Boston MA - The four members of California's legislative leadership who in 2009 led a bi-partisan effort in a bid to close the state's devastating budget deficit have been named this year's recipients of the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award™.
Dave Cogdill, California State Senator and former Senate Republican Leader; Mike Villines, California State Assembly Member and former Assembly Republican Leader; Darrell Steinberg, California State Senator and Democratic Senate President pro Tem; and Karen Bass, California State Assembly Member, and former Democratic Speaker of the Assembly, were chosen in recognition of the political courage each demonstrated in standing up to the extraordinary constituent and party pressure they faced while working with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to address California's severe financial crisis. (Press Release)
Look, I don't want to take anything away from the enormous difficulties that these four faced in political terms. Cogdill and Villines were villified by leading voices on their own side (ie...John and Ken heads on a pike), while Bass and Steinberg were never going to get those votes. As for the Democratic leaders, well, Democrats are in a really tough position with the supermajority constraints. It looks like they are working to do something
I suppose much of this is for history to answer. But I will say this as somebody who worked to oppose Prop 1A personally and professionally, the February deal that was rejected on May 19 last year, we are still on the same road to shock doctrining that we were on in January 2009. Nothing has changed on that front.
So, courage? Perhaps, if you mean courage in that, courage to keep the lights on sort of way. But if we are to truly build a sustainable future for California, the heaping amounts of courage that will be required from our leaders will make this look like tiny in comparison. In San Francisco terms, they had to jaywalk on Front Street. We need leaders willing to crawl over Highway 101 in rush hour. Blindfolded. On one leg.
Senator Dave Cogdill (R-Modesto), who used to be the Minority Leader until being tossed under the bus after the budget deal, announced that he will not be running for re-election. Despite not being termed out, Cogdill said that he accomplished what he came to Sacramento for, getting a water deal. Now he's ready to ride off into the sunset.
But wait, there's another part of this. Cogdill is also on the Governor's "Short list" to replace John Garamendi as Lt. Governor. So, we may yet be hearing more from Cogdill. That he lasted as long as he did as Senate Minority leader was something of an accomplishment. He was fighting uprisings constantly, and the caucus was none too pleased when he came back with the May 19 election deal.
Asm. Mike Villines (R-Clovis), who is currently running for insurance commissioner, has said he hasn't ruled out running for the seat. The seat leans fairly Republican, while the Insurance Commissioner would be a tough fight for a Republican against any one of the three Democratic candidates.
UPDATE: I can't forget about the other Democratic candidate: SF Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier thinks she's running for the race as well. She entered the race too late to file for the July filings.
Here's today's entry into my continuing money race series: insurance commissioner. The insurance commissioner is kind of a strange gig. There are a number of other insurance regulators in the governor's administration that also do a lot of regulation that the title is kind of overbroad. For example, the department of managed care regulates HMOs and most health insurance, so strike that one off the list. Although I'm not really sure it should be an elected position, the insurance commissioner does play an important role in publicly defining the relationship between the state and insurers.
This should be an interesting race. In theory, it's one of those races where typically people vote based upon party because they haven't really heard of the candidates. The exception would be 2006 when voters had heard enough about the Democratic candidate, Cruz Bustamante, to know they thought his campaign slogan was very apt: Lose with Cruz. Seriously, the campaign was something about weight loss or something.
Anyway, this time you have three Assembly members running for the race, with the Republican, Mike Villines, probably having the highest profile due to his Assembly Minority Leader position until he was deposed after the February budget deal. On the Democratic side you have Dave Jones, a long-time progressive who is pretty popular with the grassroots wherever he goes, and Hector De La Torre, a pretty good guy himself.
Account/Candidate
Dave Jones
Hector De La Torre
Mike Villines
1st Half Contribs
$293,190.97
$528,459.96
$612,399.00
Ending Cash IC Account
$257,788.86
$512,328.15
$185,944.93
Assembly Account
$845,398.04
n/a
$44,717.28
Total Cash
$1,103,186.90
$512,328.15
$230,662.21
All of the candidates are pretty good fundraisers, but Villines has one key advantage: he's taking money from every insurance company he can. He's received money from Aetna ($1500), Farmers ($3900) and the Association of California Insurance Companies PAC ($2000), among others. Asm. Jones has said that he will not accept any insurance money, and I found no evidence that he has done so. Asm. De La Torre has taken a few contributions from insurance companies as well, but it seems to be less pervasive than Villines. That being said, if you are looking for the guy who is keeping as far away from taking money from the people you are supposed to be regulating, there is a clear winner: Dave Jones.UPDATE: It turns out those transactions were old, dating all the way back to 2006 and 2007. Asm. De La Torre has also pledged to take no insurance company money for this campaign. It is reassuring that both Democrats see this as an important issue this time around.
As for the money totals, Dave Jones takes a huge cash on hand advantage into the race from his assembly account. Contributions for the first half of the year, despite looking lopsided in favor of Villines and De La Torre, were actually quite equal, as both of those candidates included transfers from their old accounts into their new insurance commissioner accounts. Keeping track of Villines money was particularly confusing because he also has an account for state senate in 2014 where he raised for the first part of the year, and the transferred to the IC account. Nonetheless, each raised slightly under $300K for the first half of the year. Villines spent a ton of money, over $400K. It seems to have gone to slate mailers, so perhaps this was related to the May 19 election. Otherwise, I'm not sure when these mailers are going to go out.
This should be an interesting race. The Democratic primary could be an interesting discussion between two qualified candidates, while the general election could end up being a little more competitive than we'd like.
Considering the drubbing he's getting from his own caucus in the press, this can hardly be a shock to anybody in the Capitol. From CapitolAlert:
"Mike is going to be making an announcement tomorrow morning prior to a 9 a.m. caucus meeting," said his spokeswoman, Jennifer Gibbons.
She would not discuss details but indications are that Villines will step aside after a more than two-year reign. It is not clear who his replacement will be. Caucus rules require 15 of the Assembly's 29 Republicans to approve the leader and several members could still be scrambling for votes.
Well, my money is on "anybody but DeVore or Anthony Adams." Beyond that, it's really rather tough to point out any one of the GOP drones that would be substantially better than the next.
UPDATE: Capitol Weekly reports that Sam Blakeslee will take over for the next 18 months. After that, he's termed out.
In a last-ditch and ultimately futile attempt to get the Republicans to support the May 19 ballot measures, Yacht Party leader in the Assembly Mike Villines played the majority vote card.
One fear of GOP lawmakers surrounding the May 19 special election is that should the ballot measures fail, Democrats and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger could go around them and simply swap certain taxes for fees and raise revenues without their votes [...]
"I know it's counterintuitive, but by coming to the table and negotiating, we saved the two-thirds protection," Villines said as the California Republican Party opposed the measures. "Mark my word, I believe that if these initiatives don't go through, you will see a majority-vote budget, you will see it signed and you will see the defense of taxpayers in this state disappear."
Mike, you say that like majority rule is a bad thing.
Unfortunately I don't share the optimism of Asm. Villines about the backbone of the Democratic Party to go ahead and fill the budget gap with a work-around fee increase. I had the opportunity to share the stage with a couple members of the legislature this weekend to debate the special election, and in particular, Senate Majority Leader Dean Florez seemed especially pessimistic on the majority vote option. He basically said that the lawyers advising the legislature questions the legality of the effort and that if the ballot measures fail, "we will have a cuts-only budget." He even went so far as to identify particular cuts that have already been discussed, all affecting the usual suspects - the elderly, the blind, the IHSS patients, kids without health care, CalWorks members, etc. So that's the May 20th strategy that the legislature is teeing up.
Now, maybe it's easier to ramp up the fear by playing up this disaster scenario in the event of the failure of the ballot measures. But I definitely expressed disappointment that the Majority Leader was foreclosing on an option which the nonpartisan Legislative Counsel found perfectly legal. I see no need to shut down creative solutions to the budget problem, especially when they can offer a glimpse into how a working government can function in a post-two-thirds environment. Even moderates and conservatives understand that the Yacht Party has hijacked the state and irresponsibly used their chokehold on legislative rules to force failed solutions and drive California into a fiscal ditch. The point is that this is coming, or at least it ought to be, whether by a work-around or ballot initiative, and we can end this hostage situation that Republicans have forced upon us for the last thirty years. To their credit, everyone in the legislature that I've talked to wants to move forward on repealing two-thirds.
Sen. Florez and I had a lot else to discuss in our debate (including his admission that "if you want to vote No on 1F, go ahead," which was a bit off the reservation), including the continued debate over the state spending cap, Prop. 1A (or a spending constraint, if you prefer, but certainly not anything like the inoffensive tweak that supporters make it out to be). In the end, the West Los Angeles Democratic Club took no position on anything but No on 1E, and PDA, where I also spoke this weekend, voted NO on all the ballot measures.
CapAlert gets around to covering the issue we covered on Wednesday - how legislative vacancies on the Democratic side embolden the Yacht Party and make it more impossible to pass a decent budget. What amazes me is that they get a Yacht Party leader to go on the record about it:
To this day, Ridley-Thomas' seat remains unfilled. Democratic Assemblyman Curren Price of Inglewood finished first in the primary last week and is expected to take his place in the upper house after a May 19 runoff.
Of course, that will create a vacancy in the Assembly, which will likely last until early October by virtue of the state's election-scheduling laws.
"Every vote we pick up, it is exponential for the Republicans," said Assembly GOP leader Mike Villines. "It gives us a lot of ability to move the debate and navigate to issues that we care about."
This is Yacht Party logic - they actually think a vacancy is a PICK-UP for them. It's the logic of an extortionist. No sane person other than someone trying to exploit would agree that a less-than-full legislature for years on end makes sense from a public policy standpoint. That's why we could significantly reduce the time of the merry go-round AND save millions of dollars in special election costs by instituting Instant Runoff Voting for special election seats.
But the Yacht Party has no intention of fixing the policy. They want to laugh as they see legislators walk out the door.
In Northern California, Rep. Ellen Tauscher has accepted an Obama post in the state department, though still faces the confirmation process.
Sen. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Concord, has already declared for the seat, and Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan, D-Alamo, is said to be considering a run.
"Joan Buchanan should run for Congress," said a laughing Villines, hoping for yet another vacancy in his house. "She'd be an excellent congresswoman."
"It creates a better dynamic than having the ability of the liberal-controlled Legislature to just steamroll its own desires," Villines said.
A better dynamic in the sense of being a fake dynamic, where the elected will of the voters is not reflected in the ability of the legislature. I can't think of a better argument to repeal two-thirds than these two quotes.
From the twitter updates I've seen so far, it looks like the Governor is leaning very, very hard on Cogdill, Ashburn and Dave Cox. At this point it looks like Sen. Cox (R-Fair Oaks) is the key vote. Incidentally, Maldanado is doing us no favors. Good thing nobody ran against him last year.
Another interesting tidbit from the Capitol: Asm Chuck DeVore, (R-OC) and Republican candidate for Boxer's Senate seat, attempted a coup on Assembly Minority Leader Mike Villines. It failed.
Update by Robert: DeVore resigned his post as whip in the aftermath of the apparent leadership struggle, thereby taking his ball and going home:
"For these reasons, I believe it is appropriate for me to resign as Chief Republican Whip, effective immediately. I can no longer participate as a leader on a team that is preparing to make a fundamental mistake of colossal proportions. For the sake of California I hope I am wrong - however, I fear I am right and that this tax increase and budget deal will result in more harm to the Golden State than good."
In the Byzantine world of Yacht Party politics this of course is good news for his chances of winning the party's nomination to get pummeled by Barbara Boxer in 2010.
Update by Brian: Per John Myers' tweets it appears Dave Cox is trying to get Prop 10 (tobacco tax) money diverted from children's health care programs. So far, it seems the Democrats are resisting. While we're speaking of kids, the CA Budget Project has a chart (PDF) of how much the deal would cut from K12 funding by district.
Update by Brian 6:30am: Well, it seems the legislators have pulled an all-nighter, as the Senate continues to be one vote short. John Myers has been a real sport and tweeted throughout. Sen. Cox announced at about 1am that he was a no on the budget, despite the changes to Prop 10 that were done only to please him. On another note, apparently when the Assembly went into lockdown, they really went into lockdown, Assembly sergeants-at-arms at the doors and everything. Over in the Senate, they dimmed the lights.
This process has been a disaster. The worst of everything that we've been going through for months, even years, with the Republicans. This is a fancy stick-up, with a patina of legitimacy. Who knows if a deal will be reached, but at this point there can be no question from the High Broderists who caused this. Every newspaper, every television station, every radio station should do what the Media News group did and call out the Republicans for their stickup of the state.
Their sheer cowardice to face down their own interest groups is remarkable. It is truly a sad day when a group of elected leaders, when faced with a clear policy decision between what is good for the state and what is good for the politician, have decided that they choose themselves. They have willingly played along with the anti-tax rigid ideology, and their capacity to actually lead on their own has withered away.
What happens from here is anybody's guess. Maybe they get the additional vote, maybe they don't. Perhaps, Arnold will be willing to sign the majority budget agreement that the Democrats passed back in December now, because lord knows we cannot simply do nothing. Arnold wanted to play brinksman, well here it is. We are standing at the precipice, does he want to jump?
Update by Brian: Quick thought - how big is that LA Board of Supes victory by former Sen. Mark Ridley-Thomas. If he were still in the Senate, rather than the seat being vacant until March, the deal would have gone through by now. You have to wonder whether maybe labor wishes they hadn't worked quite so hard to help him defeat Bernard Parks...
Two months ago I wrote about how Mike Villines' threats on the budget were illegal under Section 86 of the California Penal Code:
86. Every Member of either house of the Legislature, or any member of the legislative body of a city, county, city and county, school district, or other special district, 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 shall give, in any particular manner, or upon any particular side of any question or matter upon which he or she may be required to act in his or her official capacity, or gives, or offers or promises to give, any official vote in consideration that another Member of the Legislature, or another member of the legislative body of a city, county, city and county, school district, or other special district 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 of not less than two thousand dollars ($2,000) or not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or, in cases in which a bribe was actually received, by a restitution fine of at least the actual amount of the bribe received or two thousand dollars ($2,000), whichever is greater, or any larger amount of not more than double the amount of any bribe received or ten thousand dollars ($10,000), whichever is greater.
It appears that the California Labor Federation includes some readers. Yesterday, they sent a letter to the Attorney General calling for an investigation into illegal vote-trading.
The charge by leaders of the California Labor Federation, State Building and Construction Trades Council, Sierra Club California and the Planning and Conservation League stems from reports that Republican legislative leadership are withholding their votes on a state budget as they attempt to extract votes on policy matters unrelated to the budget.
"Republicans are holding the state budget hostage in a shameful attempt to gut vital workplace and environmental standards that have absolutely nothing to do with the budget," said California Labor Federation Executive Secretary-Treasurer Art Pulaski. "These actions aren't just unconscionable, they may be criminal."
According to a release from the California Labor Federation and the Sierra club there are several examples of actions that may be in violation of California Penal Code.
"Specifically, (Republican leaders) have demanded that legislators vote for proposals to weaken labor and environmental standards as a condition for any 'aye' vote from Republican caucus members on the overall budget," the letter states.
According to the release, "This conduct appears to violate Penal Code Section 86, which prohibits any legislator from offering to give his or her vote in exchange for another legislator's vote on the same or a different matter."
Some would call this the criminalization of politics, but in this state, politics is too often a criminal enterprise, and it's high time somebody was taught a lesson. Like the Yacht Party.
AG Brown should do this. There's already a Facebook group set up; I urge you to join it. End the Blagojevich-ization of the California legislature.
Good ol' Jon Fleischman is at it again. It seems Jon is getting a bit worried that some of his fellow Republicans aren't willing to throw the state off the cliff. Yup, Jon wants to break the unions, break the state, and break the government for all but the wealthiest amongst us. Developing nation status here we come!
Fleischman, who publishes the conservative FlashReport Web site, said the resolution is meant as a "stick" to dissuade GOP legislators from agreeing to any budget plan with higher taxes crafted with majority Democrats and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
"I think it is fair to say that if you are a Republican and, between now and the February convention, you vote for tax increases, you are likely to be censured by your party and cast out among the unwanted," he said.
The resolution goes one step further than a censure. It calls for changes in party bylaws to allow the Republican Party "to campaign and contribute funds against these pro-tax Republican legislators in primaries, and in general elections." (CapAlert 2/2/09)
As a member of the resolutions committee on the Democratic side, my guess is that this will face substantial heat. But, as Nate Silver pointed out for the national GOP, the Yacht party is in a death spiral in California to an even greater extent. As it loses supporters, its base clamors for more attention. And, as you can see, the base is a rigidly ideological beast in search of a failed state. That in turn turns more voters off, and the spiral continues. This is a generally progressive state, with only one party that speaks to anything resembling a majority of the state.
So, who knows, maybe this will pass, and Fleischman will be touted as a hero as he seeks to become some sort of Chief Wingnut. But as he bloviates about bringing the state down, at least we get a peek at his real agenda:
"It makes no sense that in the private sector there is massive downsizing of companies and there is no right-sizing taking place in government," he said.
Or, as he wrote on his Web site on Monday, "State government needs to do less, with less,"(CapAlert 2/2/09)
Of course, the state should run counter to the economic times. Anybody with an introductory economic class knows that. The government is most needed when the state is in bad shape, and now is not the time to be slashing budgets, firing teachers, furloughing workers that are trying to process unemployment claims, and destroying workers' rights. No, this is the time to increase government spending, and doing it through the least economically painful method. Unfortunately, Republicans are barring every possible escape route. It's like Dwight Shrute is playing games with the fire drills or something.
Just when you thought the Republicans don't have anything to say, well, they say something. Mike Villines issues a question of What ifs. Many of them conflicted with each other if interpreted in any logical way. Others are the same old tired Republican truisms that we've heard for years. You know them, You hate them. "waste, fraud and abuse" and "eliminate bureaucracy" to just name two of the golden oldies.
Of course, they don't actually present any workable ideas, other than the same old "no more taxes." But, you know, they are totally going to clear the state of the three-headed boogeymen of waste fraud and abuse. The same damn boogeymen that have been dominating Sacramento for the past quarter decade. You'd think the Republicans could clear some of that out during the 21 of 26 years that they've held the Governor's gig. Or perhaps it works better as a cliche than an actual policy? No, that would be cynical, and Republicans are never cynical.
By the way, did anybody else want to take a nap after watching this?
Transcript, and a whole slew of Republican Senators' statements, over the flip.
As the UCLA Anderson Forecast projects a "nasty recession" with "ugly" unemployment figures that won't turn around until 2010 at the soonest, California Republicans have decided to join their fellow partisans in the US Senate and place pathological hatred of unions and environmental laws ahead of our fiscal and economic survival.
Sources said Villines raised the possibility of GOP support for a higher car fee in budget negotiations last month, saying he thought that he could bring rank-and-file Republicans along if Democrats agreed to steep cuts in government programs and a permanent cap on state spending.
The sources who were in the room said his suggestion came after Democrats offered spending cuts they would reluctantly agree to implement.
Villines denies it of course - he's got to keep up the anti-tax front - but this is typical and unsurprising. Republicans have a habit of promising to finally do what common sense has long dictated - provide a bridge loan to automakers, ensure that California doesn't go bankrupt - but only if Democrats agree to destroy a union, or a government program, or an environmental treasure. And if Democrats refuse to go along with such recklessness, Republicans walk away and let everything collapse.
I suppose I should see Villines' willingness to embrace a VLF increase as a victory, but what this really does is bring into clear view the fact that the Yacht Party has no intention whatsoever in trying to solve this crisis. They genuinely don't care what happens to schools, health care clinics, or the economy as a whole. They're out to break liberalism, whatever the cost.
We're not dealing with rational actors here. The focus of political work in California is no longer about trying to work out a budget deal. It's about defusing a full-blown hostage crisis where every one of us - our economic security - are being used as pawns in Villines' game.
Combined with Dave Cogdill's crybaby move at today's budget talks this suggests a clear strategy for moving forward - show Californians just how reckless and dangerous the Republican Party has become. And if any of these jokers want to have a shot at higher office in 2010 they're going to have to defend their decision to let this state collapse in their desire to settle old scores.
California will pull through this crisis, but the light at the end of the tunnel never seemed so far away.
For a while, Speaker Bass and others (including lots of posts here) have pleaded with Governor Schwarzenegger to stand up to the Republican obstructionism. He says he is for revenue increases, but he's not knocking heads like past Republican governors have been willing to do. Pete Wilson and Ronald Reagan did it, surely Arnold could bang out some sort of compromise.
But up to now, he's just been sort of attacking the legislature in general and really failing to recognize the underlying unwillingness to work for a solution from the Republicans. Now, surely we can agree that today's Republicans are a lot more partisan than those of 20 years ago. However, that's just not a sufficient excuse for the Republican governor to fail to bring a single vote over.
At yesterday's press conference, Arnold slighlty altered his tune. He began to acknowledge what this is: Republicans are holding the state hostage. They are simply not negotiating in good faith. Take this for example, from the transcript on the Bee:
But I think that what is important is to come to the meeting and to be prepared and to propose those kind of issues. I have been to many meetings; none of those things were discussed. So I think it's very hard for the Democrats, in a way, to negotiate when no one puts that on the table and says here is the list of things that we ask for and if we have this list then we're willing to increase taxes and to come up with extra revenues. But it's always very vague and nothing specific and I think that makes it sometimes frustrating in those negotiations.
Ok, well it's a start, Governor, and the legislative inaction clock is very cute. But this simply isn't enough. But today it seems that criticizing Republicans is too much. After a Big 5 meeting, Senate Minority Leader Dave Cogdill decided to take his frustration out on the Governor:
I believe that the Big 5 process has been irreparably compromised as a result of comments in the press over the last couple of days, and it's pretty difficult to negotiate in good faith in that situation. My personal belief is that any resolution to this that is going to be negotiated will result from efforts with the Big 4 similar to what we were able to accomplish with the budget last year, because, again, I just don't see this process as being productive or helpful. (SacBee 12/11/08)
The thing is that the Republicans in the Legislature have grown used to one Arnold. The post-partisan Arnold that tries to make nice with everybody. The Arnold that we've basically had since the 2005 Special Election. Then some new Arnold dared to nudge the Republicans for failing to negotiate in good faith, so Cogdill is going to take his marbles and go home. Boo-hoo Dave, there's no crying in politics, Hillary Clinton aside. You are being intransigent, and you got called out on it. You know what else? Nobody likes you, so go cry about that too.
In actuality the problem here isn't that Arnold is being too tough now, it's that he's not being tough enough. We need the Governor to play hardball with these Republicans. The real problems is that he already missed his chance to really break the logjam a few months ago. If he wanted to get reform, well dammit he should have been hanging out in Audra Strickland's district and campaigning against Tony Strickland in the Senate. He should have gone to Stockton and argued to the voters there that John Eisenhut would work to fix the budget and that Bill Berryhill would not. But it seems that post-partisanship doesn't extend so far as to electing people who will actually pursue sound policy, regardless of party.
Oh to be a fly on the wall of that Big 5 Meeting, but Sen. Steinberg gave us a clue about the atmosphere:
"There was no lunch served," Steinberg said.
The leaders are signaling that perhaps there will be a deal next week, but I won't be holding my breath. The recent behavior of Cogdill and Assembly Minority Leader Mike Villines don't give much reason for hope.
UPDATE: Speaker Bass released a statement on Cogdill's little tantrum:
"They said that they came up here because of what they believed in and they believed that there should never be a tax increase. All of us came up here for what we believed in. I came up here to make sure that I would protect programs that now I have to recognize have to be cut. We all have to do things that we never thought we would do because California is in a catastrophic situation."
It'd be nice if the Republicans could at least pretend to care that our state government is about to collapse.
Yacht Party Assembly leader Mike Villines visited the Sacramento Bee editorial board yesterday, and like any good mob boss, he offered an ultimatum.
Solving the budget stalemate is simple enough, Assembly Republican leader Mike Villines said in a visit to The Bee's Capitol Bureau Tuesday. Democrats have to capitulate to GOP demands for the 8-hour work day, meal breaks, looser environmental regulations, permanent budget cuts and a stiff spending cap, among other things.
Then, and only then, will Republicans come to the table to discuss -- but not necessarily agree to -- new taxes.
"We think you have to do these reforms first, cuts first and make sure that you're doing an economic package that puts people back to work," Villines said. "Then you have a discussion about revenue - and only then."
Many of these things, you'll notice, have nothing to do with the budget. In fact, CapAlert published the ransom note that Villines brought with him, and while he puts his demands in somewhat vague terms (and the Bee should really spell it out if they want to inform the public), it's pretty clear what he and the GOP want. They want to eliminate overtime regulations and meal breaks for state employees. They want to re-legislate already-passed environmental regulations on retrofitting buildings, cutting greenhouse gas emissions and air quality standards. And they want a bushel of tax cuts for businesses. I'll put the ransom note on the flip.
Aside from being ridiculous, this is extremely close to being illegal. Yes, illegal. I know horse-trading is customary in politics, but it violates California law. This is Section 86 of the California Penal Code:
86. Every Member of either house of the Legislature, or any member of the legislative body of a city, county, city and county, school district, or other special district, 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 shall give, in any particular manner, or upon any particular side of any question or matter upon which he or she may be required to act in his or her official capacity, or gives, or offers or promises to give, any official vote in consideration that another Member of the Legislature, or another member of the legislative body of a city, county, city and county, school district, or other special district 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 of not less than two thousand dollars ($2,000) or not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or, in cases in which a bribe was actually received, by a restitution fine of at least the actual amount of the bribe received or two thousand dollars ($2,000), whichever is greater, or any larger amount of not more than double the amount of any bribe received or ten thousand dollars ($10,000), whichever is greater.
Put it this way, there's a Governor in Illinois who just got arrested for this activity.
But instead of indicting Mike Villines, he will be allowed to hold up the California Legislature, confident in the knowledge that Democrats, given little choice with the 2/3 requirement, will come around to his demands. In fact, Villines has already announced his intention to run for Senate in 2014, something that even cranky winger columnist Jim Boren scoffs at.
Villines helped lead the Legislature to an 85-day budget stalemate and then was a party to passing a phony budget that quickly fell apart. And so far, he's done nothing to solve the state budget crisis in the latest round of negotiations. And that's the record he'll run on for his next post?
Do our legislators live in a world where doing badly means you get to move up?
Yes, in a word.
And mind you, what Villines illegally lays out is just a precondition to TALK about revenue increases.
"This is very hard for Democrats to accept," Villines said of his list, which he said he had been distributed to the governor and other legislative leaders. "They'll say that look, 'This goes right to the heart of many things that we care terribly about and we just can't go there.' I understand that because we feel the same way about revenues."
Jim Evans, a spokesman for Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, challenged the Republicans to "put a specific $17 billion, half cuts, half revenues, deficit-reduction plan on the table and then we can begin productive conversations."
Villines is holding out hope Democrats will cave. "I think that they'll ultimately come around to this," he said.
Why wouldn't he say that? A criminal who never gets caught usually keeps robbing banks. The learned behavior is that Democrats will give up at some point. And with General Fund revenue down another $1.3 billion in November, and the state due to run out of cash in February, who is going to disagree with him?
Or, the real question is, will anyone arrest Mike Villines for crimes against the state?
This could be just to get the freshman members of the legislature up to speed, but it sounds rather... serious.
The entire Legislature will meet in a joint session Monday in the Assembly chambers to discuss the state's cash situation and overall budget dynamics with state fiscal leaders, according to Jim Evans, spokesman for Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg.
In a rare Budget 101 session, Treasurer Bill Lockyer, Controller John Chiang, Department of Finance Director Mike Genest and Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor will describe the consequences of delaying a compromise over the budget. They're likely to discuss the possibility of issuing IOUs to state vendors and state workers, as well as layoff scenarios and other consequences.
If I had to guess, this will be one of those meetings where everyone is sat down and told that this is what they have to do or the state will fall into the ocean. They should get some veterans from Scared Straight to run it. Put the fear of God into these lawmakers.
Although, I can't say whether or not it'll be successful. I mean, the Governor has already called a state of emergency and that didn't shake anybody up. Mike Villines is still sounding like a Yacht Party regular on budget issues:
Republican Assembly Leader Mike Villines (R-Clovis) took a dim view of a Democratic proposal to take reducing the threshold to pass a state budget to the voters.
Calling the proposed bill, which would ask voters to make a simple majority all that's necessary for passing a budget, a Democratic power grab, Villines said doing so was a duck on responsibly addressing the state's budget woes.
"Shutting Republicans out of the budget process will just make it easier for Democrats to pass more of the same reckless spending measures that have resulted in our current fiscal crisis." Villines said in a statement released late Wednesday."This will do nothing to improve our long-term budget picture, and will actually make things much worse."
He still wants a spending cap, of course.
But Lockyer and Chiang have plenty of ammunition to throw around. Failing a bailout from the Feds (which I think is a better bet at this point), state workers are about to be laid off or have their salaries frozen, and cuts to popular professions like teachers and nurses and cops and firefighters would be on the horizon in a protracted delay. Whether or not this threat of potentially hundreds of thousands of angry Californians and their families marching in the streets (Lockyer and Chiang need to have a flair for DRAMA in this speech) is enough to overrule the Iron Law of Institutions remains to be seen.
For a while now, the federal government has been handing out money to private business. Mostly banks, but a few insurance companies and the possibility of the Big 3 Automakers. It's raining cash if you happen to be "too big to fail."
Meanwhile, the state of California is bleeding red ink, laying off workers and cutting the services Californians count on in poor economic times. So, hat in hand, off we go to the feds:
Led by California with a $28 billion hole in its budget, 41 states are in financial trouble, and many of their leaders are looking to Congress to bail them out. State officials are hoping to join the ranks of the financial industry and auto manufacturers, who've found a sympathetic ear on Capitol Hill. They've found some key supporters: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other top Democrats are promoting aid to states as part of a broad stimulus package that could inject more than $300 billion into the ailing economy.
* * *
Speaking Wednesday before a Chamber of Commerce group in Fresno, Calif., Schwarzenegger said that "government is really at fault" and that Washington was obligated to "get us out of this mess." (McClatchy 11/14/08)
The economy sucks, that much we all know. Sure, we're tossing everything up at the wall hoping it sticks. But, here is one simple statement of fact: money that comes in to the state goes out almost immediately in the form of services to those who most need it. It gets recycled as state employees that would have otherwise been on the chopping block retain their jobs. And of course there is the fact that by spending a little money now to retain a decent level of services, we can save ourselves a lot of money on the back end on prison and other corrective, and expensive, services.
Yet there are those who simply see the states as profligate dens of the mythical "waste, fraud, and abuse." Unsurprisingly, one such opinion, by the Manhattan City Institute's Steve Malanga, appears at Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal:
Thus, when practically every day the federal government is defining downward the very notion of what constitutes fiscal responsibility, the states know they are hardly the most reckless supplicants in Washington. Unfortunately, more federal aid all but guarantees they won't use the current crisis as an opportunity to put their fiscal houses in order -- setting the stage for worse problems to come.
While it is true that California's 2/3 system of governance has built a budgetary house of cards, simply letting that house of cards collapse is no better than letting GM and Ford simply disappear. Apparently Mr. Malanga would like to see the states get taught a lesson just like some would have beaten into the banking system's hide. But while conservatives are lining up to give money to AIG, perhaps they should take some of that time to consider just who they are teaching a lesson.
Are they teaching a lesson to the 6 year old who now has a first grade class of 45 kids and doesn't have any actual contact with his teacher. I'm sure his not being able to read will really teach the Mike Villines of this world a huge lesson.
Are they teaching a lesson to the state's seniors? To the disabled? I'm sure Dave Cogdill will repent once he sees a few thousand more homeless mentally ill across our state.
Or perhaps not, but the lesson's worth a shot, right Mr. Malanga?
UPDATE: Over the flip find the letter that the Democratic Leaders sent to Pelosi, Boxer & Feinstein. (h/t SacBee)
An outdated tax code, voter-approved initiatives that lock in billions of dollars for programs, inadequate oversight of spending and the lack of a substantial rainy-day fund all add to California's financial ills. Other states have addressed such issues with impressive results. But attempts at similar changes here routinely fall flat.
These are all important issues, but if you look down the page, then you get to the real issues. One could quibble with putting a possible rainy-day fund above the 2/3 requirement and Prop 13. It's burying the lede a smidge, but Halper spends some real time pixels/ink discussing the third rail of California politics, Prop 13.
But all the while, Villines insists that the solution is to build a rainy day fund while in the midst of a deluge:
"She [Michele Bachelet, Chile's President] is a former communist, and she was talking about how you have to have a rainy-day fund to balance ups and downs," Villines said. "If it is good enough for Chile and a former communist, it should be good enough for California."
I'm just guessing that Bachelet's advice didn't begin and end with the rainy-day fund. As a Socialist and a believer in social programs, Bachelet understands the concept of a diversified tax base. It's a pity that Villines dwells on the small things, while continuing to hijack the process using undemocratic means.
Comparing California to Virginia, the key difference is that Virginia, under Mark Warner's leadership and without a 2/3 rule, had the flexibility to revise their tax code. Villines and his crew refuse to allow the same.
Congratulations, California! It's July 1, the start of the new fiscal year, and you don't have a budget, again. And if Mike Villines is to be believed, you won't have one for some time:
"We're doing meetings, but we're not making a ton of progress," Villines said on the final day of the 2007-08 fiscal year.
The four legislative leaders are meeting regularly, but "a lot of it is building a rapport."
I hope they're playing that "trust" game where one of them falls to the ground and relies on everyone else to catch them, that's always a good one. Maybe they could swing a team building trip to Joshua Tree while they're at it!
According to Villines, those mean old Democrats are just irrationally sticking to raising taxes at a time of budget deficits between $15 and $20 billion dollars! Don't they know they could just stop funding public schools and everyone could go home for the summer? (over...)
One thing you can usually count on in a hostage crisis is that the hostage takers will eventually start to freak out. And so it is with Assembly Republican Leader Mike Villines, who let loose on Democrats in an interview with Valleyfornia. (h/t to Josiah Greene at the CMR) Some highlights, beginning with his whining on dams and environmental rules:
That's a liberal minority of people these environmentalists, who I call whackos, who are totally out of touch with reality (that) are controlling the legislative process.
Right there Villines explains why his party is viewed by even other Republicans as tainted dog meat - in a state that is so strongly environmentalist, California Republicans have deluded themselves into thinking that voters actually think the way Villines and his Rush Limbaugh-fed colleagues do.
Villines then predicted that Republicans would win seats if the redistricting measure passed - showing the "government reform" groups supporting that plan to be useful idiots - because, in his words,
They are totally out of touch with reality. Their main issues are gay marriage, no reservoirs, no taxes. This is not mainstream California. They are out of touch.
Psychologists might call that "projection" but we can just call it the last gasp of a dying party. Unfortunately that dying party has a lot of power with the 2/3 rule and they are using it for all it's worth. Villines says some progress is being made in negotiations with Speaker Bass and the Senate leadership but these comments ought to suggest they're locked inside the building for the long haul, until all their demands are met. If innocent Californians are hurt, well, tough - such is the mentality of the hostage taker.
California has been a very cyclical economy for quite a while now. We experience the highest of the highs and the lowest of the lows. Today, the University of the Pacific's Economic Forecasting Center let us know that, yup, we're in a recession. The PDF of the report is here, but it won't really shock you. It simply acknowledges what most of us have known for a while: our economy is in trouble. (h/t SacBee) The report doesn't really say anything major, it takes their prediction from slow growth to light negative growth.
While we may not be in a catastrophic position at this point, we can only harm ourselves by slashing our investments in the state. But rather than having the government run an organized program, you have cities like Davis independently organizing and fundraising for schools. Leaders in Davis are organizing a "dollar a day" drive just to keep the schools open and the teachers employed. All the while, the Republicans fiddle away in their obstinacy. Over at the Flash Report, Asm. Minority Leader Mike Villines writes that over their dead body will taxes be raised.
One thing is clear: Republicans will not support tax increases on you and your family. Our priority is helping California live within its means by cutting wasteful government spending.
We don't believe it makes sense to create new government programs when we can't afford what we already have.
We are also working to reform our broken budget system so that our state has the tools it needs to avoid severe budget deficits like this one. Republicans will propose common-sense reforms like a rainy day fund that can only be used in fiscal emergencies or adopting a pre-negotiated list of budget reductions that state leaders can implement during economic downturns to save the state from a budget crisis.
First, these solutions are nothing of the sort. Villines wants to create a rainy day fund? While it's pouring outside? Brilliant, I suppose if you're totally immersed in the water, you don't notice the additional rainfall. So, perhaps we need to make good on the the rhetorical threat I implied from his writing: Taxes over the GOP's dead body. We have the opportunity to hammer the GOP at the ballot box in the legislature in November, but there's still the Governor hanging around. Sure, he's willing to nibble around the edges, but unwilling to address the real need to reform our revenue system.
Villines writes that, "The contrast between the Republican and Democrat approach could not be clearer." He is correct. They stand for firing thousands of teachers, Democrats stand for working to ensure the long-term stability of our education system. They stand for a crumbling infrastructure build around 1950s values, we stand for maintaining our assets and working to provide a long term vision. Republicans stand for social Darwinism without a net. Democrats understand that we cannot continue to think that it's still "good times" with our revenue and not expect consequences.
Fiddle on Mr. Villines, but don't expect Californians to pay the price of admission for that performance.
Hillary's lead is shrinking! Oh my goodness, the newspapers and horse race crowd will have something to cover! Yay, can we hear some more incessant blather about how people are "connecting emotionally" or whatever. Wouldn't it be nice to hear about policy for once? But, I suppose it's not to be. Anyway, the Field Poll for the presidentials(PDF) came out today. Hillary leads Obama by only 14 these days. However it seems much of this has to do with the famous "momentum" drawn from Iowa. Ah, fun compressed primary schedule. Oh, and if you are a CapitoAlert subscriber (and why wouldn't you be, now that it's free?) you can get the cross tabs. Interestingly, Clinton's lead is strongest amongst 18-29 year olds.
By the way, pretty much any Democrat trounces the GOP field in California.
Even the Wall Street Journal (it's behind a paywall) is talking about the need to raise revenue in California. But, as Assembly Minority Leader Mike Villines says oh so frequently, taxes will not be raised on his watch. So, Arnold has another great idea: flush our money down the toilet that are P3s:
"Mr. Schwarzenegger and his advisers say the real problem is that the way the state's budget is devised needs to be changed. One suggestion: more public-private partnerships for infrastructure projects to lessen the state's financial load.
"What we have to do is fix the budget system," Mr. Schwarzenegger said in a speech Friday in Long Beach. "The system itself needs to be fixed, and I think this is a good year, this coming year, to fix it.""
Duncan Hunter has lost once again on opening Santa Rosa Island to hunting. The Congressman and Presidential Candidate (haha) tries this pretty much every year, and has not yet found a way to get 'er done. The Park Service is trying to get rid of the invasive deer and elk, and Hunter wants to let them be hunted by disabled veterans(?). Lois Capps, whose district includes the island, opposes Hunter's persistant attempts every time.
[update by Julia] Speaking of the presidential race, the Drum Major Institute in partnership with The Nation has a new project caled Mayor TV. The goal is to try and get the candidates talking about issues facing our major cities. Here is Mayor Villariagosa's video, and yes he does flack for Hillary at the end.
