MOMocrats™

Note to Sacramento GOP's "Taxpayer's Caucus": Let the Voters Decide

Last week's special election in my California state Senate district was SO under-the-radar, that as clued in as I like to believe I am, I didn't know it was happening until I finally listened to the robocalls on my voicemail - about an hour before the polls closed.

The place was pretty quiet. In fact, we were told that only 50 voters had showed up all day.

My candidate did not win - but that's politics. One would hope that whatever a legislator's party, he or she would do whatever possible to represent the needs of the District.

And all of California's districts are in a whole mess of pain right now. New Governor Jerry Brown has been visibly wrestling with our whopping $26 billion budget shortfall.

It's not an easy hole to fix; the Sacramento Bee lets you try it yourself here.

Brown has released a budget proposal with $12.5 billion in cuts that will affect all Californians: $1.7 billion less to Medi-Cal, $1.5 billion to California’s welfare-to-work program (CalWORKs), $500 million to the University of California, $500 million to California State University, and $308 million for a 10 percent reduction in take-home pay for state employees not currently covered under collective bargaining agreements. 

But he recognizes that a budget deficiency of this magnitude cannot be closed through spending cuts alone; that the people of our state actually need some infrastructure and basic services - like public education.

Brown's plan depends on an extension of a previous tax hike that was supposed to end this year. Unfortunately, thanks to Proposition 13 - the fourth rail of California politics, and the root of our fiscal problems today - this cannot be done without the approval of the voters. Brown wants to give us that choice in another special election - and surprisingly, most Californians support him.

Predictably, Republican members of the state Senate and Assembly have formed a "Taxpayer's Caucus," vowing to vote against the proposal.

Today, the Bee reported that Jerry Brown became the first sitting governor since the 1960's to speak before a state budget committee: 

"When you folks say, 'No, no vote, no plan, no,' that's not American," Brown said. "It's not acceptable. And it's not loyalty to California. I don't expect you to agree with me. But I expect you to honestly say, 'I want to cut this.'"

In the meantime, the school board here in Los Angeles is preparing for the worst case scenario. Year after year, they've cut funds for teachers and workers... and the budget they passed last week would completely dismantle the District's successful magnet program. 

Now we're talking pain that's really personal: My daughter is a ninth-grader at a high-performing magnet school. If this budget passes, it will pull the rug out from right under her - just when her grades and test scores are starting to count towards college.

Last week, magnet administrators all over the District urged parents to write to our state represenatatives. Yesterday, I got a form letter back from my new state Senator, Sharon Runner:

Dear Ms. Mills:

Thanks for your comments. I appreciate knowing how my constituents feel about the issues. It's going to be another tough budget year so it's important to get feedback from the people who are impacted by the decisions the legislators make, especially with regard to education funding.

In the next couple of weeks I'll be briefed by colleagues and consultants and lobbied by many interest groups and the Governor himself. I'll carefully consider the Governor's proposal but I'm not sure at the moment how I'll be voting. However, I do appreciate your input.

 

I don't like being cynical. I would like to think that people - even politicians - can be taken at their word.

I went to her website. Her bio describes her as "A lifelong advocate of education." That's good. 

But in the second part of that sentence, it says she founded a parochial school that is now one of the largest in all of California. The cynical side of me can't help but think she may be less supportive of all those godless kids in public schools.

And today, I received the following information in her constituent newsletter:

During my campaign for Senate, I pledged to protect the interests of my constituents and vote no on tax increases of any kind. That is the reason one of my first acts as Senator was to join the Taxpayers Caucus;

Oh. So I guess she didn't need a couple of weeks to make up her mind, after all. In fact:

Yesterday, I participated in a press conference (see picture) announcing the caucus... 

It goes on with the usual Republican Kool-Aid about balancing the budget by cutting "wasteful spending" and how instead of raising revenue for our schools, she will work to get more tax cuts. WHICH DOESN'T MAKE A LICK OF SENSE WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO FILL A $26 BILLION HOLE.

We've had years and years of Republican governors and years and years of bad budget compromises (for which I blame both parties). I don't like paying taxes any more than anyone else. But I am just as much a taxpayer, and I want to have an opportunity to have a say on this.

In my email yesterday to Sharon Runner I let her know that I think refusing to allow us the vote is undemocratic. And I think all Californians should let their legislators know that, too.

Donna Schwartz Mills lives in Los Angeles. Her personal blog is SoCal Mom.

 

 

2010 Politics in Review by the MOMocrats: President Obama's Trial by Fire

I think there's a musty old law somewhere that impels media outlets to produce some kind of year in review piece each end of December -- or maybe it's just an easy topic to riff on when all you really want to do is recover from one holiday while preparing for the next. At any rate, Karoli and I did our own Year in Review episode on this week's MOMocrats MOMochat radio show.

I prepared for the show by highlighting some of the posts here on the MOMocrats website for 2010, and even though I remember all of these events, I was surprised to see they had all occurred THIS YEAR. And what a year it's been.

Karoli summed up 2010 as "President Obama's Trial by Fire":

JANUARY

• Health care reform had still not passed by the time of the State of the Union (for some reason, I had been remembering HCR as a 2009 endeavor - maybe because it took ALL of 2009 before spilling into the first quarter of this year).

• Supreme Court hands down Citizens United ruling

• Scott Roeder convicted for murder of Dr. George Tiller

• James O’Keefe caught and arrested for dirty tricks at Senator Mary Landrieu’s office

• A 7.0 earthquake devastates Haiti

Has Meg Whitman Lost It?

Today's California Women's Conference included a 2010 election first: Governor Schwarzenegger conversing with Meg Whitman and Jerry Brown, the two people who are vying to replace him.

Matt Lauer moderated the discussion, which started out affably enough. Everyone paid tribute to their moms (this is, after all, the Women's Conference) and spouses. All the participants acknowledged the very real problems plaguing California right now: unemployment, education, Sacramento gridlock.

Whitman predictably blamed the GOP boogey-man "special interests," which is code for "unions" -- never big business. Brown talked about his days at a seminary a penchant for turning order into chaos (no, I didn't quite follow that either, but that's vintage Brown).

The bottom line is that no one really expected this session to be newsworthy. It turned out to be a delicious bit of political theater.

Apparently, Matt Lauer had other ideas. After all, the entire country knows that Whitman has spent a year - and a fortune - campaigning for this office.

The election is in one week. Lauer wondered if the candidates could be persuaded to get their campaigns and surrogates to pull all of their negative ads and spend the next six days just airing positive ones stating their qualifications and positions?

The audience exploded with applause, and if you've spent any time watching television here over the last few weeks, you'd understand why. This has been the meannest election cycle I can remember, and just when you think you've heard the nastiest ad a worse one comes along.

"Sometimes negativity is in the eye of the beholder," Brown said, almost making it a "define 'the'" moment. But then he relented. "If Meg agrees, we can talk about it."

Huge applause. Lauer looked expectedly at Whitman for a response.

"I will take down any ads that can be construed as a negative attack," she said. "But I don't think we can take down the ads that talk about where Gov. Brown is on the issues."

Um, well. Maybe that's what Brown meant about negativity being in the eye of the beholder. Because most of those issue ads distort Brown's stands and record.

Lauer persisted, to the point where the session was about to end. That's when Schwarzenegger pointed out that he and Maria Shriver were hosting this little party. "Don't schvitz about the time," he said.

But the session ended without agreement. Brown scored major points by being willing to pull the negative ads.

In conclusion, Schwarzenegger talked about despite California's problems, it is still the Golden State. Whitman concurred, saying that she moved here 30 years ago because she fell in love with California, and that we could have that state again.

Brown laughed. "That sounds like my next new ad," he said. "Meg moves to California 30 years ago. And who was Governor then?"

It would be positive.

Happy Equality Day: We've Come a Long Way. Maybe.

As you can see from the clip above, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand is a very capable, knowledgeable, intelligent woman. I don't live in New York, but from what I've seen and heard and read (in the news and here on MOMocrats), she is doing a terrific job of serving her constituents.

So I could not help but roll my eyes at the news that at a debate this week, one of the men vying to be her opponent in the November election characterized her as "an attractive woman." 

Happy Equality Day, Senator Gillibrand. I bet you thought it was no longer acceptable to dismiss powerful women by focusing on their physical attributes. 

You say you've never heard of Equality Day?

It's may not be an official holiday, but August 26 is an important date in our history. Today is the 90th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment which extended the right to vote to the women of the United States.

To paraphrase a catchy little advertising jingle from my youth: We've Come a Long Way. Maybe.

In 1979, only 3% of the people elected to the US Congress were women. Today, we've got 90 -- including 17 Senators.

That's still less than 17% of 535 seats in the combined chambers of Congress. After all, women make up nearly 51% of the population. We're nowhere near the point where we can claim equal representation.

We have some interesting races going on in my home state of California. We are already represented by two female Senators, with one of them in a heated re-election race against a female opponent.

And if GOP candidate Meg Whitman succeeds in her bid to become Governor, all three of our top elected offices will be filled by women.

My point is that today, women really are a political force. Imagine how much more we could do if we looked beyond what's reported on network news, learned about the issues and actually bothered to vote. It may come as a surprise to MOMocrats readers (who tend to be politically involved), but large numbers of women do not exercise their hard-fought 19th Amendment rights -- especially unmarried women. 

Page Gardner of Women's Voices, Women's Vote writes eloquently on the organization's blog today:

In 2008, of the nearly 51 million unmarried women who were eligible to register to vote, only 35 million did register. That means 16 million women who could have voted did not even register.

Until recently, that figure included Meg Whitman, who famously didn't vote for 28 years.She says she was too focused on family and career to make the time. Sadly, those are the same reasons cited by most women who choose to stay on the political sidelines.

Few of them are billionaires like Whitman, or mere millionaires like Fiorina. I think it's commendable that these two former businesswoman want to serve the people of California. But as I am diametrically opposed to their stance on nearly every issue, they won't get my vote. (Both candidates are anti-choice, pro-Prop 8 and think tax cuts are the solution for everything; Whitman claims she can fix California's $19.1 billion deficit without raising taxes by running the state like a business -- a promise similar to what we heard seven years ago from Arnold Schwarzenegger. And we all know where that has got us.)

I think both Whitman and Senate candidate Carly Fiorina would be nightmares if elected. But I also think true equality means that women have the right to be just as wrong on the issues as some men.

Happy Equality Day!

Donna Schwartz Mills can usually be found on her personal blog about life in Southern California, SoCal Mom.

Happy Tax Day!

 No, really. Happy Tax Day!

We at MOMocrats get as annoyed as any normal person by the tedious piles of tax paperwork we have to fill out each year to do our social duty. (I mean, seriously: we're a bunch of writers. We have to fill out the Schedule C.) And of course, there are some government programs we are disappointed to see our tax dollars going toward.

But as patriotic Americans, we're also genuinely proud to know that we help pay for many of the public sector agencies and government programs that make this country a better place to live, and so we're happy, on this tax day, to reflect on all the good the hard earned cash we're parting with can accomplish.

Here are some of the things MOMocrats writers actually like paying taxes for:

Julie: I am happy to pay taxes because I know it helps fund schools and I do believe that solid, well-rounded education is a cornerstone of a great culture.

I am happy to pay taxes because I know it helps fund CHIP, and knowing that kids get needed health care is crucial to me.

Sarah Palin's First Amendment Rights

I don't know about the rest of you, but I am sick and tired of GOP Vice Presidential Candidate Sarah Palin. If I never have to see her winking, sneering countenance again it will be too soon.

But as hard as I pray for the end of her 15 minutes of fame, I have a feeling this is just the beginning. Because even if McCain-Palin loses (which is the main thing I've been praying for), she has made it very clear that she's not going to go quietly back to Alaska. And there is a faction of the conservative right wing who love her and see her as the future of their party. So for better or worse (mostly worse), we'll be seeing a lot more of her here in the lower 48.

So I've been trying to ignore her. Unfortunately, she makes that really hard, because now that she's "gone rogue" and veers off her carefully crafted script, she seems to come up with some new outrageous statement every single day.

The latest: complaining to a conservative radio host that journalists who criticize her for negative campaigning against Barack Obama are infringing on HER First Amendment rights.

As ABC News reports:

"If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations," Palin told host Chris Plante, "then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."

Governor Palin, have you ever READ the First Amendment? Because time and time again, you have indicated that you have NO UNDERSTANDING OF IT AT ALL:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Let me explain it to you.

California's Proposition 8: The Battle Tightens

The "Yes on 8" people have been out in force in my neighborhood.

This is the ballot proposition that seeks to nullify the California Supreme Court decision to allow gays to legally marry.

I have been horrified to discover that most of my neighbors are supporting this waste of taxpayer time and money. I understood that my northern San Fernando Valley community skews conservative, and I saw it in 2000 and 2004 as the roads leading to my daughter's school were lined with yard signs supporting George W. Bush. But somehow, I had lulled myself into thinking that during the ensuing years, my neighbors' eyes had opened to the bad policy and intolerant thought processes that were behind the current Administration's most outrageous positions.

It's not the first time I've been guilty of misreading folks.

The measure's proponents are selling it to the public as a rally to "protect marriage." Many of its supporters cite the Bible as their rationale for opposing equal rights for same sex couples.

Not all clergy agree.

I was pleasantly surprised earlier this month, when our rabbi devoted his Yom Kippur sermon to the Proposition 8 controversy.

"Of all the groups within American society whose struggle for equal rights found a renewed voice in the 60's and 70's, homosexuals are alone in still suffering widespread, socially accepted discrimination," he said, describing Proposition 8's title (The Marriage Protection Act) as "pure Orwellian newspeak."

Rabbi Brown went on: "Even the most diehard cynic must find truly breathtaking the spectacle of those who would impose their religious views on us all now cloaking themselves in the constitutional principle of separation of church and state. If Proposition 8 is defeated, its proponents tell us, churches will be forced to recognize gay marriages, even if such recognition flies in the face of church doctrine."

But that's simply not true. There is nothing in the law that would require religious entities to endorse or accept gay marriage. That is their first amendment right. But, as Rabbi Brown quoted the Los Angeles Times, "the government, which has obligations of equity, may not engage in discrimination that religions are allowed. As long as it bestows the privileges of marriage on some couples, it must bestow them on all."

I was pleased to discover that the leaders of Southern California's Board of Rabbis publicly oppose Proposition 8. Among the reasons: that gay marriage is a civil matter, and they honor and uphold the separation of church/synagogue and state.

The rabbis are not alone. In the past few days, Lutheran and Presbyterian clergy in Southern California have also demonstrated against the measure, and all of California's Episcopal dioceses also say NO.

CA Women's Conference: Condoleeza Rice, Indra Nooyi and Campbell Brown

Rice: I still think that in our society women are seen in particular roles. But it's changing very rapidly. You had Hillary Clinton, who was terrific and now you have Sarah Palin, who I think is a fantastic person. The glass ceiling is going to  have to continue to be shattered by girls who truly believe they can be whatever they want to be. I think the hard sciences and new technology are the new glass ceiling.

Nooyi: I think there is a glass ceiling. I think it will go away when women help other women break through it.

Brown: You are both in male dominated profession. Were your mentors males?

Rice: I didn't start out even in diplomacy, I started out in military, so it was very male dominated. Women do have to help women. But you also have to be comfortable being first. Sally Ride would not have been the first woman astronaut if she had been looking for one to follow. Don't limit your role models to those who are like you; they can be found in any color and any gender.

Nooyi: When a man presents and messes up, the men go to the men's room and they say, you could have done better. When women could  do it, two things happen. The women don't go to them and say you could have done better. And the woman tears herself down.

We have to get to the root of that issue at some point.

Brown: Women are often much tougher on each other than men are on women. Have you found that to be the case?

Rice: I guess so, although men can be tough on women. Sometimes when I stand in a classroom and look around, I think the people there are pretty scary. But then I look at the men, and some of them look scared, too.

Women are just as confident. Men have just learned how to act that way.

CA Women's Conference: Keynote Address by Maria Shriver

The Schwarzenegger daughters take the stage. They're cute, as they introduce their famous mom, Maria Shriver.

Secrets we don't know about their mom: We bet you don't know she's obsessed w/licorice and dots and hides them around the house. That she has her very own miniature pony named Whisky that's supposed to be in the backyard but wanders the house. That she travels everywhere with a tub of caramel popcorn. That she wears Halloween teeth in the morning for carpool and thinks it's hilarious. Or that last year, she took that miniature pony trick or treating and it kicked a child. She sometimes puts her workout clothes on inside-out in hopes of making it to the Lifecycle...

Maria Shriver takes the stage, kissing her daughters as they walk off.

Live Blogging the CA Women's Conference: Part two of Opening Session

Christiane Amanpour talking about being a foreign correspondent.

In 1994, covered genocide. Today, seeing the woman (most of the survivors) are powering Africa. Women are  more natural, flexible entrepreneurs. When a woman can buy a goat and make a business out of it, it can turn the world around. Women repay loans at higher rate than most men do.

In Rwanda, women now own 41% of businesses and half the seats of Parliament. All the major economic indicators are ahead in women. Rwanda rocks when it comes to ending povertry by empowering women.

In the less hopeful areas of Africa, in the AIDS belt, grandmothers are the new mothers, keeping their souls alive.

I come from a privileged background. I grew up in Iran where my mother showed me by example that there was nothing a woman could not do. But when the Islamic revolution swept up, we lost everything. We saw people executed for being on the wrong side of the political divide.

I decided to become a journalist. I came to America and found that if you work hard, you can be a success. I found something that gave me joy, willing to sacrifice and risk my life. I loved every hard won step up the ladder at CNN 25 years ago.

God gives all of us gifts and it's how we use those gifts that make a difference. Somehow somewhere I've been given a voice and I've tried to use that voice to tell the truth through my work at CNN.

I have always told myself that when my son Darius asks why I'm going away, I'd better have a good answer. You don't need to tell me about the crisis in journalism. These days it's tempting to quit and do something else. But I continue by convincing myself that this still matters. I truly believe that the history of human civilization is built by storytellers.

This Christmas, my family is going to an orphanage I covered in Kenya. And I'm going to try to teach my son at this young age that it is about justice, not us. We need strong, important journalists committed to telling the truth. Telling the story of women is one way to do that work.

Take Afghanistan. Areas there where women can go to school, drive, learn, be elected. In one such province a woman is the first female governor ever in AFghanistan. But in corners where the Taliban are back, women again are being victimized. Just a few weeks ago, one of the few women police officers in Khandahar was murdered.

You've seen what happens when journalism fails. Look at Rwanda. We failed to put the light on it and we failed. One million people were murdered in full view. And we helped enable the war in Iraq. This is something we have to take very seriously.

In the past eight years, I have never seen so much global angst. While we are having an election, the whole world wants to have a vote. Because when America sneezes, the whole world catches a cold.

The next President needs to make it cool again for the world to share America's great values and ideals and rescue freedom's good name. It's not very popular to say that and some pundits still sneer at that suggestion. But 83% of Americans say that improving America's standing in the world should be the next President's foreign policy goal.

Close Guantanamo. Lead climate change. Talk to other leaders without preconditions. I can tell you this will change the world. That women are great barometers of change and when given a chance can be architects of change, even in places like Iran.

It bewilders me that there are simply more women elected to high office outside this country. There are female presidents and prime ministers in South America, Europe, the Middle East, Asia. I do think it's a good thing to have a woman on a major ticket. But I do think the qualifications of that woman and any woman seeking high office matters. It matters, because the stakes are higher than ever. The stakes are too high.

In 2000, I asked why a candidate's qualifications were not questioned. I am truly alarmed by the rise of the citizen ruler (or citizen journalist). Experience and expertise.

So when young women and young men ask me about the way ahead, I ask them to use their success to change the world through their deeds. No matter what path you take, by all means be entrepreneurs but also consider your place in your communities, in our world. Consider giving your future a social face and travel - it can be done cheaply.

Amanpour urges people to go to less developed countries and use their expertise to help people out of their poverty trap.

It changes the lives of both parties and it changes the way America is seen in the world.

Would like to see an army of citizens brandishing great ideas, spreading a soft kind of power (as Robert Gates says).

Concludes with words from student Dominique Jones: hoping that her generation is one of great thinkers but more importantly, one of great doers. Peace is possible. She believes that, and Amanpour believes that.