by David Donnelly, Fri Nov 03, 2006 at 08:53:40 AM EST
This morning my wife and I spent an hour in my son Benjamin's class. He's in third grade. His teacher had thought it would be great for my wife and I to come in and talk about Election Day and the importance of voting. We were happy to do it.
We talked about all the signs they see on the side of the road, the commercials running on television, and what elections mean. We also had them throw out examples of things that they didn't think were political, and we told them how they were. (They offered things like, "This textbook isn't political!" and "Getting sick isn't political.") Of course, our son Benjamin, who has watched me working on passing Clean Elections in states, actually knows who Tom DeLay is (go figure), etc., tried to be the star of the show. We went from discussing all of the things that are impacted by the laws passed by people we elect, to going through the voter file for our small town to see if their parents were registered to vote. Their homework: Make sure their parents vote, and go with them, if possible.
I couldn't help but think, though, about what a disconnect there is between the classroom democracy taught to our kids and the real world democracy practiced by consultants, fundraisers, lobbyists, and power-seekers. Leaving, I also couldn't help but wonder if any of those kids in Benjamin's class would ever be turned on to politics enough to run for office someday. If so, they'd better make their next birthday party a fundraiser.
I'm only half joking. Who can run major office today? This election wil cost an estimated $2.6 billion. It costs between $1 and 2 million for a challenger to stand a chance. Most have to spend more. It's out of control, and now, out of reach for far too many qualified Americans who see public service as a calling rather an avenue to riches by cashing-in at the end of their time in office. If you spend any time in our public schools, you are immediately confronted with the need for qualified political leaders willing to invest in what's right (education) versus what's wrong (the war in Iraq). But our political system doesn't always pick the best leaders. It generally picks the best fundraisers though. How much overlap is there?
There's more...
Loading

by Yes on Prop 89, Tue Aug 29, 2006 at 10:44:48 AM EDT
With the Katrina anniversary, there has been lots of talk about what government needs to do to protect citizens from another disaster. The other day, California Assemblymember John Laird told the
Capitol Weekly, "We have less flood protection than they had in New Orleans. Sacramento is really not protected and the thousands of people who live here are at risk." But this wasn't a story about the anniversary, this was a report on how flood protection in California died a suspicious death in the legislature:
This week, just as Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata put on hold an eight-bill package of flood-protection legislation, one of his political committees received a $500,000 donation from the California Building Industry Association (CBIA), one of the package's biggest opponents. The donation is the single largest that a Perata committee has received since he became Senate leader in 2004.
There's more...
Loading

by Yes on Prop 89, Tue Aug 22, 2006 at 06:20:15 PM EDT
Dan Walters has been covering Sacramento politics for decades. In California, state senate seats larger than congressional seats create a reality where the most populous state is the most expensive state when it comes to campaigning.
Last week, a solid measure for re-districting died in the legislature. The big money, special interests have a strangle-hold on Sacramento and won. Dan Walters wrote:
There's more...
Loading

by jre, Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 08:28:24 PM EDT
Another issue worth noting about the Lieberman-Lamont match. Their race brings together two of the less popular archetypes in American public life: the incumbent creature of Washington and the guy with more money than God.
That's not a coincidence.
Under the "one dollar, one vote" system undergirded by the "money is speech" regime set forth in Buckley, the ability to raise and spend money ranks high on the already frightful list of institutional advantages held by incumbents. The ability to raise money is the first mark of legitimacy in the eyes of the media and political establishments who too often serve as gatekeepers between would-be challengers and the attention of the electorate. Ostensibly liberal people pledge fealty to the doctrine that serious candidates should be able to raise serious money.
Some millionaire candidates, of course, fail spectacularly. Some spend enough of their dough to leave the incumbent at a significant spending disadvantage. Some do both.
But wherever one comes down on what we should or shouldn't assume about millionaires' character and suitability to represent us, the difficulty of unseating an incumbent without being one should concern us.
Josh
There's more...
Loading

by utbrian, Thu Aug 03, 2006 at 02:26:42 PM EDT
Phil Angelides is apparently taking some new, bold moves. He has announced his support for Prop 89, the California Nurses' Association's Clean Money Initiative:
California State Treasurer and Democratic nominee for Governor Phil Angelides today endorsed the Clean Money Initiative, Proposition 89 on the November ballot.
"I am proud to join the ranks of California Nurses Association, The League of Women Voters, California Common Cause and so many others in supporting Proposition 89 - the Clean Money Initiative," said Angelides who was joined by California Nurses Association President Deborah Burger and Assemblywoman Loni Hancock. "It is time for the people of California to clean up the influence of money in our government. Our government should answer to the voices of Californians, not corporate special interests."(Angelides.com 8/3/06)
To say that I am excited by this move is more than a bit of an understatement. Admittedly, Phil is taking a significant risk by endorsing Prop 89, as the CTA and other unions that support him have rejected it. But, for me, I think it's a great move. Prop 89 gives the people of California a chance to take back their government. It gives the grassroots something to get excited about.
But I'm not saying all of this for my own health, we need to make sure that Phil understands that this was the right decision. So, if you can give him some money, please contribute. If you can give some time and some cell minutes, make some calls. And finally, Phil will be having a town hall tomorrow morning in Sacramento. I don't have all the details yet, but I'll update when I do.
I've posted the entire press release in the extended.
There's more...
Loading
