<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
    <rss version="2.0">
        <channel>
            <title>Speak Out California Weblog</title>
            <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/</link>
            <description></description>
            <language>en</language>
            <copyright>Copyright 2010</copyright>
            <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:15:50 -0800</lastBuildDate>
            <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/</generator>
            <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    
            <item>
                <title>June Ballot Initiatives</title>
                <description><![CDATA[<p> The June election is coming up and several initiatives have qualified for the ballot.  We will be writing about them here at Speak Out California as the election draws near.</p>

<p>The <a href="http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/qualified-ballot-measures.htm">Secretary of State's website shows</a> that the following initiatives have qualified for the June ballot:</p>

<p><strong>Proposition 13</strong>: Limits on Property Tax Assessment. Seismic Retrofitting of Existing Buildings. Legislative Constitutional Amendment.</p>

<p><strong>Proposition 14</strong>: Primary Election Process Reform. Greater Participation in Elections.</p>

<p><strong>Proposition 15</strong>: California Fair Elections Act.</p>

<p><strong>Proposition 16</strong>: Imposes New Two-Thirds Voter Approval Requirement for Local Public Electricity Providers. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.</p>

<p><strong>Proposition 17</strong>: Allows Auto Insurance Companies to Base Their Prices in Part on a Driver's History of Insurance Coverage. Initiative Statute.</p>

<p>Proposition 16 is known as "the PGE initiative" and Proposition 17 as the "Mercury Insurance initiative" -- but we'll get into that later.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/vig-public-display/060810-primary-election/">The not-yet-final state voter guide is available here</a>.<br />
</p>]]></description>
                <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/03/june-ballot-ini.html</link>
                <guid>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/03/june-ballot-ini.html</guid>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">2010 Primary</category>
        
        
                <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:15:50 -0800</pubDate>
            </item>
    
            <item>
                <title>Cost Of Tax Cuts Catching Up To Us</title>
                <description><![CDATA[<p>The following letter <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/letters/ci_14636728?nclick_check=1">appeared in the San Jose Mercury News</a>:</p>

<blockquote><strong>State not geared up for high-speed rail</strong>

<p>Is high-speed rail really the answer in California? I think not. I originally thought, great, let's match Europe's and Japan's advanced transportation with our own high-speed trains.</p>

<p>However, California is not Europe or Japan. We do not have convenient trains and buses running everywhere you could possibly want to go in every city.</p>

<p>Consider that if you traveled from San Francisco to Los Angeles by high-speed train in 2½ hours, what do you do when you arrive? Catch a bus or light rail to your destination? Sorry, too inconvenient and time-consuming. Rent a car? Sorry, now you have lost the economy of train travel as well as the time savings.</p>

<p>Either alternative adds at least two hours to your trip making the time equivalent to driving.</p>

<p>I say, "no on high-speed rail." Let's save the money and reduce our debt in California!</blockquote></p>

<p>Let it sink in what the writer is saying here: We should not even try to catch up to the rest of the world, because we have already fallen so far behind that it will cost too much.  Instead let's just try to pay off some of the accumulated debt.</p>

<p>The writer is bearing witness to the results of many years of tax cutting and cutbacks in our government.  After the tax cutting started in the 70s and 80s we stopped maintaining the infrastructure, so now we do not have convenient trains or buses or mass transit to use after the high-speed rail reaches your destination.  We instead accumulated debt.  </p>

<p>So here we are.  The consequences of decades of cutbacks are arriving.  The rest of the world leaps ahead of us.  China has nearly completed a network of 42 high-speed rail lines connecting the major cities, and we can't even get one project off the ground.</p>

<p>It's certainly not going to get any better until we start asking corporations and the wealthy to pitch in and pay back some of what they gained from the infrastructure that we built in California, back in the decades before they got tax cuts.</p>]]></description>
                <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/03/cost-of-tax-cut.html</link>
                <guid>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/03/cost-of-tax-cut.html</guid>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Taxes</category>
        
        
                <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:15:13 -0800</pubDate>
            </item>
    
            <item>
                <title>Getting Solar Energy Stimulus Spending Right In California</title>
                <description><![CDATA[ <div><i><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 0.8em; "><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">This guest post is by Natasha Chart of </font></font></i><a href="http://ourfuture.org/"><i><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 0.8em; "><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">Campaign for America's Future</font></font></i></a><i><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 0.8em; "><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">. &nbsp;The post </font></font></i><a href="http://ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010031009/getting-solar-energy-stimulus-spending-right-california"><i><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 0.8em; "><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">first appeared at the Blog For OurFuture</font></font></i></a><i><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 0.8em; "><font class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 1.25em; ">.</font></font></i></div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(17, 17, 17); font-family: Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; "><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 12px; padding-left: 0px; ">Thanks to $24 million in stimulus funding, Solar Power, Inc., a company that&nbsp;<a href="http://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2010/03/08/daily13.html" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; color: rgb(159, 0, 40); text-decoration: none; ">manufactures solar panels in China to install in the US</a>&nbsp;is exploring&nbsp;<a href="http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=14579" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; color: rgb(159, 0, 40); text-decoration: none; ">opening a solar panel manufacturing plant in Sacramento, CA,</a>&nbsp;to go along with a 10 megawatt solar power installation in the area.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 12px; padding-left: 0px; ">There are no timelines for the projects, but Solar Power chairman and CEO, Steve Kircher seems optimistic. In a&nbsp;<a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/solar-power-inc-receives-initial-commitment-of-247-million-from-787-billion-american-recovery-and-reinvestment-act-arra-2010-03-09?reflink=MW_news_stmp" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; color: rgb(159, 0, 40); text-decoration: none; ">press release</a>, he said, "Expanding our manufacturing base to California will significantly enhance our ability to meet growing demand for our solar system development expertise and our top-ranked solar panels across the U.S."</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 12px; padding-left: 0px; ">While it's great to get results like this from the stimulus, passing a clean energy bill at the federal level, for all the inherent problems, would create a lot more of the same. I expect that in the long run, the expansion of investments in clean energy will be more useful for reducing carbon emissions than many other, more direct attempts to regulate carbon. The reason I think that is because it will begin creating positive incentives that tie people's livelihoods to the clean energy economy, which is a much-needed shift in the political dynamic that will ease the way towards necessary future reforms.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 12px; padding-left: 0px; ">As David Roberts continues to point out so lucidly,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.grist.org/article/2010-03-05-using-behavioral-science-to-maker-smarter-energy-policy/" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; color: rgb(159, 0, 40); text-decoration: none; ">shifting behavior and understanding incentives is probably the most important task</a>&nbsp;of building a clean energy economy.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 12px; padding-left: 0px; ">Fortunately, Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), chairman of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, seems to be of a roughly overlapping opinion about the&nbsp;<a href="http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/09/jobs_and_change_communications_and_energy/" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; color: rgb(159, 0, 40); text-decoration: none; ">importance of the job incentive</a>:</p><blockquote style="margin-top: 10px; margin-right: 25px; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 25px; padding-top: 10px; padding-right: 20px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 20px; border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 1px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-left-width: 1px; border-top-color: rgb(119, 119, 170); border-right-color: rgb(119, 119, 170); border-bottom-color: rgb(119, 119, 170); border-left-color: rgb(119, 119, 170); border-top-style: dotted; border-right-style: dotted; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-left-style: dotted; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 249, 238); font-style: italic; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 12px; padding-left: 0px; ">... Similarly, in the energy sector we need to retool the existing generation and distribution networks with cleaner forms of generation, open markets to innovators who will build power lines that lose fewer electrons and connect new sources of clean power to users, and reward investors for installing more efficient ways of using electricity. Creating the right framework for our communications networks led investors to commit about $850 billion to rebuild those networks. With the right set of policies, it is reasonable expect a similar explosion of private sector investment in the energy sector. This will result in consumers paying less for heating, cooling and lighting, and America's energy sector will be firmly based on abundant, cheap and clean fuels. Nothing will pull innovation into the energy sector more than wind farms demanding better storage technology, solar farms demanding better ways of capturing and converting sunlight into electricity, and appliances and electric vehicles that can talk to the grid if it is smart enough.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 12px; padding-left: 0px; ">There are other areas of the economy where Americans can and should find new jobs. In the energy sector we not only will need millions of employees, but we also know that those millions will help us achieve independence from foreign oil and an end to the pollution of the environment from carbon emissions. The trifecta of huge employment, national security, and protection of the environment is a winning ticket for America. ...</p></blockquote><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 12px; padding-left: 0px; ">And by "America", Markey thankfully seems to mean&nbsp;<a href="http://www.eschatonblog.com/2010/03/chocolate-rations-are-up.html" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; color: rgb(159, 0, 40); text-decoration: none; ">all the Americans who need jobs</a>, and&nbsp;<a href="http://www.eschatonblog.com/2010/03/its-economy-stupid.html" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; color: rgb(159, 0, 40); text-decoration: none; ">a lot more jobs, quickly</a>, because&nbsp;<a href="http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010020611/conservative-policies-economics-hard-families" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; color: rgb(159, 0, 40); text-decoration: none; ">young</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/aarp-report-middle-aged-workers-hit-h" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; color: rgb(159, 0, 40); text-decoration: none; ">older</a>, most people have to work for a living and don't care how the stock market is doing.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 12px; padding-left: 0px; ">So, more like this, please.</p></span></div>]]></description>
                <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/03/getting-solar-e.html</link>
                <guid>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/03/getting-solar-e.html</guid>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Environment</category>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Government and governing</category>
        
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">environment</category>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">solar power</category>
        
                <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 17:28:01 -0800</pubDate>
            </item>
    
            <item>
                <title>NUMMI Factory Closing - HUGE Impact - Steps You Can Take</title>
                <description><![CDATA[<p> <em>This post originally appeared at <a href="http://www.ourfuture.org/">Campaign for America's Future</a> (CAF) at their <a href="http://www.ourfuture.org/blog">Blog for OurFuture</a> as part of the <a href="http://www.ourfuture.org/economy/makingitinamerica">Making It In America</a> project.  I am a Fellow with CAF.</em></p>

<p>Toyota is planning on closing the New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc. NUMMI auto-manufacturing plant in Fremont, CA on March 31.  The immediate effect is a loss of 5,000 jobs.  But, <a href="http://blog.aflcio.org/2010/03/04/a-tire-plant-closes-a-community-withers/">as with any factory closing</a>, the effects ripple out well beyond the immediately obvious.  The public has put up a lot of money to have the plant here, and the costs this closing will put on the public will be <em>enormous</em>.  </p>

<p>Toyota takes off with a ton of cash, we pay the costs, it's the way the system is set up -- <em>by us</em>.</p>

<p>The effect?  From The California Labor Federation, <a href="http://www.calaborfed.org/index.php/site/page/toyota_nummi_closure_would_kill_jobs_destroy_communities/">Toyota NUMMI Closure Would Kill Jobs, Destroy Communities</a>, </p>

<blockquote>...more than 5,000 autoworkers at the plant will be out of work, and another 1,500 Teamsters who transport the cars from the NUMMI plant to the dealerships will also be jobless. Additionally, as many as 50,000 workers at hundreds of businesses in California are completely dependant on NUMMI to stay afloat, from the suppliers that manufacture car parts to the restaurants where the NUMMI workers go for lunch and even the shoe stores where the plant workers buy their specialized work boots.</blockquote>

<p>Toyota has benefited tremendously from this plant, as well as receiving state and federal money.  A <a href="http://www2.calaborfed.org/userfiles/doc/2010/blog/NUMMI%20Blue%20Ribbon%20Commission%20white%20paper.pdf">study released yesterday by the NUMMI Blue Ribbon Commission</a> says, </p>

<blockquote>The United States is Toyota's largest market in the world. California accounted for almost 18 percent of Toyota's U.S. sales and 5 percent of the automaker's global sales in 2007. Toyota led California sales with a quarter of the market, more than the combined share of General Motors and Ford in 2009.

<p>. . . Toyota has benefitted considerably from federal and state programs over the years. ... the automaker captured first place in "Cash for Clunkers" sales ... In a similar program in Japan at about the same time, U.S.-based automakers were excluded initially.</p>

<p>California has invested heavily in NUMMI ... The state has given NUMMI more than $18 million for training<br />
since the plant's inception... Millions more have gone to NUMMI suppliers for training. Major infrastructure improvements have been done explicitly for the plant and to meet its needs. The Port of Oakland, for example,<br />
was dredged 12 years ago to accommodate the kinds of cargo ships the plant requires at a cost of $410 million.</blockquote></p>

<p><strong>When the plant closes the public takes up the costs</strong> -- paying unemployment, for example, for the up-to-50,000 people expected to become unemployed.  The Federal Government will <a href="http://www.autoevolution.com/news/nummi-pension-funds-pass-to-pbgc-17621.html">pick up the costs of the workers' pensions</a>.</p>

<blockquote>The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) announced yesterday it will assume responsibility for the underfunded pension plan of the 5,800 employees and retirees of New United Motor Manufacturing (NUMMI), pending the plant's liquidation by the end of the month.</blockquote>

<p>Just as <a href="http://ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010030902/whirlpool-tells-callers-call-congress-theyre-right">I wrote this week about Whirlpool</a>, this is the way WE have chosen to make the system work.  We can and must change the way the system works.</p>

<blockquote>This is what companies today do. It is just the way the game is played, the way the system works. ... There aren't "good" or "bad" companies; ANY company will do these things because if they don't they lose out to the companies that do. <em><strong>BECAUSE WE LET THEM</strong></em>. In fact, by letting this happen we make it happen because, as I just wrote, if one company doesn't the next will, and the company that doesn't loses out. The system.

<p>So here is what we have to do. <strong>We have to change the rules to stop these jobs from leaving the country.</strong></blockquote></p>

<p><strong>We are going to have to put our foot down, as a people, and take control of the system to make it work for us.  This is not only something we can do, it is our responsibility to do this.</strong></p>

<p>Call Congress and demand that they stop companies -- ALL companies -- from closing factories in the US and moving the jobs out of the country. </p>

<p>I have more coming about this.</p>

<p>Here is one immediate action you can take.  American Rights At Work has an action page with a petition: <a href="http://action.americanrightsatwork.org/campaign/toyota_numii/xs5enbs9q7dkn33m?">Take Action: Tell Toyota: Don't Abandon Your Workers</a></p>

<blockquote>Toyota got its start in America 25 years ago when it opened a plant in Fremont, CA. But on March 31, Toyota plans to close the plant.

<p>Laying off 5,000 people will only be the beginning. 50,000 workers, vendors, and suppliers - and the families who depend on them - could immediately lose their livelihoods. And hundreds of thousands more will be affected by the loss of tax revenue and consumer spending.</p>

<p>Will you help us demand Toyota do right by the workers who helped it get a foothold in America?</blockquote></p>]]></description>
                <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/03/nummi-factory-c.html</link>
                <guid>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/03/nummi-factory-c.html</guid>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Labor &amp; the Economy</category>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Social Justice</category>
        
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">jobs</category>
        
                <pubDate>Sun, 07 Mar 2010 20:21:13 -0800</pubDate>
            </item>
    
            <item>
                <title>CA Taxes Poll -- Ask A Stupid Question...</title>
                <description><![CDATA[Here's a surprise, <a href="http://field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/Rls2329.pdf">in a recent poll</a> of Californians <i>The Field Poll</i> asked if Californians want to balance the state's budget by having their taxes raised, and a lot of people said they would prefer not to have their taxes raised.<div><br /></div><div>The poll mysteriously did not ask if people would prefer that large corporations, who <a href="http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2009/06/did-you-know-ab.html">got their taxes cut</a> in the most recent budget negotiations, should pay for their use of the state's infrastructure. &nbsp;It did not ask if oil companies should pay a bit for the oil they take out of the ground here to sell back to us. &nbsp;It did not ask of the wealthiest Californians -- <a href="http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/02/108-million-inc.html">some of whom pay no taxes at all</a> -- should be asked to pay a fair share to support the infrastructure that enabled them to become wealthy.</div><div><br /></div><div>The poll only asked people what they think of raising taxes. &nbsp;Only 9% think California's budget should be balanced using only tax increases.</div><div><br /></div><div>The poll asked if the budget should be balanced using spending cuts only. &nbsp;31% said yes.&nbsp;The poll did not ask what specific spending to cut. &nbsp;I suspect people would have answered that the state should cut only that spending that is wasted, but certainly not any of the spending that is used for services they find necessary, like schools or roads or police. &nbsp;Cut that <i>other</i> stuff. &nbsp;It did not explain <a href="http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/01/what-cut-taxes.html">what spending cuts mean</a> to the respondents, that class sizes have grown enormous, that college tuition has increased beyond what people can afford, or that elderly ill people cannot get basic services. &nbsp;They would answer, cut that <i>other</i> stuff but not stuff that affects any of us.</div><div><br /></div><div>The poll asked if people feel the state should balance the budget using an equal mix of spending cuts and tax increases. &nbsp;29% said yes. &nbsp;&nbsp;It did not point out that people have always answered polls this way but the state has been <i>only</i> cutting and cutting for years and years.</div><div><br /></div><div>The poll also asked if people feel the state is responding to their needs. &nbsp;That would be the same state that has been cutting services for years and years, while giving big tax breaks to corporations. &nbsp;Surprisingly a lot of people feel that the state is not responding to their needs.</div><div><br /></div><div>The poll did not ask if people wanted a pony.</div>
]]></description>
                <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/03/ca-taxes-poll--.html</link>
                <guid>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/03/ca-taxes-poll--.html</guid>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Taxes</category>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">The Budget</category>
        
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">polls</category>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">taxes</category>
        
                <pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2010 00:04:08 -0800</pubDate>
            </item>
    
            <item>
                <title>$108 Million Income = NO State Taxes</title>
                <description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hiltzik24-2010feb24,0,5865964.column">Michael Hiltzik in the LA Times today</a>,<div><br /></div><blockquote>To everyone who claims that our wealthiest citizens pay more than their fair share of income taxes and we should cut them a break because they're the ones who, you know, create jobs in our economy, I have four words for you:</blockquote><blockquote>Frank and Jamie McCourt.</blockquote><blockquote>The McCourts, who own the Los Angeles Dodgers (so she says; he says he's the owner and she's not), jointly pocketed income totaling $108 million from 2004 through 2009, according to documents Jamie McCourt recently filed in the couple's divorce case in Los Angeles County Superior Court.<div><br /></div>On that sum, they paid zero federal and state income tax. Jamie suggests that some tax breaks will apply this year too.</blockquote><div>The McCourts have eight houses. &nbsp;Eight. &nbsp;Houses.</div><div><br /></div><div>California is laying off teachers, closing parks, etc. -- killing the state -- just to protect the wealthiest and biggest corporations from paying their fair share of taxes. &nbsp;Millions of dollars in corporate contributions pay for the nasty smear campaigns -- and all the lies about how the wealthy are "hurt" by taxes and will "leave the state" -- all to protect THIS!</div><div><br /></div><div>California needs to take a cold, hard look at the game-playing and the holes in our tax system that allow the rich to get away with paying less taxes than "the help" while at the same time we're telling teachers we can't afford to keep them teaching our kids.</div><div><br /></div><div>And please, let's stop all this nonsense about "they'll just leave the state" if we try to make the wealthy and big corporations pay their fair share.</div>]]></description>
                <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/02/108-million-inc.html</link>
                <guid>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/02/108-million-inc.html</guid>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Taxes</category>
        
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">taxes</category>
        
                <pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 09:12:26 -0800</pubDate>
            </item>
    
            <item>
                <title>What is the Puzzle with Jerry Brown?</title>
                <description><![CDATA[<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;color:black">Why won't Jerry Brown just announce that he is running for Governor? &nbsp;Why won't he campaign? &nbsp;Why is he letting Meg Whitman get so far ahead of things in this campaign? &nbsp;Does he just assume he has it "in the bag?"</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;color:black"><br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;color:black">I suspect that is exactly what he assumes. &nbsp;My take on Brown is that
Democrats who were around when he was Governor and later when he ran for
President in 1992 are going to support him, many quite strongly,<i> and they
regularly let him know this</i>. &nbsp;I suspect it is hard for him to go anywhere without stopping to shake a hand and hear from someone who tells him what a great Governor he was, that his ideas on energy and the environment were so far ahead of their time, that he should have been elected President, etc.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;color:black"><br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;color:black">So he probably feels a wind at his back
wherever he goes. &nbsp;This is for sure: the "moonbeam" things Brown was about like
energy and the environment and unions have proven to be the right things. <a href="http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2009/04/on-jerry-browns.html">&nbsp;I wrote about this</a> almost a year ago,&nbsp;</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;color:black"><br /></span></p><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;color:black">He was called "Moonbeam" and mocked, but he was right, and we were right, and the country needs to come to terms with this so we can move on and finally DO right.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;color:black"><br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Arial&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;color:black">. . .&nbsp;It is 30 years later and the country needs to get past that mocking of the people who were right. But the mocking and obstruction by entrenched interests are still in the way of letting us move on and do the things we need to do for the economy, the country, and the planet.</span></p></blockquote><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; "><br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; ">The problem with this is that <i>it really is</i> 30 years later now. &nbsp;This is
2010, and that pool of people just isn't big enough by any means. &nbsp;You
have to be "a certain age" to even care. &nbsp;He needs to find a way to reach out and be relevant to people who were not around when he was Governor or when he ran for President.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; "><br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:
normal"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; ">Does he realize this? &nbsp;If he is not meeting a lot of the people to whom he just isn't
relevant and who just don't care, he might not be picking this up at all. &nbsp;But it just is the case. &nbsp;He needs to start campaigning and saying things that are relevant to the 21st century of he is going to win this election.</span></p>

<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p> ]]></description>
                <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/02/what-is-the-puz.html</link>
                <guid>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/02/what-is-the-puz.html</guid>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">2010 General Election</category>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Environment</category>
        
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">Jerry Brown</category>
        
                <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 12:24:22 -0800</pubDate>
            </item>
    
            <item>
                <title>Promoting Ideas</title>
                <description><![CDATA[Danny Goldberg, former CEO of Air America, <a href="http://www.alternet.org/story/145460/air_america_radio,_rip_--_it_didn't_have_to_be_this_way/?page=entire">writes about the demise of the network</a>, and how this contrasts with conservative talk radio. Excerpt,<div><br /></div><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><div>"Conservatives believe in doing whatever it takes to promote their ideas. ...&nbsp;In 1976 Rupert Murdoch bought the New York Post and it has lost money every year since--the total loss estimated to be more than half a billion dollars.</div><div><br /></div><div>In 1983, the Rev. Sun Myung Moon created the Washington Times, which has also lost money every year. Widely published reports place Moon's losses at over $1 billion on the Times and other political media including a purchase of the venerable wire service UPI. These money-losing properties have put dozens of conservatively slanted stories onto the national radar screen, altered the framing of every important political issue and nurtured virtually every right-wing pundit who now thrives as a TV talking head.</div><div><br /></div><div>More recently, Phillip Anschutz bought the money-losing Weekly Standard from Murdoch and announced plans to invest in more conservative media. Meanwhile his fellow billionaire and former Republican Treasury Secretary Pete Petersen started a digital news service called the Fiscal Times."</div></blockquote><div><br /></div><div>He goes on to talk about the influence of talk radio,</div><div><br /></div><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><div>"One-hundred-thirty-eight million people commute to and from work in automobiles, where they have no access to computer or TV screens. For around a third of them, or 48 million, AM talk radio is their entertainment of choice. Of the top 10 AM talk radio shows, nine are hosted by extreme conservatives, giving the right wing a captive audience of around 40 million listeners a week--at least seven times greater than the combined audiences of Fox News, CNN and MSNBC."</div></blockquote><div><br /></div><div>Also about how this helps boost the "Tea Party Movement"</div><div><br /></div><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><div>"It was not preordained that all of the millions of people who identify with the Tea Party movement would believe the conservative narrative that the economic ills afflicting the middle class are the result of liberalism. But given that tens of millions of them had no alternative explanations or solutions, it is not surprising that conservative ideas and candidates are ascendant."</div></blockquote><div><br /></div><div>And finally the key point,</div><div><br /></div><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><div><div>"Instead, most of today's progressives spent the last year talking to themselves while conservatives convinced millions of people that global warming is a hoax, that torture is required to keep America safe, that non-millionaires in Canada and Europe have worse health care than their American counterparts. The right wing could never have convinced 45 percent of Americans that the Democrats wanted "death panels" if their outreach was limited to Sarah Palin's Facebook page and the three million people a night who watch Fox's highest-rated shows."</div></div></blockquote><div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; border-collapse: collapse; line-height: 17px; ">By and large, Progressives talk to each other, while conservatives talk to the public. &nbsp;However,<b>&nbsp;Speak Out California</b>'s mission is to reach out to the public through the Internet, op-eds, radio and TV interviews, speaking engagements and other means. &nbsp;Other California progressive organizations have a mission of reaching people as well. <a href="http://www.couragecampaign.org/">Courage Campaign</a> currently works primarily through the Internet. &nbsp;Others, like <a href="http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/cahome">Organizing for America/California</a> and <a href="http://www.democracyforamerica.com/groups/730-california-for-democracy">Democracy for America</a>, work on voter engagement.</span></div></div><div><br /></div><div><div>Until we persuade our legislative leaders that we've got their backs, they're going to continue doing things--like capitulating to&nbsp;suspending the <a href="http://ceres.ca.gov/ceqa/">California Environmental Quality Act</a>&nbsp;(CEQA) and other important state environmental laws that protect the public health and the beauty of natural resources. &nbsp;There will be lots more capitulation this year as well, unfortunately, and from the top down. We're already seeing it in the President's&nbsp;sharp veering to the right after the Massachusetts election and we sense the same fear and uncertainty swelling in Sacramento.</div><div><br /></div><div>Unless we put some resources into building a competitive messaging machine and create a megaphone that reaches out beyond our own ears, the state of California will continue to veer to the destructive "right" and we'll all be blaming "left" politics for it.</div></div>]]></description>
                <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/02/promoting-ideas.html</link>
                <guid>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/02/promoting-ideas.html</guid>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Progressive Infrastructure</category>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Progressivism</category>
        
        
                <pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 07:46:09 -0800</pubDate>
            </item>
    
            <item>
                <title>&quot;But&quot; Watch</title>
                <description><![CDATA[<center><img src="http://seeingtheforest.com/STFphotos/butt-head.jpg" height="175" /></center><div><br /></div> 

<p>"But" Watch is when you see Republican junior propagandists write letters to the editor, call radio stations, etc. and begin them with, "<a href="http://www.seeingtheforest.com/archives/2006/01/but_watch.htm">I'm a Democrat, but..."</a></p>

<p>Today we have <a href="http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/?q=node/7438#comment-568">this comment</a> to the post: <a title="Senator Reid: Why Should We Help You Win Re-election? | California Progress Report" href="http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/?q=node/743">Senator Reid: Why Should We Help You Win Re-election? | California Progress Report</a>,</p>

<blockquote>I'm a Democrat, but I appreciate that we have an opponent party. It's too bad that both parties cannot work more harmoniously together. Bi-partisan is a funny word the way it's usually interpreted...when one party is in the majority, it says that bi-partisanship is for the other to roll over dead.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</blockquote><blockquote><p>If it were not for the Republicans, we would be in a worse financial mess than we are with "pork" gong hog wild.Of course, they did not to a very good job of balancing the budget when they were in power under Bush.</p>

<p>More and more "pork" comes to the surface everyday. E.g., BART wants billions to build a not-needed train to the Oakland airport. Or, Fremont wants $385,000 federal dollars to study how to use the about-to-be empty NUMMI plant. If the city fathers and city staff are not capable of doing that, then they should be voted out of office or fired.</p>

<p>It's interesting the liberal media don't use the word "pork" anymore; they use the cleaner word: "earmarks;" or , more recently "stimulus." In any case, it's all "pork."</p></blockquote><p></p>

<p>This is from a "Democrat"?  Seriously, how many Democrats talk about "the liberal media?" &nbsp;</p><p>And considering that Republican deregulation caused the financial crisis this line is astonishing: "If it were not for the Republicans, we would be in a worse financial mess than we are."</p><p>Nice try. &nbsp;Didn't work.</p>]]></description>
                <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/02/but-watch.html</link>
                <guid>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/02/but-watch.html</guid>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Extremism</category>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Opposition</category>
        
        
                <pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 16:00:26 -0800</pubDate>
            </item>
    
            <item>
                <title>Did Bush Leave Us Bankrupt, Corrupt, Ungovernable?</title>
                <description><![CDATA[<div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: verdana, arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 16px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 2px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px; "><i>This appeared first at </i><a href="http://www.openleft.com/"><i>Open Left</i></a><i>, but I wonder if it applies to California as well? Is it already too late for California? &nbsp;Have the conservatives done so much damage that the state is just bankrupt and ungovernable?</i></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: verdana, arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 16px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 2px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px; "><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: verdana, arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 16px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 2px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px; ">When you sell the farm, the farm's gone.<p></p><p>Is it already too late for America? &nbsp;I'm starting to think that the anti-tax, anti-government conservative movement that started in the mid-70s, elected Reagan and led to the terrible Bush Presidency may have effectively destroyed the country, leaving it bankrupt, corrupt,ungovernable, ruled by a wealthy elite -- and we're only now just starting to realize it. &nbsp; To cover tax cuts we stopped maintaining the infrastructure and started borrowing. &nbsp;To satisfy their &nbsp;hatred of government we increasingly stripped away rule of law, regulation, and belief in one-person-one-vote. &nbsp;We are seeing the consequences of all of that coming back to roost now.</p><p>Reagan left us with massive debt and ever-increasing interest payments. Bush left us with $1.3 trillion deficits and a destroyed economy that would force further increases in the borrowing for years - to be blamed on Obama. &nbsp;The "free marketers" gave away our manufacturing base that will take decades and massive capital investment to recover. &nbsp;Obama can try, but it may just be too late to do anything about the borrowing. &nbsp;We need massive investment in jobs and infrastructure, and a national economic/industrial plan. &nbsp;But, with their own Reagan/Bush debt as ammunition, conservative ideologues continue to block every effort at investment to get out of the mess we are in.</p><p>The conservatives destroyed the regulatory structure of the government. &nbsp;They removed the inspectors, administrators, regulators and replaced them with corrupt cronies.</p><p>The conservatives killed off, contracted out or sold off - "privatized" - so much of our in-common resources and heritage of public structures. &nbsp;Water systems, oil and mineral leases, government functions, elements of the military, etc.</p><p>The conservatives destroyed the rule of law, leaving behind public perception of rule by cronyism, favoritism and mob.</p><p>The conservatives destroyed public understanding of democracy, leaving behind a one-dollar-one-vote system that their Supreme Court just formalized, along with a corporate media that works to keep people uninformed. &nbsp;And to make matters worse, now&nbsp;<a href="http://balkin.blogspot.com/2010/02/next-citizens-united.html" style="color: rgb(27, 60, 111); text-decoration: none; ">the telecoms can argue</a>&nbsp;before Federalist Society judges that their "speech rights" are violated by rules making them carry labor and progressive websites over the internet lines they control. &nbsp;And forget about the idea of them ever letting anti-corporate-rule candidates raise money on "their" internet.</p><p>I hate to&nbsp;<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/31/opinion/31friedman.html" style="color: rgb(27, 60, 111); text-decoration: none; ">reference Friedman</a>&nbsp;but this from last week has been sticking in my mind. &nbsp;He says the world is looking at the mess in the US and is turning away from democracy as a result.</p><p></p><blockquote style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 40px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 40px; border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 1px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-left-width: 1px; border-top-style: dashed; border-right-style: dashed; border-bottom-style: dashed; border-left-style: dashed; border-top-color: rgb(53, 62, 98); border-right-color: rgb(53, 62, 98); border-bottom-color: rgb(53, 62, 98); border-left-color: rgb(53, 62, 98); background-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); padding-top: 10px; padding-right: 10px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 10px; ">[Foreigners] look at America and see a president elected by a solid majority, coming into office riding a wave of optimism, controlling both the House and the Senate. Yet, a year later, he can't win passage of his top legislative priority: health care.<p>"Our two-party political system is broken just when everything needs major repair, not minor repair," said ... who is attending the forum. "I am talking about health care, infrastructure, education, energy. We are the ones who need a Marshall Plan now."</p><p>Indeed, speaking of phrases I've never heard here before, another goes like this: "Is the 'Beijing Consensus' replacing the 'Washington Consensus?' " Washington Consensus is a term coined after the cold war for the free-market, pro-trade and globalization policies promoted by America. ... developing countries everywhere are looking "for a recipe for faster growth and greater stability than that offered by the now tattered 'Washington Consensus' of open markets, floating currencies and free elections." And as they do, "there is growing talk about a 'Beijing Consensus.' "</p><p>The Beijing Consensus, ... is a "Confucian-Communist-Capitalist" hybrid under the umbrella of a one-party state, with a lot of government guidance, strictly controlled capital markets and an authoritarian decision-making process that is capable of making tough choices and long-term investments, without having to heed daily public polls.</p></blockquote><br /><strong>It is too late to recover?</strong>&nbsp;&nbsp;<p>Accountability is a first step. &nbsp;If the current administration would&nbsp;<a href="http://www.seeingtheforest.com/archives/2010/01/my_main_beef_wi.htm" style="color: rgb(27, 60, 111); text-decoration: none; ">hold the corrupt actors accountable</a>, maybe we could begin to restore governance. &nbsp;And the public would know who to blame for what has happened to us, enabling them to support policies that will get us out of this. &nbsp;But so far they won't. &nbsp;If they won't even investigate torture and illegally invading a country why should we expect any accountability for the financial collapse, corrupt government contracts, bribery, embezzlement, corruption and other crimes of the Bush era?</p><p>More equitable distribution of the fruits of our economy is another step. &nbsp;Our system worked so much better back when the top tax rate was 90%. &nbsp;The returns from our investment in infrastructure were more widely shared. &nbsp;And back when it took many years to build a fortune businesses had an interdependence with their communities. &nbsp;Executives needed the schools and roads and other public structures functioning well. They needed long-range business and community planning. &nbsp;But just imagine trying to do something about the concentration of wealth today.</p><p>So where do we go from here. &nbsp;Is democracy over? &nbsp;Is rule of law a thing of the past? &nbsp;Is predatory monopoly control by the largest corporations the way things are and will be? &nbsp;Does the world now move to governance by a wealthy elite?</p><p>Or is the winter and the rain and the snow just getting to me?</p><p>What are your thoughts?</p><p></p></span></div> </div>]]></description>
                <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/02/did-bush-leave.html</link>
                <guid>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/02/did-bush-leave.html</guid>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Democracy</category>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Extremism</category>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Government and governing</category>
        
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">budget</category>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">debt</category>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag">taxes</category>
        
                <pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 22:42:23 -0800</pubDate>
            </item>
    
            <item>
                <title>Low Taxes Destroy Our Small Businesses</title>
                <description><![CDATA[Remember last year when the Republicans laid out the price of a budget deal and it was a <a href="http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2009/06/did-you-know-ab.html">giant tax cut for the biggest corporations</a>? &nbsp;So in the middle of a revenue crisis they forced ... less revenue. &nbsp;Well, imagine that you are a struggling small or medium business in California, and the Republicans gave your nemesis even more power to crush you.<div><br /></div><div><b>Corporate taxes are on profits</b>. So a tax cut means that the more profitable companies pay back less to the government for their use of the roads, schools, police and fire protection. &nbsp;The very infrastructure that supports new businesses is weakened.<p></p><p>Meanwhile, smaller businesses that are struggling don't pay corporate taxes, so tax cuts do nothing for them. And small businesses that make modest profits only pay modest taxes, and don't care.</p><p>On the other hand, the giant monopolistic corporations that are chewing up small businesses, destroying local and regional retailers, take those tax cuts and use them to turn themselves into even better small-business-destroying machines.</p><p>For example, the giant Wal-Marts are destroying local and regional retailers. &nbsp;<b>But it is the Wal-Marts, not the local and regional retailers that are the beneficiaries of tax cuts.</b> &nbsp;This is why the "usual suspects" <a href="http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2009/03/teachers-fired.html">who get their campaign funds from the giant companies</a>, and work with lobbyists for the largest corporations are the same ones who always advocate corporate tax cuts.</p><a href="http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2009/12/tax-cuts-and-de.html">Businesses Need Customers Not Tax Cuts</a>.<br /><p></p><br /></div>]]></description>
                <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/02/low-taxes-destr.html</link>
                <guid>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/02/low-taxes-destr.html</guid>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Taxes</category>
        
        
                <pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 11:05:01 -0800</pubDate>
            </item>
    
            <item>
                <title>Oregon Voters Raise Taxes On Wealthy and Corporations</title>
                <description><![CDATA[<div>Voters in Oregon <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/26/AR2010012600936.html">passed tax increases on corporations and the wealthy</a>. &nbsp;This was in spite of well-funded corporate campaigns against the measures.</div><div><br /></div><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><div>Measure 66 raises tax rates on individuals who earn more than $125,000 and couples with incomes greater than $250,000. Measure 67 increases business taxes. Fifty-four percent of voters had approved both measures with more than 80 percent of the vote counted late Tuesday.</div></blockquote><div><br /></div><div>At Calitics Robert Cruichshank writes,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.calitics.com/diary/10992/oregon-voters-deliver-gamechanging-victory">Oregon Voters Deliver Game-Changing Victory</a>,</div><div><br /></div><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><div>The opposition ran a well-funded campaign, led by Nike, Columbia Sportswear, and other big businesses. They were joined by Ari Fleischer's FreedomWorks and the libertarian publisher of the Oregonian, who used to be at the Orange County Register before it went belly-up. Together they ran a campaign arguing that the tax increases would worsen unemployment. But 55% of voters have rejected that, and instead showed that when a truly progressive campaign is waged, the right-wingers can be beaten. Even on taxes.</div><div><br /></div><div>...&nbsp;<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 2px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px; ">Their message was deeply progressive:</span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 2px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px; "><blockquote style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 10px; padding-left: 20px; border-left-width: 5px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(119, 119, 119); color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: arial; ">These reforms protect nearly $1 billion in vital services like education, health care and public safety. These funds preserve class sizes, save jobs for teachers, provide seniors with in-home care, and provide health care for thousands of Oregonians through the Oregon Health Plan. In this time of economic crisis, we must protect those who have been hit the hardest - seniors, children and the unemployed - without putting more of a burden on the middle class.</blockquote></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 2px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px; "><p><br /></p><p>It's a message that works nationally. And it's a message that'll work here in California. Voters don't like seeing their neighborhood schools close, or mass layoffs of teachers, or ending care for the disabled, or kicking kids off of health care. They don't want it, and are willing to raise taxes to prevent it.</p></span></blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 2px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px; "><p></p></span><div>The important lesson to learn is that the public wants government: good schools and roads and courts and police and fire protection. &nbsp;And the public understands that building solid public structures is the key investment in future prosperity.</div><div><br /></div><div>California leaders can now feel free to lead and understand that the public is behind them if they raise taxes on the wealthy and corporations in order to find needed state government programs.</div> ]]></description>
                <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/01/oregon-voters-r.html</link>
                <guid>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/01/oregon-voters-r.html</guid>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Democracy</category>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Government and governing</category>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Taxes</category>
        
        
                <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 13:04:18 -0800</pubDate>
            </item>
    
            <item>
                <title>Supreme Court Unleashes Unlimited Corporate Influence Over Government</title>
                <description><![CDATA[ <div>The Supreme Court has unleashed the unlimited use of corporate resources to influence our elections. &nbsp;This doesn't immediately change our state and local elections, which <a href="http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2009/03/teachers-fired.html">already suffered under a great deal of corporate influence</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>In the understatement-of-the-week the Sacramento Bee writes,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/capitolalertlatest/2010/01/supreme-court-d.html">Supreme Court decision could affect Barbara Boxer race</a>,</div><div><br /></div><div><div><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;">California state campaign finance rules already allow corporations and unions to give directly to independent expenditure campaigns without limits, so the court decision will have little impact on state contests.</blockquote><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><br /><p>But the decision overturns federal rules requiring that corporations and unions establish political action committees, or PACs, to spend on elections.</p><p>. . .&nbsp;"It certainly changes the Boxer race," Stern said. "It means corporations, without setting up a PAC, can spend as much as they want opposing Boxer."</p></blockquote></div><div>let's see, will unlimited corporate resources unleashed against Boxer make a difference? &nbsp;Do ya think?</div><div><br /></div><div>Meanwhile, over at Calitics, some of the diaries express a stronger opinion:</div><div><br /></div><p><a href="http://www.calitics.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=10966">The Day Democracy Died</a></p><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><p>"The outlook isn't pretty after today. Elections will never work in the same way as they have before, and power has taken a giant swing towards the right."</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.calitics.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=10964">Did Democracy Die in America</a></p><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><p>We already have a dominance of corporate spending in CA elections. &nbsp;It really takes place in the machinations involved in the ever increasing number of initiatives, where the airways fill with misleading hyperventiated negative commercials that only Gary South could love. &nbsp;</p><p>Take any major issue we are dealing with: Health Care and Climate Change come most to mind, and figure out how the will of the people is anything more than the will of the corporation. &nbsp;Consider the power of Exxon-Mobil and or Chevron vis-a-vis climate change legislation and offshore drilling. &nbsp;Consider the power of Stewart Resnick regarding water.</p></blockquote><p></p><p></p><p>It is universally agreed that in the short-run this will bring a huge advantage to Republican candidates, who already are big supporters of one-dollar-one-vote corporatism over one-person-one-vote democracy. &nbsp;However, in the long term this really means the parties will become factions of corporate interests lining up against other factions of corporate interests. &nbsp;Perhaps ExxonMobil on one side and Chevron on the other, each trying to buy legislation to give them advantages over the other. &nbsp;The people won't be players any longer.</p></div>]]></description>
                <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/01/supreme-court-u.html</link>
                <guid>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/01/supreme-court-u.html</guid>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Democracy</category>
        
        
                <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2010 14:40:19 -0800</pubDate>
            </item>
    
            <item>
                <title>Lessons From Massachusetts</title>
                <description><![CDATA[The Republican candidate won the special election in Massachusetts to replace Senator Kennedy, giving them 41 votes. &nbsp;The Republicans have filibustered every single bill this year, and this clinches their ability to block the President's agenda. &nbsp;If this sounds familiar to Californians, it's because in California the Republican minority is able to block budgets, and we have seen the results.<div><br /></div><div>There are lots of sophisticated explanations for the election's outcome, mostly involving people being upset at particulars of the health care bill. &nbsp;But I don't really think that the people who voted for the Repubican candidate were all that well informed about differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill, the "public option," or other&nbsp;intricacies&nbsp;of in-progress legislation. &nbsp;</div><div><br /></div><div>Instead, when looking for the reasons people voted this way,<b> I think we should take the Republican candidate's word for it</b>. &nbsp;<a href="http://www.brownforussenate.com/senator-brown">On his website he says</a>&nbsp;it is for the following reasons:</div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#000000" face="verdana, arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 16px;"><br /></span></font></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><blockquote>At his September 12 announcement of candidacy for the U.S. Senate, Senator Brown articulated a core set of beliefs that guide his thinking.</blockquote></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span"><ul style="margin-top: 1em; margin-right: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 2em; padding-left: 0px; list-style-type: disc; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; "><li style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; list-style-type: disc; list-style-position: outside; list-style-image: initial; ">Government is too big and that the federal stimulus bill made government bigger instead of creating jobs</li><li style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; list-style-type: disc; list-style-position: outside; list-style-image: initial; ">Taxes are too high and are going higher if Congress continues with its out-of-control spending</li><li style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; list-style-type: disc; list-style-position: outside; list-style-image: initial; ">The historic amount of debt we are passing on to our children and grandchildren is immoral</li><li style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; list-style-type: disc; list-style-position: outside; list-style-image: initial; ">Power concentrated in the hands of one political party, as it is here in Massachusetts, leads to bad government and poor decisions</li><li style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; list-style-type: disc; list-style-position: outside; list-style-image: initial; ">A strong military and vigorous homeland defense will protect our interests and security around the world and at home</li><li style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; list-style-type: disc; list-style-position: outside; list-style-image: initial; ">All Americans deserve health care, but we shouldn't have to create a new government insurance program to provide it</li></ul></span><blockquote></blockquote></div><div>Here's the thing. &nbsp;<b>Most of the assumptions underlying these statements are simply wrong - factually incorrect</b>. &nbsp;They have been pounded out by a corporate/conservative misinformation machine that just makes stuff out and puts it out there on TV, the radio, email forwarding and every other channel they can find. &nbsp;</div><div><br /></div><div>But the facts are that the federal stimulus didn't "make government bigger," the "out-of-control spending" occurred under the previous Republican president, we spend more on military than every other country in the world combined - and it is the largest government spending program and contributing to the debt, and the health care reform specifically <i>doesn't</i> create a government insurance program (it should) and <i>saves</i> money rather than increase spending.</div><div><br /></div><div>The Right has a message machine that has been repeating misinformation and getting away with it, because:&nbsp;</div><div>1) The leadership of the other party has let them get away with it.</div><div>2) There is no comparable megaphone with which to refute the misinformation.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>The same is true here in California, and we may be heading for similar election turnovers</b>. &nbsp;Republicans repeat things that simply are not true, but there is lack of leadership from elected democrats and almost no megaphone with which to counter the untruths. The example we regularly bring up here is the assertion, repeated over and over, that businesses and rich people leave California because of taxes and regulations. &nbsp;Of courase this just isn't true, but is formulated in a way that sounds like it could be true if you just don't think about it, and leads to large corporations having even more power over our lives and the wealthy having an even greater share of all income and wealth.</div><div><br /></div><div>Of course, people and businesses that do leave the state do so because of the high cost of living, which is the result of so many poeple wanting to live here. &nbsp;It just costs more to live in a nicer place. &nbsp;And as I wrote last week, <a href="http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/01/ca-still-trying.html">it is a nicer place because of the government and the public structures that We, the People built</a>. &nbsp;In other words,<b> California is a nicer place because of those regulations and taxes!</b></div>]]></description>
                <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/01/lessons-from-ma.html</link>
                <guid>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/01/lessons-from-ma.html</guid>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Government and governing</category>
        
        
                <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jan 2010 20:49:27 -0800</pubDate>
            </item>
    
            <item>
                <title>Support Women&apos;s Health Care</title>
                <description><![CDATA[<p>We are passing this along:</p>

<p><strong>We Will Not Be Thrown Under the Bus!</strong></p>

<p>On January 13th, <a href="http://www.notunderthebus.com/">Not Under the Bus</a>, the premier women's health care campaign from the <a href="http://www.womensmediacenter.com/">Women's Media Center</a>, is asking women everywhere to take action against the discriminatory, anti-choice language that exists in both the House and Senate health care bills. These bills would effectively roll back women's health care coverage in the area of reproductive rights. It is up to all of us to make sure we don't get thrown under the bus by politicians in Washington.</p>

<p>Here's how you can TAKE ACTION on Wednesday, January 13th:<br />
<strong>Tweet</strong>: Take Action today with @NotUnderTheBus. Demand that women's rights be protected in #HCR: http://bit.ly/7u15IG #underthebus</p>

<p>Post our video to your <strong>Facebook</strong> page, Blog, or status:<br />
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUtLTB6zKbo</p>

<p>Donate your Facebook Status to raise awareness:<br />
"Today is Take Action Day with NotUnderTheBus.com. What are you doing to demand pro-choice, fair health care? http://bit.ly/7u15IG Take Action. Write an op-ed, call your Senator, and sign a petition. Demand that women's rights be protected in health care reform."</p>

<p>Sign and Share Our Petition: Tell lawmakers in Washington to keep women's health care safe, fair and covered and urge them to strike any anti-abortion amendments from the final bill. <a href="http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/do-not-throw-women-under-the-bus">http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/do-not-throw-women-under-the-bus</a></p>]]></description>
                <link>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/01/support-womens.html</link>
                <guid>http://www.speakoutca.org/weblog/2010/01/support-womens.html</guid>
        
                    <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Action Alerts</category>
        
        
                <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 12:32:56 -0800</pubDate>
            </item>
    
        </channel>
    </rss>
