You will know us by our enemies

Steven Harmon in the Contra Costa Times:

Foes unite to fight 89
Opposition to the 'clean money' campaign initiative, with strict contribution limits, has created odd bedfellows

SACRAMENTO - The odd alliance opposing Proposition 89, the "clean money" initiative, illustrates what proponents say is the problem in state politics: Big-money interests are so vested in the system that even the most extreme opposites -- like the state teacher's union and the state's biggest business advocate -- will join forces to keep the status quo.

Prop. 89 would place limits on contributions to state legislative candidates, independent expenditure committees and political parties. It would also restrict donations to ballot initiatives, though political action committees could still give unlimited amounts. [...]

But while corporations have provided the bulk of financial backing to the opposition, the merging of forces between left and right -- unions and businesses, Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, and Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger -- has exposed how the measure has threatened entrenched interests, said Ned Wigglesworth, policy advocate for California Common Cause.

"Democrats and Republicans alike are hooked on campaign cash, making it possible for a handful of interests to keep both parties on a fairly short leash," Wigglesworth said. "This means the public interest often takes a back seat to the wish list of big donors, whether it's a bloated contract for the prison guards union, an expansion of Indian gaming compacts or the passage of a bill like the cable bill, done to benefit one particular company."

Look our opponents, the only thing they have in common is that they have enough money to buy what they want in Sacramento.

This is already the most expensive election ever. Just like the last one was the most expensive election ever. Unless Proposition 89 passes, the next election will again be the most expensive ever.

LA Teachers Endorse Proposition 89

In sharp contrast to the CTA message, UTLA has come out strong for Proposition 89:

United Teachers Los Angeles Endorses Prop. 89
Nation's Second Largest Teachers Union Local Says Prop. 89 Will Benefit Democracy and Working People

The United Teachers Los Angeles, the second-largest local teachers union in the country, Wednesday night endorsed Proposition 89, a November initiative that would reduce political corruption and establish a more level playing field in California elections.

UTLA, with 44,000 members, is largest National Education Association local in the country and the largest union in Los Angeles County.

"We hope that UTLA's endorsement of Prop. 89 will send a strong message that teachers are fed up with a system of political corruption that has put big donor demands ahead of fulfilling our state's commitment to excellent schools and a top quality education for our children. Prop. 89 will end big money control and allow us to take back our government so that its accountable to the needs and concerns of California teachers and families," said Leonard Segal, member of the UTLA Board of Directors and a substitute teacher, after the vote.

"We need to make it possible for candidates who don't have massive corporate backing to participate in the political process. That's really what Prop. 89 is about," said Paul Huebner, vice chair of the 44,000-member UTLA's Political Action Council of Educators, and a second grade teacher.

"We can never outspend the big corporate donors and millionaires and political action committees. But we can get our members more involved in politics for the benefit of our democracy. That includes enabling more teachers and more working people to be able to run for office and win," Huebner said.

Notice how UTLA focuses on increasing their members' participation in democracy, not preserving power.

Quote of the Day

In a moment of high political comedy, the No on 89 campaign has argued that Prop 89’s $10,000 limit on corporate contributions to ballot measures is unfair to corporations because it doesn’t apply to labor unions. At the same time, the No on 89 campaign has argued that Prop 89 is unfair because the $10,000 limit on corporate contributions to ballot measures will apply to labor unions.

Somewhere, Erwin Schrodinger and his cat are enjoying a laugh.

The absurdity of this position makes sense when you look at the opposition, which includes two of the 800 lb. gorillas in the zoo of California politics, the Chamber of Commerce and the California Teachers Association. When the No on 89 campaign speaks to Chamber-friendly audiences, Prop 89 is unfair to corporations. When the No on 89 campaign speaks to labor-friendly audiences, as spokesperson Robin Swanson recently did on KPFA radio, Prop 89 is unfair to labor unions.

So which is it?

The answer, which has been drowned out by a torrent of misinformation, is that Prop 89 is fair to both labor unions and corporations. Just like federal law requirements for contributions to candidates and PACs, Prop 89 allows labor unions and corporations alike to contribute unlimited amounts to ballot measures through PACs.

But more importantly, Prop 89 is fair to the voters of California, who have been so marginalized by big spenders on both sides of the political spectrum that they no longer bother to show up at the polls. If Prop 89 passes, the people of California would have the opportunity to take back control of their government from the special interests and fulfill the promise of representative democracy in this state.

And it is that fact which has Prop 89’s opposition tying themselves in knots.

-Ned Wigglesworth

Quote of the Day

A dream team of campaign consultants has been assembled to fight Prop. 89, the public financing initiative on the November ballot. Among them: Gale Kaufman, the Democratic consultant who led the campaign to defeat Schwarzenegger's special election initiatives; Goddard Clausen, which helped kill off the universal preschool initiative in June; and the firm of veteran initiative man Frank Schubert. Among the interest groups lining up against the measure are the California Teachers Assn., the California State Council of Laborers and the California Chamber of Commerce. Almost makes you want to support it. Last week, the League of Women Voters and California Common Cause did just that.

-Dan Weintraub

What Will We Tell the Children?

Steve Lawrence of the AP has a story on Proposition 89. Unless you are a big money special interest, it is clear that the current system is broken. Which gives California two options.

Option 1: We throw our hands up in the air, whine that it is "too complicated" and give up

Option 2: We can research the problem, identify the best solutions found by others facing similiar situations, learn from past experience, and put together sound policy.

To hightlight these two options, compare the message of CTA President Barbara Kerr to others quoted in this story:

Teachers (?)	Everyone Else
Barbara Kerr, "It’s too complicated."	Chuck Idelson, "This is not some newfangled proposal. It’s based on systems in place and working extremely well in a number of other states and municipalities."
Barbara Kerr, "It’s a flawed proposal."	Robert Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies, a Los Angeles-based political think tank, "It will allow more people to run who aren’t wealthy and aren’t connected to wealthy special interests. I think it will reduce the impact of special interest money but not eliminate it. ... It would be a major improvement but not the Holy Grail."
Barbara Kerr, "If I had a good idea of what would be the best system, I assure you we would have talked about it and proposed it."	A 2005 study by three University of Wisconsin political scientists concluded that public financing can significantly increase the number of candidates running for office and therefore the choices available to voters. [...] A study released this year by the nonpartisan Institute on Money in State Politics found that Arizona’s public financing system, adopted by voters in 1998, had narrowed the funding gap between challengers and incumbents and drawn an increasing number of participants.

I know special interests will fight to preserve their vested interest, but does any else find it odd that this message is coming from the teachers? "It is too complicated"??? "If I had a good idea..."?????

Like most things, there is a large knowledge-base when it comes to campaign finance reform and clean money. There is information to learn. All it takes is a little research.

Fabian Nunez

Consultant Wagging the Politician

Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez just announced his opposition to Prop 89, the Clean Elections Initiative. Not coincidentally, the campaign against the measure is being led by his chief political consultant, Gale Kaufman. It was Kaufman who notified the press of Nunez's decision. Under Prop 89, Nunez would no longer be able to raise campaign cash to parcel out to other Democrats and consolidate his power in the Assembly. He could no longer shake down big donors, like insurer Blue Cross, for 25 grand to sit beside him at the World Cup. Nor could he tap special interests for his all purpose ballot measure committees. Kaufman would see an even bigger blow to her business, which currently includes helping the California Teachers Association buy all the influence it can. Prop 89 is for those who believe in the power of big ideas, not big money. This years Speaker Nunez's legislative agenda has spoken for the likes of AT&T, TimeWarner and Blue Cross. Voters deserve better.

Indeed. The problem with Sacramento is that the legislative incentive system is all built about money. Just like voters deserve campaigns of ideas instead of fundraising, so too do invidual legislators deserve leadership that values good policy as much as fundraising. It seems that the further one is from the gavel the more likely they are to support real reform.

One final thought for the night: Is it any surprise that everyone is talking about nonvoters?

Quote of the Day

I don't worry so much as a Republican, but as a citizen, and there's one word: "the blogosphere"...that's what scares me. There are angry people on the left and angry people on the right. And I'm not sure if I want to see that anger harnessed in reforming our government. I like the firewall, if you will. And that's one interesting thing about Prop 89, the campaign finance reform measure...notice how that has bridged together some rather disparate groups. Among the leaders opposing that are the California Teachers Association and the California Chamber of Commerce. Why? They are very vested interests in Sacramento, they don't want the rules changed.

-Bill Whalen, Hooever Fellow, on KQED

California Teacher's Association and Proposition 89

Jean Rains, a teacher at Longwood Elementary School, has a great letter to the editor of the Oakland Tribune:

As a public school teacher and CTA member, I was deeply disappointed to read that a CTA spokesperson announced that CTA was opposing Prop. 89, the California Clean Money and Fair Elections Act.

I frankly do not believe that the CTA is failing to support the proposition because it is "poorly crafted." The CTA, like any other power player, doesn't want to take the chance that it would lose power if a fairer, more inclusive, less corrupting political system replaced our old pay-to-play system.

I'm a union member, and a union supporter. I'm on the phone with the rest of the teachers when we have to work against legislation that would be harmful to students and teachers. But by opposing Prop. 89, the CTA is jeopardizing an opportunity to bring some fairness into our political process.

The California League of Women Voters and the California Nurses Association support this proposition. Arizona and Maine have adopted Clean Money reforms, and since then Maine has been the first state to adopt a form of universal health care. Majorities of candidates in both states are now running as "clean" candidates, because the public does not want to vote for candidates who are obligated to big money donors. Clean Money reforms have already proven that they support a more equitable political process.

Today, in Arizona and Maine, more women, minorities, and working class people are running for office and winning.

We teachers cannot let the CTA make up our minds for us on this important issue. Go to http://www.CAclean.org to get informed and to see a 14-minute special report by Bill Moyers. And contact the CTA to ask them to rethink their decision. They could make or break it. Don't let them break it.

While some special interest bosses like the way Sacramento operates, the people (and our schools) keep losing. We need Proposition 89