You have no doubt already been made aware that at the state level, California is already burdened by record debt and we, again, face a 20 billion dollar annual deficit this year. At the local level, budgets are being slashed, with critical services from public safety to public works to parks being cut. The bottom line is: California’s state and local governments cannot make ends meet.

Yet, at the same time, some local leaders are working to have their communities commit hundreds of millions of public dollars or debt to push out privately run electricity businesses and get government into the retail electricity business. And, even in these tough economic times, they don’t want taxpayers to vote on it because current law does not require a vote.

Proposition 16 – the Taxpayers Right to Vote Act would simply require that voters have the final say if a local government chooses to spend public money or incur public debt to create a government-run electricity business. Like most other local special tax and bond decisions in California, a 2/3 vote would be required.

Cross-posted at RonKayeLA.com.

Remember back when Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa told us he was tripling the trash fee and going to put all that money in a lockbox and use it solely to hire cops to make us safe on the streets and in our houses?

He never mentioned his “full cost recovery” policy applied only to homeowners except for the 60,000 who were getting the trash picked up free.

Remember when the state got rid of public access TV and the mayor promised to put $10 million of the $25 million they get from cable franchise taxes into a special account that would used to run Channel 35 and restore our opportunity to provide our own shows about important issues to the public?

He never mentioned he was going to use most of the money to run other departments and that he had no intention of ever restoring public access.

The fallout from the passage of health care reform will be many, varied and often surprising. For example, how many imagined that the Republican strategy of “just say no but say it continually” would have resulted in the resurrection of candidate Obama and the disappearance of the insider of policy wonk Obama? Another possible if unanticipated consequence of GOP parliamentary tactics may be a Churchill-like pushback by the majority Democrats.

Senator Harry Reid will not discover oratory. But he may remember that we are approaching the centenary of Winston Churchill’s triumph over another “just say no but say it continually” strategy.
In 1906 the Liberal Party won one of the largest parliamentary majorities in British history. The Conservative Party went from controlling nearly 60% of the House of Common to a bit over 20%. Yet Arthur Balfour, head of the Conservative Party, announced that his Party was the true voice of the Great Britain Nation and would use its majority in the unelected House of Lords to block Liberal legislation. For the next four years Winston Churchill (who years later would switch parties and join the Conservatives), David Lloyd George and other Liberal Party leaders tried to reach reasonable compromises. With a few exceptions, however, the Conservative Lords defiantly and continually said no. The situation continued even after the election of 1910 again returned a Liberal majority.

When Steve Poizner’s TV ad talks about “the Whitman/Obama policy” on immigration, California voters are seeing the themes he’s hoping can carry him to victory in the GOP primary for governor.

From now until June, expect to see Poizner pound on two points. First, that he’s the conservative candidate who will be toughest on illegal immigration and, second, that Meg Whitman is no real Republican.

Recent polls show Poizner running a staggering 50 percentage points behind the former eBay CEO, who’s spent better than $46 million on her campaign, with plenty more to come. The only way to trim that type of lead is with an all-attack, all-the-time strategy aimed at shocking the hard-core conservatives who make up a major chunk of the voters in a Republican primary.

That’s why you can bet that Poizner’s oppo research folks are combing photo galleries for any picture of Whitman with Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, just the thing to feature in the inevitable TV spot that will talk about how Whitman endorsed Boxer in 2004.

Even long-time liberal Barbara Boxer has said it. Her 2010 Senate re-election campaign will be competitive – her first contested election since she was elected to the Senate in the early 1990s. According to an early March Field Poll, 51 percent of California voters hold an unfavorable opinion of Barbara Boxer – bad news for any incumbent.

In that same poll, Tom Campbell is statistically tied with Boxer in a head-to-head general election match-up, and holds a narrow lead over both Carly Fiorina and Chuck DeVore in a Republican primary. However, the most telling numbers in the Field Poll are that 41 percent of Republican primary voters are undecided. And, almost 60 percent of general election voters have “no opinion” of Tom Campbell, Carly Fiorina and Chuck DeVore.

So, while Campbell has an early lead in polling, his status as March frontrunner necessitates greater scrutiny of his candidacy.

Toyota–the world’s largest automaker–has its troubles now, no doubt. Over six million cars recalled, product liability issues, injured drivers, and a reputation badly beaten. Add to that, Congressional, federal grand jury and National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration investigations and at least 89 class-action law suits. Clearly, this is a top employer under siege as it is recalling millions of vehicles and trying to make corrections.

It’s odd to me that one of those 89+ law suits comes from Orange County District Attorney, Tony Rackauckas, on behalf of the County “to protect the public and consumers.” What specifically is unique about OC cases that requires our DA to use this public office to pursue a civil case? Is it PR? Aren’t there enough lawsuits filed by those directly affected?

Mr. Rackauckas says the lawsuit was motivated by questioning if Toyota “puts profits over people.” Interesting choice of words for a DA who seeks monetary damages from a company through a contingency fee agreement with a private law firm. Is this to fill his own diminished department coffers in a very tough economy? Determining whether or not Toyota “used deceptive business practices” should not be the responsibility of a county, nor the DA, nor is it good public policy in the trend by government agencies to use private contingency fee lawyers to go after business. And please share with us, Mr. D.A: exactly what is your financial arrangement with the private law firm you hired to go after Toyota?

Small businesses are the backbone of California’s economy. They are praised in speeches by elected officials and correctly regarded as the engine that will pull us out of the recession.

On the other hand, the term “independent contractor” sounds technical and can conjure up images of a faceless business that has no loyalty, threatens government jobs and is a ripe target for new taxes or regulations. Politicians don’t tout their support for “independent contractors” when running for office.

The truth is that most independent contractors are small businesses. They are painters, plumbers, real estate agents, auto mechanics, computer programmers, photographers, sound engineers, doctors, accountants — and many other types of small businesses.

In Sacramento, some legislators are seeking to implement an “independent contractor withholding” proposal, which would require businesses to withhold 3 percent of their payments to independent contractors to provide an interest-free loan to the state.

According to the new Public Policy Institute Poll, disgusted voters are ready for a third party in California. Fifty-five percent of likely voters think a third party is needed. This reflects a similar finding in September 2008. There is no warmth from likely voters for the two major parties. Forty-one percent of likely voters have a favorable impression of the Democratic Party; 31% have a favorable impression of the Republicans. Interestingly, those numbers pretty much reflect party registration in California.

Surprisingly, the unorganized Tea Party reflects better than the Republicans with 34% of likely voters recording a favorable impression. It is not just Republican Party supporters who gave thumbs up to the Tea Party. A good number of those who sing the praises of the Tea Party do not embrace the Republicans. The PPIC poll found that 58% of those voters who have an unfavorable impression of the Republican Party think positively about the Tea Party.

Let the pot wars begin.

An initiative to legalize the possession and sale of marijuana in California officially made the November ballot Wednesday, opening the door to a, ah, high-stakes campaign that the whole country will be watching.

If passed, California would have the most marijuana-friendly laws in the nation, if not the entire world.

How the vote will go depends on whom you ask.

The initiative drive was financed by Richard Lee, a marijuana entrepreneur who put up almost all the $1.3 million it took to qualify the measure for the ballot.