Friday, July 15, 2011

Congresswoman Susan Davis Votes to Protect San Diego’s CleanTech Innovation

See the Press Release here.

WASHINGTON – Congresswoman Susan Davis (D-San Diego) opposed an energy spending bill that would have gutted clean energy, including biomass and solar programs. The bill would hit San Diego hard as it has a large concentration of clean technology companies.

“San Diego has 767 clean technology companies and has become an innovation hub, especially in solar power, energy storage, and advanced biofuels,” said Davis. “If we’re going to remain competitive in the global economy, we must invest in clean energy innovation.”

According to the San Diego Association of Governments, the algae energy section alone provides the region with 410 direct jobs and $108 million in economic activity each year.

The Energy and Water Appropriations bill (H.R. 2354) cuts solar energy research by more than one-third, decreases biomass research by $33 million, and cuts $80 million from funding for breakthrough domestic clean energy innovators.

“We can’t hold back the companies that can come up with the answers to our serious energy problem,” said Davis.

H.R. 2354 passed the House of Representatives on a vote of 219-196.

###

Bill Horn Apoligizes Today for Misrepresenting his Record on Civil Rights

When Bill Horn was running for the County Board of Supervisors he made claims of his military record. Those opposing him called that record into question. Though, the veteran community came together to stand with him that he truly was one of them and that any these questions about his records was wrong.

The Voice of San Diego did a fact check on Supervisor Horn and found the following statement he made last week at a County of San Diego Board of Supervisor Meeting over the county's agenda item on redistricting to be false:

"During the civil rights movement I worked for Ralph Abernathy and went to jail over the rights of the minority," County Supervisor Bill Horn said June 28 at a public board meeting."

Turns out the real story, again according to Horn was he was only questioned by police for a downtown incident, Mr. Abernathy never worked in California, let alone in San Diego and never worked with Horn.

Unfortunately, it seems he and his staff got him into further trouble in trying to explain his falsehood. According to Horn's staff he said the following:

"[Horn] knows that [Hal] Brown and former NFL star Rosey Grier came to his office many years ago to reminisce about the incident. The Supervisor has a football in his office with the faded signature of Grier. Unfortunately, both of those men have passed away, and short of a séance, there's no way to confirm with them the events of a half century ago."

Again, the above is false, because the truth is Brown the former chairman of the local C.O.R.E. chapter at the time and Grier are alive, Brown does not recall Horn being involved, and Grier was playing for the LA Raiders at the time, not involved and doesn't recall the incident.

Each time Horn tells his story he only gets deeper in trouble. So, as a public official he should do the right thing and apologize to his constituents and those that were truly arrested in the civil rights fights.

Both as an elected official and a religiously moral person, he wants to set the example for our next generation that in the end it is better to tell the truth, then to mislead and cover it up.

Horn will state the following in his announcement:
  1. Those that were arrested for civil injustice in the 1950's and 1960's should be honored and no person should misrepresent themselves as one to use them for political reasons;
  2. He did not work for Mr. Ralph Abernathy;
  3. He knew of Mr. Hal Brown, but not in the way he has retold the story repeatedly over the years;
  4. As a truly religious man, then it is important to be truthful at all times, even in difficult times;
  5. Over the years he has questioned other elected officials about being honest with the voters, he doesn't want them to question him in the future with this incident weighing on him; and
  6. He will sit down with those in the civil rights community and seek to help in his capacity has an elected official to continuing struggle he had started many decades again against the injustices for those in the African-American and Latino community.
This press conference at 5:00 pm outside the County Administrative Building north steps will be a difficult statement by Horn, as he has confirmed, but something he must do to set the record straight and move on.

The truth on my part is the false statements made by Horn, his staff, those statements retorted about Horn's claims to have been involved in the civil rights incident, plus the Voice of San Diego article are true. HOWEVER, it would have been nice for the rest of the above story to be true. Horn won't be making an announcement clearing up the real story, he won't be seeking to continue his fight for injustice he started decades ago and lost his way, and he won't be setting an example as a public official or someone claiming to be religiously moral. Horn was upset of being called what he felt a racist and shoot back with the first thing he could think about, which was a story he has been over exaggerating over the past several decades, like the fish I caught.

Horn is Horn, his staff will protect him, and the rest of the community he surrounds himself with will keep quiet, because he votes their way most of the time, he tells a good story, takes on their enemies, and if they don't do it, then he will get angry and be vindictive in every way he possible can be.

If you think Horn should do the right thing, then comment here on the Voice of San Diego article or link to this post on your Facebook or Twitter feed. I would have suggested Horn's Facebook page, but he doesn't want to hear from others in a public arena and calling and emailing his office won't make a difference, because he will claim you are a bunch complainers. SD ROSTRA won't write about it either, because he is a conserve now and their site is about looking at the injustices and falsehoods of only the liberals.

Thursday, July 14, 2011

The Problem with Petitioning. . .

As you may have noticed from the posts below, or from the Voice of San Diego, or lately, Daily Kos, you might have noticed a slight problem we seem to be having with our signature-gathers here in San Diego.  It appears that our local petitioners (as they prefer to be called) have been misleading voters throughout San Diego about various initatives.  I can't say I'm surprised.

First, a slight confession - in the summer of 1996, I worked as a signature gatherer/petitioner for Voter Revolt, a group that, the more I think about it, was a fairly conservative organization.  In my defense, it was the 1990's, and we were all "New Democrats" back then.  Also, I was young and didn't know any better.  And lastly, the initiatives I worked on were fairly innocuous - term limits for Congress and a limitation on how much money school districts could spend on non-classroom spending.  Neither were great, but they weren't bad either.

From that experience, here's what I can tell you about petitioning - its hard work, and most people don't last long.  As a petitioner, I would stand in a parking lot or some other designated area, and walk up to people and talk to them.  The goal was to get them to sign my petitions, and for each valid signature, I'd get $0.25.  As I had two petitions, I could get $0.50 out of most people.  The money sucked, but going out there, being with the people, it felt like politics, only it wasn't (oh, and the independent contractor thing the company was running was a total scam, but I digress).  Instead, Voter Revolt was paid by some group to gather the signatures, and they were paid to do it.

Now, from later experience, I can tell that most professional petitioners are much more mercenary than I was.  They gather signatures for petitions based not on whether they agree with the issue, but how much it pays.  A reasonably decent petitioner can get 200 signatures in a day - if the petition is paying out at $1-$2 per signature, working 5 days a week, well, that can be as much as $1000 per week, or $4000 per month.  That's more than I made out of law school.*  As a result, petitioning, in my experience, attracts interesting people.  People with a lot of charm, little job skills, and a desire for a flexible work schedule.  Given what we now know, is it surprising that a few (or more than a few) are actively misleading voters?  I bet that anti-union petition is paying over $2 per signature.

Ultimately, every initiative campaign needs these professionals to collect signatures because they are really, really good collecting a lot of valid signatures in a short period of time.  As a result, the "grassroots" aspect of the initiative process is not grassroots at all - its simply a way for the wealthy to get around legislative bodies.

*Okay, I did work for a non-profit out of law school, but still, $48k per year ain't bad.

Governor Brown Signs SB 48 To Recognize Contributions of LGBT Americans, Pacific Islanders and Persons With Disabilities

SACRAMENTO - Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. today issued the following statement regarding SB 48 by Senator Mark Leno (D-San Francisco):

"History should be honest. This bill revises existing laws that prohibit discrimination in education and ensures that the important contributions of Americans from all backgrounds and walks of life are included in our history books. It represents an important step forward for our state, and I thank Senator Leno for his hard work on this historic legislation."

For full text of the bill, visit: http://leginfo.ca.gov/bilinfo.html.

###

Daily Kos: Misleading Signature Gathering Being Used to Push Anti-Union Measure in San Diego

Check out the blog post here.

VOSD: Fact Check: Bill Horn's Bogus Civil Rights Story

Shocking, right? The Voice has the story here.

SDUT: Medical marijuana rules may be repealed

They did better than the school "reformers." Check the story here.

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

Word on the Street: Peters for Congress


This rumor has been swirling around for over a month, ever since the DCCC sought him out to run against Bilbray.

Word is that he didn't bite but "establishment" Democrats have ben pushing him to run because they can't seem to stomach the possibility of Saldana candidacy.

So, with Lori and Scott verses Brian, who wins?

On the Democratic side, I give the edge to Saldana. She's tenacious, been working the activist base, and has represented most of the draft district before. She will need to work like she has never worked before on raising the money but she has a base of support and a volunteer base as rabid as Frye supporters.

Scott can raise money but can't seem to spend it well. In his run against Aguirre, he ran a full-blown campaign operation with a full complement of staff and volunteers and lost to a less-than-loved incumbent who didn't campaign. Scott doesn't have a base outside of La Jolla and has a tendency to surround himself with yes people who aren't known for their strategic brilliance.

Saldana thinks and acts outside the box which can cut both ways. Against two white, bland, establishment-approved men, she will shine as a fresh face ready to take on DC.

Don't rule Peters out (he has yet to announce). As things stand today, I would give the nod to Lori against Brian in the fall of 2012.

SD CityBeat: District mine

I'm back (thank you Franklin, but you missed a story).

Saldana says she can win against Bilbray. CityBeat has the story here.

Calitics: Darrell Issa bails on FCIC hearing after reality "didn't fit the narrative"

Lucas O'Conner of Two Cathedrals exposes Issa's hypocrisy at Calitics here.

SD CityBeat: “Oy!” said the goy

Gracchus is out so I'm posting this.

Bob Filner’s problem with prominent Democrats from SD CityBeat. Story here.

We Party: Misleading Signature Gathering Being Used to Push Anti-Union Measure in San Diego

Check out this blog here.

LA Times: Janice Hahn wins House seat

Story here.

LA Times: Obama campaign's staggering haul: $86 million raised for re-election

Story here.

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

VOSD:DeMaio Tops Half-Million in Mayoral War Chest

The Voice has the story here.

SDUT: County to delay political maps over ACLU concerns


Read the story here.

SDUT: Signatures fall short in bid to shake up SDUSD

From the SDUT:

School board president Richard Barrera said he was not surprised that the signature-gathering effort came up short.

“I think when you stand out in front of supermarkets a lot of times people who sign may not be registered voters or not be registered voters in the district,” he said. “I’m not surprised.”

Read the story here.

Monday, July 11, 2011

VOSD: Nathan Fletcher's Other Fundraising Account

The Voice has the story here.

LA Times: 'South California' for 51st state?

I believe that many San Diegans would object to this.

You decide. The story here.

Sunday, July 10, 2011

KQED Capital Notes: No 2nd Draft of CA Redistricting Maps

Final maps will be released on July 28th with a vote on Aug 15th.

See the note here.