San Francisco where we examined how the current financial crisis is affecting retirement savings. Witnesses told us that after a lifetime of planning and saving, a growing number of retirees are facing shrinking 401(k)s and increasing insecurity as a result of the ongoing financial crisis. While this crisis may have started on Wall Street, it's Main Street that stands to suffer the most. More than ever before, there is an urgent need to help Americans strengthen their retirement savings.
We also learned today that U.S. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation lost at least $3 billion in stock investments during the last fiscal year through August, and invested a significant portion of its funds in mortgage-backed securities. The head of the PBGC, Charles Millard, will testify before the committee on Friday in Washington regarding the agency's financial problems.
Taxpayers subsidize 401(k) plans by $80 billion dollars annually. For a taxpayer investment of this size, we must ensure that the structure of 401(k)s adequately protects the nest eggs of participating workers.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has added her voice to those who are calling on the superdelegates not to overrule the voters. She joins MoveOn, Democracy for America and many more in urging the superdelegates not to determine the winner of the Democratic presidential primary by what amounts to a vote in a smokey back room. ChronBlog
Don't veto the people's choice.
"I think there is a concern when the public speaks and there is a counter-decision made to that," she said, adding quickly, "I don't think that will happen."
She said the governors, lawmakers, DNC members and others picked as super delegates are chosen through a grassroots process and are accountable to the party's voters.
"I do think that they have a respect -- it's not just following the returns, it's also having a respect for what has been said by the people," Pelosi said. "It would be a problem for the party if the verdict would be something different than the public has decided."
This is obviously an argument that would appear to most benefit Barack Obama, given that he currently leads in both the pledged delegate count and the popular vote. Speaker Pelosi's opinion should wield a great deal of influence on her fellow superdelegates.
Several of those members of the House closest to Pelosi like Rep. George Miller have endorsed Obama. Miller is on the team of current legislators tasked with swaying superdelegates to endorse Obama. The Speaker is rumored to be supportive of Obama, but does not want to undermine her own authority by making an endorsement. I have to assume that there is a two pronged approach from the Obama superdelegate team: if they don't get the outright endorsement, supporting the "let the people decide" tact is almost as good.
Via Newseum, here's how Barack Obama's victory over Hillary Clinton in South Carolina is playing above the fold in today's California's Sunday papers:
Bakersfield Californian: Obama routs Clinton in S.C. North County Times (Escondido): Obama romps in South Carolina LA Daily News: Obama defeats Clinton in rout in S. Carolina LA Times: Obama easily captures strongest win yet in S.C. Modesto Bee: Obama crushes Clinton in South Carolina primary Sacramento Bee: Obama's big win sets up next fight San Diego Union-Tribune: Obama thrashes rivals in S.C. San Francisco Chronicle: OBAMA WINS BIG IN S. CAROLINA Orange County Register: Obama runs away with S.C. Contra Costa Times: Obama nets huge win in S. Carolina
More after the flip and please use the comments to let us everyone know what you're doing and seeing locally.
The Obama rally in San Francisco was your typical presidential rally. There were a bunch of people announcing they were endorsing him, including Reps. George Miller and Barbara Lee (who actually had already announced) and Supes Peskin, Daly, Dufty, and Maxwell. I imagine others will come on board the Obama train soon from what I hear.
Barbara Lee is always inspiring, but I'm always pleasantly surprised when I see George Miller in person. I don't know if it's just that he's not all that telegenic or something, but he's just one of those people who is better in person. Others attending included Asm. Wilma Chan, SF DA Kamala Harris and Steve Westly. You can check out more photos of the event at my Flickr set .
Woohoo! Jerry did it! Jerry McNerney has managed to become the most un-progressive Democrat of the entire California congressional delegation. For those keeping score at home, Jerry's 82.45 was about a half point lower than the next CA Dem, Jim Costa, that progressive stalwart, at 82.97. And for all the talk of Harman changing her ways, she's still worse than even Joe Baca, almost 7 points worse from a very safe Dem seat.
For all of you CA-45 fans, "moderate" Mary Bono came in with a stellar 4.42 Chips are Down score. So, for all the bluster of the SCHIP vote, she's still dancing the same jig as the rest of her party.
On thing must be said, the Speaker has done an excellent job at preserving unity amongst the caucus. Whether that means she's being too incremental and/or ineffective, or just laying down the law is the big question. The reason her approval rating, and the Congress in general, is down has a whole lot to do with the fact that little has changed on the Iraq front. So, would it be better to have a speaker who is more willing to take risks? Perhaps, but the impediment of the president always lingers over her head, veto pen in hand. So, whether the unity is really there, is an open question. Full data over the flip.
(I was working on a similar post, but I'll still post my own, with all CA data and some other miscellany. - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
The problem with most scorecards is that they are written by lobbyists concerned with always getting the votes of potential supporters. Thus, there is an equal weighting while in the real world not all votes are equal. In fact, regardless of everything else, some votes are dealbreakers and when they show up on scorecards as one of 12 votes or something, it looks silly. However, Progressive Punch has a new "when the chips are down" scorecard. After the flip is the ratings of CA's congressional delegation, in descending order.
I'm guessing that at tonight's Calitics' Actblue Celebrations there will be a lot of discussion about the votes to condemn MoveOn. The CA delegation split 50-50 in the senate and 16 yea and 17 nay in the house -- wedged successfully by the GOP in half. After the flip is the scorecard.
(full-disclosure: CTA has hired me to do blog outreach on NCLB)
Remember the uproar from parents when NCLB was first passed and they discovered that the law would automatically pass on their children's contact information to military recruiters? They made it an opt-in policy, rather than an opt-out, leaving it up to already incredibly busy parents to make sure recruiters could not hound their kids without their permission. And it's not like the military actually paid attention to those forms. They often kept pressuring students to join the military, even once the opt-out form was signed and turned in.
The current version of the NCLB re-authorization by Miller/Pelosi has left in that regulation, forcing schools to choose between federal funding and letting the military recruit high school students without the prior permission of their parents.
(full disclosure: CTA has hired me to do blog outreach on NCLB) cross-posted on DailyKos
Teachers, lawmakers and San Francisco labor leaders came together today to present House Speaker Nancy Pelosi with a garage door-sized CTA postcard about the current NCLB re-authorization draft. The 8-foot by 12-foot postcard was signed by nearly 1,000 teachers. Since the big one would not fit in the door, they dropped off a off a poster-sized picture of the big postcard to her 14th floor office. Unfortunately, Speaker Pelosi was not in her office to receive her visitors and their gift.
(full disclosure, I have been hired by CTA to do blog outreach on NCLB)
One of the dirty little secrets, at least for most people is the exact price tag of the massive underfunding of NCLB. Conservatively, it is now at $56 billion, an astronomical sum. That is the amount of money promised states and schools for reimbursement for the costs of implementing NCLB. This includes money to actually run the test, and for states to actually put together the data tracking systems so that schools can be evaluated.
Here in California, our underfunding is now over $7.3 billion. This chart shows the amount that was authorized and the actual amount California received (click the link for a larger version). The cumulative NCLB funding gap just kept on growing over seven years, thus the $7.3 billion total. It is not like the state is going to step up and cover for the federal government. The feds are the ones who placed these demands/mandates on the schools. Thus, NCLB implementation has been cutting directly into actual education funding for learning. It is a bad situation that only gets worse each year.
One would think that the current draft for re-authorizing NCLB by Rep. George Miller would include a way to start paying that back. But no, it does not even guarantee that there will be money for all of the new demands they have placed on our schools that they added to the new bill, let alone cover the $56 billion. It is just one of many reasons why California's teachers are saying to to the Miller/Pelosi proposal.
(full disclosure CTA has hired me do to online outreach on NCLB)
It is well known that the current focus of NCLB on testing forces teachers to teach to the test. In fact, according to a recent national study by the Center on Education Policy, a majority of the nation's school districts report that while increasing time for test preparation they have decreased class time for science, social studies, art, music, and physical education. In some elementary schools time for student lunches has also been cut to spend more time to prepare for the standardized tests mandated by the feds. How depressing is that, kids forced to eat quickly and lose out on valuable social time to cram for a test.
The Miller/Pelosi reauthorization proposal continues to punish lower-performing schools, rather than providing assistance and resources to help all students and schools succeed. Their proposal creates four new levels of sanctions for struggling schools. This year NCLB labeled one out of every four California public schools as failing. As an example of how ridiculous NCLB's school rating system is, a California distinguished school, after successfully passing 45 of the 46 components of the NCLB rating system, was labeled a failure because ten English language learners did not score high enough on one test.
(full disclosure CTA has hired me to do blog outreach on NCLB) (also in orange: Miller and NCLB)
One of the many problems with the current Miller/Pelosi draft of the re-authorization of NCLB is how it assesses schools. The feds require schools get assessed with an Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) report. It sets benchmarks. If you do not meet them, you fail. It is a very rigid system. They mandated this program, yet never provided the money for states to actually track schools and students. Thus states have had to cough up the money on their own for data programs.
Here in California we already have a great assessment program called the Academic Performance Index (API). (Get that AYP (feds) API (Cali)). The API sets goals based on progress over time. So if a school is way behind, but they show significant percentage improvement (say 20% or so gains), they don't get on the failing list and get punished. Many schools who were really far behind under NCLB were classified as failing and punished, even though they were showing dramatic gains under API. It was a vicious and disheartening cycle.
There are a lot of things wrong with NCLB, so why are George Miller and Nancy Pelosi insisting on adding new problems. More specifically, adding a federal merit pay program for teachers. First of all, studies have shown that merit pay just does not work. It leads to divisiveness in the teaching ranks, makes hiring more difficult and tends to go to teachers in affluent school districts, despite promises to the contrary. Just about every school that implements merit pay repeals it down the road.
(full disclosure: CTA has hired me to do blog outreach on NCLB)
Well, CTA sure got George Miller's attention yesterday with the blog ads. He actually responded with a statement to Education Weekly:
The CTA claimed today that the legislation would judge teachers' performance solely on the basis of their students' achievement gains, even though the organization knows this isn't true. Contrary to the CTA's assertions, the legislation would consider achievement gains along with other measures, like principal and master teacher evaluations. The CTA also wrongly implies that I don't support things like class size reduction, teacher professional development, and mentoring programs for teachers. I do support those things, which is why they are included in the bipartisan discussion draft of NCLB reauthorization legislation that we have circulated. From the very beginning, I sought the input of teacher organizations to craft the legislation.
Actually, Rep. Miller knows full well that the Miller/Pelosi proposal still bases achievement gains predominantly on test scores. It counts for something like 85% of the scoring and indeed states could choose just to base it on test scores. Perhaps he needs to read the press release over again.
Notice that he only responded on a limited number of topics and was quite defensive. Just because he included teachers in the discussions, does not mean that he totally heard them. Take the issue of data. I know boring right, but stick with me below the fold. It's an important lesson about the failings of the first version and how this Miller/Pelosi proposal fails to fix them.
(full disclosure, CTA has hired me to work on blog outreach about NCLB)
The main flaws of NCLB have been known for years.
The program is woefully underfunded to the tune of a whopping $56 billion
It relies too heavily on one measurement of student achievement,: standardized testing.
Luckily this bill comes up for re-authorization this year and we have a great chance to get it right. Unfortunately, the current NCLB bill from Miller and Pelosi is more like something we would expect from the Bush Dogs. It fails to fix the above, and in some respects goes backwards. The California Teachers Association (CTA) is urging people contact their Members of Congress and ask them to Vote NO on NCLB, saying this proposal "does nothing to improve the law". A series of blog ads are now up (Calitics ad is coming) on a whole host of Californian and national blogs, calling out Pelosi and Miller on their insistence on punishing teachers and students.
Urban education expert and author Jonathan Kozol has been fasting for 67 days as a "personal act of protest at the vicious damage being done to inner-city children" by NCLB. Kozol has a powerful piece up today on HuffPo:
The poisonous essence of this law lies in the mania of obsessive testing it has forced upon our nation's schools and, in the case of underfunded, overcrowded inner-city schools, the miserable drill-and-kill curriculum of robotic "teaching to the test" it has imposed on teachers, the best of whom are fleeing from these schools because they know that this debased curriculum would never have been tolerated in the good suburban schools that they, themselves, attended.
The current proposal still relies on just test scores, instead of multiple measures of student and school success like attendance/graduation rates, a rigorous curriculum and the number of students taking honors and AP classes. It adds a merit pay program (a truly bad idea, more on that later this week), creates four new levels of sanctions on schools and does not guarantee that there will be funding. more on the flip...
