Author: Patrick Dorinson

It appears as of this writing that we now have a budget agreement. Pardon me if I don’t cheer this development, but I am in no mood to cheer because it is a cruel joke on the people of this great state.

What has happened to California over the last 50 years? I sure don’t recognize it.

I am a native Californian. I was born in San Francisco in 1952 and reared in Marin County when it was a Republican County. I always tell people that I am old enough to remember when the only place you could get a latte or cappuccino in those days was at an Italian restaurant in San Francisco’s North Beach. Now you can get one every street corner. To this day I can’t seem to understand why anyone would pay $5 for a cup of coffee with some hot milk added, but that is a story for another day.

Fifty years ago in 1958, the New York Giants left the Polo Grounds of New York bound for the West Coast where they would become the San Francisco Giants and the Brooklyn Dodgers left Ebbets Field arriving in Southern California where they would become the Los Angeles Dodgers. They had been bitter rivals in New York and in the years since they have moved here, the rivalry has been handed down from generation to generation to where no matter where they are in the standings a Giants-Dodgers series is still a blood feud.

Sometimes when you look at a ballot proposition it is best to look not at the language of the proposed initiative, but who is behind it. Such is the case with Proposition 2 on the November ballot.

Proposition 2 would mandate new housing standards for egg laying chickens at great cost to California’s egg producers and potential health risks to the rest of us.

It is sponsored by the Humane Society of the United States. But this is not your mother’s or your aunt’s Humane Society. It is now led by seasoned political operatives whose agenda goes far beyond protecting animals.

And according to a UC Davis study, if they are successful, California’s egg industry and the $600 million in economic activity it generates annually as well as thousands of jobs would be wiped out. A whole industry that is a key for California agriculture lost in one fell swoop.

An item appeared in the Sacramento Bee yesterday that reminded me how far we have come from the days of Hiram Johnson and progressive reforms of the early 20th Century.

It was a story about how the all powerful prison guard’s union, CCPOA, just contributed $577,000 to Senate Pro Tem Don Perata’s political committee with the express purpose of defeating Proposition 11, the initiative on the November ballot to take control of legislative redistricting away from the Legislature. You can read all the gory details here.

Just by chance, CCPOA is trying to get a new contract with a pay increase from Perata and his allies in the Legislature. Last year they tried to ram through a pay increase at the last minute but the deal died as the session ended. To demonstrate their displeasure with the Democratic leadership, they then spent $2 million to defeat the February initiative to change term limits, a pet project of the Democrats. My guess is they get what they want this time or else they would have withheld the donation until after the legislative session. You don’t “invest” over a half a million dollars if you think you will not get the “return on investment” you desire.

Now I am certainly not accusing either party of doing something wrong. Perish the thought. But if you believe there is no connection between these two events, I have an international orange-colored bridge in San Francisco that I would like to sell you.

When J. Clark Kelso, the court appointed receiver for California’s prison healthcare system demanded that a federal judge order the state to come up with $8 billion over the next 5 years to fund his overhaul of the system, there was the predictable anger and outrage from politicians and interest groups on both sides of the issue. This was followed by another predictable step in these dramas when the Governor issued a statement that read in part, “we will continue to work cooperatively with the receiver in a fiscally responsible way to provide the necessary funding”.

But while everyone is rightly focused on the staggering amount Kelso has asked for, we are somehow forgetting about another significant expenditure in the budget—the escalating cost of the new death row at San Quentin.

The “estimated” cost for this facility is now pegged at $395.5 million, and as sure as the sun coming up in the morning, you know the cost will only grow before it’s completed. $19 million has already been spent on planning and construction could begin later this year. There is no question that San Quentin’s aging death house is overcrowded, and since we keep adding new crimes and circumstances every year that can get a person a date with the executioner, it will only get worse.

But, is a new death row the answer?

On September 27, 2006 to great fanfare and international media attention, Governor Schwarzenegger signed AB 32, California’s landmark bill to drastically cut greenhouse gases in California.

As with all “landmark” bills the devil is in the details. Does anyone remember AB1890 California’s “landmark” Electricity Deregulation bill? As someone who was in the trenches at the California ISO during the Energy Crisis of 2000-01, I remember it vividly.

Whether you agree with the merits of AB 32 or not, it is the law and now we must implement it. The California Air Resources Board and a slew of other government officials and business groups are now in the process of setting the standards of how California is going to meet the aggressive goals set out by AB 32.

Setting standards is one thing, but what will be the means to get there?

Enter T. Boone Pickens.

The other day, Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed SB 1709 authored by State Senator Elaine Alquist. Had he signed it, school districts would have been allowed and in fact encouraged to give nonmonetary incentives to middle and high school students for getting good scores on the state’s standardized tests. Prizes might include coupons for movies and restaurants and tickets to concerts or sporting events. Sounds like a game show– answer some questions and win prizes!

In his veto message, the Governor didn’t say he opposed the measure, instead saying it was unnecessary since there is nothing in current law prohibiting the practice. How about the laws of common sense?

Not only is it unnecessary, it is a symptom of a larger problem when it comes to education and preparing kids not just academically but also psychologically for life. The idea that we need to bribe children to excel should give us all pause. They can call it a reward or incentive but that’s just semantics. Let’s be honest, it’s a bribe.

Why are the grownups today constantly looking for ways to materially reward desired behavior? Why does almost everything nowadays with regard to children appear to be a negotiation over what the reward will be for doing what you are supposed to do?

When I was a boy, my folks owned a farm in Upper Lake in Lake County where we raised walnuts. It was managed by an aunt and uncle and I used to love going to visit. Every fall, we would go as a family to help with the harvest. The one thing I used to hate about it was drinking the water at my Aunt Betty’s house. It tasted horrible and there were always stains in the bathtub and the sink that looked like rust.

I remember asking my mother why the water tasted so bad and why there were those stains. It was the first time I ever heard the term hard water.

Hard water is water with a high mineral content. The United States Geological Survey states that 89.3% of homes in America of have some degree of hard water and some of the hardest water in the country is right here in California, including the counties of Los Angeles, Riverside, Ventura, and San Diego.

The ban on offshore drilling must be renewed by September 30th. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has categorically stated that she will not permit a straight up or down vote on whether or not to keep the ban in place. Instead, she has said that she will place the measure in an Omnibus Spending bill which will be needed to continue to fund the government.

For weeks, there have been no Appropriations hearings because that would allow Republicans to offer amendments on overturning the ban. Her partner, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, is also trying to stall any vote. So the Democratically controlled Congress ceases to do the people’s business on the orders of two people.

Why won’t they allow this vote? In a word—fear.

Fear that the ban might be lifted with full Republican support and the support of Blue Dog Democrats and many members from swing districts in the heartland that they recently wrested from the Republicans in 2006. Their constituents don’t own beachfront property in California or Florida. Heck, with gas prices being what they are, they can’t even afford to drive to the beach.