Susan,

Would you have voted to confirm Abel Maldonado as Lt. Governor?

Susan,

Do you support marriage equality? Do you remember when you started supporting marriage equality? What in your background informed your views towards gay rights?

No, I would not have voted to confirm Senator Abel Maldonado as Lt. Governor. The acting Lt. Governor, Mona Pasquil, was doing a excellent job and had served with former Lt. Governor John Garamendi. Since opposition to the PXP oil deal had become a litmus test for confirmation, Abel made some encouraging comments about his opposition to the PXP oil deal, including that he would not support it without the Minerals Management Service agreeing in writing to the end dates. He also said he wouldn't support it unless the oil rigs were being removed (they are not being removed). But you have to look beyond that single issue. His record on many other issues that I care about including health care, workers' rights and women's issues is dismal.

Susan,

The Medical Marijuana law passed by voters has had many problems with implementation, including issues with dispensaries. I believe part of the problem is that politicians were too fearful of being labeled as soft on drugs to craft better regulations.

How do you think the current law could be improved?

Do you believe people have a fundamental right to choose to smoke marijuana for health reasons?

Yes I wholeheartedly support marriage equality. Throughout my life, I have had very close friends and loved ones who were gay and at no point did I ever consider that they were not entitled to the right to marry. As the parent of a son, I have always been astonished by some parents who would deny those rights to their children. For me it's a deep personal commitment to equality for all and not a political decision.

Many people believe a fundamental problem in California is partisanship. In your work as an environmental activist can you share the names of some Republicans you have worked with to protect our natural resources?

I believe that medical marijuana should be made available in a controlled fashion to those who truly need it to address serious health problems. Prop. 215 was not authored by legislators but by pro-legalization supporters. It was designed to allow non-profit, closed-loop collectives, not to allow for-profit dispensaries. In fact, the word "dispensaries" does not appear in Prop. 215.

Many believe that existing law gives local governments the ability to craft ordinances that are consistent under Prop. 215 and that allow them to appropriately limit the proliferation of dispensaries in their communities.

Prop. 215 allows for people to grow marijuana in small quantities and smoke it for health reasons.

I have worked with Republicans who give generously to environmental causes. They care as deeply about the environment, clean air and clean water as Democrats do. It's unfortunate that the debate on the environment in both the legislature and Congress has become so polarized.

I am fully aware that some charter schools offer students very little and perform worse than other public schools in their area. Others though offer unique programs and opportunities. Would you like to see more charters in total opened in California if they are of the same quality we currently have in Ventura and Santa Barbara Counties?

Susan,

Do you believe the total tax rate in California is too high or too low?

I believe as many others do that the governor has deliberately underfunded public schools in order to push for the privatization of education, including private, for-profit charter schools.

Charter schools can serve as laboratories for creative and innovative programs, but I would want to make sure that any expansion of charter schools did not undermine the public schools that are so important to so many families and children.

I did not agree with the removal of the cap on the number of charter schools in California that was pushed through by the legislature and the governor in a last-minute attempt to get Race to the Top funds (which we didn't get). In the mean time, we made hasty changes in education policy without a thorough debate.

What groups do you refuse to take campaign contributions from? Will you also refuse to take campaign contributions from leadership PACs funded by these groups?

Like every other person I know, I think it would be nice to be paying lower taxes. However I also believe in providing services to the needy, funding for schools, and other essential services.

Our property taxes in California tend to be lower than other states, but our income taxes are in the high range.

But what also needs to be examined are the corporate tax breaks that were pushed through during the most recent budget crises that don't create jobs and in some cases only benefit the eight largest corporations in the state.

Your environmental activism has helped to stop projects that you thought were problematic. I admire someone that is willing to stand up for the environment when a coalition of groups wants to build. But can you think of an example where your support for the environment has helped to create jobs?

I evaluate each contribution as it is received. For example, I was offered a possible contribution from Anthem Blue Cross, which I declined. I would not accept contributions from PACs that oppose single-payer health care as my primary opponent already has.

I have not solicited or accepted any tribal gaming money, as my primary opponent has.

My environmental activism is designed to ensure that projects comply with the law and do not compromise the health, safety or quality of life in the communities in which they are located.

In many instances, modifications to projects that bring them into compliance with the law do not eliminate jobs. The projects still get built, but they are beneficial for the community.

In Crystal Cove State Park, for example, I worked with the local community to stop the demolition of historic cottages on the coast that had fallen into disrepair. They were to be replaced by a single private luxury resort with rooms going for $650-plus a night. Instead, we worked to convince both State Parks and the Coastal Commission to deny the resort proposal and to opt for renovation of the cottages and the creation of a vibrant public low-cost resort area. Many construction jobs were created that continue to this day in addition to the jobs related to ongoing operation of the resort and its restaurant, etc. It was a win-win for all.

As Chair and member of the Santa Barbara County Planning Commission, I approved over 900 new homes, and 200,000 square feet of new commercial space that also resulted in the creation of jobs.

Thank you so much for featuring me on your blog. I'd love to come back and talk about my background, experience and qualifications -- including my business career -- in addition to my non-profit work. You do a great service for the community, Brian.

Susan,

Thanks for coming on my blog and answering questions, including those my readers suggested.

Readers,

Feel free to post your feedback on my questions and her answers. I only asked Susan Jordan to be on here until 9PM, so any other questions should be directed to her Facebook page or her website.

Thanks for reading.

"Like every other person I know, I think it would be nice to be paying lower taxes. However..."

Looks like my taxes will go up if Jordan's elected.

Eric,
That's a really dramatic statement. First of all, she only talked about corporate taxes for a select few. Second, no matter who is elected in this race, the 2/3 majority needed to raise taxes will still give your minority party veto power on any increase. Third, you and your TEA Party buddies always seem to forget that under Obama's watch 95 percent of working Americans got a tax cut.

But then you have always been the master of hyperbole and you have told me several times you don't believe in providing services to the needy.

Define "needy". Under Obama's reign, we are seeing a mass redistribution of wealth, which, in effect, discourages people from trying to better themselves. Because as soon as you get into a certain tax bracket Obama's going to come along and take your hard earned money from you and give it to the welfare Mom down the street.

This is what the Tea Party movement is all about. As Grover Norquist so eloquently put it, we need to shrink government down so small that we can drown it in a bathtub.

I think in earlier conversations we defined -- at least I defined -- the most needy as the low-income elderly and disabled.

Agreed. But, we all know Obama's plan extends way beyond the elderly and disabled. The people who will have their mortgage debt forgiven via the Obama bailout plan are people who should never have gotten into a mortgage loan to begin with. This is rewarding reckless and irresponsible behavior -- Chicago style.

At the end of the day people like Susan Jordan and Marie Lakin care more about preserving bloated pension benefits for their union buddies than caring for the needy, elderly and disabled. Notice how liberal democrats refuse to stand up to pension spiking and six figure pension benefits for some of the highest paid public employees in the nation, something that is crowding out funding for vital government services. These folks are more than happy to throw the needy, elderly and disabled under the bus so long as it keeps fueling the union political machine that funds campaigns for liberal democrats. They talk a good game about caring for the poor and disadvantaged, but their actions show that they simply use these folks as props to achieve their far left political goals.

The same applies to schools, where our children are being short-changed by teachers unions that divert more and more school district money to fund their lavish healthcare and early retirement plans. School districts throughout the state would save billions of dollars if retirement benefits were more reasonable and the retirement age were raised to 67, which is the age required for full social security benefits. Why should public employees be allowed to retire 10-15 years earlier than regular taxpaying citizens, while collecting retirement benefits that people in the private sector can only dream about? It is morally wrong to short-change our kids in order to fund these bloated union contracts.

Over the next few years you will witness drastic cuts to government programs that will result in reduced library services, cuts in classroom funding, less cops on the streets, and sharp reductions in services for children, elderly, disabled, and homeless citizens. Meanwhile, liberals like Susan and Marie will fight to sustain the bloated union contracts that are crowding out funding for these services. Their only answer is to continue to raise taxes on a public that is already overburdened, and suffering through the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. Heaven forbid that we take a hard look at wasteful government spending and union contracts that have become a spreading cancer, drowning state and local government budgets in red ink.

Teacher retirement age is 60, not 52, BK. The average CalPERS retiree gets $17,000....not much different than your similarly aged, SocSec retiree. The difference is that the average teacher has had to see much more of their paycheck deducted to finance their pension than the top SoCSec earner. Retired teachers also get Medicare, just like everyone else, or they can pay into their district plan until they reach 65.

How about having all private SocSec earners pay a fair amount into their retirement plans instead of having their payroll deductions capped. teachers don't have that luxury...they keep paying and paying, without any annual cap on deductions.

Or here's a great idea, based on your logic! We should reduce EVRYONE's pensions and benefits, public AND private. That way we can save much more and put the collective savings into providing MORE tax breaks for you and your tea bagging friends.

I'd much prefer that teachers get the same pay as teenaged babysitters: $5/hr per child. After all, they not only have to watch and manage them, our teachers also have to teach them, deal with medical and emotional problems, a full load of administrational record-keeping, testing, dealing with parents, preparing lesson plans, holding their bladders to a once-a-day opportunity, etc. Why, at that price....and you can keep the benefits....most teachers would earn about $200 per class, times 6 classes a day for a total of about $216,000 per year. Not bad! As it is, the average teacher receives about one-fifth of that amount adn has the same problem paying bills, keeping a mortgage and paying taxes as everyone else.

But like other political wonks of your ilk, BK, you like to pit neighbor against neighbor, one against the other, solely for political gain. Your answer to the Nation's economic problems...that you and your ilk created...is to encourage communities to choose an easily-identified group among us to become the targets of YOUR anger. Sounds familiar, doesn't it. Amoral creeps like you have done it time and time again: pick a neighbor and lay the blame on him and then rile up the other neighbors for a lynching.

God forgive you.

Gary is once again spreading more lies and disinformation. But that's to be expected from somebody who is a direct beneficiary of the teacher's union and the CalPERS pension system. He post is yet another self-serving example of someone who is willing to gut services to the poor, disabled, elderly, disadvantaged, and children if it puts more money into his own pocket. Shame on you.

Click on the link to see a video featuring close friends and associates of Susan Jordan, Marie Lakin, and Gary Selvaggio.

Thanks for the clarificatrion, BK. I'll let all the teachers know that they should have retired 10 years earlier than they did, so they could glom on to more of their fabulously extravagant retiurement packages.

Aw, Bubba, you missed me and so you came to pick a fight. I miss you, too. Gary's done a great job here. Can't top him.

See you around BK.