Well, not that they really have anything to do with each other, with the exception of the fact that Lynn Woolsey has supported marriage equality from way back in the day. Woolsey voted against DOMA in 1996, as did many California Democrats. In fact of the 67 House no votes on DOMA, my quick counting showed at least 16 Californians, or nearly double the percentage of Californians in the House.
No, the Prop 8 case is also up today. The Supreme Court will consider whether the proponents of Prop 8 have standing to appeal Judge Vaughn Walker's decision.
The California Supreme Court will hear arguments Tuesday on whether conservatives who sponsored Proposition 8 are entitled to appeal last year's federal ruling that overturned the 2008 same-sex marriage ban.
The court's ruling, due 90 days after argument, will determine whether all initiative sponsors in California are legally entitled to defend their measures in state court when the governor and the attorney general refuse. (LA Times)
To be sure, it is far from clear which way this decision will go. Prior case law, from my reading, seems to lean in the favor of no, they can't appeal and do not have standing. However, the issue is a little gray, and that's why the question was certified to the CA Supreme Court. Unfortunately, the Court did not choose to expedite the process, but we should have a decision before December or so.
However, you can also watch the argument live on CalChannel, either on your cable provider or online at calchannel.com. The hearing starts at 10AM.
With the budget news and the San Francisco redistricting hearing, I never got to the retirement of a progressive champion in Congress:
Rep. Lynn Woolsey confirmed Monday what many had suspected for some time -- that she will retire from Congress when her 10th term ends in 2012.
In a press conference in the backyard of her Petaluma home amid a crowd that included family members, local officials, news reporters and political supporters, Woolsey said, "I will turn 75 years old just before the next election and after two decades of service to this wonderful district it will be time for me to move on.
"So with enormous gratitude and not one ounce of regret," Woolsey said, ''I am announcing that I will not run for re-election in 2012. I will retire at the end of this current term." (BayArea News Group)
If there's one thing that you can say about Rep. Woolsey, it is that she never failed to follow her conscience. She has pursued social justice throughout her tenure in the house, and her voice will be sorely missed.
One can only hope to find another strong progressive to fill that seat, whereever its boundaries may be. Dick Spotswood had a good overview of the potential competitors last week. Depending on turnout, we may just see a Dem-on-Dem general election in November.
Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey has long been rumored to be a possible retirement. No matter how the lines are drawn, the Marin-Sonoma centered seat will be a safe Democratic seat. She criticized the draft maps for removing Santa Rosa from the Marin-Sonoma based district that she represents. In fact, she was really the most outspoken elected official on the maps. The criticism rose a few eyebrows.
So, with that speculation running high, I got a little message in my inbox today:
WOOLSEY ANNOUNCEMENT
Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Petaluma), joined by Rep. Barbara Lee and friends and
family, will make an announcement at her home next Monday.
TIME: Monday, June 27, 2011 3:00pm
We'll keep you updated with more details next week. Rep. Woolsey has always been an outstanding champion of progressive goals. If she does choose to retire, we must hope for a leader with dedication as strong as hers.
Rep. Barbara Lee [D-CA9], proved she has a backbone when in 2001 she stood up against war and became the only member of congress to vote "No" on the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF), and she was oh so right.
Now, Barbara has again taken the lead in trying to stop the insane decision to expand and escalate the war in Afghanistan. Her bill, H.R. 3699 "To prohibit any increase in the number of members of the United States Armed Forces serving in Afghanistan," has been referred to the House Armed Services Committee. Link: http://www.govtrack.us/congres... Cosponsors:
Yvette Clarke [D-NY11] Emanuel Cleaver [D-MO5] Steve Cohen [D-TN9]
John Conyers [D-MI14] Donna Edwards [D-MD4] Keith Ellison [D-MN5]
Bob Filner [D-CA51] Alan Grayson [D-FL8] Raul Grijalva [D-AZ7]
Maurice Hinchey [D-NY22] Michael Honda [D-CA15] Sheila Jackson-Lee [D-TX18] Dennis Kucinich [D-OH10] John Lewis [D-GA5] James McDermott [D-WA7]
James McGovern [D-MA3] Jerrold Nadler [D-NY8] Fortney Stark [D-CA13] Edolphus Towns [D-NY10] Nydia Velázquez [D-NY12]Maxine Waters [D-CA35]
Diane Watson [D-CA33] Lynn Woolsey [D-CA6]
As you can see, MOST of our 53 California representatives have NOT signed onto the bill. No Waxman. No Berman. No Sherman. No Schiff. Just those heroes in bold above are on this short list. CONTACT your representative to ask that they co-sponsor and support this important legislation to take back the war powers as in our constitution. And thank those who have signed on.
Here's the link to the committee: http://www.govtrack.us/congres... The Democratic Chair is Rep. Ike Skelton [D-MO4] with the ranking Republican member Rep. Howard McKeon [R-CA25] (Santa Clarita and east), Rep. Duncan Hunter [R-CA52], and the TWO DEMOCRATS from CA:
Rep. Susan Davis [D-CA53] (San Diego) and Rep. Loretta Sanchez [D-CA47] (Garden Grove-Santa Ana).
Please CONTACT these people on the committee right away and ask that this bill be brought to a vote immediately. With the impending announcement coming from Obama, there is no time to lose.////
A new initiative organized by Howie Klein, Jane Hamsher, fellow Calitician Dante Atkins and myself to verbally and financially reward Congressmembers who pledge to vote down any healthcare bill that does not include the public option is catching fire today. The objective is to use carrots as well as sticks to achieve progressive goals. As I said in the diary kicking off this intiative at DailyKos:
Human beings are psychologically predictable creatures, much like Pavlov's famous canine. We do respond well to punishment, but we respond just as well if not better to positive reinforcement. Do nothing but beat a dog with a stick, and the dog is likelier to be aggressive than lovingly loyal. Do nothing but scream at a child, and the child will eventually fail to respond to her abusive parent. Senators and Representatives, no matter how elevated, are still just people: the rules of psychological conditioning still apply. If all we can do is scream at people who don't do what we want, eventually no one will listen to us at all.
If you have the resources, please consider donations to our excellent California legislators. For those who can't chip in, DFA has a thank you action item to thank our healthcare heroes.
With an approach that uses more carrots and less sticks, hopefully we can encourage others in California and across the country to join these brave progressive leaders.
The Chronicle has a nice rundown of where Northern California House Democrats stand on today's war funding vote. The lines of fissure have pitted Nancy Pelosi against Lynn Woolsey, which, if it's safe to assume that San Francisco is every bit as progressive on Iraq and Afghanistan as Marin and Sonoma Counties are, you could fairly depict as a struggle between the priorities of the majority leadership and the preferences of constituents back home in the Bay Area. Lynn Woolsey comes out here fighting like a champ for her district, while the Speaker is representing, in effect, the Obama administration. Which I suppose we should just start getting used to (it's her job, after all).
One surprise here is that Sam Farr (CA-17) is now "on the fence." Farr used to be a 'no' vote. He signed a letter in 2007 committing not to vote for funding without timelines, as well as another letter objecting to the bill in its current form with the IMF provisions included. His even straddling the fence now is a pretty major reversal, and demonstrates how hard these members are being pushed to break with principle on this decision.
If you live in Farr's district and believe that a war funding bill without an exit plan and with an IMF bailout is a dumb idea, his office could use a gentle push: 202-225-2861. One question you could ask is the question Jane Hamsher put to Zoe Lofgren: How exactly does the Congressman justify supporting a bailout of European banks after his own state has been refused assistance when on the brink of bankruptcy?
The vote is today and the final outcome is being shaped this very moment, so your call would need to be placed right now.
As per The Chronicle, here's where other Northern California Democrats come out:
Where Northern California Democrats stand
How House members polled Monday broke down on the $106 billion bill:
On the fence: Sam Farr, Monterey; Mike Thompson, Napa; Mike Honda, San Jose; Jerry McNerney, Pleasanton; Doris Matsui, Sacramento
Likely/definite yes: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, San Francisco; George Miller, Martinez
Likely/definite no: Lynn Woolsey, Petaluma; Barbara Lee, Oakland; Pete Stark, Fremont; Jackie Speier, San Mateo
Not returning calls: Anna Eshoo, Palo Alto; Zoe Lofgren, San Jose
While the traditional media is focusing on the spat between the House Republicans and Nancy Pelosi, credit also goes to progressive Democrats who refused to go along with a huge giveaway to Wall Street that lacked accountability and repayment guarantees. Some of them have given statements explaining their votes.
Today, I voted against H.R. 3997, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (EESA), compromise legislation to bailout financial institutions saddled with large debts. I am very concerned about the credit crisis created by the housing market meltdown and while I appreciate efforts of the Democratic leadership to work in a bipartisan fashion to improve the Bush Administration's proposal, this legislation lacks needed taxpayer protections and assistance for Main Street families like those in the Congressional District I represent.
"I cannot in good conscience, vote for legislation that gives $700 billion to the same firms that helped cause the current financial crisis through irresponsible lending without providing meaningful help for homeowners who are in danger of foreclosure. In the 32nd Congressional District, housing foreclosures have nearly tripled in the past few months, with over 2,300 homeowners currently going through the foreclosure process. The impact of such widespread foreclosures on our local economy and community is devastating.
"Unfortunately, this legislation will not help the families who are stretching paychecks and trying to hold onto jobs without additional steps to stabilize our housing market. It lacks needed reform of bankruptcy laws to allow consumers to renegotiate the terms of their mortgage in bankruptcy courts to help keep their homes. Homeowners on Main Streets should have the same rights to renegotiate their loans, especially those for their primary residence, as Wall Street.
Pete Stark:
President Bush tells us that we face unparalleled financial doom if this $700 billion bailout is not approved today. He and his Treasury Secretary - a former Wall Street fat cat - tell us that we have reached the point of "crisis." That is a familiar line from this President. It sounds like the disastrous rush to war in Iraq and the subsequent stampede to enact the Patriot Act. As I opposed the Iraq War and the Patriot Act, I stand in opposition to his latest rush to judgment.
"We are not in a sudden crisis. It has been building over the past 8 years of the Bush Administration. Lax oversight of the financial industry ballooned into a house of cards....
"The bill before us today is basically the same three-page Wall Street give away first put forth by President Bush. The fig leaf adjustments are not enough to outweigh the fact that no one knows if this bill is what's needed. I'm not willing to make a $700 billion gamble that President Bush is right after 8 years of seeing all that he's done wrong.
A 0.25% tax on all stock trades and "exotic transactions" such as derivatives trading as a kind of "progressive PAYGO" to ensure that the taxpayers won't be paying the costs of the bailout.
Equity shares in any companies that benefit from the bailout
"Major bankruptcy reform" including homeowner renegotiation of mortgages. Obama undercut progressives on this when he said bankruptcy reform didn't need to be part of the package, perhaps a telltale sign of how unprogressive an Obama administration might be. But it's still a necessary part of any financial solution.
A detailed list of new regulations to protect consumers and provide more stable, responsible regulation of the financial industry to prevent a recurrence of this crisis.
If we want to ensure that we have more and better Democrats to push progressive economic policy in the Congress next year, we need to help them win this November. Join our Calitics Match and help send Charlie Brown and Debbie Cook to Congress, and Hannah Beth Jackson, Manuel Perez and Alyson Huber to Sacramento.
UPDATE by Dave: On the flip, a list of the ayes and nays among out Congressional delegation.
The letter insists that 4 kinds of reform be included in any bailout:
A 0.25% tax on all stock trades and "exotic transactions" such as derivatives trading as a kind of "progressive PAYGO" to ensure that the taxpayers won't be paying the costs of the bailout.
Equity shares in any companies that benefit from the bailout
"Major bankruptcy reform" including homeowner renegotiation of mortgages. Obama undercut progressives on this when he said bankruptcy reform didn't need to be part of the package, perhaps a telltale sign of how unprogressive an Obama administration might be. But it's still a necessary part of any financial solution.
A detailed list of new regulations to protect consumers and provide more stable, responsible regulation of the financial industry to prevent a recurrence of this crisis.
The progressives' move in Congress comes as more economic observers question the need for a bailout. It's possible that this represents the first move by the 74 members of the Progressive Caucus to block a bill that in particular lacks bankruptcy reform. Even so, an axis of Bush Dogs, House Republicans, and timid/weak/complicit House Democratic leadership may prove to be too much for the Progressive Caucus to overcome.
Still, this letter is a welcome move by California progressives like Barbara Lee and Lynn Woolsey. The bailout needs to be either made a fundamentally progressive policy move or stopped entirely. If a progressive coalition is to come together to stop it leadership from the Progressive Caucus is a necessary component. Even if it is too little too late, it potentially marks the beginning of a push for truly progressive solutions to our economic crisis - the kind that FDR and the Democratic Party stood for 75 years ago, but that current Democratic leaders from Obama on down have now eschewed.
UPDATE: A deal has been announced, although the details have been slow to materialize - a likely sign that the deal isn't exactly set in stone. More significantly Republicans are being pressured to deliver 70-100 votes which suggests that Congressional progressives, especially those from California, do have leverage to stop this train wreck. Universal health care, green infrastructure, a jobs-and-wages economic recovery - all those things are imperilled by this bailout. Better to deal with this after January 20.
There he goes again, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, reading into the Congressional record just 35 of the reasons why this Congress should be impeaching this sitting president and his VP. With diminutive stature but steely resolve, Kucinich forcefully takes his place alongside the earlier patriots who stood up to executive abuse, the "high crimes and misdemeanors," and spoke out for accountability.
And who was listening? Certainly not the US media, and by extension, no one else. The C-Span viewer was one of the few in the country who could witness this historic event. Or, check youtube: http://youtube.com/watch?v=JLf... Gore Vidal rightfully points out that anyone truly interested in knowing what's going on in our country must be reading foreign coverage--all still available online--since other countries ARE interested in what happens in the U.S. http://www.truthdig.com/report...
The impeachment resolution, HR 1258, was introduced June 9th as a "privileged motion" to get around Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who personally opposes impeachment and has reportedly said she "likes" President Bush.
Big election eve for Mark Leno. Jim Dean of Democracy for America flew into town to help get out the vote (he's phone banking right now). Also, here is video of Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey and Assemblyman Jared Huffman from earlier today. All three candidates were also on Forum with Michael Krasney (mp3).
Woolsey video and pictures from both events over the flip.
The grassroots, anti-occupation crew got McNerney elected. He needs to step up. He voted the wrong way on the Kucinich impeachment move, and even more importantly, he has refused to sign on to the letter from the Progressive Caucus to Bush saying that the singers will only fund withdrawal. 90 Congresspersons have singed so far, including Waxman and Conyers. His staffer told me it is to "restrictive". That's ridiculous.
In answer to their solicitation today, I'm saying I will give them $ once he decides to sign that letter. I hope that you will join me.
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.
Fresno peace activists are taking it to Jim Costa. A coordinated effort from throughout the region is coming together
to "pressure Democratic Representative Jim Costa to vote NO on the September bill to continue funding the occupation of Iraq." [Peace Fresno president Bill] Simon wrote that "each group will take one day a week to picket in front of Costa's office and perhaps to go into the office to say 'No more funding'. We will also encourage passers by to call their Congressman and Senators."
Rep. Lynn Woolsey recently said that moderate Democrats need to hear the message that people in their district care. In Fresno, the message is getting through to local activists. Jean Hays, President of WILPF (Women's International League for Peace and Freedom) explains the strategy: "Some say Congress is not listening to us; we say maybe WE ARE NOT TALKING LOUD ENOUGH!!"
This is how we apply pressure and bring about change.
...who just signed on to a letter to the President vowing not to appropriate any more money to the Iraq debacle for anything other than a fully funded withdrawal. Kudos to these 12:
Lynn Woolsey
Barbara Lee
Maxine Waters
Ellen Tauscher
Diane Watson
Bob Filner
Hilda Solis
Grace Napolitano
Linda Sanchez
Mike Honda
Pete Stark
Lois Capps
If you read Calitics you would know that, after much introspection, liberal House members from California - Barbara Lee, Lynn Woolsey, Diane Watson and Maxine Waters - have relented and voiced their support for the Iraq appropriation which would set an end date for the conflict.
Steve Maviglio reads Calitics but didn't before he clicked send about twenty minutes ago and slathered the egg upon his face, especially considering that the California progressives' shift to support of the bill was only the single biggest political story going on since this afternoon. And the article is a doozy. It shows a knee-jerk hatred of liberalism (and principles, for that matter), a defend-the-leadership-at-all-costs mentality, a thuddingly poor understanding of the fact that you might want to check Google News before you blog, and... wait for it... a hat tip to Ellen Tauscher for her work on helping whip the bill.
We all write things we'd rather take back, but I get the sense that this is the norm and not the exception over there.
I got this via email from the Progressive Caucus. I happen to be among those who believe that passing this supplemental is the best way we can start ending this war.
It is our Californian Progressives who are dropping their opposition and are letting this pass. Congresswomen Barbara Lee, Lynn Woolsey, Maxine Waters and Diane Watson will vote in favor of the leadership, despite their reservations on the substance.
