Younger Californians more positive about immigration than older generations
Attitudes toward immigration have traditionally swung with the economy. When times are good, people feel good about pretty much everything, and less threatened by immigration and its potential effect on them. When times turn bad, folks tend to look for scapegoats, and they either blame immigrants for the economy’s problems or express fears that immigrants will be bad for the country and the state.
California saw this in 1994, when voters approved a measure that sought to end public benefits for undocumented immigrants, and again in 2003, when then-Gov. Gray Davis signed legislation allowing undocumented immigrants to obtain a drivers license, and the backlash against that law helped drive him from office in a recall election.
But the connection between the economy and public attitudes toward immigration may be moderating. Two recent polls suggest that Californians remain fairly sanguine about immigrants and immigration, despite high unemployment and a big and persistent budget deficit.
A Field Poll last week found that nearly half – 47 percent – of registered voters said that recent immigration was having no effect on California’s quality of life. Thirty-nine percent said immigration was making things worse, and 10 percent said it was improving the state’s quality of life.
One Does Not Buy An Ox From an Ox’: Why It’s Time to Cut Out the Budget Middlemen
Gov. Merriam "remarked
rather proudly to your correspondent that in all his years in various offices
nobody ever had made an attempt to bribe him and he took this as a mark of
deference to his high honor. It did not occur to him that when anyone wished to
buy him that person would not go to him but to those whom George Creel
described as his medieval owners. One does not buy an ox from an ox."
-The journalist Westbrook Pegler,
describing Gov. Frank Merriam in 1934
I found the above quote while re-reading The Campaign of the
Century, Greg Mitchell’s spectacular book about the 1934 California
gubernatorial campaign. It reminded me of today’s budget negotiations,
particularly the fact that our elected officials are not the most powerful or
consequential people in making decisions. In some ways, they are Merriamite
oxen.
Comments on the Counterpunch; Prop 13 Still Favored 2-1
The Public Policy Institute poll released Wednesday showed the
anti-tax attitude is still strong in this state. The poll indicates that Gov. Brown’s tax
extension proposal is in for a dogfight. Support for the measure is dropping
with only 46 percent approval, a terrible place to start if you’re seeking a
Yes vote in an election.
While the poll indicates a positive attitude toward local
governments, voters are not about to ease the requirement of a two-thirds vote
to raise certain local taxes. By a 59-percent to 37-percent margin, likely
voters in the PPIC poll say they favor this two -thirds vote provision.
The two-thirds vote requirement for local special taxes was, of
course, part of Proposition 13, the 1978 tax reform initiative.
Stop me if you’ve heard this before, but according to the poll,
Proposition 13 is supported 2 to 1, the same margin it passed by nearly 33
years ago. That two to one edge has been fairly consistent with the voters over
the years.
The Professionalization of California’s Low Wage Workforces
In January I did a posting on the latest jobs projections by
EDD, indicating that the great majority of jobs in California’s future will not
be the heralded "knowledge jobs". As is the case today in California’s job
structure, the majority of job openings in the next decade are projected to be
the personal and home care aides, retail salespersons, cashiers, food
preparation and serving workers, registered nurses, customer service repress,
office clerks and laborers, With the exception of registered nurses, all of
these occupational categories have 2010 median wages below $30,000.
The posting brought several inquiries concerning the
relationship of California’s workforce system to this projected job structure.
What if any policies might improve the wages and mobility of workers in these
jobs? What is the role of the local Workforce Investment Boards (WIBs) in trying
to influence the structure of jobs in California as well as the skills of
workers?
Why I Voted No on the Governor’s Realignment Proposal
I cast the lone vote against Governor Brown’s proposal to shift state responsibilities to the counties and increase taxes at the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors meeting. Shifting the state’s budget problems to local government and then offering to take them back through contracting is an illusion from a magician’s bag of tricks. Clearly, shifting these programs is not cost-neutral — otherwise why shift them at all? If contracting with the state means it would cost local governments more money out of their own general funds, then we ought to be concerned about what the state is proposing both fiscally and operationally.
There is no constitutional guarantee that the state won’t back out funding from existing programs to fund new programs. This is the same state that wants us to take more of their responsibilities with the promise to pay it back when it already owes the county over a half a billion dollars. The state’s track record is full of empty promises and hollow reform.
With regard to shifting certain prisoners to county jails, at one point, the state was talking about shifting only those offenders sentenced up to two years in prison — but now, it has grown to three years.