Hiatus

January 27, 2007

Nifong and the boys

NEWS. — Former Duke lacrosse rape prosecutor Mike Nifong has been slapped with additional ethics charges by the state bar association, which has accused him of withholding DNA evidence and making misleading statements to the court.
The new charges by the North Carolina State Bar against Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong were announced Wednesday and could lead to his removal from the state bar, according to a copy of the updated complaint. Nifong last year indicted three men from the Duke lacrosse team on charges that they raped a stripper at an off-campus party in March of 2006.

SCOTT – Enough stories have been written expressing outrage about the actions of this out of control DA. Pleas have been made to those (including the teachers on campus) who assumed the boys were guilty to apologize, which won’t happen. The school overreacted in canceling the boys season and they won’t be able to get that back.

However, regardless of whether or not Nifong loses his job and his license to practice, nothing can make these boys lives whole again. In the end, that is the tragedy. The girl (assuming she did make false accusations) should go to prison for as long as the boys would have had they been convicted. It is only by punishing Nifong and the girl that this kind of abuse can be slowed down. But even if that happens, this incident will follow these boys for the rest of their lives and no amount of apologies can change that.

Posted by sharris at 12:49 AM

January 26, 2007

Terrorist hunger strike

NEWS ITEM -— A former college professor who pleaded guilty to aiding a Palestinian terrorist group has begun a hunger strike to protest "continued government harassment," his supporters said.
Sami Al-Arian stopped eating after being held in contempt for refusing to testify before a grand jury in Virginia, the Tampa Bay Coalition for Justice and Peace said in a news release Tuesday.
Al-Arian claims he is surrounded by rats and cockroaches in prison, and is forced to wear dirty and inadequate clothing.
Al-Arian, who has less than 18 months left on a 57-month sentence for aiding the Palestinian Islamic Jihad with nonviolence activities, was found guilty of contempt in November in federal court in Alexandria, Va.

SCOTT – In my opinion, aiding a terrorist organization makes you a terrorist. It is almost unimaginable how much I do not care about this guy going on a hunger strike. When his time his up, he is being deported, where he will almost certainly continue his work to attack and destroy our nation.

For those who question the way we treat prisoners, how many other countries in the world would release this guy – at any point, much less after 57 months – knowing he will continue to try and destroy us.

America makes many mistakes, mostly of omission, but some of commission, but we are still the most amazing, most fair, greatest nation on earth. God Bless America.

Posted by sharris at 12:24 AM

Zogby poll

Pollster John Zogby asked Americans which past president they would like to see in office today.

The winner was the Gipper, Ronald Reagan with 28%. A close second was FDR with 26%, followed by John F. Kennedy with 21%. Abraham Lincoln had 16% and our first president, George Washington had 6%. Our current president, George W. Bush and immediate past president, Bill Clinton, did not make the list. Go figure☺

Posted by sharris at 12:08 AM

January 25, 2007

Joel Fox / Redistricting

In case you missed it in yesterday’s Daily News, Joel Fox (president of the Small Business Action Committee) wrote an excellent column on redistricting and Governor Schwarzenegger. Well worth reading.

Redistricting goal needs compromise
BY JOEL FOX, Guest Columnist
LA Daily News
Article Last Updated:01/23/2007 07:01:54 PM PST
NO, Gov. Schwarzenegger, you're not a "pest."

That's what Arnold Schwarzenegger was concerned about being labeled after his State of the State address when he once again asked the Legislature to change the way congressional and legislative seats are drawn in California.

Despite the loss of a redistricting-reform measure in the 2005 California special election, even lawmakers have since come to recognize the unfairness of the system they control to draw legislative and congressional district lines. The current district drawings would make Picasso proud. The Legislature drew bizarrely mapped districts to ensure safe seats. Thus, Democrats got control of the Legislature, and Republicans didn't lose ground to Democrats in the biggest congressional delegation.

But without the chance of competitive races, the range of candidates with varying ideas is limited. This lack of competition may be partly responsible for the steady drop in voter participation in election campaigns.

Both parties talk a good game about the need to reform redistricting, but nothing ever gets done. There seems little incentive, especially for the majority party, to upset the apple cart and give up the power to draw its own safe district lines.

Then let's offer an incentive to draw fair districts by offering an opportunity for something legislators want: More time in office. Why not make a deal - redistricting reform for term-limit changes?

The jury has been out on term limits for 15 years. Now it comes back with a shrug. Under term limits most agree that there has been some good and some bad. Many point to the increased diversity of elected officials since the onset of term limits as opening up opportunity for all. Others argue that term limits take away continuity and experience from a job that demands both.

A compromise that includes redistricting reform while keeping term limits but lengthening the term in office is the answer to one of the state's biggest political problems. Such a deal would continue to put a check on the power of incumbency, while injecting more competition into political races.

The compromise often discussed is to establish an alternative commission outside the Legislature to establish district lines and, at the same time, lengthen the term an elected official can serve in one house of the Legislature to 12 years from the current six in the Assembly or eight in the Senate. The official would remain in the house he or she was elected to for the entire 12 years, if re-elected, and then would be barred from serving in the other house.

Why not?

If there is more competition with the redrawn districts, there will likely be a greater turnover in certain competitive seats. Not every elected official will serve out the full 12 years allotted under the new limit.

There is nothing sacrosanct about the number of years currently assigned to the limits. People who argue for term limits nationally will defend a three-term limit in one state and a two-term limit in another.

Adjusting the system would honor the goal of the people who supported term limits in the first place - fairness in our government's makeup.

Joel Fox is president of the Small Business Action Committee.

Posted by sharris at 12:37 AM

Radio show

As host of the radio show, California: The Alpha State, it is my pleasure to interview great guests each week. We get to spend an hour taking about subjects and issues that are important to California and Californians. This week, my guests are Jim Keene, Executive Director of the California State Association of Counties and Chris McKenzie, Executive Director of the League of California Cities.

We discuss the relationships between cities and counties as well as their relationship with the state and their residents. Sources of revenue, challenges and opportunities are all part of the discussion.

You can hear the show now on my website at AlphaState.org.

Posted by sharris at 12:16 AM

Community involvement

I love it when people put their time where their mouth is and those involved with the California Association of Political Centrists (CAPC) are doing just that. Combine that with the fact that they are good people and trying to promote centrists and it makes me want to share their most recent press release with you. Read on to learn more….

IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT – MEMBERSHIP DRIVE 2007

California Association of Political Centrists (CAPC) believes that all Californians should have good choices when election time comes. The current system is broken. We can’t fix it without you. Please join CAPC and support the effort to bring better representation to our local and state offices.

CAPC members are primarily Democrats, Republicans and Decline to States. CAPC supports the current two party system but believes that there is a reason why the Decline to State voting block is the fastest growing voting block in the state. People are frustrated with how their respective parties aren’t listening to the broad center of the California population. We need to get back on track, start working across the aisle and stop the gridlock.

Membership Information

General Membership for CAPC is open to all voters but is subject to approval by the Executive Board. The Advisory Council members are pulled from the General Membership by invitation but please let us know if you are interested. Please take a moment to read the attached two page business plan and decide how you might fit in.

All membership fees are $75.00 per household with extra funding always accepted! We have created a Donor Circle where you can help CAPC continue to develop into a strong, effective organization that is already impacting the political landscape.

Donation Information

CAPC has created a donor circle called “Archimedes’ Circle” for those of you that can help us out financially. We are planning on starting up a website and a comprehensive voter database within the next two months and need seed money to get started. We will be positioning ourselves to support current redistricting efforts, local races and the 2008 General Election. We cannot be effective without your financial support. We have fulcrum, levers, water screws and catapults available to all! A donation request form is attached to this e-mail.

2006 Advisory Council (everyone has been invited to stay on for 2007)

State: Keith Richman, Beth Rogers
Local: Neal Andrews, Peggy Buckles, Leslie Cornejo, Steve Doll, Alexandra Dymond, Quinn Fenwick, Greg Glover, Doug Halter, Jennifer Herrera, Charles Kistner, Terri Landes, Donna Prenta, Debi Schultze, Robert Taylor, Zoe Taylor, Katie Teague, Bruce Thomas, Barbra Williamson

We have some new faces for the 2007 advisory council, both East and West County. Omar Masry and Leslie Leavens-Crowe have agreed to join. Keith Richman has confirmed he will be joining us for 2007. We are courting a few other key people – all of them are community leaders and none of them are empty suits.

Please turn in your 2007 membership form along with your check ASAP! And please pass this e-mail along to your friends and family members that might be interested in our organization.

Regards,

Katie Teague
President – California Association of Political Centrists

“We still have very difficult choices to make on the budget and other things, and I am eager to work with you on these choices. I am not asking you not to be Republicans or not to be Democrats or to give up your principles. I am asking you to be Californians and to work out a solution that is the best possible answer to the challenges that we face”.

– Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s State of the State Address – January 9, 2007

Posted by sharris at 12:02 AM

January 24, 2007

Ney to prison

Former Representative Bob Ney (R-Ohio) was sentenced to 30 months in prison, followed by two years of supervised release and 200 hours of community service and fined $6,000.

His crime? He solicited and accepted bribes from Syrian businessman Fouad al Zayat and disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff. He facilitated specific legislative actions in direct response to the bribes paid.

Assistant Attorney general Alice S. Fisher said, “Today’s sentence makes it clear that our government is not for sale.” However, it seems to at least be available for lease. This sentence is amazing light based on what Ney did. I believe life in prison, rather than 30 months followed by a $29,000 a year pension and a few hours of community service would have sent a message loud and clear to the American people. If you are an elected official and you break the trust of your constituents and put your office up for sale, the price you pay should be severe – even Draconian. When – and only when – that happens will the American people believe the government is demanding of it’s elected officials what we should all be expecting.

Posted by sharris at 12:20 AM

Ted Kennedy

I have always found Senator Edward Kennedy to be one of our funniest Senators. I’m afraid it is not usually intentional on his part, but humorous nonetheless.

However, the Massachusetts Democrat did make a comment this week that was both funny and intentional. Referring to Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney changing positions on abortion, Kennedy said,

“He was pro-choice; he’s anti-choice; he’s multiple choice.”

Posted by sharris at 12:03 AM

January 23, 2007

Governor is wrong

Governor Schwarzenegger paid out almost $250 thousand dollars to four top aides. This was paid for political work done during the Governor’s campaign for reelection. The money came directly from real estate developers, oil companies, insurers, etc that contributed to the campaign, knowing full well that some of the money would be passed along to those who work most closely with the Governor; Chief-or-Staff Susan Kennedy, Communications Director Adam Mendelsohn, Maria Shriver’s Chief-of-Staff Daniel Zingale and the governor’s personal assistant, Clay Russell.

There is no gray in this. It is wrong and unethical, completely and at a high level.

When private businesses can directly pay the salaries of government employees, the danger is almost unimaginable. It strikes me that the only reason this hasn’t reached the crisis level for the Governor is that people just can’t see it for what it is. Where do we draw the line? How many hours are they putting in for these companies, rather than the work they are on the government payroll to do. The danger of conflict is so obvious as to be missed.

Does anyone really believe that those companies that paid Susan Kennedy’s $100,000 bonus will not have direct access to her and the Governor, that they won’t receive the benefit of the doubt on any difficult decisions? Is it possible for this to not cause splintered loyalty?

Posted by sharris at 12:33 AM

Expensive real estate

The only thing easier than the weather to get a conversation started in California is to talk about real estate prices. Are you on the treadmill, when did you buy, how have you done? The difference between ridiculous prices and ridiculous profits is the difference between owning and renting.

However, California prices have nothing on the cost of real estate in London.

An apartment, located in the prestigious Knightsbridge neighborhood has come on the market for $335,000 dollars. Hyde Park and Harrods are an easy walk from your front door. Doesn’t sound too bad, does it.

The “apartment” is actually an electricity free dilapidated former storage room. Total square footage? 77, less than 9’ by 9’.

If you’re interested, it’s located at 18 Cadogan Place in London and real estate agent Andrew Scott will gladly take your call – or give you the complete tour. By the way, just for fun, that’s $4,340 per square foot. NOW, what would your home sell for?

Posted by sharris at 12:25 AM

January 22, 2007

Does Leiber need to be spanked?

Bay Area Democratic Assemblywoman Sally Leiber plans to introduce a bill this week that will make it illegal for parents to spank children under the age of 4. While I don’t believe in spanking kids and choose not to with my children, do we really need the state sticking it’s nose even further into family business?

Said Leiber, “It would get us out of the ridiculous situation of having our law say there’s justifiable beating of children.”

The leap from a spanking to a beating is huge and Leiber’s inability to see the difference is a bit disconcerting. There are already multiple laws on the books to outlaw the “beating” of children, so clearly that is not what this is about. It is another effort to remove parental responsibility from parents and place it firmly in the hands of the government. Does any sensible person really think this is a good idea and a good direction?

Posted by sharris at 12:10 AM

January 19, 2007

This Week in Politics & Policy

Each week I do a column with a quick overview of what’s happened in the state in the past week. In case your local paper doesn’t carry it (and please ask them to!), I’ve attached it here.

This Week in Politics and Policy. January 19, 2007

Pull Quote – “When the people are not excited about it, how do you make the legislators excited about it?”

Scott Harris

It’s time for our weekly tour around the great State of California, highlighting what’s new in Sacramento and what’s happening around the state that affects you, your family and your business.

Prisons have moved front and center in Sacramento starting with Governor Schwarzenegger’s State-of-the-State address when he said that our jail system is 73,000 inmates overcapacity and will require at least $11 billion to fix. The Governor pointed out that prisons don’t get a lot of attention because they’re not sexy said, “When the people are not excited about it, how do you make the legislators excited about it?”

Well, $11 billion– even in California - is a lot of money and people are starting to pay attention. Proposals are now floating around Sacramento to create a sentencing review commission, taking another look at who goes to prison, why and for how long. The Governor has also suggested ending parole supervision for roughly 20,000 non-violent ex-convicts. While that move won’t reduce the number of prisoners, it will free up resources to focus on the more serious offenders. The key is that Californians are starting to pay attention to prison reform, which will help focus our elected officials’ attention on the problem and hasten the day when we find solutions.

The Governor made national news when he refused to automatically support the 2008 Republican candidate – yet to be determined – for president. Governor Schwarzenegger said. “I think you have to look at all the candidates. We need to look at everyone. Let’s see what they have to say, what their approach is. Do they really have a great plan?”

He’s already taken heat from Republicans for this perceived betrayal, but doesn’t it make sense for all of us to review all of the candidates and make a decision based on which one we believe will best represent our interests and those of the country? As the two major parties become less relevant to our everyday lives, we will see this “post-partisan” approach more often. Politicians ignore this realty at their peril – not ours.

Last note. The Governor wants to move our 2008 primary from June to February, making us more of a player at the national level. Historically, by the time June rolls around, the presidential candidate for each party has already been selected, so little to no attention (except for hitting us up for money) is paid to the California electorate. As the Governor said “We’re the No. 1 state in the nation, the number one place in the world and we’re an afterthought in the campaign.” Let’s hope Sacramento makes this happen.

That’s it for this week and remember, California is the Alpha State: the greatest state in the world’s greatest country.

Scott Harris is a political commentator and can be reached at scott@alphastate.org. His blog, columns and radio show can all be accessed at AlphaState.org.

Posted by sharris at 09:01 AM

January 18, 2007

This week’s California: The Alpha State

We talk quite a bit on my radio show about forced giving – taxes. This week we spent some time talking about those who give voluntarily, the people and businesses who choose to support our community through various non-profit organizations.

Join us as Hugh Ralston, President and CEO of the Ventura County Community Foundation and Dave Smith, President and CEO of the United Way of Ventura County discuss the current state of charitable giving, the impact of taxes, the Internet and natural disasters on our decisions to give and how things are likely to change in the future.

Posted by sharris at 07:07 AM

Comments (4) | TrackBack

January 16, 2007

Ford changes views

Following up on my column (see yesterday’s blog entry) on the importance of time and moderation, I read with interest some of President Ford’s comments.

He gave a series of interviews to his hometown paper, The Grand Rapids Press, that were not released until after his death.

In 1981, (shortly after Carter’s presidency ended) Ford said, “I think Jimmy carter would be very close to Warren G. Harding. I feel very strongly that Jimmy Carter was a disaster, particularly domestically and economically. I have said more than once that he was certainly the poorest president in my lifetime.”

However, in 1998 he said Carter, “will be looked on as a better president than some comments we hear today.”

I am not sure if time has tempered our view of President Carter, or simply President Ford’s views in general, but time certainly changed his opinion.

Posted by sharris at 06:08 AM

January 15, 2007

Media update

This weekend’s column “Moving at the Speed of Science” is about taking everything, including science and morality, in moderation. You can also find my weekly summary of happenings in Sacramento “This Week in Politics and Policy” at my website.

This week’s radio guest was Berkeley Political Science professor, Bruce Cain. Not surprisingly, you can hear this show (as well as other recent guests, including Governor Deukmejian, Assemblywoman Fran Pavley, etc.) at AlphaState.org.

As always, comments and feedback are encouraged. I hope 2007 is off to a great start for you and thank you for taking the time to read this.

Moving at the speed of Science

Pull quote – Now more than ever, we need to remember – everything in moderation, even science.

Scott Harris

In April 1975, Newsweek published an article on “Global Cooling.” According to the article, there were “ominous signs that the earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically” and that we could expect a “drastic decline in food production” which would affect “just about every nation on earth.” Time magazine, some scientists and even legendary sci-fi author Isaac Asimov saw global cooling as a serious, man-made (re: capitalist) problem.

Global Warming has now replaced global cooling, though in an ironic twist, recent articles have pointed to the possibility that global warming might actually lead to global cooling. With the ability to reflect on three decades of scientific advances since the Newsweek article, scientific leaders, presidential candidate/filmmaker Al Gore, most environmentalists, and 169 countries (signers of the Kyoto Treaty) are convinced that global warming is a reality and presents a danger of almost unimaginable consequences if we do not act immediately.

I don’t know whether or not global warming is a serious problem or the “crisis of the moment,” and I don’t know if the United States’ refusal to sign the Kyoto Treaty was a mistake or not. I do have doubts regarding the severity and immediacy of “Global Warming.”

Frankly, I’m still not sure if eggs, aspirin and wine are going to kill me, or extend my life into a disease-free run past the century mark. I know that in the past few years, it appeared I was going to die from a massive earthquake, a meteorite landing in my backyard, or asphyxiation as deforestation removed the last of the earth’s oxygen.

What I do know is that articles in well-respected media outlets have a way of becoming accepted fact and that with the advent and speed of Internet news, this morning’s rumor is tonight’s lead story and tomorrow’s retraction.

I do know that at the same time I am reading predictions that this summer will be the hottest in history, I am remembering that last year was supposed to be the worst-ever for hurricanes – and it proved to be a below-average year. I know that UC Davis released a study this month showing that 300 million years ago we transitioned from an ice age to a greenhouse and this included erratic temperature swings and increases in carbon monoxide – long before America, the Industrial Age and President Bush.

I know that most of our news media and scientists have spent the last couple of years attacking “religious fanatics” for not supporting – or actively trying to stop – embryonic stem cell research. Now, a report from the Institute for Regenerative Medicine at Wake Forest University School of Medicine shows that stem cells from amniotic fluid may offer the same (or even better) scientific benefits, without the moral dilemma of destroying embryos.

What I know most of all is that science and information is moving more quickly than we are able to comprehend fully. Technology, which constitutes a marvelous tool, is still simply that – a tool to be used by mankind. The quantity of information and the speed with which it is delivered should not replace the human thought process. We need time to reflect on what we have learned. Science, unless tempered by thought, morality and time is at least as dangerous as the disasters it so frequently predicts. Concurrently, it is equally dangerous for religion to ignore the advances of science and scientists.

Reacting to “global cooling,” one scientist said in 1972, "We simply cannot afford to gamble. We cannot risk inaction. The scientists who disagree are acting irresponsibly. The indications that our climate can soon change for the worse are too strong to be reasonably ignored."

Maybe the earth is heating up as a result of man’s activities. Maybe amniotic stem cells hold the answers to a disease-free future. Maybe the world will face a new dilemma with some announcement next month. However, one thing is certain, the only ones acting irresponsibly are those who are unwilling to invest the time and review the options to balance science and morality.

Now more than ever, we need to remember – everything in moderation, even science.

Scott Harris is a political commentator. Read his columns, hear his radio show and contact him through his Web site, AlphaState.org.

Posted by sharris at 12:16 AM

January 14, 2007

2007-08 California State budget

With an annual budget of over $100 billion dollars, the numbers involved in our annual state budget can be a bit intimidating. In round numbers, here’s what we dealing with…

Revenue Billions % of total

Personal income tax $55.6 55%
Sales tax $29.3 29%
Corporate tax $10.8 11%
Insurance tax $2.4 2%
Other $3.1 3%
TOTAL $101

Expenditures Billions % of total

K-12 education $40.5 39%
Health & human services $29.9 29%
Higher education $12 12%
Corrections & rehab $10 10%
Legislative, judicial &
Executive $3.8 4%
General government $3.1 3%
Business, transportation
And housing $1.6 1.5%
Other $2.3 2%
TOTAL $103

Posted by sharris at 12:59 AM

January 13, 2007

Earmarks

This is the Congress system (informal, but deadly) of slipping tailored spending provisions – pork barrel projects – into bills. These spending commitments usually slide right by without review and are a great way for Senators and Congressman to show the folks back home they are being taken of.

Last year there were 13,012 earmarks attached to non-related bills – quadruple the number from 1996. The cost of these projects was over $67 billion dollars, more than triple the 1996 totals.

Maybe, just maybe, it’s worth trying to put an end to this.

Posted by sharris at 12:19 AM

January 12, 2007

This Week in Politics & Policy

Each week I do a column with a quick overview of what’s happened in the state in the past week. In case your local paper doesn’t carry it (and please ask them to!), I’ve attached it here.

This Week in Politics and Policy. January 12, 2007

Pull Quote – we should watch closely and see if our elected officials really are able to play nice.

Scott Harris

It’s time for our weekly tour around the great State of California, highlighting what’s new in Sacramento and what’s happening around the state that affects you, your family and your business.

The biggest news in California politics this week was Governor Schwarzenegger’s State-of-the-State address. The 120 state legislators, as well as many columnists and op-ed writers around the state warmly, if not enthusiastically, received Tuesday night’s address. Time will tell how the public reacts, with most of us recognizing that by the time compromises are made and deals are cut, it’s quite probable the end result will bear little resemblance to the Governor’s proposals.

The Governor can certainly not be accused of thinking small. He highlighted seven top priorities that he believes Sacramento should be focused on.

He wants to invest almost $10 billion dollars in building new prisons around the state. Our prison system is designed for a capacity of 100,000 prisoners and currently holds close to 175,000 prisoners. On top of the education bond we approved in November, he wants the money to build an additional 15,000 new classrooms and renovate 40,000 more. His universal healthcare proposal, easily his most controversial, has a $12 billion price tag and theoretically would provide healthcare insurance for every Californian – legal or illegal. Regarding the environment, he is asking for $6 billion dollars for water storage and restoration, establishment of new emission standards, and a continued fight against global warming.

The biggest ticket item (if you believe the healthcare proposal will really “only” cost $12 billion) is the proposed $43 billion in new infrastructure financing – in addition to the $40 billion dollars we approved in November. His budget has a few small cuts in it, but it does theoretically eliminate the deficit we have had the past few years.

Last is his promise of political reform and an independent commission to draw new political districts. While this will have a negligible impact on the budget, it would have the biggest and most positive impact on the future of the state, by allowing us to send more moderates from both parties to Sacramento.

All of these proposals will test the Governor’s new “post-partisanship” promises. He has promised to work closely with Democrats and points to 2006 as the beginning of this new model in Sacramento. The danger in the model, as well as the irony, is that Governor Schwarzenegger appears to be much more effective in working with Democrats than Republicans. Most of the “bipartisan” victories last year were really between the Republican governor and the Democrats in the Assembly and the Senate. In most cases, the Republicans lawmakers were on the outside looking in. They have promised that won’t happen this year, so we should watch closely and see if our elected officials really are able to play nice.

That’s it for this week and remember, California is the Alpha State: the greatest state in the world’s greatest country.

Scott Harris is a political commentator and can be reached at scott@alphastate.org. His blog, columns and radio show can all be accessed at AlphaState.org.

Posted by sharris at 10:42 AM

What if a Republican….

WASHINGTON — House Democrats chose Rep. Alan Mollohan, D-W.Va., on Wednesday to head the appropriations subcommittee in charge of the budget for the Justice Department, which is investigating him for questionable land deals.

Scott – I am trying to imagine the outrage from Democrats if the parties were reversed. Even Republicans, who set a new standard fro arrogance, didn’t go this far. I’m not sure if this is what Nancy Pelosi meant by new ethical standards, but it is certainly not what I was expecting.

Posted by sharris at 12:27 AM

January 11, 2007

Stay home

Fox News - Americans are to blame for some illegal immigrants becoming serial crooks because "they're picking up those bad habits of cheating, of drinking and drugs," according to an official of a prominent Latino advocacy organization.
Jesse Diaz of the League of United Latin American Citizens made the claim on Monday during an interview on Dallas talk radio station KRLD, and then repeated them on Tuesday to WFAA-TV.

Scott – if you don’t see the humor in this, you just don’t have a sense of humor. Besides the obvious answer – stay home – what about the equally obvious answer which is people who break laws to start their life here probably have less respect for laws in general than others. If Mr. Diaz truly believes that Americans, in America, are a bad influence on Mexican illegal immigrants, might I suggest discouraging them from crossing the border?

I am really trying to understand the plight of illegal immigrants. I struggle with their access to a free education in California, with their being given in-state rates to our universities when United States citizens from other states are not. I struggle with Governor Schwarzenegger wanting to give them free universal healthcare. People like Mr. Diaz make it very difficult to continue to try and make the effort.

Posted by sharris at 12:23 AM

How true it is!

Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano who is head of the National Governors Association said the following…

“The longer people are in Congress, the harder it is for them to speak in short, declarative sentences.”

Hallelujah!

Posted by sharris at 12:09 AM

January 10, 2007

Barbara Boxer apologizes

California Senator Barbara Boxer recently had her office rescind an award they had given to Basim Elkarra. Elkarra is a Muslim and a leader of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which many believe, has ties to terrorists.

Boxer withdrew the Certificate of Achievement saying the four words we hear far too infrequently from our elected officials…

“I made a mistake”

Certainly American Muslims should not be precluded from winning awards and Boxer’s office acknowledged that they need to do a better job of checking in to the recipient’s background. What is exciting here is to hear an elected official acknowledge a mistake, apologize without excuses and ask all of us to move on. Thank you.

Posted by sharris at 12:38 AM

January 09, 2007

Understanding the Middle East

If you’re like me, you struggle to understand the Middle East. Try as I might, I just can’t seem to get my arms around the various countries, the Sunnis, the Shiites, the Baathists, the artificial borders, etc.

Robert Kaplan wrote a terrific column Sunday in the Los Angeles Times. Well worth reading and helps explain a bit of the history and the challenges of the Middle East. Unfortunately, the conclusion is that we are probably looking at decades of strife and war, with no easy or obvious answers.

Posted by sharris at 06:59 AM

Trans fat and Obama

New York City in their infinite wisdom has banned trans fat from all restaurants. Public health officials in NYC want to eliminate the artery clogging trans fat and keep us safe from ourselves.

As readers of this blog know, I find this to be quite an intrusion into our lives and our ability to make decisions for ourselves, regardless of the impact they have on our own personal health.

I am reading The Audacity of Hope by presidential hopeful Barack Obama. The 2nd chapter is titled Values and has a line (page 67) that is prescient and frightening. He is discussing the fact that there needs to be “limit’s on the state’s power to control our behavior, even if it’s for our own good. Not many Americans would feel comfortable with the government monitoring what we eat, no matter how many deaths and how much of our medical spending may be due to rising rates of obesity.”

Written less than a year ago, it has now come true. What’s next?

Posted by sharris at 12:31 AM

January 08, 2007

110th Congress

Because so many Americans keep score by gender and race, a breakdown of the new Congress might be of interest.

The Senate is made of up 50 Democrats, 49 Republicans and 1 independent. 3 Latino, 2 Asian and 1 Black member, with 16 of the 100 Senators being women and 29 with military service.

The House of Representatives has up 233 Democrats and 202 Republicans. 42 Black, 27 Latino, 7 Asian and 1 American Indian members, with 74 of the 435 Congress people being women and 102 with military service.

Posted by sharris at 12:06 AM

January 07, 2007

Home Depot excess

Home Depot CEO Bob Nardelli was fired this week. His job performance was poor and his bosses forced him out the door. On the way out, they handed him $210 million dollars as a severance package.

No one in their right mind can argue that this is justified, or even a good business decision.

I have no problem with the owners of private businesses making as much money as they possible (legally and ethically) can. However, this is a publicly traded company, with stockholders and shareholders that it is accountable to, as well as their current employees.

For those of us who still support capitalism and prefer the government keep their noses out of corporations, this is a hard one to explain. Stupid acts like this invite government oversight and regulation and frankly, it might very well be justified. It is hard to see how insider trading is illegal, but “insider boards’ that put together these types of abusive packages are not. Keep making these moves like this and sooner than we want to believe, welcome to the world of government capped compensation and severance!

Posted by sharris at 12:40 AM

Initiative – Referendum - Recall

An email exchange with a friend of mine led to this response….

You might note that one of the important unintended consequences of the I-R-R process is less and less legislative discretion. With less discretion the legislature focuses on ideological and symbolic issues (like driver licenses for illegals) and is perceived by the public to be irresponsible which increases the temptation to resort to the initiative and like measures that circumvent the legislative process. A sort of vicious circle.

His point is valid and let’s hope that in 2007, we truly do have a bipartisan effort and maybe focus our time and attention on serious issues and not symbolic ones.

Posted by sharris at 12:05 AM

January 06, 2007

Today’s radio show

My guest today on California: The Alpha State is the termed out Assembly member from the 41st District, Fran Pavley.

Fran and I discuss her 6 years in the State Assembly, her plans for the future (including a State Senate run!) and where she thinks the state is heading. Well worth listening to.

If you missed last week’s show, you might also want to listen to that. County Executive officer (Ventura County) Johnny Johnston talks about the balance between state and county, the challenges all counties face and some specific Ventura County issues.

In addition to the website, California: The Alpha State can be heard every Saturday at 3:00 on NewsTalk 1520, KVTA.

Posted by sharris at 12:20 AM

This Week in Politics & Policy

Each week I do a column with a quick overview of what’s happened in the state in the past week. In case your local paper doesn’t carry it (and please ask them to!), I’ve attached it here.

This Week in Politics and Policy. January 5, 2007

Pull Quote – Elected officials listen to their constituents but are constantly surprised at how few ask to be heard.

Scott Harris

It’s time for our weekly tour around the great State of California, highlighting what’s new in Sacramento and what’s happening around the state that affects you, your family and your business.

Early January is a time for new beginnings and that’s certainly true in the world of politics.

On a national level, the 110th Congress was sworn in this week with San Francisco Democrat Nancy Pelosi becoming the first female speaker of the House of Representatives and with Democrats being in control of the House for the first time in 12 years. Nancy is one of 74 women in the House, up from 68 in the 109th Congress and 63 in the 108th.

In California, the 100th session of the California State Legislature was sworn in this week as well. Democrats maintained control of the State Senate and the State Assembly, and no race or gender-busting firsts took place. Out of 80 State Assembly members, 36 are freshman, so the first few weeks should be spent learning the ropes—from where offices are located, to how the phone system works, to how legislation is proposed and shepherded through the system. Whether you are for or against term limits, you have to be concerned that nearly half of our State Assembly members took office this week with no statewide legislative experience.

Governor Schwarzenegger is also being sworn in this week and has already made clear that his top priority is healthcare for all Californians – legal and illegal. This is sure to lead to quite a battle with Sacramento Republicans and will be an early test of the bipartisanship efforts we have been promised.

In his inaugural address, the Governor claims to be a centrist and says, “Centrist does not mean weak. It does not mean watered down or watered over. It means well-balanced and well-grounded. The American people are instinctively centrist… so should be our government.” Only time will tell if this is more than rhetoric, but we can all certainly hope.

On a local level, county supervisors, city councils, school boards, water districts, etc are being sworn in all over the state. If you want to have an impact on government at the local, state or national level, there is no better time to get involved than now. Write a letter or an email, make a phone call or two, attend a city council meeting, or even visit Sacramento. Elected officials listen to their constituents but are constantly surprised at how few ask to be heard. You have the power to influence the policies and policymakers that impact your life, your families and your business. Don’t waste that opportunity. It’s a new year for all of us, not just our elected officials. Let’s make it a great one! That’s it for this week and remember, California is the Alpha State: the greatest state in the world’s greatest country.

Scott Harris is a political commentator and can be reached at scott@alphastate.org. His blog, columns and radio show can all be accessed at AlphaState.org.

Posted by sharris at 12:03 AM

January 05, 2007

President Bush making new friends?

The Los Angeles Times has an excellent front page article this morning about President Bush suddenly finding the time and interest in reaching out to Democrats. Cynics among us might think this has something to do with new majority leaders being Democrats, but maybe it’s just a New Year’s resolution that he would have made anyway☺

There is no doubt the President has done a terrible job of reaching across the aisle, certainly during his second term. It is also equally true that his newfound effort to play nice with Democrats is a direct result of getting his butt kicked in district after district and state after state this past November. The temptation for Democrats to rub his face in this must be high indeed.

However, this is their opportunity to take the high road. If our Democratic leaders can focus on the future, on building bridges and coalitions – on true bipartisanship – they will go a long way toward healing a nation and strengthening their party. It won’t be easy; they’ve been at the kid’s table for quite a few years. But, wouldn’t it be great for both their party and the country and if they rose to new heights?

Posted by sharris at 11:01 AM

Sunday’s column

Sunday’s column - Scott Harris crash course introduction to politics - has received quite a bit of feedback and suggestions. In case you missed it, it’s attached below. As always, please let me know your thoughts.

Intro to politics

Pull quote - You’ll get angry, you’ll be frustrated, you’ll be shocked – but you’ll help move this country forward and make a difference.

Scott Harris

I am frequently asked by young people coming of age politically and by people of all ages who are developing an interest in politics and policy – “how do I get started?” I am taking the liberty of sharing with you the “Scott Harris Crash Course Introduction to Politics and Policy.” Warning: this course is designed for people with open minds, regardless of whether or not they may lean left or right.

First and foremost: read, watch and listen. The danger in our news media today is that almost all news sources are biased to the left or the right (though they all deny it), so let’s start with a balanced news diet program.

If you are a reader, on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays you will read the New York Times. Most print media leans to the left (except for this newspaper which is absolutely middle of the road!) and the New York Times is the standard bearer of leftist thinking. It sends conservatives screaming into the night and is probably the most influential news source in the country. On Tuesday, Thursday and Saturdays, read the Wall Street Journal, an exceptional newspaper and an exception to the liberal bias found in many other papers.

If you prefer your news by television, Monday, Wednesday and Fridays should find you watching CNN, or almost any other television network. Television is also home to a strong left-leaning bias, which will also be denied. The exception to this—your viewing option for Tuesday, Thursday and Saturdays—is Fox. While Fox claims to be fair and balanced, they are not. They lean very hard to the right and are television’s established spot for conservative voices.

However, should you be a fan of radio, you will find the opposite of the liberal views found predominantly in print and on television. Radio is home for conservatives. Rush Limbaugh, Michael Medved, Sean Hannity, et al. fill the airwaves 24-hours a day with right-wing talk. So, you can pick essentially any talk radio station for Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday to sample the conservative stars of radio. Until recently, liberal talk radio was an oxymoron. However, a relatively new talk radio network, Air America, is trying to gain a foothold in radio with an all-liberal, all-the-time lineup. So far, it has failed financially, but to date has certainly given a voice to left wingers. This will be your Monday, Wednesday, Friday listening assignment.

Now for Sunday. If you have survived the onslaught of screaming guests, vindictive and pejorative-filled “editorials,” conflicting information, and pompous writers and hosts, you’ll have an excellent start. Simply take everything you have heard, read and watched and average it all out. This will give you a pretty good idea of where the country and the people really stand.

Assuming this effort has not driven you into a politically agnostic state and you still have an open mind, what’s next? It’s time to look at the two major political parties – Democrats and Republicans. The differences between the two parties are not nearly as dramatic as either would like you to believe.

Power is top priority for both parties. Everything they do, every decision they make, every dollar of our money they spend is designed with a single primary purpose – generate votes, get or stay in power, and crush the opposing party.

Look back at your recent venture into political media. Did you find a single instance of a national or statewide political figure complementing the actions or decisions of a member of the other political party? Not likely. You have a better chance of being hit by lightning or winning the lottery than you do of hearing a politician applaud the efforts or results of an opposition party member.

However, don’t let any of this discourage you. Involvement and participation by as many of us as possible is the only way to bring about change. If you lean right, become a Republican. If you lean left, join the Democrats. If you’re not sure, or can’t stand either party, register to vote as a Decline-To-State, but register. Look at the issues and think them through. Don’t drink the Kool-Aid of either party, not on candidates or issues. Learn, think and vote your own mind. You’ll get angry, you’ll be frustrated, you’ll be shocked – but you’ll help move this country forward and make a difference.

It’s worth it.

Posted by sharris at 12:53 AM

Las Vegas and the homeless

Las Vegas has decided that the homeless are a problem, not homelessness, but the homeless. In an effort to reduce the number of homeless in the city, they have enacted a new law making it illegal to sleep within 500 feet of unattended feces.

While I wonder if this is the best way to deal with the problem of human beings and American citizens not having a roof over their hear, or a bathroom, it begs the question – is their attended feces in Las Vegas?

Posted by sharris at 12:01 AM

January 04, 2007

Separation of church and state

A good friend sent me the following….

Hi, I just signed the First Freedom First petition -- about the importance of safeguarding separation of church and state and protecting religious liberty. I think that the distinction between personally held religious convictions and the societal values that transcend any particular personal or religion-based teaching or tradition has been badly eroded. The result is the current practice of faith-based groups exerting political pressure in support of their particular beliefs. I support this petition as an effort to define and dramatize this distinction.

My response to my friend was….

This is a critical issue facing our country and President Bush has certainly brought it to the forefront of many people’s minds. There are certainly no easy answers and balancing our Judeo-Christian heritage with the need to respect those who don’t fall into that category is an ongoing and challenging problem. Three questions come to mind....

1. The headline they use discusses separation, not establishment. That is a jump that has been made in recent years and in my mind is inconsistent with the 1st Amendment.

2. Is it really reasonable – or even a good idea – to separate religious beliefs from the decision making process of our individual elected officials? Do we really want decisions made on a purely scientific basis, or do we need the moral underpinning of a religion, or God?

3. Why should every special interest group in America be allowed in the political process, expected houses of worship?

Since I view this blog as an ongoing conversation with my readers and a forum for discussion, I look foreward to your responses and thoughts.

Posted by sharris at 08:53 AM

Golden State Fence Co.

In 1999, Golden State Fence Co. helped build a 14-mile border fence between California and Mexico. They have now been fined almost $5 million dollars because close to 1/3 of their labor force was made of illegal immigrants. Golden State’s attorney while acknowledging the company used the illegal immigrants and broke the law said this proves the need for a guest worker program.

The multiple levels of irony would be funny, if this weren’t so sad. Of the many failings of the Bush administration, lacking the willingness to tackle the critical issue of illegal immigration stands close to the top.

Posted by sharris at 12:47 AM

January 03, 2007

Scott Friedman for President

I frequently write about the importance of getting involved, which is the necessary ingredient in ensuring that our representative democracy stays representative.

The following is an essay from a gentleman, Scott Friedman, who has decided to run for President of the United States. He sent me the essay and asked that I pass it on to my readers, so I am doing so. While you may or may not agree with his positions and may or may not think he has a realistic chance of becoming the 44th President of the United States – I hope you will join me in applauding his enthusiasm and effort.

Unity of Life Practically Applied to Responsibility

Responsibility is our response to our inherent ability. Put another way, it is our obligation to our self to use all our resources for the greatest benefit.

In our society today we need much improvement in the degree of responsibility we accept. That is, we have great untapped resources we could be using to create benefit.

What are the impediments to accepting this responsibility? As with any question, it can be answered in any number of ways. For now, I’ll focus on three obstacles.

The first is we don’t believe in our ability. We tell ourselves, “I really don’t have what it takes to succeed in such a brutally competitive environment”; or “I really don’t have anything unique or outstanding to offer”. We don’t try or we give up because we don’t believe we have “what it takes” to succeed. The way through this obstacle is the same as with any other obstacle. We accept we feel this way. We also accept our desire still exists and has a basis within us. We accept these two contradictory points of view both exist within us. This brings us to the point where we say, maybe it will work and maybe it won’t, and I’m going to give it my best shot. At that point we do what we can. With each effort we gain more strength and ability for the next effort. Absolutely there are discouragement and set backs along the way. These need to be accepted as real and the choice made once again to keep moving forward.

A second obstacle to accepting responsibility is the fear that if we do achieve the influence we desire, we will misuse our power. Paradoxically, those who are most concerned about using their power wisely for the greatest good, are the ones who are least likely to abuse that power. Those who seek power to have power are trying to fill an internal void from the outside; which can’t be done.

A third obstacle to accepting responsibility is the thought that people should lead themselves and it is wrong to take a leadership position where we’re in a position to “tell others what to do, or think”. We all have the responsibility to decide who we’ll listen to, what we’ll do, and what we think. That responsibility is ours and even if we wanted to give it to someone else, we can’t. A leader doesn’t control thought and direction of others, they present an option and people either accept or reject that option as they choose. The idea that we control other people is false. Even the President of the United States, arguably the most powerful person on Earth, can do nothing unless Congress and the Supreme Court go along with it.

Spiritual growth is accepting and aligning in ever grater degree with that which is true. What is true here is that each of us is responsible for how we live our life, and that responsibility is ours alone. If we feel part of our responsibility is to share what we believe are solutions that will benefit everyone, then to be true to ourselves we must do that. Weather or not people agree and go along with our suggestions is out of our control. We can redouble our efforts to communicate more effectively, with greater clarity, heart and compassion. And, it is still other’s responsibility to decide if they agree or disagree with what we say.

Paradoxically, the more we focus on taking responsibility for ourselves and what we know, the greater influence we have.

Blessings

Scott
(Playing the roles of)
Candidate for President of the United States
Mortgage Broker

Posted by sharris at 12:30 AM

Comments (5) | TrackBack

January 02, 2007

2007 – New Laws

As it always does, the 1st of the year brings us a variety of new laws. Included in this years crop of almost a 1,000 new laws are the following: it is illegal to falsify a report that leads to the activation of the Amber alert system, it’s illegal to tie up your dog for more than 3 hours a day, municipal workers now have the power to arrest you if you’re caught illegally dumping trash, college administrators can no longer censor college newspapers and hospitals are no longer allowed to “dump” homeless patients in another county without first receiving permission.

However, at least we don’t live in China. In preparation for the 2008 Olympics, the Chinese have now made it illegal for Beijing shopkeepers to act impatiently, make ironic or sarcastic remarks or glance disdainfully at customers. Penalties for violations were not made public☺

Posted by sharris at 08:27 AM