Fox and Hounds Daily Says Goodbye
With this article, we end publication of Fox and Hounds Daily. It has been a satisfying 12½ year run. When we opened in May 2008, our site was designed to offer an opportunity to those who wished to engage in public debate on many issues, especially in politics and business, but found it difficult to get placed in newspaper op-ed pages.
Co-publishers Tom Ross, Bryan Merica and I have kept F&H going over this time investing our own time, funding, and staff help. Last year at this time we considered closing the site, however with an election on the horizon we decided to keep F&H going through the election year. With the election come and gone, and with no sense of additional resources, we have decided to close the site down.
Fox and Hounds will live on, at least, with my articles collected in the California State Library.
On a personal note, I have spent over 40 years in California policy and politics. There have been some incredible high moments and some difficult low points. It pains me that politics too often is a blood sport, frequently demonizing the motives of opponents and using the legal system as a weapon in public discourse. At Fox & Hounds, we tried to adhere to the practice of giving all a voice in the debate, yet keep the commentaries civil and avoided personal attacks.
F&H offered the opportunity to publish different perspectives (even ones that criticized my writings!). We had success as indicated by the Washington Post twice citing Fox and Hounds Daily one of the best California political websites and many other positive affirmations and comments received over the years.
Tom, Bryan and I want to thank our many readers and writers for being part of our journey. The publishers of Fox and Hounds Daily believe that we added value to California and its people. We hope you agree.
Decision Time for Tim Draper
I like and respect Tim Draper, the venture capitalist. His investments in start-ups in Silicon Valley and around the world have helped fuel the global economy and given us new products and services we use every day.
But Draper newest idea – a ballot initiative to split California into six new states – is a bad investment.
Dividing California into six new states means disassembling the University of California. Two out of three UC students attend a campus far from home, exposing them to out-of-state tuition of $36,000 a year under Draper’s plan. The total cost to parents for charging all these students out-of-state fees would be $2.4 billion, and one state – Jefferson, in the north – would have no UC campus at all.
Meaningful Strides Forward on Initiative Reform
I’d like to go on the record and say I agree wholeheartedly with Joe Mathews that SB 1253, the Ballot Initiative Transparency Act introduced by Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, certainly does deserve more attention [“Very Small Steps Forward on Ballot Initiative System,” May 20]. To be sure, California’s decades old initiative process is long overdue for reform. Where Joe and I, and the many groups and individuals supporting SB 1253 part ways is in just how quickly we think these reforms can happen. If our goal is real, lasting reform, it will take thoughtful change, implemented over time so as not to shock the system completely. Voters don’t want to feel like a system they value has suddenly been turned on its head. SB 1253 takes an important first step in improving the process by focusing on changes that Californians have prioritized. About 8 in 10 voters indicate that improving the clarity, transparency, and accountability of the initiative process are their greatest priority. SB 1253 will give the voters what they are asked for.
The bill comes out of a year-long collaborative process that was the work of a broad coalition. Over 60 different groups were involved in the process, meetings were held with voters, and bi-partisan and non-partisan polls were used to build a proposal that voters want. The proposals in SB 1253 had the clearest and broadest consensus, including among our authors, and will make immediate improvements to the initiative process.
Debate Over Israel Flares on CA College Campuses, Politicians Must Take a Stand
I have taught for many years at the University of Southern California, so it is rare that I will go out of my way to offer kind words to our friendly crosstown rivals at UCLA. But I write this to salute a group of young heroes in Westwood. They are not basketball or football stars but an extraordinarily courageous group of young men and women who are bravely standing up for principles that they hold dear, not just their support for the safety and security of the state of Israel but their ongoing fight in defense of academic freedom, human rights, and religious tolerance.
Pro-Israel students have fought for months to protect their campus against the threat of the so-called Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, whose goal of forcing the university to participate in a morally inexcusable economic boycott against Israel. BDS proponents assert that Israel discriminates against its Arab citizens, a peculiar charge against a nation that includes Arabs in its Cabinet, Supreme Court, Knesset, civil service and defense forces and whose robust free press, freedom of speech, freedom of religion and human rights protections are virtually unique in the Middle East. Meanwhile, BDS leaders ignore horrendous civil and human rights violations in neighboring countries such as Syria, Iran, and Egypt, leading to the unavoidable conclusion that in their eyes, Israel’s transgression is not one of conduct but rather crimes of religion, heritage and existence.
2013 Prop. 65 Private Settlement Summary Shows Widespread Lawsuit Abuse Continues
Every year the Attorney General’s office releases an annual summary of the private settlements of Proposition 65 cases brought by private plaintiffs. The office has been doing this since 2000 and the summaries are based on reports submitted to the Attorney General as required by law. The summary shows total penalties, attorney fees, other funds collected, and includes a brief description of actions defendants were required to take to remedy alleged violations.
For years, CALA has been posting these annual summaries and discussing the outrageous attorney fees. Specifically, we have pointed out how a certain group of individuals and organizations collect huge sums of money by filing shakedown Prop. 65 lawsuits up and down the state.
So here are the numbers from the 2013 Proposition 65 Settlement Summary. In 2013, there were 352 settlements, and total payments of $17,409,756. Of that $17.4 million, non-contingent civil penalties accounted for 15% ($2,680,059), payments in lieu of penalty were 11% ($1,998,435), and – wait for it – attorney fees and costs were a whopping 73% ($12,731,262). Just like every year, the attorneys are generating millions in fees from shakedown lawsuits, and our small businesses are paying the price.
Happy Memorial Day!
Happy Memorial Day! Fox and Hounds will continue publishing tomorrow, May 27th.
Direction of CA Depends on Which Democrats Prevail
Forget all the talk of Neel Kashkari vs. Tim Donnelly and the fight for the soul of the GOP. The more interesting, and arguably more important, political battle in California is the one for the future of the Democratic Party.
This week, California billionaire Tom Steyer promised to pump millions into Democratic contests to push his strong environmental message. Meanwhile, business groups and moderate Democrats are pouring millions of their own into legislative races in California, seeking to elect Democrats who are more inclined to embrace a jobs-first approach to governing.
The skirmishes start now, but will come to a head in 2016 as the state faces the possibility of a fracking moratorium and oil severance tax on the November ballot, and again in 2018 in the state’s gubernatorial contest.