Fox And Hounds Blog

What Now for Dems' Redistricting Fight?

John Wildermuth — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:31:59 -0500

When it comes to redistricting, $2.7 million may trump $280,000.

The $2.7 million is what Charles Munger, a Palo Alto Republican, has anted up to qualify a “Son of Prop. 11” redistricting measure for the November ballot.

The initiative is simple enough. It allows the Citizens Redistricting Commission created by the 2008 initiative to also draw the lines for California’s congressional districts after this year’s census.

The $280,000, on the other hand, is what Democratic politicians and their allies have put aside for a November initiative that would kill Prop. 11 entirely, putting redistricting back in the hands of the Democrat-run Legislature.

Most of that money comes from California Democrats who are either in Congress or who want to be in Congress – that would be Karen Bass, who has given $50,000 to the initiative. But under Prop. 11, only legislative districts will be redrawn by the committee. Munger’s measure, though, would take redistricting out of the comforting hands of the Legislature and give it to a multi-partisan commission that won’t care nearly so much about putting more California Democrats in Congress.

Fixing AB 32 Will Require Real Action, Not More Delay

Steve Poizner — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:26:30 -0500

The findings announced yesterday by Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor on AB 32’s impact on unemployment in California confirmed what many of us have known for a long time – the regulations imposed by AB 32 will cause California to lose more jobs. With California facing its worst jobs crisis since the Great Depression, we don’t have the luxury of a wait-and-see approach to AB 32, the greenhouse gas law that will smother job creation, raise costs for consumers, and destroy businesses across our state. It’s time for decisive action to correct AB 32, a law that will only make it harder for California families to make ends meet.

That’s why I support the California Jobs Initiative. This initiative, which is currently seeking signatures to qualify for the ballot, will stop all rulemaking and regulation under AB 32 until California’s unemployment rate declines to the level it was when AB 32 was adopted. I am proud to be the only candidate for governor that has endorsed this initiative and called for AB 32 to be completely halted until our economy is back on track and Californians are back to work.

Maybe We’re Furloughing the Wrong State Workers

Joel Fox — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:25:33 -0500

In pushing a bill to prevent furloughs for nearly 80,000 state workers, Senate Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg argued a number of furloughs were counter productive. He pointed particularly to the tax collectors under the Board of Equalization and the Franchise Tax Board. According to a report, Steinberg argued that the furlough savings of $65 million in salary paid to these employees was more than offset by the loss of $465 million in unpaid taxes these workers would collect if they were on the job.

I don’t know how this calculation was made. Seems odd, though. When these workers were working full time was all that uncollected tax revenue accounted for? With rates of return described by Steinberg, we should offer overtime to the tax collectors. At that rate, they could probably collect enough revenue to solve the budget deficit in no time.

But let’s be less cynical. Let’s accept Senator Steinberg’s assertion that furloughs limit productive workers from doing the jobs they are supposed to do in improving the difficult condition of the state.

California's advantage

Loren Kaye — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:24:09 -0500

Amid the wreckage of California’s economy and our diminishing competitiveness, one California character trait abides: innovation and the prospect of cashing in on it.

According to a survey by the research firm VentureSource, fully 33 of the top 50 venture capital-backed firms (two-thirds), and 15 of the top 20, are located in California, a striking reminder that intellectual capital and innovation start right here. And since many of these firms are spinning off from research undertaken at our great universities, this drives home the importance of investing in a strong public university system for the future health of our economy.

The other take-away: only three of the 33 California firms are involved in what’s known as “clean tech.” In fact, more venture-backed firms were involved in health care than any other sector except technology. California has been a leader in health care innovation for decades, spinning off jobs and advancing medical treatments. But the equipment used to produce DNA sequencers, implantable devices for neurological disorders, or innovative orthopedic products (to name the technologies from just three of these top venture-backed firms) would not qualify for the proposed tax incentives aimed at the favored green sector.

Arnold's Third Term

Joe Mathews — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:22:39 -0500

Californians, meet your next governor.

Let’s call him Jerry Schwarzenegger.

As former California Gov. Jerry Brown officially rolled out his 2010 campaign for governor this week, he was confronted by questions about how a new Brown term in the stateh ouse might be different than his first, an entertaining if unfocused eight-year stretch from 1975 to 1983.

But in trying to reassure voters that he’s learned lessons, Brown looked and sounded like an older, Zen version of the unpopular incumbent, Arnold Schwarzenegger, who can’t run for re-election because of term limits.

Machiavelli or Torquemada?

Joel Kotkin — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:28:59 -0500

Cross-posted at NewGeography.com.

For more than one-third of a century Jerry Brown has proved one of the most interesting and original figures in American politics--and the 71-year-old former wunderkind might be back in office in 2010. If he indeed wins California's gubernatorial election, the results could range from somewhat positive to positively disastrous.

Brown is a multi-faceted man, but in political terms he has a dual personality, split between two very different Catholic figures from the 15th century: Machiavelli and Tomas de Torquemada. For the sake of California, we better hope that he follows the pragmatism espoused by the Italian author more than the stern visage of the Grand Inquisitor.

Like a good Jesuit, Brown certainly can be flexible. Back in 1978, for example, he worked against Howard Jarvis' Proposition 13, which capped real estate taxes. But once the measure was passed, Brown embraced it as his own. Indeed, he was so enthusiastic about the tax-cutting measure that Jarvis actually voted for Brown's re-election late that same year. A month after the vote a Los Angeles Times poll revealed most Californians thought Brown actually supported 13.

This Cadillac is a Chevy

Loren Kaye — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:26:35 -0500

The national health care debate has many moving parts, but most of the friction is over how to pay for it. One of the new taxes proposed by both the Senate and the President is a “high-cost plan” excise tax: a 40 percent tax on the value of health insurance premiums that exceed a certain threshold of “high cost.” The tax would be levied against health insurers, but would very likely be passed on to policy holders.

As passed by the Senate, the annual thresholds were $8,500 for individual coverage and $23,000 for family coverage, beginning in 2013. The President proposed increasing the thresholds – to $10,200 and $27,500, respectively – but also postponed the effective date of the tax until 2018.

The stated purpose of the tax is to discourage “Cadillac” plans that are effectively subsidized by the income tax exclusion for employee benefits. Many conservative economists and elected officials have favored eliminating the tax subsidy for employer-sponsored plans and instead provide a tax deduction for the policy holder to help drive incentives and decision-making to the health care consumer. This proposal gives a nod in that direction by providing the disincentive, but no offsetting encouragement for consumers to take cost comparison into their own hands. In fact, it is nothing more or less than a revenue raising exercise.

Jerry in Wonderland

Jennifer Kerns — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:24:57 -0500

The year was 1975. Jerry Brown was Governor. And the movie “Alice in Wonderland” was all the rage.

Fast forward 35 years later. Jerry Brown wants to be Governor. And the movie “Alice in Wonderland” is all the rage.

Coincidence? I think not.

To peer into a third potential Jerry Brown reign, one only needs to take a trip down the rabbit hole into the fantasy world of Jerry’s Wonderland – where you’ll soon find that what’s up is down, and what’s down is up. It is here that a few comparisons can be drawn between the original tale vs. the tale that is playing out in California today.

The Setting: “The Garden” – which is the central location in the fictional tale – is a place that could easily pass for the State Capitol today. It is where all of the action takes place. It is where kings and queens hold court. It is where Tea Parties are held. And it is a place where all of the characters compete (and I’m quoting directly here) “in a Caucus race which consists of everyone running in a circle with no clear winner.” Ah, yes, this is all starting to sound familiar…

Drawing a Line at City Hall

Charles Crumpley — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:23:28 -0500

I’m writing this column from City Hall. I came down here to get a business permit, and I’m waiting in this line. Judging from how slow this line is moving, and if I stand on my tiptoes and look at how many people are in front of me, it looks like it’ll take me, oh, maybe 18 months more. This could be a long column.

I guess it’s not so bad waiting here. I’ve got this cozy tent. I hired a maid twice a week. Good cable service.

Nice neighbors, too. Todd, a guy in a different line, the one to the left of mine, is a fine middle-age man (just don’t lend him money before the Friday night poker game). His line’s even slower than mine. He came a long time ago to get a license to open a shop because he had this innovative idea to rent videos so people can watch movies at home. He’s worried that if his line doesn’t move more quickly, by the time he gets his permit, VHS tapes may be passé.

Cell Phone Warning Labels Another Example Of Newsom's Ridiculous, Grandstanding Ordinances

James Spencer — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 09:00:00 -0500

Cross-posted at PublicCEO

In the latest edition of, “I can’t believe an educated person would actually think this is a good idea,” we once again welcome a proposed ordinance from the desk of San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom.

Newsom has proposed an ordinance that all cell phones sold in his city be given a warning label similar to those placed on cigarettes.

Based on concerns that cell phones cause brain cancer, the proposal would require a label with the level of radio frequency emissions and specific absorption rate of the phone.

The problem: It’s just another example of Newsom’s feel-good, grandstanding types of ordinances that lack any actual substance or intelligent reason.

The ordinance would provide warning of a safety risk that remains scientifically unproven. Both the National Cancer Institute and the World Health Organization have opposed labeling because of beliefs that research does not support the need.