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.
CalPERS Return Rate Decision Could Lead To Tax Hikes
When California voters hear calls for tax increases in the near future they should think of pensions. That truth has never been clearer now that the California Public Employees’ Retirement System board voted to establish a more realistic return rate on its investments. The end result of this action is that state and local governments will have to chip in even more money for public employee pensions.
For years, defenders of the government retirement system justified healthy retirement payouts by claiming that CalPERS investments will bring an annual return of 7.5 percent. That assertion was defended despite the fact that over the last 20 years investment returns averaged only 6.9 percent, with the current annual return bringing in only 2.3 percent. (more…)
Did Dems Forget Eric Holder’s Fast & Furious Scandal?
What were they thinking? California Democrats believe they scored a coup when then hired Eric Holder to give them legal counsel. The former attorney general also is a close friend of the president – the one leaving office Jan. 20, not the one moving in.
The New York Times quoted Senate President Kevin de León, “Having the former attorney general of the United States brings us a lot of firepower in order to prepare to safeguard the values of the people of California.” The Times reported, “Mr. de León said he expected California to challenge Washington – and defend itself from policies instituted in Washington – on issues including the environment, immigration and criminal justice. He said California Democrats decided to turn to Mr. Holder as they watched Mr. Trump assemble his cabinet and begin to set the tone for his presidency.” (more…)
California as Alt-America
In 1949 the historian Carey McWilliams defined California as the “the Great Exception” — a place so different from the rest of America as to seem almost a separate country. In the ensuing half-century, the Golden State became not so much exceptional but predictive of the rest of the nation: California’s approaches to public education, the environment, politics, community-building and lifestyle often became national standards, and even normative.
Today California is returning to its outlier roots, defying many of the political trends that define most of the country. Rather than adjust to changing conditions, the state seems determined to go it alone as a bastion of progressivism. Some Californians, going farther out on a limb, have proposed separating from the rest of the country entirely; a ballot measure on that proposition has been proposed for 2018. (more…)
Uncertainty Over Federal Health Care Policy Creates Major Heartburn for California Budget-Makers
When C. Duane Dauner, the crackerjack CEO who has headed the California Hospital Association for 31 years, announced last month his intent to retire at the end of 2018, the timing must surely have been bittersweet.
On the one hand, he had just completed one of his most productive years in the big leagues of California health care politics by spearheading a successful ballot initiative to protect hospital revenues from being raided by the Legislature. On the other hand, the results of the presidential election made the motivation behind the initiative instantly outdated. It already seems quaint to have been worried about protecting one small stream of existing federal health care funding when a disastrous flood of change could be forthcoming.
The key component of Proposition 52, from the perspective of Dauner and hospital executives across the state, is that it prohibits the Legislature from diverting any of the revenues from the Medi-Cal hospital fee for other purposes. That would have been a nice piece of financial insurance for the hospital industry to have in place going forward had the popular vote been determinative in the presidential election. (more…)
For Whom the California Budget Tolls
Journalists and elected officials occasionally make the mistake of viewing budget problems in terms of size rather than where the budget item falls. For example, the costs of unfunded pensions and retiree healthcare in the current fiscal year (FYE16–17) add up to 6% of the state’s General Fund, a much smaller share than retirement spending in, say, Los Angeles where retirement spending consumes 20% of the local budget. But all the consequences of that 6% fall on a small portion of the General Fund.That’s because General Fund expenditures are like a waterfall in which money is first captured by expenditures protected by constitution, contract or statute. Unprotected programs get funded from the balance. For example:
Assume General Fund revenues this fiscal year are $100. The first $40 plus unpaid balances (if any) goes to K-14 education as a result of constitutional protection (Proposition 98). The next $7 goes to General Obligation bond debt service as a result of constitutional and contractual protection and another $7 goes to pensions and retiree healthcare as a result of contractual protection*. Medi-Cal, a statutory entitlement, takes 15% of the General Fund (plus additional amounts from Special Funds) and another 7% is consumed in part by entitlements administered by the Department of Social Services. Together, those protected obligations (ie, K-14, debt service, pensions, OPEB, Medi-Cal and DSS) will consume 78% of the General Fund this fiscal year, up from 69% just six years ago. (more…)
California’s 4.5 Million Trump Voters
In the November election, California voters passed several ballot initiatives acting on liberal priorities, and votes for Hillary Clinton in the state exceeded votes for Donald Trump by a two-to-one margin. Nevertheless, 4.5 million Californians voted for Donald Trump—7% of his total support across the country. California’s Trump voters stand apart from other voters—both those who supported past Republican presidential nominees and Clinton supporters—in important ways. But many Trump voters align with California’s Democratic majority on issues of taxation and undocumented immigrants.
California Trump voters’ low level of trust in the federal government is one of the major ways that they differ from other voters. The October PPIC Statewide Survey found that 81% of Trump voters say the federal government is run by a few big interests, wastes a lot of taxpayer money, and only does what is right sometimes (or never), compared to only 24% of Clinton voters. The large gap on these questions between Trump and Clinton voters in 2016 stands in sharp contrast to 2008, when McCain and Obama voters were about equally likely to express distrust (55% and 57%, respectively). (more…)