Perhaps the time has come for real electoral reform.
Calls for new campaign finance regulations, national registration and balloting standards, independent election commissions, and so on, reveal widespread unease about the efficacy of the way we currently choose our representatives. But none of these proposed changes will address a fundamental flaw in our system that by itself is responsible for much of its dysfunction.
Under the current winner-take-all method of awarding offices, a candidate can win who not only is not the first choice of the majority of voters, but who may even be one whom the majority loathes.
In the election recently endured, millions of Democrats, and I would guess a fair number of Republicans, voted for a candidate they disliked out of fear the other guy was worse. Make a voter terrified enough, and he will vote against his common sense, his political wishes, even his self-interest, as long as he can be convinced that in so doing he is rescuing the republic from calamity. Winner-take-all campaigns devolve inevitably into efforts to paint opponents as traitors, deviants, soldiers in Satan's army. Who wants to cast a vote for Lucifer?
All-or-nothing political races become arguments over personality not policy. The candidate who makes the error of addressing issues discovers in the next news cycle that any reference to policy specifics is seen by opponents as no more than an invitation to speculate about his intelligence, integrity, sanity, patriotism and parentage.
While "counting all the votes" is fine as far as it goes, it will not correct the fundamental flaw at the core of winner-take-all.
Currently, participants in the electoral process are made to feel they must choose between endorsing the lesser of two evils or wasting their ballots on non-standard-issue candidates. In the last election, almost the sole reason offered on behalf of John Kerry was that he was the only aspirant who could save us from wicked, bumptious George Bush, and the president won reelection by relentlessly attacking the senator's patriotism and judgement.
Since they had "no chance of winning," articulate and popular third party candidates like David Cobb, Michael Badnarik and Ralph Nader -- who clearly envision a very different America than Kerry and Bush -- were prohibited from retailing their ideas anywhere but in academic journals and junior college PoliSci classes. No presidential debates for these fellows, lest it lead to the intrusion into the campaign of ideas that the two major parties would rather have citizens not worry their pretty little heads over. Bush and Kerry were thus relieved of any duty to discuss their differences on Iraq, say, or what they planned to do about health insurance or social security or the deficit, and could proceed unimpeded to the more manly and productive work of bashing each other.
The result in the short term is that on January 22 Bush will return to office as the least popular newly reelected incumbent since Harry S Truman. A Gallup poll conducted for CNN and USA Today found Bush's approval rating this week at 49%, less than a majority and 10 to 20 points lower than any president at this point in his tenure since 1948.
In the long term, the legitimacy of democracy is undermined in the eyes of a populace that rightly wonders whether it is even possible in this country to conduct elections with intergrity.
In many parts of the democratic world, however, and even in a handful of localities in the United States, a voting adaptation called instant runoff is demonstrating that there is another way to run elections, a method that is fairer, that more accurately captures the intentions of voters, and that is far more civilized than the current system.
Instant runoffs are simple and effective. Instead of choosing one candidate, the voter ranks the contestants in order of preference. If no one wins a majority on the first tabulation, the ranking is used for a series of instant runoffs. After each round of counting that fails to deliver a victor, the lowest vote-getter is eliminated. When a voter's first choice is dropped, the next name on his list gets his vote, and so on, until one candidate receives a majority. In this way, the winner is on the ballots of the majority of voters.
Not only would an instant runoff assure that the eventual winner enjoyed the widest possible support, in the contest itself negative campaigning would have to take a back seat to fair-minded discussion of policy differences. No longer would the advantage go to the side that was most ruthless at muddying the other team.While it would still be possible to destroy a candidate by innuendo, doing so would no longer hold the advantage that it does now.
As Steve Hill of the Center for Voting and Democracy said in the wake of a recent instant runoff for San Francisco county supervisor, candidates don't need to demonize opponents. "Now here you have an example where instead candidates who are of similar political background are striving to find common ground instead of attacking each other."
In a race decided by instant runoff, the ideal post position may be as everyone's second choice.
Instant runoff voting would be more easily achieved than many other proposed improvements -- campaign finance reform, for instance, and unlike the latter, the effects would be immediate, unambiguous and profound.
For more information on the race in the Bay Area, please go to "San Francisco's first use of Instant Runoff Voting is Big Success" <http://www.fairvote.org/sf/>.
Quote. Close Quote.
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." -- H.L. Mencken
"Mother of mercy, is this the end of Vino?"*
From the monthly newsletter of Library Alehouse <http://www.libraryalehouse.com/> on Main Street in Santa Monica:
Once, the term “big house” conjured ghosts of Paul Muni, Paul Newman and Clint Eastwood scheming to shed their prison grays. For those longest in their cups, the term might bring up memories of Chester Morris, pardoned for saving the guards in the great 1930 prison flicker, “The Big House.”
Now, at the Alehouse at least, “Big House” means just one thing: Ca' del Solo California Big House Red, a dense, richly erubescent vino from Bonny-Doon, the somewhat pixilated vintner from Santa Cruz. Ca' del Solo is what Bonny-Doon calls Italian-style wines; Big House is a blend faintly remindful of Gallo’s Hearty Burgundy, celebrated in less cosmopolitan days as the vessel on which many Americans traveled to vineland.
There is no escape from this Big House, a thick, fragrant, rustic libation that envelops the palate like honey. Despite its heft, this is a beverage with balance and grace, an elephant poised on one leg, gorgeous crimson in color, redolent of esoteric spices and ripe sugarplums, hints of rosemary and black raspberries persisting from its Piedmontese heritage.
Bonny-Doon Vineyard, which insists that “wine should be as much fun as government regulations allow,” is a pleasure to visit on line, with delightful visuals and cheerful prose, and such assets as wine clubs, 30-second Python-meets-South Park promos, and relentless advocacy on behalf of bottles with screw tops.
Befitting a winery that believes that “we should champion the strange, esoteric, ugly-duckling grape varieties of the world,” the current online-special is a naughty Framboisified Syrah Port called "Bouteille Call."
* With apologies to James Cagney.
Once, the term “big house” conjured ghosts of Paul Muni, Paul Newman and Clint Eastwood scheming to shed their prison grays. For those longest in their cups, the term might bring up memories of Chester Morris, pardoned for saving the guards in the great 1930 prison flicker, “The Big House.”
Now, at the Alehouse at least, “Big House” means just one thing: Ca' del Solo California Big House Red, a dense, richly erubescent vino from Bonny-Doon, the somewhat pixilated vintner from Santa Cruz. Ca' del Solo is what Bonny-Doon calls Italian-style wines; Big House is a blend faintly remindful of Gallo’s Hearty Burgundy, celebrated in less cosmopolitan days as the vessel on which many Americans traveled to vineland.
There is no escape from this Big House, a thick, fragrant, rustic libation that envelops the palate like honey. Despite its heft, this is a beverage with balance and grace, an elephant poised on one leg, gorgeous crimson in color, redolent of esoteric spices and ripe sugarplums, hints of rosemary and black raspberries persisting from its Piedmontese heritage.Bonny-Doon Vineyard, which insists that “wine should be as much fun as government regulations allow,” is a pleasure to visit on line, with delightful visuals and cheerful prose, and such assets as wine clubs, 30-second Python-meets-South Park promos, and relentless advocacy on behalf of bottles with screw tops.
Befitting a winery that believes that “we should champion the strange, esoteric, ugly-duckling grape varieties of the world,” the current online-special is a naughty Framboisified Syrah Port called "Bouteille Call."
* With apologies to James Cagney.
LAVoice: "Los Angeles To-Do List for 2005"
Mack Reed posted his "Visualize the Next Los Angeles - To-Do List for 2005" on LAVoice.org, and I banged out a few quick comments in reply: <http://lavoice.org/article454.html>
End of Enlightenment
"The aide (a senior adviser to President Bush) said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality- based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. 'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. 'We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality – judiciously, as you will – we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors ... and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do." – Ron Suskind, New York Times Magazine, Oct. 17, 2004.
Profile in Courage
"We cannot simply suspend or restrict civil liberties until the War on Terror is over, because the War on Terror is unlikely ever to be truly over. September 11, 2001, already a day of immeasurable tragedy, cannot be the day liberty perished in this country." -- U.S. Apellate Judge Gerald Tjoflat, October 2004 (ruling in a case involving protesters at the School of the Americas).
The Arts: Subscribe to Goldstar Events emailings
The weekly email from Goldstar Events lists dozens of current cultural events -- the categories they list include Popular Music, Classic Rock, Jazz, Classical, Comedy, Theatre, Performing Arts, Film, Sports, Spas & Massage, Family and Unique Ideas -- all of them heavily discounted, a few free (i.e., for the cost of Goldstar's $2-$5 handling charge). Goldstar mailings are also available for Orange County, San Diego, South Bay/Long Beach, San Fernando Valley, Whittier Area, Inland Empire, San Francisco and East Bay, and Silicon Valley. <https://www.goldstarevents.com/splash?p=F37688N>
Dogs Gone
Most troubling about the campaign to unleash dogs upon the beach in Santa Monica is its disingenuousness. To bolster her case, for example, Santa Monica Daily press columnist Carole Orlin cites the safety record of pet visitations at nursing homes and hospitals, while failing to mention that these programs are motivated by hoped-for therapeutic benefits and are limited to a very small number of carefully monitored animals in highly controlled environments that are cleaned by professional staffs and protected by extensive liability insurance.
Do we really want to worry about the risk from additional semi-curbed canines on our crowded strand? Statistics show that nearly 2% of the population is bitten by a dog each year, the great majority of and most severe bites and attacks being suffered by children under 12 years old. If the mutt mavens are successful in their designs, some personal injury attorney can save everybody a lot of time by opening a kiosk right at the beach. Along those lines, I have a question: given the inevitability of dog bites if a large number of animals is introduced into a crowded venue, especially one heavily populated by casually supervised children (and with full appreciation that most severe dog attacks involve kids), won't the city and state governments be on the hook for potentially millions of dineros in damages if they knowingly create an inherently unsafe situation? Just asking.
Orlin also anecdotally points to her experience at the "completely open and dog friendly beach" in Carmel, from whence she returned "amazed at how beautiful and clean it was." Well, maybe. I remember the Carmel beach as sparsely attended, certainly when compared to ours, which is as heavily trafficked as Times Square. Closer to home, I myself am "amazed" at the amount of dogtritus already at the beach, especially on the sidewalks and bike path where dog owners can't fall back on the excuse that they lost it in the dunes.
Speaking of the sidewalks and bike path, isn't it also disingenuous to describe the off-leash proposal as being limited to "a 1/10-mile area of beach?" How are the pups going to get there? Dropped by helicopter? Catapulted from the palisades? No, they're going to walk there, depositing packages in the sand and on the byways as they go. And how are the animals going to be confined to the off-leash zone? Do the dogafiles propose barricading the beach at each end of the dog pound with fences? And, by the way, 1/10 of a mile doesn't sound like much, but if the fenced-in area extends from the street to the water line, what's being discussed is privatizing 50-60 acres of public beach.
The most disingenuous argument of the dog people Orlin puts this way: "Dog owners appear to want the same access to recreational opportunities as do tennis players, soccer players, volleyball players, surfers, sunbathers and others." As things stand now, though, everyone already has equal right to use to the beach. Including dog owners. It's the pooch park promoters who want to make some residents of Animal Farm more equal than others.
If dog owners are comparable to anyone, it is smokers, who are also welcome at the beach but have been asked to leave their filthy habit at home. Besides whatever messes are left by dogs that fail to reach the designated area before letting go, Orlin can't seriously think that dog owners, enough of whom already can't be bothered to pick up after their animals on sidewalks and streets and in neighbors' yards, will be able locate their pets' droppings in acres of sand, even if they want to.
Make no mistake: if the fidolators get their way, the beach will be dirtier. Parents of small children, to take one interested group, should ask themselves if they truly want to have more dogs at the beach (you haven't enjoyed the full, rich experience of parenthood until you've watched your little one pop a sand-encrusted "tootsie roll" he's found into his mouth). Turds aside, don't forget that many canines urinate copiously, and there is nothing much even the most conscientious dog owner can do about that. If you're already afraid to let your children play freely on your urine-soaked front lawn, do you really want the same concern on your treks to the beach? For that matter, does any of us look forward to spreading our blanket in a giant box of doggie litter that isn't even odor-absorbing and pine-scented?
Cleaning our beach is already a formidable job. We shouldn't be entertaining proposals that will make it harder. Some boosters of the canine corral seemed determined to press the issue, though, and they are organizing others to hound public officials about it. The rest of us may want to let the city council and the coastal commission know we think about it, too.
Do we really want to worry about the risk from additional semi-curbed canines on our crowded strand? Statistics show that nearly 2% of the population is bitten by a dog each year, the great majority of and most severe bites and attacks being suffered by children under 12 years old. If the mutt mavens are successful in their designs, some personal injury attorney can save everybody a lot of time by opening a kiosk right at the beach. Along those lines, I have a question: given the inevitability of dog bites if a large number of animals is introduced into a crowded venue, especially one heavily populated by casually supervised children (and with full appreciation that most severe dog attacks involve kids), won't the city and state governments be on the hook for potentially millions of dineros in damages if they knowingly create an inherently unsafe situation? Just asking.
Orlin also anecdotally points to her experience at the "completely open and dog friendly beach" in Carmel, from whence she returned "amazed at how beautiful and clean it was." Well, maybe. I remember the Carmel beach as sparsely attended, certainly when compared to ours, which is as heavily trafficked as Times Square. Closer to home, I myself am "amazed" at the amount of dogtritus already at the beach, especially on the sidewalks and bike path where dog owners can't fall back on the excuse that they lost it in the dunes.
Speaking of the sidewalks and bike path, isn't it also disingenuous to describe the off-leash proposal as being limited to "a 1/10-mile area of beach?" How are the pups going to get there? Dropped by helicopter? Catapulted from the palisades? No, they're going to walk there, depositing packages in the sand and on the byways as they go. And how are the animals going to be confined to the off-leash zone? Do the dogafiles propose barricading the beach at each end of the dog pound with fences? And, by the way, 1/10 of a mile doesn't sound like much, but if the fenced-in area extends from the street to the water line, what's being discussed is privatizing 50-60 acres of public beach.
The most disingenuous argument of the dog people Orlin puts this way: "Dog owners appear to want the same access to recreational opportunities as do tennis players, soccer players, volleyball players, surfers, sunbathers and others." As things stand now, though, everyone already has equal right to use to the beach. Including dog owners. It's the pooch park promoters who want to make some residents of Animal Farm more equal than others.
If dog owners are comparable to anyone, it is smokers, who are also welcome at the beach but have been asked to leave their filthy habit at home. Besides whatever messes are left by dogs that fail to reach the designated area before letting go, Orlin can't seriously think that dog owners, enough of whom already can't be bothered to pick up after their animals on sidewalks and streets and in neighbors' yards, will be able locate their pets' droppings in acres of sand, even if they want to.
Make no mistake: if the fidolators get their way, the beach will be dirtier. Parents of small children, to take one interested group, should ask themselves if they truly want to have more dogs at the beach (you haven't enjoyed the full, rich experience of parenthood until you've watched your little one pop a sand-encrusted "tootsie roll" he's found into his mouth). Turds aside, don't forget that many canines urinate copiously, and there is nothing much even the most conscientious dog owner can do about that. If you're already afraid to let your children play freely on your urine-soaked front lawn, do you really want the same concern on your treks to the beach? For that matter, does any of us look forward to spreading our blanket in a giant box of doggie litter that isn't even odor-absorbing and pine-scented?
Cleaning our beach is already a formidable job. We shouldn't be entertaining proposals that will make it harder. Some boosters of the canine corral seemed determined to press the issue, though, and they are organizing others to hound public officials about it. The rest of us may want to let the city council and the coastal commission know we think about it, too.
Turn Yards Into Parks
Little in urban life is more dreary than the sight of a lawn. Even when well-tended, their uniformity is deadening to the spirit; thus, they are well-suited to the tedium of suburbs but inappropriate to the more bracing landscape of the city. More often than not, a yard is not the verdant meadow that was intended, luxuriant and enticing, but a tufted and scrabbled wasteland, like the carpet of a fleabag hotel.
In the southern California community where I live, concern over the "pedestrian experience" has expressed itself in the harassment of homeowners, miscreants who use high hedges and lines of trees as shields from noise and fumes on busy thoroughfares. Although some of this shrubbery has been in place for decades, property owners suddenly face, without the benefit of public discussion, at least not in this century, of the desirability or not of such vegetation, the possibility of costly fines or expensive removal.
The lifestyle police argue that their intervention is required because high hedges are antisocial, creating areas of private space that are, well, too private. Although there must be reasonable limits on private property rights, it isn't clear that the hedge row is the place where the line should be drawn. In pursuit of the vaunted pedestrian experience, why should an ugly four foot copse be permitted while a beautifully designed and cared for twelve footer is criminalized? Doesn't any fence have the effect of confining the passerby to a narrow ribbon of concrete? And is there any legitimate lifestyle exigency (there may be safety concerns) that requires regulating the height of barriers other than those that actually intersect the public's space? If I don't want to look in my neighbor's window or permit her to peek in mine, is that anyone's business but ours?
Here are two proposals that, if adopted, would not only improve the pedestrian orientation of residential streets, but also offer additional benefits in water conservation, improved air quality, protection for native flora and fauna, and greatly expanded public space. Either scenario could be realized by means of tax incentives, cash payments, abatements, zoning exemptions, or similar forms of positive reinforcement:
Turn lawns into parks and native plant refuges.
Imagine, if you will, a street in your neighborhood, perhaps the one you use to walk to the market or take your daily constitutional. Instead of crabgrass and sandpits, each yard features a garden of native plants: here cacti, there succulents, the occasional lemonadeberry or manzinita, beds of chinese houses and fiesta flowers beyond.
In addition to inducements favoring such uses, the city could offer the assistance of gardeners, nurseries, publications, free compost, etc., to assure that even those with limited means, time or experience would be able to provide the community with beautified walkways. Where there was interest, neighborhood groups might be able to facilitate and coordinate block-long conversions.
Similarly, in the few cases where a building is set back deeply from the street, a landowner might be moved to offer the front yard as a park, a municipally maintained dell being preferable to the typical sunbaked expanse rendered inhospitable by the reek of dog urine mixed with feces flakes. If such a facility were carefully designed to encourage contemplative uses and were limited to daylight hours, with the right incentives what landowners wouldn't be pleased to have the responsibility for their troublesome and demanding front yards taken over by the parks department?
Such an arrangement would need clear boundaries to protect both the property owner and the city, but there is no reason to think the obstacles couldn't be overcome, as they are routinely for office and apartment buildings.
In the southern California community where I live, concern over the "pedestrian experience" has expressed itself in the harassment of homeowners, miscreants who use high hedges and lines of trees as shields from noise and fumes on busy thoroughfares. Although some of this shrubbery has been in place for decades, property owners suddenly face, without the benefit of public discussion, at least not in this century, of the desirability or not of such vegetation, the possibility of costly fines or expensive removal.
The lifestyle police argue that their intervention is required because high hedges are antisocial, creating areas of private space that are, well, too private. Although there must be reasonable limits on private property rights, it isn't clear that the hedge row is the place where the line should be drawn. In pursuit of the vaunted pedestrian experience, why should an ugly four foot copse be permitted while a beautifully designed and cared for twelve footer is criminalized? Doesn't any fence have the effect of confining the passerby to a narrow ribbon of concrete? And is there any legitimate lifestyle exigency (there may be safety concerns) that requires regulating the height of barriers other than those that actually intersect the public's space? If I don't want to look in my neighbor's window or permit her to peek in mine, is that anyone's business but ours?
Here are two proposals that, if adopted, would not only improve the pedestrian orientation of residential streets, but also offer additional benefits in water conservation, improved air quality, protection for native flora and fauna, and greatly expanded public space. Either scenario could be realized by means of tax incentives, cash payments, abatements, zoning exemptions, or similar forms of positive reinforcement:
Turn lawns into parks and native plant refuges.
Imagine, if you will, a street in your neighborhood, perhaps the one you use to walk to the market or take your daily constitutional. Instead of crabgrass and sandpits, each yard features a garden of native plants: here cacti, there succulents, the occasional lemonadeberry or manzinita, beds of chinese houses and fiesta flowers beyond.
In addition to inducements favoring such uses, the city could offer the assistance of gardeners, nurseries, publications, free compost, etc., to assure that even those with limited means, time or experience would be able to provide the community with beautified walkways. Where there was interest, neighborhood groups might be able to facilitate and coordinate block-long conversions.
Similarly, in the few cases where a building is set back deeply from the street, a landowner might be moved to offer the front yard as a park, a municipally maintained dell being preferable to the typical sunbaked expanse rendered inhospitable by the reek of dog urine mixed with feces flakes. If such a facility were carefully designed to encourage contemplative uses and were limited to daylight hours, with the right incentives what landowners wouldn't be pleased to have the responsibility for their troublesome and demanding front yards taken over by the parks department?
Such an arrangement would need clear boundaries to protect both the property owner and the city, but there is no reason to think the obstacles couldn't be overcome, as they are routinely for office and apartment buildings.
Crossing Main
How many more decades must pass before the mid-block crosswalk, long promised for Main Street between Hill Street and Ashland Avenue, will be installed at last? Although we have been trained by experience to have low expectations about follow-through by city staff, in this case there are grandfathers who were in diapers when the proposal was first broached.
It's not as though the idea is unprecedented. Mid-block crosswalks already exist on Main -- between Ocean Park Blvd. and Hollister and between Ashland and Pier -- causing both those sections of the drag to be considerably more pedestrian friendly than the rest. The crossing to the north, connecting the Galley Restaurant and Edgemar, has a pedestrian-controlled signal (known locally as "the god light" because it's quick response time makes walkers feel like gods when they push the button to arrest traffic). In front of Joe's Diner (at Kinney), crossers halt the cars by stepping into the marked lane. For the the long-anticipated crosswalk in the Ashland-Hill block, linking the area in front of the World Cafe's parking lot booth (next to LF Stores) with FITO across the street, either method of interrupting traffic would be acceptable, as would a stop sign.
As long as they already have their cans and brushes out (although to suggest this may be to invite another generation of studies by consultants and commissions), city staff could also put a path across Main between the northeast corner of the Victorian and Amelia's (on the block between Hill and Ocean Park), ending the petty harrassment of citizens by expensive jaywalking citations during Sunday farmers' market. As a side effect, both crossings would slow traffic, further benefiting walkers. Although these suggestions have the disadvantage of not costing millions of dollars to implement, like transit malls and traffic calming impedimentia, they would have an immediate and positive impact on the experience of shoppers and strollers on Main Street. (Published Santa Monica Mirror 2004-08-25)
It's not as though the idea is unprecedented. Mid-block crosswalks already exist on Main -- between Ocean Park Blvd. and Hollister and between Ashland and Pier -- causing both those sections of the drag to be considerably more pedestrian friendly than the rest. The crossing to the north, connecting the Galley Restaurant and Edgemar, has a pedestrian-controlled signal (known locally as "the god light" because it's quick response time makes walkers feel like gods when they push the button to arrest traffic). In front of Joe's Diner (at Kinney), crossers halt the cars by stepping into the marked lane. For the the long-anticipated crosswalk in the Ashland-Hill block, linking the area in front of the World Cafe's parking lot booth (next to LF Stores) with FITO across the street, either method of interrupting traffic would be acceptable, as would a stop sign.
As long as they already have their cans and brushes out (although to suggest this may be to invite another generation of studies by consultants and commissions), city staff could also put a path across Main between the northeast corner of the Victorian and Amelia's (on the block between Hill and Ocean Park), ending the petty harrassment of citizens by expensive jaywalking citations during Sunday farmers' market. As a side effect, both crossings would slow traffic, further benefiting walkers. Although these suggestions have the disadvantage of not costing millions of dollars to implement, like transit malls and traffic calming impedimentia, they would have an immediate and positive impact on the experience of shoppers and strollers on Main Street. (Published Santa Monica Mirror 2004-08-25)
Edifice Wrecks
What's curious about the Santa Monica Public Library now being built -- I mean, aside from the fact that there was no demonstrable need for the thing, that it required a building that had only recently cost millions of dollars to retrofit to be torn down, and that it now itself is millions of more dollars over budget -- besides all that, the construction of a big central athenaeum flies in the face of this burg's rhetorical commitment to neighborhoods, pedestrian orientation, and slow growth.
Unfortunately, the edifice complex afflicting the city elite inevitably leads to such ill-conceived and overblown projects as the transit mall, the civic center and the library.
In the latter case, how much more fitting it would have been to create a network of satellite reading rooms around town, backed up by an efficient distribution system. Even after the central book depository comes on line, there will still be a need for small, local, high-tech libraries. Such mini-libraries (booktiques, call them) would help to increase access to the Internet; provide more -- and more convenient -- locales for library patrons to read, study and create; encourage walking and bike riding; and save many, many unnecessary automobile trips.
Booktiques needn't be nearly as large nor as permanent as the neighborhood library branches already on Main, Montana and Ocean Park. In fact, it's better that they're not. Storefronts, warehouses, churches, community rooms, abandoned gas stations...almost any publicly accessible space could easily be converted to library uses. Once the infrastructure was put in place to deliver books physically and transmit information digitally, booktiques would be simple to set up and remove, unlike the present library configuration, giving librarians the ability to respond relatively quickly to changing demands for their services.
The next time the city council and staff sit down to divvy up budget dollars, maybe they can spare a few bucks for booktiques (imagine, if you will, that the $85 million currently being poured into the central library building was being used instead to innovate ways to relocate "the library" into every corner of the community). Creating attractive destinations for pedestrians and bikers, which is one thing booktiques would be, is a far more effective traffic mitigator, for example, than cluttering the streets with more circles, islands and bumpers at intersections.
What's needed, as it is in nearly every aspect of public life hereabouts, is the application of creative thinking. The same old same old may be a fair description of the bureaucratic safety zone, but there should be other criteria required of planning projects than that they be big and expensive and have been done before. (Published Santa Monica Mirror 2004-07-22).
Unfortunately, the edifice complex afflicting the city elite inevitably leads to such ill-conceived and overblown projects as the transit mall, the civic center and the library.
In the latter case, how much more fitting it would have been to create a network of satellite reading rooms around town, backed up by an efficient distribution system. Even after the central book depository comes on line, there will still be a need for small, local, high-tech libraries. Such mini-libraries (booktiques, call them) would help to increase access to the Internet; provide more -- and more convenient -- locales for library patrons to read, study and create; encourage walking and bike riding; and save many, many unnecessary automobile trips.
Booktiques needn't be nearly as large nor as permanent as the neighborhood library branches already on Main, Montana and Ocean Park. In fact, it's better that they're not. Storefronts, warehouses, churches, community rooms, abandoned gas stations...almost any publicly accessible space could easily be converted to library uses. Once the infrastructure was put in place to deliver books physically and transmit information digitally, booktiques would be simple to set up and remove, unlike the present library configuration, giving librarians the ability to respond relatively quickly to changing demands for their services.
The next time the city council and staff sit down to divvy up budget dollars, maybe they can spare a few bucks for booktiques (imagine, if you will, that the $85 million currently being poured into the central library building was being used instead to innovate ways to relocate "the library" into every corner of the community). Creating attractive destinations for pedestrians and bikers, which is one thing booktiques would be, is a far more effective traffic mitigator, for example, than cluttering the streets with more circles, islands and bumpers at intersections.
What's needed, as it is in nearly every aspect of public life hereabouts, is the application of creative thinking. The same old same old may be a fair description of the bureaucratic safety zone, but there should be other criteria required of planning projects than that they be big and expensive and have been done before. (Published Santa Monica Mirror 2004-07-22).
The new city council must discipline the bureaucrats at last
Someone contemplating the retreat from the communitarian ideals that animated the renters' rights movement might do worse than reflect on these quotes from John Adams:
"The representative assembly," he wrote with revolutionary ardor in 1776 (and no doubt with some small intention of drumming up support for his enterprise), "should be in miniature an exact portrait of the people at large. It should think, feel, reason and act like them."
By 1787, however, reeling from the near-anarchy of the toothless Confederation, Adams believed that the "proposition that [the people] are the best keeper of their liberties is not true. They are the worst conceivable, they are no keepers at all. They can neither act, judge, think, or will."
Similarly did "the People's Republic of Santa Monica" descend from the eden of participatory democracy to the current abyss of shoddy and mediocre dictatorship by bureaucrats. When the SMRR leadership's trust in the people faltered, it removed a counterweight to the city staff's arrogance and trumpery.
The incoming council needs to make a new start by terminating city manager Susan McCarthy and the most autocratic department managers, not limited to those running the planning department. If McCarthy continues to occupy her office at city hall, the council might as soon stay home. It will be business as usual in the dysfunctional village by the sea.
It is way past time the citizens of Santa Monica took the power back from the hired help.
"The representative assembly," he wrote with revolutionary ardor in 1776 (and no doubt with some small intention of drumming up support for his enterprise), "should be in miniature an exact portrait of the people at large. It should think, feel, reason and act like them."
By 1787, however, reeling from the near-anarchy of the toothless Confederation, Adams believed that the "proposition that [the people] are the best keeper of their liberties is not true. They are the worst conceivable, they are no keepers at all. They can neither act, judge, think, or will."
Similarly did "the People's Republic of Santa Monica" descend from the eden of participatory democracy to the current abyss of shoddy and mediocre dictatorship by bureaucrats. When the SMRR leadership's trust in the people faltered, it removed a counterweight to the city staff's arrogance and trumpery.
The incoming council needs to make a new start by terminating city manager Susan McCarthy and the most autocratic department managers, not limited to those running the planning department. If McCarthy continues to occupy her office at city hall, the council might as soon stay home. It will be business as usual in the dysfunctional village by the sea.
It is way past time the citizens of Santa Monica took the power back from the hired help.
Weather: The Santa Anas
"Named after Southern California's Santa Ana Canyon and a fixture of local legend and literature, the Santa Ana is a blustery, dry and warm (often hot) wind that blows out of the desert. In Raymond Chandler's story Red Wind, the title being one of the offshore wind's many nicknames, the Santa Anas were introduced as 'those hot dry [winds] that come down through the mountain passes and curl your hair and make your nerves jump and your skin itch. On nights like that every booze party ends in a fight. Meek little wives feel the edge of the carving knife and study their husbands' necks. Anything can happen.' Local legends associate the hot, dry winds with homicides and earthquakes, but these are myths.
"Another popular misconception that the winds are hot owing to their desert origin. Actually, the Santa Anas develop when the desert is cold, and are thus most common during the cool season stretching from October through March. High pressure builds over the Great Basin (e.g., Nevada) and the cold air there begins to sink. However, this air is forced downslope which compresses and warms it at a rate of about 10C per kilometer (29F per mile) of descent. As its temperature rises, the relative humidity drops; the air starts out dry and winds up at sea level much drier still. The air picks up speed as it is channeled through passes and canyons...." -- from the website.
<http://www.atmos.ucla.edu/~fovell/ASother/mm5/SantaAna/winds.html>
"Another popular misconception that the winds are hot owing to their desert origin. Actually, the Santa Anas develop when the desert is cold, and are thus most common during the cool season stretching from October through March. High pressure builds over the Great Basin (e.g., Nevada) and the cold air there begins to sink. However, this air is forced downslope which compresses and warms it at a rate of about 10C per kilometer (29F per mile) of descent. As its temperature rises, the relative humidity drops; the air starts out dry and winds up at sea level much drier still. The air picks up speed as it is channeled through passes and canyons...." -- from the website.
<http://www.atmos.ucla.edu/~fovell/ASother/mm5/SantaAna/winds.html>
Media: IPSM Observed
Impractical Proposals SM benefited from kind notice last week from former LATimesman Kevin Roderick in his local media and lifestyle zine L.A. Observed, which does a great job covering local media and news. "Today's Blog" for October 21, for example, reports on the shutdown of an anonymous insider website about the daily activities, indiscretions and mishaps of Elay's mayor and councilmembers that has been must reading at City Hall; a note on the efforts to clean up the environmental damage at Rocketdyne's Santa Susana Field Lab near Chatsworth (Roderick is author of The San Fernando Valley: America's Suburb, so he pays close attention to doings in the Valley); a link to a Hollywood business story with a Black Dahlia twist; a reminder to listen to 89.3 KPCC's excellent weekly Journalist Roundtable that morning and Kitty Felde's Talk of the City look at the Indian gambling Propositions 68 and 70 in the afternoon; and a tip on an upcoming New York Review of Books-sponsored panel of journalists at Occidental College on "The Media and Iraq: What Went Wrong?" <http://www.laobserved.com/>
SM Library: Free access at library
The Santa Monica Public Library has added free wireless access at the temporary main library and the three neighborhood branches. To get on line, patrons need their own wi-fi-ready computer or PDA. The library already offers free internet access on some of its own computers at all four locations. The info line is 310-458-8600.
Blog: Baghdad Burning
If you were alive during the Vietnam era, this may have a familiar ring:
"The bombs being dropped on Fallujah don't contain
explosives, depleted uranium or anything harmful - they
contain laughing gas - that would, of course, explain
[Pentagon chief Donald] Rumsfeld's misplaced optimism
about not killing civilians in Fallujah. Also, being a
'civilian' is a relative thing in a country occupied by
Americans. You're only a civilian if you're on their
side. If you translate for them, or serve them food in
the Green Zone, or wipe their floors - you're an
innocent civilian. Just about everyone else is an
insurgent, unless they can get a job as a 'civilian'."
- Riverbend, an Iraqi civilian girl,
author of the blog Baghdad Burning
<http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/>
"The bombs being dropped on Fallujah don't contain
explosives, depleted uranium or anything harmful - they
contain laughing gas - that would, of course, explain
[Pentagon chief Donald] Rumsfeld's misplaced optimism
about not killing civilians in Fallujah. Also, being a
'civilian' is a relative thing in a country occupied by
Americans. You're only a civilian if you're on their
side. If you translate for them, or serve them food in
the Green Zone, or wipe their floors - you're an
innocent civilian. Just about everyone else is an
insurgent, unless they can get a job as a 'civilian'."
- Riverbend, an Iraqi civilian girl,
author of the blog Baghdad Burning
<http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/>
Theater: Last Night for "The Tansparency of Val"
"Life starts. People tell you things. Girls become boys. Facts become thoughts. Is my mother attractive? Is licorice really food? In Stephen Belber's new comedy, Transparency of Val, 'Val' is born. Within minutes, he learns part of the entire history of the world. By then, having finished college, he is faced with the task of actually living. It's not quite the coconut he was taught, what with all the twisted Buddhists, sexually-amorphous mates, and frighteningly friendly Nazis. But Val's a survivor, and like most good people, he'll endure. Unless he goes insane.
"Transparency of Val, no less sweeping in scope than Plato's 'Allegory of the Cave,' tackles the life cycle, sexual politics, race relations, foreign affairs, and modern religion. And it's a comedy! Playwright Stephen Belber, no longer content with the realism that drove his previous dramas like Tape and Finally, chooses a dramatic style which allows him to tackle so many broad issues. Like every good absurdist, he begs a number of fundamental questions without presuming any answers." -- from the program.
The LA Weekly: "Playwright Stephen Belber puts a ‘90s spin on the Candide story....So long as Belber keeps his eye on the satiric ball, his play is lively and funny, but it keeps veering into allegory, fantasy, absurdism and New Age truisms....Director Kelly Ann Ford gives the piece a slick and clever production, well served by a solid cast (including Bob Wilson in several roles), but the play’s warring elements never quite gel."
Backstage West: "...Please keep your hands and arms inside the car at all times.
Dutifully warned, one sits back for a spin on playwright Stephen Belber's philosophically comic roller coaster. Val, a quickly developing newborn played with infectiously wide-eyed wonder by Guy Busick, learns all he needs to know about life within the first 10 minutes of Belber's tautly constructed first act....best are the scenes in which Ford lets the dramatic side run its course naturally. The cast's
handling, Busick's in particular, of Val's parents' separation and his father's eventual death are touching oases in Belber's otherwise fast-moving tale."
West Coast Ensemble, wcensemble.org
522 N. La Brea Ave., Hlywd.;
Tues.-Thurs., 8 p.m.; thru Nov. 11. (323) 525-0022.
"Transparency of Val, no less sweeping in scope than Plato's 'Allegory of the Cave,' tackles the life cycle, sexual politics, race relations, foreign affairs, and modern religion. And it's a comedy! Playwright Stephen Belber, no longer content with the realism that drove his previous dramas like Tape and Finally, chooses a dramatic style which allows him to tackle so many broad issues. Like every good absurdist, he begs a number of fundamental questions without presuming any answers." -- from the program.
The LA Weekly: "Playwright Stephen Belber puts a ‘90s spin on the Candide story....So long as Belber keeps his eye on the satiric ball, his play is lively and funny, but it keeps veering into allegory, fantasy, absurdism and New Age truisms....Director Kelly Ann Ford gives the piece a slick and clever production, well served by a solid cast (including Bob Wilson in several roles), but the play’s warring elements never quite gel."
Backstage West: "...Please keep your hands and arms inside the car at all times.
Dutifully warned, one sits back for a spin on playwright Stephen Belber's philosophically comic roller coaster. Val, a quickly developing newborn played with infectiously wide-eyed wonder by Guy Busick, learns all he needs to know about life within the first 10 minutes of Belber's tautly constructed first act....best are the scenes in which Ford lets the dramatic side run its course naturally. The cast's
handling, Busick's in particular, of Val's parents' separation and his father's eventual death are touching oases in Belber's otherwise fast-moving tale."
West Coast Ensemble, wcensemble.org
522 N. La Brea Ave., Hlywd.;
Tues.-Thurs., 8 p.m.; thru Nov. 11. (323) 525-0022.
Public Policy: The (Running) Cost of the War in Iraq
"War affects everyone, not just those directly involved in the fighting. This webpage is a simple attempt to demonstrate one of the more quantifiable effects of war: the financial burden it places on our tax dollars." -- from the website. <http://costofwar.com/>
You'll get pie in the sky when you die -- Joe Hill
The Preacher and the Slave
Long-haired preachers come out every night,
Try to tell you what's wrong and what's right;
But when asked how 'bout something to eat
They will answer with voices so sweet:
The starvation army they play,
They sing and they clap and they pray
'Till they get all your coin on the drum
Then they'll tell you when you're on the bum:
Holy Rollers and jumpers come out,
They holler, they jump and they shout.
Give your money to Jesus they say,
He will cure all diseases today.
If you fight hard for children and wife --
Try to get something good in this life --
You're a sinner and bad man, they tell,
When you die you will sure go to hell.
Workingmen of all countries, unite,
Side by side we for freedom will fight;
When the world and its wealth we have gained
To the grafters we'll sing this refrain:
Long-haired preachers come out every night,
Try to tell you what's wrong and what's right;
But when asked how 'bout something to eat
They will answer with voices so sweet:
You will eat, bye and bye,
In that glorious land above the sky;
Work and pray, live on hay,
You'll get pie in the sky when you die.
The starvation army they play,
They sing and they clap and they pray
'Till they get all your coin on the drum
Then they'll tell you when you're on the bum:
Holy Rollers and jumpers come out,
They holler, they jump and they shout.
Give your money to Jesus they say,
He will cure all diseases today.
If you fight hard for children and wife --
Try to get something good in this life --
You're a sinner and bad man, they tell,
When you die you will sure go to hell.
Workingmen of all countries, unite,
Side by side we for freedom will fight;
When the world and its wealth we have gained
To the grafters we'll sing this refrain:
You will eat, bye and bye,
When you've learned how to cook and to fry.
Chop some wood, 'twill do you good,
And you'll eat in the sweet bye and bye.
-- Joe Hill (1911)
Jazz: Thom Rotella
And speaking of jazz, guitarist Thom Rotella continues to host a Sunday Jazz Guitar Brunch at La Vecchia Cucina, featuring guest guitarists....
November 7 - Larry Koonse
November 14 - John Pisano
November 21 - Mitch Holder
November 28 - Thom Rotella solo
Sundays 11am-2:30pm
(no cover charge) at
La Vecchia Cucina
2654 Main Street
Santa Monica
310.399.7979
<http://www.lavecchiacucina.com/>
<http://www.thomrotella.com/>
November 7 - Larry Koonse
November 14 - John Pisano
November 21 - Mitch Holder
November 28 - Thom Rotella solo
Sundays 11am-2:30pm
(no cover charge) at
La Vecchia Cucina
2654 Main Street
Santa Monica
310.399.7979
<http://www.lavecchiacucina.com/>
<http://www.thomrotella.com/>
It's not that bad
It's undeniably true that the driving issues in this campaign, besides security, were gun control, abortion and, most crucially, gay marriage. Karl Rove and his minions were extremely skillful at realizing a strategy that they outlined after the last election to build up a rock solid base of support among evangelicals.
How policies, such as the free use of guns and the criminalization of abortion, that together will result in uncountable deaths and untold suffering, become the "moral" choice I leave you to ponder. Why aren't the pulpits thundering about poverty and unjust war and the death of innocents in general? According to the New York Times, "voters who cited honesty as the most important quality in a candidate broke 2 to 1 in Mr. Bush's favor."
The most mendacious administration in American history gets the award for integrity.
A gang of crooks led by a known liar is the chosen guardian of moral values.
God works in mysterious ways, indeed.
The Democrats are not without responsibility, of course. Kerry tried to fudge every one of those same issues, especially abortion and gay marriage. And gay activists, by stressing marriage -- a vestige of religious ooga booga that maybe the state should get out of altogether -- over rights, about which most Americans agree, played into Rove's hands.
The administration will attempt to do the following: make the tax cuts for the rich permanent; privatize social security; pack the Supreme Court with right-wingers; overrule Roe v. Wade; expand the military; invade Iran; institute a draft; beef up the Patriot Act; continue to dismantle health and environmental protection laws; unloose the exploiters on those few public lands not yet despoiled; attempt to initiate a national sales tax as the final nail in the coffin of the progressive taxes; turn health care over to private business; and on and on.
You'll note that most of this agenda is about power and money, very little -- beyond tossing the bone of abortion to the Christian right -- about "morality."
Progressives are actually in a great position. We are more organized and unified than at any time since at least the 1930s. We agree with at least half the people on the kind of country we want to live in. And we have the high moral ground on the issues that actually affect the way people live.
What is needed is a clear articulation of the values that drive most progressives.
And the creation of organizations for influencing policy and politics independent of the fatally compromized Democratic Party.
How policies, such as the free use of guns and the criminalization of abortion, that together will result in uncountable deaths and untold suffering, become the "moral" choice I leave you to ponder. Why aren't the pulpits thundering about poverty and unjust war and the death of innocents in general? According to the New York Times, "voters who cited honesty as the most important quality in a candidate broke 2 to 1 in Mr. Bush's favor."
The most mendacious administration in American history gets the award for integrity.
A gang of crooks led by a known liar is the chosen guardian of moral values.
God works in mysterious ways, indeed.
The Democrats are not without responsibility, of course. Kerry tried to fudge every one of those same issues, especially abortion and gay marriage. And gay activists, by stressing marriage -- a vestige of religious ooga booga that maybe the state should get out of altogether -- over rights, about which most Americans agree, played into Rove's hands.
The administration will attempt to do the following: make the tax cuts for the rich permanent; privatize social security; pack the Supreme Court with right-wingers; overrule Roe v. Wade; expand the military; invade Iran; institute a draft; beef up the Patriot Act; continue to dismantle health and environmental protection laws; unloose the exploiters on those few public lands not yet despoiled; attempt to initiate a national sales tax as the final nail in the coffin of the progressive taxes; turn health care over to private business; and on and on.
You'll note that most of this agenda is about power and money, very little -- beyond tossing the bone of abortion to the Christian right -- about "morality."
Progressives are actually in a great position. We are more organized and unified than at any time since at least the 1930s. We agree with at least half the people on the kind of country we want to live in. And we have the high moral ground on the issues that actually affect the way people live.
What is needed is a clear articulation of the values that drive most progressives.
And the creation of organizations for influencing policy and politics independent of the fatally compromized Democratic Party.
Jazz: Carl Saunders at Clancy's...
...with Andy Martin and Jerry Pinter!!!
Carl Saunders is one of the trumpet greats. After high school, joined Stan Kenton's Orchestra, then spent 20 years in Vegas where he played lead in show bands for the likes of Ella Fitzgerald, Tony Bennet and Frank Sinatra (also for Paul Anka and Robert Goulet, but let's not go there). His big band credits include Si Zentner, Harry James, Maynard Ferguson, Benny Goodman and Charlie Barnet.
The Group: Andy Martin(trmb), Jerry Pinter(s), Christian Jacobs(p), Kevin Axt(b), Santo Savino(d).
Friday, November 05, 2004 - 8:00pm to Midnight - $10.00 Cover
Clancy's Jazz at the Crab Shack
219 North Central Avenue
Glendale, CA 91203
818-242-CRAB
(Just off the 134 at Central/Brand Avenue)
Carl Saunders is one of the trumpet greats. After high school, joined Stan Kenton's Orchestra, then spent 20 years in Vegas where he played lead in show bands for the likes of Ella Fitzgerald, Tony Bennet and Frank Sinatra (also for Paul Anka and Robert Goulet, but let's not go there). His big band credits include Si Zentner, Harry James, Maynard Ferguson, Benny Goodman and Charlie Barnet.
The Group: Andy Martin(trmb), Jerry Pinter(s), Christian Jacobs(p), Kevin Axt(b), Santo Savino(d).
Friday, November 05, 2004 - 8:00pm to Midnight - $10.00 Cover
Clancy's Jazz at the Crab Shack
219 North Central Avenue
Glendale, CA 91203
818-242-CRAB
(Just off the 134 at Central/Brand Avenue)
Today Is the First Day of the Rest of Your (Political) Life
Progressives need to take a step back from the Democratic Party.
Who cares which corporatist they nominate? They will continue to lose until they start to provide a viable alternative to corporate power.
I doubt that there ever was a time in our history when the labor, civil rights, peace and environmental movements have been as unified; too bad they bet it all on a nag.
Now these movements need to secure that unity by getting together behind a simple program:
single payer health insurance,
an increase in the minimum wage, and
the internationalization of American labor and environmental laws.
Lament that Bush won; shed tears for the country; but have no regrets that Kerry lost. He's just another symptom of our political dysfunction.
Joe Hill said, "Don't mourn. Organize!"
Who cares which corporatist they nominate? They will continue to lose until they start to provide a viable alternative to corporate power.
I doubt that there ever was a time in our history when the labor, civil rights, peace and environmental movements have been as unified; too bad they bet it all on a nag.
Now these movements need to secure that unity by getting together behind a simple program:
single payer health insurance,
an increase in the minimum wage, and
the internationalization of American labor and environmental laws.
Lament that Bush won; shed tears for the country; but have no regrets that Kerry lost. He's just another symptom of our political dysfunction.
Joe Hill said, "Don't mourn. Organize!"
Roosevelt: On the wages of fear
"...This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself -- nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days." -- President Franklin D. Roosevelt, March 4, 1933
Election: List of ballot recommendations
President/Vice President: To defeat Bush, John Kerry and John Edwards
(but go to VotePair.Org <http://www.votepair.org/>and trade your vote with a third party (Green, Libertarian or Nader) voter in a swing state -- see Keep the Protest Alive, Trade Your Vote).
U.S. Senate: Barbara Boxer
The Props (see earlier posts, below):
Prop 1A: No
Prop 59: Yes
Prop 60: Yes
Prop 60A: No
Prop 61: Yes
Prop 62: No
Prop 63: Yes
Prop 64: No
Prop 65: No
Prop 66: Yes
Prop 67: No
Prop 68: No
Prop 69: No
Prop 70: No
Prop 71: No
Prop 72: Yes
Los Angeles County
Measure A: No.
Judges:
Office 18: Mildred Escobedo
Office 29: Gus Gomez
Office 52: Laura F. Priver
Office 53: Daniel Zeke Zeidler
Office 69: Donna Groman
City of Los Angeles
Measure O: Yes.
City of Santa Monica
City Council: Michael Feinstein, Herb Katz
(only: see Michael Feinstein and Herb Katz for City Council)
Rent Board: Jeff Sklar
Measure N: Increases the hotel occupancy tax from 12 to 14 percent (same as other municipalities): Yes
Santa MonicaCommunity College District
Measure S (authorizes the college district -- encompassing Santa Monica and Malibu -- to issue $135 million in bonds to replace or repair deteriorating buildings, construct and equip laboratories and meet new needs in emerging technologies): Yes
(but go to VotePair.Org <http://www.votepair.org/>and trade your vote with a third party (Green, Libertarian or Nader) voter in a swing state -- see Keep the Protest Alive, Trade Your Vote).
U.S. Senate: Barbara Boxer
The Props (see earlier posts, below):
Prop 1A: No
Prop 59: Yes
Prop 60: Yes
Prop 60A: No
Prop 61: Yes
Prop 62: No
Prop 63: Yes
Prop 64: No
Prop 65: No
Prop 66: Yes
Prop 67: No
Prop 68: No
Prop 69: No
Prop 70: No
Prop 71: No
Prop 72: Yes
Los Angeles County
Measure A: No.
Judges:
Office 18: Mildred Escobedo
Office 29: Gus Gomez
Office 52: Laura F. Priver
Office 53: Daniel Zeke Zeidler
Office 69: Donna Groman
City of Los Angeles
Measure O: Yes.
City of Santa Monica
City Council: Michael Feinstein, Herb Katz
(only: see Michael Feinstein and Herb Katz for City Council)
Rent Board: Jeff Sklar
Measure N: Increases the hotel occupancy tax from 12 to 14 percent (same as other municipalities): Yes
Santa MonicaCommunity College District
Measure S (authorizes the college district -- encompassing Santa Monica and Malibu -- to issue $135 million in bonds to replace or repair deteriorating buildings, construct and equip laboratories and meet new needs in emerging technologies): Yes
Election: Here's how it's gonna be
At least we can still smile:
<http://www.clowntech.com/win04/vote.htm>
The Props: NO on 62 -- Primary Elections
YES on 60 -- Political Parties in Elections
By limiting choice in the general election to the top two vote-getters from the primaries, Prop 62 all but guarantees that third parties will never have a fair shot at gaining power.
In a community where one party possesses the allegiance of a significant portion of registered voters, it is not unlikely, if this initiative passes, that the selection of candidates on election day will be reduced to two of that party. Similarly, a low turnout in an uncontested primary could result in the top candidates from a hotly disputed but closely decided race among the opposition being the only choices in the general election, even if the disputatious party is not normally the favorite of a majority of voters in that district.
Prop 62 also allows any citizen, no matter how registered, to vote for any candidate of any party. But primaries are the mechanism the parties employ to choose their candidates and, by extension, most of their leaders. If it passes, this "reform" will lead inevitably to weaker party loyalties. And weaker parties make it harder for voters to judge candidates and to hold them accountable.
Also, when one party is particularly settled in its candidates -- this would most frequently be the case of a party that already holds a particular seat, its members will be released to make mischief for its competitors. As a Democrat, I am not especially pleased with the idea of Republicans and Independents picking my representatives. It's to be hoped that Republicans, Greens, Libertarians, and so on, feel the same.
In addition, there are sometimes factors at work other than the relative merit of the Democratic and Republican nominees. For example, if control of a legislature is in balance, you may wish to vote for the delegate from the party you hope will win the majority of the body in question, regardless of the individual merits the candidates on the ballot. Better a mediocre Democrat in your district and control of the House, than a fabulous Republican (should there be such) in your district and minority status in the House.
Here in California the incumbent Democratic Senator, Barbara Boxer, is running against a nonentity, but in a state where the question is closer, the matter of the Senate's role in consenting or not to the next several appointments to the Supreme Court ought to weigh heavily in the Democrat's favor, even if he is, to take an example so extreme as almost to undermine the argument, of the caliber of a Zell Miller. As you choose your senator this year, you may want to give a thought to the prospect of Chief Justice Scalia.
There is another factor. On occasion, you may not wish to vote for either of the top two primary vote-getters, whether they are both Republicans, both Democrats, or one from column A and one from column B. For some voters, the major parties too often serve up a choice between Tweedledum and Tweedledee. If Prop 62 is successful, your menu of candidates will be even narrower than it is already. Surely, no one save the most partisan Republican and Democrat can want that.
"Reform" nearly always is the code word applied by its backers to any change of procedure that seeks to put a limit on democracy. From charter cities to term limits, political reforms commonly have the effect of weakening the power of the people's representatives while concomitantly increasing the influence of ruling elites, special interests and bureaucrats. If we're going to have reform, let's have it target power not indulge it.
As an aside, if we consider greater choice to be a desirable goal, why not create a primary in which candidates who do not wish to be affiliated with a party can run and voters who do not wish to be affiliated with a party can vote? The top winner in this primary could then appear on the general election ballot along with the victors in the partisan races; Democrat, Republican, Peace & Freedom, Libertarian, Green, et al, now joined by an "Independent."
As for Prop 60, it would deserve to lose, too, if 62 weren't on the ballot and in danger of winning approval. The "Election Rights of Political Parties" initiative assures that any candidate who wins a primary gets a position on the general election ballot. No one can be excluded for receiving an insufficient number of votes in the primaries. Thus 60 will thwart 62's ambition to exclude all but the top two primary vote-getters. Prop 60 would fail for being needless if the possibility of a win by Prop 62 didn't acquire it relevancy; if 62 passes, then at least Prop 60 preserves the citizenry's current range of choices; if 62 fails, the passage of Prop 60 leaves us no worse off, something too rarely possible to say of a California referendum.
In a community where one party possesses the allegiance of a significant portion of registered voters, it is not unlikely, if this initiative passes, that the selection of candidates on election day will be reduced to two of that party. Similarly, a low turnout in an uncontested primary could result in the top candidates from a hotly disputed but closely decided race among the opposition being the only choices in the general election, even if the disputatious party is not normally the favorite of a majority of voters in that district.
Prop 62 also allows any citizen, no matter how registered, to vote for any candidate of any party. But primaries are the mechanism the parties employ to choose their candidates and, by extension, most of their leaders. If it passes, this "reform" will lead inevitably to weaker party loyalties. And weaker parties make it harder for voters to judge candidates and to hold them accountable.
Also, when one party is particularly settled in its candidates -- this would most frequently be the case of a party that already holds a particular seat, its members will be released to make mischief for its competitors. As a Democrat, I am not especially pleased with the idea of Republicans and Independents picking my representatives. It's to be hoped that Republicans, Greens, Libertarians, and so on, feel the same.
In addition, there are sometimes factors at work other than the relative merit of the Democratic and Republican nominees. For example, if control of a legislature is in balance, you may wish to vote for the delegate from the party you hope will win the majority of the body in question, regardless of the individual merits the candidates on the ballot. Better a mediocre Democrat in your district and control of the House, than a fabulous Republican (should there be such) in your district and minority status in the House.
Here in California the incumbent Democratic Senator, Barbara Boxer, is running against a nonentity, but in a state where the question is closer, the matter of the Senate's role in consenting or not to the next several appointments to the Supreme Court ought to weigh heavily in the Democrat's favor, even if he is, to take an example so extreme as almost to undermine the argument, of the caliber of a Zell Miller. As you choose your senator this year, you may want to give a thought to the prospect of Chief Justice Scalia.
There is another factor. On occasion, you may not wish to vote for either of the top two primary vote-getters, whether they are both Republicans, both Democrats, or one from column A and one from column B. For some voters, the major parties too often serve up a choice between Tweedledum and Tweedledee. If Prop 62 is successful, your menu of candidates will be even narrower than it is already. Surely, no one save the most partisan Republican and Democrat can want that.
"Reform" nearly always is the code word applied by its backers to any change of procedure that seeks to put a limit on democracy. From charter cities to term limits, political reforms commonly have the effect of weakening the power of the people's representatives while concomitantly increasing the influence of ruling elites, special interests and bureaucrats. If we're going to have reform, let's have it target power not indulge it.
As an aside, if we consider greater choice to be a desirable goal, why not create a primary in which candidates who do not wish to be affiliated with a party can run and voters who do not wish to be affiliated with a party can vote? The top winner in this primary could then appear on the general election ballot along with the victors in the partisan races; Democrat, Republican, Peace & Freedom, Libertarian, Green, et al, now joined by an "Independent."
As for Prop 60, it would deserve to lose, too, if 62 weren't on the ballot and in danger of winning approval. The "Election Rights of Political Parties" initiative assures that any candidate who wins a primary gets a position on the general election ballot. No one can be excluded for receiving an insufficient number of votes in the primaries. Thus 60 will thwart 62's ambition to exclude all but the top two primary vote-getters. Prop 60 would fail for being needless if the possibility of a win by Prop 62 didn't acquire it relevancy; if 62 passes, then at least Prop 60 preserves the citizenry's current range of choices; if 62 fails, the passage of Prop 60 leaves us no worse off, something too rarely possible to say of a California referendum.
The Props: 66 YES -- Limits on the Three Strikes Law
Under Three Strikes, as it has been applied in California, thousands of people have been condemned to unconscionably long prison terms for non-violent, petty crimes.
There are Californians serving life in prison for shoplifting a package of flashlight batteries. Or holding $2 worth of pot. Or helping somebody steal baby formula.
Baby formula.
In April, 52-year-old Delbert Meeks, who has AIDS and was homeless at the time of his arrest, and whose last felony, a robbery, was in 1991, had his 27 years-to-life sentence for failure to register as a sex offender upheld because it was his third strike.
Draconian prison stays for nonviolent crimes disrupt families and communities, worsen the effects of poverty, and generate more crime. Since California prisons make almost no attempt at rehabilitation and amount to little more than brutal training camps for criminals, many who were sent to jail for making trivial mistakes eventually return to the community bitter and hardened.
Third Strike is also grotesquely expensive. To house an inmate in the California penal system for 25 years costs about $600,000. The drain on California taxpayers is in the hundreds of millions of dollars, money that could be far better spent on keeping people out of jail.
Using scare tactics, ads by opponents of 66 charge that passage of the measure will spring thousands of violent criminals -- "murderers and rapists " -- from jail. Not true. The measure would simply require that inmates who are serving life terms imposed by non-violent third strike convictions be re-sentenced within six months of passage; some prisoners will be released, others will have sentences reduced; prosecutors can file new charges based on the original crime if they're dissatisfied with a particular outcome. Dangerous criminals will not be returned to the streets.
The bottom line is that Prop 66 returns to judges some of the discretion they need to make the punishment fit the crime. It's about time. YES.
There are Californians serving life in prison for shoplifting a package of flashlight batteries. Or holding $2 worth of pot. Or helping somebody steal baby formula.
Baby formula.
In April, 52-year-old Delbert Meeks, who has AIDS and was homeless at the time of his arrest, and whose last felony, a robbery, was in 1991, had his 27 years-to-life sentence for failure to register as a sex offender upheld because it was his third strike.
Draconian prison stays for nonviolent crimes disrupt families and communities, worsen the effects of poverty, and generate more crime. Since California prisons make almost no attempt at rehabilitation and amount to little more than brutal training camps for criminals, many who were sent to jail for making trivial mistakes eventually return to the community bitter and hardened.
Third Strike is also grotesquely expensive. To house an inmate in the California penal system for 25 years costs about $600,000. The drain on California taxpayers is in the hundreds of millions of dollars, money that could be far better spent on keeping people out of jail.
Using scare tactics, ads by opponents of 66 charge that passage of the measure will spring thousands of violent criminals -- "murderers and rapists " -- from jail. Not true. The measure would simply require that inmates who are serving life terms imposed by non-violent third strike convictions be re-sentenced within six months of passage; some prisoners will be released, others will have sentences reduced; prosecutors can file new charges based on the original crime if they're dissatisfied with a particular outcome. Dangerous criminals will not be returned to the streets.
The bottom line is that Prop 66 returns to judges some of the discretion they need to make the punishment fit the crime. It's about time. YES.
Election: Keep the Protest Alive -- Trade Your Vote
If you live in California, Illinois, New York, Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maryland or the District of Columbia, instead of holding your nose while you vote for Kerry, consider trading votes with someone in a swing state. Trading your Kerry vote with a Nader, Cobb or Badnarik supporter in a state that is still in play will do more to help defeat Bush than will casting your ballot for the senator in one of the indelibly blue states. A significant third party turnout will help to strengthen alternative politics and remind the Democrats, even in the face of victory, that there is a large block of Americans who want change. <http://www.votepair.org/>
The Props: 59 YES -- Public Records, Open Meetings
To one living in a town where the city council routinely veils itself in closed sessions and "hides in plain site" by holding seven-hour "public" meetings that extend long past the witching hour, when all good citizens have taken to their beds, Prop 59 seems long overdue. The California Sunshine Amendment strengthens public access and open meeting requirements by embedding them in the state constitution. The so-called Brown Act and other statutes enacted since the 1950s have proved inadequate to the job of securing open access to government information and assuring that the public business is conducted in public. In Santa Monica, for example, the burden falls generally on the public to make a fuss when the government secretes itself; by establishing a constitutional guarantee to open access and public meetings, Prop 59 puts the onus on the government to defend secrecy. Legal experts suggest that 59 will encourage the courts to be less forgiving of policies and procedures that restrict access. The initiative would have existing laws that grant access be interpreted broadly and restrictions narrowly, and allows only a handful exceptions for such things as confidential proceedings of the Ledge, matters of personal privacy, and information about the performance and qualifications of peace officers. YES.
The Props: 69 NO -- DNA Collecting
Here's a referendum in keeping with our times. Prop 69 would empower government agencies to take DNA samples involuntarily from all current incarcerees and anyone arrested anytime anywhere for anything in the future. The data could be stored forever. And note that's arrested, whether or not the individual is actually charged and tried for a crime. This data would become part of what they used to like to call in grammar school your permanent record, even if you were completely innocent.
Although language in the proposal says that an investigating agency must notify the medical lab that a person is no longer a suspect and that the specimens of DNA, blood, fingerprints, etc., must be expunged, this provision kicks in two years after the sample is submitted, so a person who was arrested and immediately cleared could still have samples floating around for up to two years. And that's if you believe the government will follow its own procedures. Not only are there no penalties if it doesn't, but the measure specifically says that matches made after the data should have been removed would still be valid for warrants and other actions by police and prosecutors. There are no penalties for mistakes, either, so authorities needn't worry about being careful.
The information collected from the guilty and the innocent alike would be stored in a single database. It isn't hard to imagine a scenario in which would occur the kinds of "mistakes" that, in Florida in 2000 and, apparently, again this year, caused thousands of guiltless citizens to be falsely labeled as felons and thus to wrongly lose their right to vote.
When it comes to police power, it is better to err on the side of too little than too much. Intrusive government access to the DNA data of ordinary citizens is a power we are safer not granting to the state, at least until there are absolutely ironclad safeguards in place to prevent misuse. Prop 69 comes nowhere near meeting that criterion. NO.
Although language in the proposal says that an investigating agency must notify the medical lab that a person is no longer a suspect and that the specimens of DNA, blood, fingerprints, etc., must be expunged, this provision kicks in two years after the sample is submitted, so a person who was arrested and immediately cleared could still have samples floating around for up to two years. And that's if you believe the government will follow its own procedures. Not only are there no penalties if it doesn't, but the measure specifically says that matches made after the data should have been removed would still be valid for warrants and other actions by police and prosecutors. There are no penalties for mistakes, either, so authorities needn't worry about being careful.
The information collected from the guilty and the innocent alike would be stored in a single database. It isn't hard to imagine a scenario in which would occur the kinds of "mistakes" that, in Florida in 2000 and, apparently, again this year, caused thousands of guiltless citizens to be falsely labeled as felons and thus to wrongly lose their right to vote.
When it comes to police power, it is better to err on the side of too little than too much. Intrusive government access to the DNA data of ordinary citizens is a power we are safer not granting to the state, at least until there are absolutely ironclad safeguards in place to prevent misuse. Prop 69 comes nowhere near meeting that criterion. NO.
Election: Feinstein and Katz for City Council
If the goal of creating a more efficient, fair and unified community is to be realized, for this election only one strategy makes sense: bullet vote for Michael Feinstein and Herb Katz.
That both Katz and Feinstein have shown themselves to be independent-minded and conscientious during their city council incumbencies is beside the point. They are the only candidates, besides Bobby Shriver, with a reasonable chance of winning against the divisive and elitist politics of Richard Bloom and Ken Genzer.
Shriver, with heavy spending and a brand name, is a shoo-in, even though no one has a clue what he will do in office.
The remaining seats will be occupied by three of the four incumbents. If we are going to begin to develop a new politics in this town, Bloom or Genzer must go (that will still leave Bloom or Genzer, plus Pam O'Connor and Kevin McKeown to represent SMRR's interests on the council).
The only way a new majority can emerge is if Feinstein and Katz are returned. Shriver has run on the promise of bringing a new civility to the council, and O'Connor, Katz, Feinstein and Bob Holbrook, despite very different political values, have a demonstrated ability to work together in a spirit of compromise. With five of seven members bent of solving the city's problems without rancor, as John Edwards might put it, hope would be on the way.
It may seem counter-intuitive to suggest reelecting incumbents as a way of assuring change, but unless Katz and Feinstein are sitting with Shriver on the new council, then the Bloom/Genzer-dominated majority that has presided over so much resentment and unhappiness in our town will still be in place. It will be business as usual in Santa Monica.
You get to pick four. Don't. Bullet vote for Katz and Feinstein. It's the surest way, indeed, the only way, to set Santa Monica on a new direction.
That both Katz and Feinstein have shown themselves to be independent-minded and conscientious during their city council incumbencies is beside the point. They are the only candidates, besides Bobby Shriver, with a reasonable chance of winning against the divisive and elitist politics of Richard Bloom and Ken Genzer.
Shriver, with heavy spending and a brand name, is a shoo-in, even though no one has a clue what he will do in office.
The remaining seats will be occupied by three of the four incumbents. If we are going to begin to develop a new politics in this town, Bloom or Genzer must go (that will still leave Bloom or Genzer, plus Pam O'Connor and Kevin McKeown to represent SMRR's interests on the council).
The only way a new majority can emerge is if Feinstein and Katz are returned. Shriver has run on the promise of bringing a new civility to the council, and O'Connor, Katz, Feinstein and Bob Holbrook, despite very different political values, have a demonstrated ability to work together in a spirit of compromise. With five of seven members bent of solving the city's problems without rancor, as John Edwards might put it, hope would be on the way.
It may seem counter-intuitive to suggest reelecting incumbents as a way of assuring change, but unless Katz and Feinstein are sitting with Shriver on the new council, then the Bloom/Genzer-dominated majority that has presided over so much resentment and unhappiness in our town will still be in place. It will be business as usual in Santa Monica.
You get to pick four. Don't. Bullet vote for Katz and Feinstein. It's the surest way, indeed, the only way, to set Santa Monica on a new direction.
The Props: Health Care
61 YES -- 63 YES -- 67 NO -- 72 YES
-> Selling the bond proposal as "for the kids" and with a promise that "it won't raise taxes," the campaign for Prop 61 is as cute as a baby's bum, despite the fact that only one of the arguments favoring it is true (a tax by any other name, etc.).
If 61 passes, the state will be authorized to sell $750 million in bonds to fund the construction, renovation and outfitting of pediatric hospitals. Repaying the measure will have cost us about $1.5 billion by the time the loan is repaid with interest in 30 years.
Prop 61 is not a close call despite the cost. We need more and better hospitals -- actually it's the boomers who are going to face a truly catastrophic hospital crisis -- and capital improvements are the one thing that bond measures are actually designed to do, even if it is preferable in general to pursue a policy of pay-as-you-go. YES.
-> Proposition 63 would levy an extra 1% tax on personal incomes over one million dollars. It will affect about 30,000 people out of 36 million.
The money is to be used to expand county mental health programs and is likely to have a positive impact on costs related to crime, health care and other public services.
It's estimated that the tax would raise about $275 million in the current fiscal year, with the annual return increasing to $800 million by 2006-07. That's if the economy doesn't tank, of course, or that rich people don't move away or not come here because of high taxes.
In general, making tax policy by plebiscite is a bad idea. And watching the majority gang up on a tiny minority isn't a pretty sight, either. But the four decades-long campaign by the rich to avoid their tax obligations has left the progressive tax structure a shambles. Prop 63 is a not very elegant attempt to restore some balance.
Soak the rich? Why not? We so rarely get the chance. YES.
-> To fund the 911 system, the state currently adds a surcharge to telephone bills for calls within the state. Proposition 67 would add another 3% to the surcharge. The tax has a $.50 limit per month for residential phones and "Lifeline" customers are exempted entirely, but there's no limit for cell phone or business users.
Because public hospitals and emergency rooms are insufficiently compensated, caring for uninsured patients is causing some private hospitals and many emergency room doctors to go broke, so it is intended that most of the expected $500 million in added yearly income from Prop 67 will be used to reimburse the doctors and hospitals for the cost of emergency and trauma care.
Opponents of 67 are lying about the cost, but unfortunately this particular formula is a pretty bad idea anyway, if for another reason. Taxing one area of the economy to patch up another helps to produce a crazy-quilt of tax regulations that makes planning nearly impossible.
At first blush, this proposal narrowly passes muster because at least telephone service is nearly universal. Unlike Prop 63, Prop 67 hits almost everyone and even builds in a little progressivity by exempting "lifeline" subscribers.
But in practice it is too likely that small businesses and cell phone users will end up paying considerably more than their fair share. The big corporations are making their calls from huge phone banks in Omaha and Uttar Pradesh. For small business, the phone's still on the desk. And, increasingly, since it's usually pointless for an individual to have more than one phone, small businesses and residents alike are replacing their landline device with a cell phone they can have with them everywhere. Neither group is protected by a cap.
We need those emergency rooms, though. So vote NO on 67, but get on your legislator's case. It's not that we can't afford to have a hospital system that's the envy of the world. It's only that we lack the political will. NO.
-> Prop 72 is a referendum on a law signed last year by Gov. Grey that requires employers with 200 or more workers to provide them with health insurance. Beginning in 2006, these businesses must pay at least 80 percent of the cost of employees' coverage. Companies with 50 to 199 workers would have to cover workers beginning in 2007. Employers with 20 to 49 workers would be required to provide insurance only if the state provided a tax credit to make up for the cost.
While not a substitute for a single-payer national health plan, Prop 72 is better than nothing, and will help to cover some people until the national Democratic Party gets back on track. And, although it seems like business is being asked to carry the burden for society, in fact, because the law will negatively impact company bottom lines (although there will be positive effects on productivity), the state will lose several hundred million dollars a year in tax revenue that will have to be made up by the rest of us in higher taxes or reduced services. YES.
If 61 passes, the state will be authorized to sell $750 million in bonds to fund the construction, renovation and outfitting of pediatric hospitals. Repaying the measure will have cost us about $1.5 billion by the time the loan is repaid with interest in 30 years.
Prop 61 is not a close call despite the cost. We need more and better hospitals -- actually it's the boomers who are going to face a truly catastrophic hospital crisis -- and capital improvements are the one thing that bond measures are actually designed to do, even if it is preferable in general to pursue a policy of pay-as-you-go. YES.
-> Proposition 63 would levy an extra 1% tax on personal incomes over one million dollars. It will affect about 30,000 people out of 36 million.
The money is to be used to expand county mental health programs and is likely to have a positive impact on costs related to crime, health care and other public services.
It's estimated that the tax would raise about $275 million in the current fiscal year, with the annual return increasing to $800 million by 2006-07. That's if the economy doesn't tank, of course, or that rich people don't move away or not come here because of high taxes.
In general, making tax policy by plebiscite is a bad idea. And watching the majority gang up on a tiny minority isn't a pretty sight, either. But the four decades-long campaign by the rich to avoid their tax obligations has left the progressive tax structure a shambles. Prop 63 is a not very elegant attempt to restore some balance.
Soak the rich? Why not? We so rarely get the chance. YES.
-> To fund the 911 system, the state currently adds a surcharge to telephone bills for calls within the state. Proposition 67 would add another 3% to the surcharge. The tax has a $.50 limit per month for residential phones and "Lifeline" customers are exempted entirely, but there's no limit for cell phone or business users.
Because public hospitals and emergency rooms are insufficiently compensated, caring for uninsured patients is causing some private hospitals and many emergency room doctors to go broke, so it is intended that most of the expected $500 million in added yearly income from Prop 67 will be used to reimburse the doctors and hospitals for the cost of emergency and trauma care.
Opponents of 67 are lying about the cost, but unfortunately this particular formula is a pretty bad idea anyway, if for another reason. Taxing one area of the economy to patch up another helps to produce a crazy-quilt of tax regulations that makes planning nearly impossible.
At first blush, this proposal narrowly passes muster because at least telephone service is nearly universal. Unlike Prop 63, Prop 67 hits almost everyone and even builds in a little progressivity by exempting "lifeline" subscribers.
But in practice it is too likely that small businesses and cell phone users will end up paying considerably more than their fair share. The big corporations are making their calls from huge phone banks in Omaha and Uttar Pradesh. For small business, the phone's still on the desk. And, increasingly, since it's usually pointless for an individual to have more than one phone, small businesses and residents alike are replacing their landline device with a cell phone they can have with them everywhere. Neither group is protected by a cap.
We need those emergency rooms, though. So vote NO on 67, but get on your legislator's case. It's not that we can't afford to have a hospital system that's the envy of the world. It's only that we lack the political will. NO.
-> Prop 72 is a referendum on a law signed last year by Gov. Grey that requires employers with 200 or more workers to provide them with health insurance. Beginning in 2006, these businesses must pay at least 80 percent of the cost of employees' coverage. Companies with 50 to 199 workers would have to cover workers beginning in 2007. Employers with 20 to 49 workers would be required to provide insurance only if the state provided a tax credit to make up for the cost.
While not a substitute for a single-payer national health plan, Prop 72 is better than nothing, and will help to cover some people until the national Democratic Party gets back on track. And, although it seems like business is being asked to carry the burden for society, in fact, because the law will negatively impact company bottom lines (although there will be positive effects on productivity), the state will lose several hundred million dollars a year in tax revenue that will have to be made up by the rest of us in higher taxes or reduced services. YES.
The Props: Prop A NO -- Public Safety, Emergency Response and Crime Prevention
The use of a regressive 1/2 cent rise in the sales tax negates the desirability of a measure that unexpectedly seeks to provide some funds for programs to prevent crimes, rather than just to apprehend perpetrators. But many of these dollars are required to meet unfunded federal mandates in the war on terror. Let the grandstanders in the beltway come up with ways to pay for these measures, instead of forcing local governments to squeeze a few more pennies out of the poor. NO.
The Props: 65 NO -- 1A NO -- Local Government Revenues
Municipalities, counties and special districts providing such services as schools, libraries, water, sanitation, police and fire protection, etc., are funded by dedicated revenue streams from sales and property taxes, vehicle license fees, etc. Not so dedicated, as it turns out, though, since over the past dozen years Sacramento has been able to raid these funds to the tune of $40 billion. Too often left short of dollars for essential services, the local entities struck back by sponsoring the petition drive that secured Prop. 65 a place on the ballot.
The measure would force the state to give back to local governments $2.9 billion that it has taken just during the last two years. The loss of these funds has seriously weakened essential city and county services and kept local governments in a constant state of uncertainty and crisis. Giving the money back to the cities and counties sounds like a good idea, until you consider the fact that the practical effect would be to throw the state into financial chaos.
In addition, 65 includes no workable mechanism to deal with real fiscal emergencies, such as a major earthquake, instead requiring the calling of a state-wide special election at which an impossible-to-meet (and anti-democractic) two-thirds minimum number of votes would be needed to pass an override.
Prop 65 is a very bad solution to a very real problem. 1A is a weaker version of the same idea, with fewer guarantees to local authorities, cooked up when the Governator and the Ledge freaked out over the prospect of the passage of 65. NO and NO.
The Props: 64 -- NO
Limit on Private Enforcement of Unfair Business Competition Laws
In an attempt to gut California's vital consumer protection laws, Big Business is exploiting the natural outrage inspired by the exploits of gang of unethical lawyers who exploited a loophole in those laws to bully small businesses into settling fraudulent claims without a fight. Big corporations too often engage in exploitive, unfair and dishonest business practices and, despite the good intentions of some public regulators, it is ultimately the threat of lawsuits by private attorneys that keeps many corporations on the straight and narrow. The law firm that is the justification for this proposition is out of business, by the way, and the attorneys have all been disbarred. Prop 64 is a bad idea. NO.
The Props: 60A -- Government Property -- NO
Prop 60A's answer to California's ongoing fiscal crisis is to auction off California's long-term assets for short-term gain. The initiative also prohibits the profits from the sale of old and obsolete equipment (e.g., computers, copy machines, desks, vehicles, etc.) from being used for any other purpose than paying off the debt. Measures like this are designed to limit the authority and flexibility of our elected officials, and that's exactly what it will do. NO.
The Props: NO on 68 & 70 -- Indian Gaming
Prop 68 is being sold as a 25% tax on Indian gaming revenue. This is not money we'll ever see.
The tax is supposed to be negotiated between the governor and the tribes within three months of passage, but if the parties fail to make a deal -- and there's no reason the Indians should agree to anything, plus the 90-day deadline makes an agreement almost impossible anyway -- a provision kicks in that amends the state constitution to allow the owners of existing card clubs and race tracks to deploy 30,000 gaming devices throughout the state.
Even more cynically, this scam will give the gangsters promoting it a permanent monopoly on gaming in California.
Voters opposed to legalized gambling may be persuaded this measure sets limits, but it is intended to do the opposite. If it passes, those 30,000 gaming "devices" will mean anything goes in the already licensed card clubs and race tracks. The only "limitation" is that profits will be reserved to those already in the business.
Prop 68 is the initiative process at its scummiest: besides the bait and switch character of the ballot measure itself, it is being promoted with a smarmy "just make them pay their fare share" rhetoric that encourages resentment toward Native Americans.
There's no question that Indian casinos should be required to pay taxes -- their businesses depend on the upkeep of the same roads, power grid, etc., as the rest of us, but Prop 68 is not the mechanism to do the job.
The governor has indicated he is serious about getting a tax commitment from the tribes; he should be held to it. Indian gambling can always be revisited in another referendum, if necessary.
Like 68, Prop 70 expands the reach of gaming while purporting to rein it in.
Prop 70 would allow Indian tribes to negotiate 99-year agreements with the governor, but the state and the sovereign nations can negotiate any arrangements they want already. In exchange for whatever payments/taxes they commit to, the Indians would be handed a monopoly to run Vegas-style casinos in the state. The payments to the general fund would cease, however, if the state permitted non-tribal casino-type gambling to be established off the reservation.
Under current law, Indian casinos are limited to slots and a few games of cards. With the passage of 70, they can add craps, roulette and the full panoply of Vegas-type devices for fleecing the public.
While the tribes' statewide gaming monopoly would seem to protect communities that oppose gambling from the instrusion of massive casinos, it's important to remember that there are tribal lands throughout the state, including the middle of urban regions like the Coachella Valley and the Bay Area. Still, if you're opposed to legalized gambling you may want to vote for Prop 70 because it does limit somewhat the extent to which gambling casinos can be built anywhere.
Prop 70 is a much better proposition -- for the state and the tribes -- than the despicable 68. At least 70's backers are honest about their intentions. But the initiative unnecessarily ties the hands of the governor and legislature. The state is in a strong position to work out a fair payment plan with the sovereign nations; Prop 70 does nothing to strengthen its hand.
Some voters appear to believe that they must choose between 68 and 70, but that isn't so. The most desirable outcome is that both fail. NO and NO.
The tax is supposed to be negotiated between the governor and the tribes within three months of passage, but if the parties fail to make a deal -- and there's no reason the Indians should agree to anything, plus the 90-day deadline makes an agreement almost impossible anyway -- a provision kicks in that amends the state constitution to allow the owners of existing card clubs and race tracks to deploy 30,000 gaming devices throughout the state.
Even more cynically, this scam will give the gangsters promoting it a permanent monopoly on gaming in California.
Voters opposed to legalized gambling may be persuaded this measure sets limits, but it is intended to do the opposite. If it passes, those 30,000 gaming "devices" will mean anything goes in the already licensed card clubs and race tracks. The only "limitation" is that profits will be reserved to those already in the business.
Prop 68 is the initiative process at its scummiest: besides the bait and switch character of the ballot measure itself, it is being promoted with a smarmy "just make them pay their fare share" rhetoric that encourages resentment toward Native Americans.
There's no question that Indian casinos should be required to pay taxes -- their businesses depend on the upkeep of the same roads, power grid, etc., as the rest of us, but Prop 68 is not the mechanism to do the job.
The governor has indicated he is serious about getting a tax commitment from the tribes; he should be held to it. Indian gambling can always be revisited in another referendum, if necessary.
Like 68, Prop 70 expands the reach of gaming while purporting to rein it in.
Prop 70 would allow Indian tribes to negotiate 99-year agreements with the governor, but the state and the sovereign nations can negotiate any arrangements they want already. In exchange for whatever payments/taxes they commit to, the Indians would be handed a monopoly to run Vegas-style casinos in the state. The payments to the general fund would cease, however, if the state permitted non-tribal casino-type gambling to be established off the reservation.
Under current law, Indian casinos are limited to slots and a few games of cards. With the passage of 70, they can add craps, roulette and the full panoply of Vegas-type devices for fleecing the public.
While the tribes' statewide gaming monopoly would seem to protect communities that oppose gambling from the instrusion of massive casinos, it's important to remember that there are tribal lands throughout the state, including the middle of urban regions like the Coachella Valley and the Bay Area. Still, if you're opposed to legalized gambling you may want to vote for Prop 70 because it does limit somewhat the extent to which gambling casinos can be built anywhere.
Prop 70 is a much better proposition -- for the state and the tribes -- than the despicable 68. At least 70's backers are honest about their intentions. But the initiative unnecessarily ties the hands of the governor and legislature. The state is in a strong position to work out a fair payment plan with the sovereign nations; Prop 70 does nothing to strengthen its hand.
Some voters appear to believe that they must choose between 68 and 70, but that isn't so. The most desirable outcome is that both fail. NO and NO.
The Props: NO on 71 -- Stem Cell Research
An issue that shouldn't be decided by referendum, but here it is. The initiative would create $3 billion in bonds to fund stem cell research that has been stalled by the religious fanatics in the White House and Republican-controlled Congress. Government, through publicly funded research by public and private institutions, is the best mechanism to encourage pure research, but matters like this should be decided by the legislative and executive branches and shouldn't be locked in place by humungous bond issues. Prop 71 commits the California taxpayer to costly spending even if stem cell research turns out quickly to be a dead end scientifically or if the most promising avenues of research turn out to run through Toronto or New Jersey. A NO doesn't put an end to exploration into the potential benefits residing in stem cells, just kicks the decision-making back to the governor and legislature and -- after next Tuesday, it is to be hoped -- to the federal government where responsibility belongs. Vote NO, then write a note to your representatives telling them that you want stem cell research to proceed.
2004: Fraud and other electile dysfunction
"VotingLive.com [is] a public forum and database of news articles related to election fraud and voting problems. All articles are organized by state, category, and date of publication. Registered Members can comment on these articles, or leave links for others to followup on...[Topics include] Disinformation, Voter Fraud, Registration Fraud, Bureaucratic Snarls, Vote Suppression, TechnicalDifficulties, Broken Ballots, Lost /Missing Votes, [and] Vexing Votecounts." -- from the website. <http://www.votinglive.com/>
Public Policy: Ballot Measures -- threat or menace?
The Ballot Initiative Strategy Center has information on over 160 referenda in 34 states. The site provides a short description of each measure, as well as links to sites in support and opposition. <http://www.ballot.org/>
And, by the way: No on 68 and 70!
And, by the way: No on 68 and 70!
Election: Video Repository
Fascinating and diverse: debate footage from C-SPAN, depressing quantities of campaign advertising by candidates and interest groups, political rap videos, etc., sorted by the Internet Archive staff into a Spotlight Movie; a collection of videos with "high batting averages" (i.e., "the percentage of people who downloaded the item after visiting its details page" -- the What's happened to George W. Bush after 10 years video sent to the LOL list a while back is #1); and a menu of the "most viewed films." Number one among the latter is Constitution Class taught by Libertarian Michael Badnarik, the most qualified of the candidates for president this year <http://tinyurl.com/7yrql> (this guy would wipe the floor with Bush and Kerry). An RSS feed is available or search by keyword: title, creator, date, date range, description, etc. Uploads are welcome "from official candidates and their campaigns, journalists, students, and anyone with video materials related to the upcoming Presidential Election," so it's still possible for your video to affect the outcome of the election. All contributions "are provided under a non-commercial Creative Commons license."
<http://www.archive.org/movies/collection.php?collection=election_2004>
<http://www.archive.org/movies/collection.php?collection=election_2004>
Media: TruthOut.Org
There are any number of worthwhile news digests on the left, but few that compare to TruthOut. Edited by spirited essayist William Rivers Pitt (author, with Scott Ritter, of War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn't Want You to Know), the easy-to-navigate site is rich with news and editorials drawn from official sources and mainstream and alternative media, but the focus on issues -- specifically voting rights, the environment, the federal budget, the welfare and safety of children, the impract of politics on the process of governing, indigenous survival, renrewable energy, defense, health, the economy, human rights, labor, trade, women, campaign finance reform, and related global developments -- provides a very different perspective on the news than the car-chase and political horse race world depicted in corporate media. TruthOut publishes email summaries and bulletins, usually bandwidth-friendly links, that are clearly labeled for easy handling; subscribe at <join-three-to@news.truthout.org>. The website is <http://www.truthout.org/>.
Environment: More than 300 Crimes against Nature
Here's the record of the last administration, before Bush received his fanciful "mandate." Get ready for worse. It's going to be a bumpy ride:
Source: Natural Resources Defense Council
SIERRA magazine, September/October 2004
http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra
January 20, 2001 White House freezes all rules set at end of
Clinton term - including tougher ones for raw sewage
January 20, 2001 Bush proposes opening Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling
February 12, 2001 Energy Department puts off enforcing new
efficiency standards for air conditioners
February 15, 2001 EPA delays new rule protecting wetlands
from mining and development
March 7, 2001 Fish and Wildlife Service withdraws report
calling for protection of endangered salmonids
March 9, 2001 Bush appoints oil and mining lobbyist as deputy
secretary of Interior
March 13, 2001 Bush reneges on campaign promise to reduce
carbon dioxide emissions
March 16, 2001 Bush administration refuses to defend in court
rule protecting 58 million acres of wild forest
March 20, 2001 Bush withdraws proposed stricter limits on
arsenic in drinking water
March 28, 2001 Bush administration rejects Kyoto Protocol on
Climate Change
April 9, 2001 Bush budget proposal cuts $500 million from EPA
May 10, 2001 Bush administration refuses to name industry
participants in Cheney energy task force
May 12, 2001 Bureau of Land Management allows continued
grazing on endangered-tortoise land in California
May 17, 2001 Bush releases energy plan heavily favoring
fossil fuels and nukes
May 17, 2001 Forest Service reduces citizen and scientific
participation in decision-making
May 22, 2001 EPA officially suspends stricter limits for
arsenic in drinking water
June 19, 2001 States and others sue Energy Department over
air-conditioner rules (see February 12, 2001)
June 21, 2001 Timber lobbyist Mark Rey appointed to key post
in Forest Service
July 2, 2001 Oil drilling off Florida coast proposed by Bush
administration
July 23, 2001 Bush budget proposes cutting 270 EPA inspector
jobs
August 2, 2001 Army Corps of Engineers kills plan to protect
Missouri River wildlife by changing stream flows
August 8, 2001 Army Corps of Engineers weakens wetlands
protections by slackening permit requirements
August 12, 2001 National forests opened to roadbuilding and
logging by Forest Service rule changes
August 14, 2001 EPA delays tougher rules for toxic power-
plant emissions
August 17, 2001 Federal judge's decision to ban drilling off
California's coast appealed by administration
August 27, 2001 Cattle still grazing on tortoise habitat in
California, despite BLM agreement to move them
August 28, 2001 Bush administration proposes missile-defense
test installation in Pacific; environmentalists sue
August 28, 2001 Bush administration reconsiders ban on
recycling radioactive metals into consumer products
September 13, 2001 EPA lies about Manhattan hazards after
9/11, calls area safe despite extreme toxic pollution
September 20, 2001 Forest Service proposes further reduction
in citizen participation in policymaking
October 25, 2001 Interior Department weakens environmental
rules for mining operations
October 31, 2001 Arsenic flip-flop: Under public pressure,
EPA adopts higher standard after all (see May 22, 2001)
November 2, 2001 Army Corps of Engineers retreats from policy
of "no net loss" of wetlands
November 5, 2001 Bush signs bill to boost spending for
national forests, but with harmful logging riders
November 29, 2001 Minnesota's Voyageurs National Park reopens
winter lakes to snowmobiles
December 3, 2001 Army Corps of Engineers decides not to
decommission Snake River dams in Pacific Northwest
December 14, 2001 Administration announces weaker standards
for nuclear waste storage at Nevada's Yucca Mountain
December 14, 2001 Forest Service announces more roadbuilding
on undeveloped forestlands
January 9, 2002 Administration backs hydrogen-car research,
but most hydrogen to come from fossil fuels
January 10, 2002 Study shows big drop in enforcement of
environmental laws under Bush
January 10, 2002 Bush administration fights in court for new
oil drilling off California coast
January 14, 2002 Report shows Interior secretary squelched
her own agency's criticism of weaker wetlands rules
January 14, 2002 Wetlands protections weakened nationwide in
flip-flop from Bush campaign promise
January 14, 2002 Park Service okays more oil drilling in
Florida's Big Cypress National Preserve
January 21, 2002 BLM preliminarily approves gas drilling in
Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument, Montana
January 22, 2002 Forest Service sues to overturn ban on
salvage logging in Montana's Bitterroot National Forest
January 28, 2002 Bush supports Cheney's refusal to release
secret energy-task-force records
February 4, 2002 Bush slashes environmental-education
spending
February 4, 2002 Bush budget proposes cutting $1 billion from
environmental spending
February 4, 2002 Bush budget proposes $404 million to support
timber sales in national forests
February 11, 2002 Environmentalists sue Park Service for
allowing motorized vehicles in Georgia wilderness
February 14, 2002 Bush gives power plants ten more years to
cut mercury and sulfur dioxide emissions
February 14, 2002 White House unveils global-warming plan
that lets C02 emissions continue at present rate
February 15, 2002 Bush endorses plan to store 77,000 tons of
nuclear waste in Nevada's Yucca Mountain
February 15, 2002 Forest Service approves mining exploration
in Missouri's Mark Twain National Forest
February 16, 2002 Bush administration asks court to delay
endangered-species protection in California
February 19, 2002 Phaseout of snowmobiles in national parks
delayed
February 22, 2002 BLM proposes to let states allow vehicles
in previously off-limits federal lands
February 23, 2002 Bush's budget asks that taxpayers pay for
Superfund cleanups instead of polluters
February 27, 2002 Top EPA official resigns to protest Bush's
effort to weaken rules for polluting industries
February 27, 2002 Federal judge orders Bush administration to
release Cheney's secret energy-task-force records
March 12, 2002 Bush administration belatedly complies with
court order to protect desert tortoise
March 18, 2002 EPA exempts large category of power plants
from lawsuits for Clean Air Act violations
March 25, 2002 Discovery that White House misspent $135,612
of clean-energy funds to print its energy plan
March 29, 2002 Pentagon seeks exemption from environmental
laws
April 1, 2002 Deadline passes for administration to set first
new fuel-economy standards since 1996
April 11, 2002 Army Corps of Engineers approves mining
limestone in 5,400 acres of Florida's everglades
April 14, 2002 White House kills program that funded
environmental research for graduate students
April 22, 2002 EPA citizen-watchdog resigns in protest,
charging that agency |officials muzzled him
May 3, 2002 New EPA rules allow mining operations to dump
waste in waterways
May 13, 2002 Administration asks judge not to limit waste-
dumping from mountaintop mines
May 13, 2002 Bush signs farm bill that pays big subsidies to
polluting agricultural operations
May 21, 2002 Ban on mining in and around Oregon's Siskiyou
National Forest ends
May 23, 2002 Energy Department cuts air-conditioner
efficiency standards
May 24, 2002 Bush-Putin summit produces nuclear treaty that
puts no long-term limit on nuclear weapons
May 24, 2002 Bush administration drops plan |for contractors
to put environmental protection into projects
June 3, 2002 Oil drilling leases on more than 500,000 acres
in Alaska signed by Interior Department
June 7, 2002 Interior secretary rejects proposal to limit
offshore oil drilling in California
June 13, 2002 Missouri River restoration halted indefinitely
by Army Corps of Engineers
June 13, 2002 EPA proposes weakening clean-air rules for
17,000 power plants
June 13, 2002 Judge halts Bush administration move to end
habitat protection on 500,000 acres in California
June 17, 2002 Judge rejects Army Corps of Engineers plan to
allow mine-waste dumping
June 24, 2002 EPA abandons plan to clean up storm-water
pollution
June 25, 2002 Bush administration blames wildfires on
environmentalists
June 25, 2002 Snowmobiling allowed to continue in national
parks, though with some restrictions
June 25, 2002 EPA ombudsman testifies Bush administration
pressured him to halt study of radiation standards
July 1, 2002 Bush administration cuts funding for toxic
cleanups to half of that requested by EPA
July 2, 2002 Bush administration rescinds 4 million acres of
protection for endangered California frog
July 10, 2002 Judge orders administration to protect 400,000
Calif. acres for endangered Alameda whipsnake
July 15, 2002 Navy given permit to use low-frequency sonar, a
known threat to whales
July 17, 2002 Bush administration opposes Senate bill to
require 10 percent renewable energy by 2020
July 22, 2002 Bush's State Department says it will withhold
$34 million from UN family-planning program
July 25, 2002 Another top EPA official quits in protest
July 26, 2002 Bush administration backs congressional
proposal to exempt companies from disclosing hazards
August 7, 2002 EPA proposes weakened water-cleanups; asks for
"voluntary" efforts
August 15, 2002 Conservatives praise Bush for skipping United
Nations summit on sustainable development
August 22, 2002 Interior Department claims new power plant
won't harm air at Mammoth Cave National Park, Ky.
August 22, 2002 Bush calls for increased logging in name of
fire prevention
August 27, 2002 U.S. opposes targets for renewable energy use
at World Summit on Sustainable Development
August 29, 2002 Interior Department approves billion-dollar
plan to store water under Mojave Desert
August 30, 2002 Foe of ecological restoration Allan
Fitzsimmons named head of federal wildfire prevention
September 3, 2002 White House asks exemption from Freedom of
Information Act in energy-task-force suit
September 4, 2002 Federal officials reject call to add white
marlin to endangered list
September 9, 2002 States' EPA air-quality inspections shown
to have dropped by 34 percent
September 13, 2002 EPA weakens proposed anti-pollution
standards for off-road vehicles
September 15, 2002 EPA deletes global-warming section from
pollution report
September 17, 2002 Bush replacing most scientists on
chemical-hazard panel with those tied to chemical industry
September 18, 2002 Bush executive order cuts citizen
involvement in review of road and airport projects
September 21, 2002 Killing of 34,000 salmonids results from
federal diversion of Klamath River water in Oregon
September 27, 2002 Interior secretary okays gold mining on
sacred Indian site in California
September 30, 2002 New EPA water-quality report shows U.S.
waters are getting dirtier
October 1, 2002 Fish and Wildlife Service reverses order to
increase Missouri River flow to protect species
October 3, 2002 Conservationists urge White House to release
$36.5 million in conservation funds for farmlands
October 4, 2002 Bureau of Land Management approves largest
oil and gas drilling exploration ever in Utah
October 8, 2002 EPA water administrator says war on terror
leaves little money for water cleanup
October 8, 2002 Bush stacks panel on lead poisoning with
people tied to the lead industry
October 8, 2002 Federal workers reveal memo from EPA chief
encouraging them to support president when off-duty
October 9, 2002 Bush administration sides with auto industry
in suit against California's emission rules
October 10, 2002 Administration failed to assess
vulnerability of chemical facilities to terrorists, GAO says
October 15 2002 Superfund cleanups drop to 42 per year from
average of 76 under Clinton, report shows
October 16, 2002 Judge finds Forest Service violates
Endangered Species Act by not protecting spotted-owl habitat
October 17, 2002 Bush administration told by federal judge to
release energy documents in Sierra Club lawsuit
October 31, 2002 EPA halts funding at seven Superfund sites
November 1, 2002 Bush administration threatens withdrawal
from historic UN population accord
November 5, 2002 Polluters paid 64 percent less in fines
under Bush than in last two Clinton years, report shows
November 11, 2002 Bush administration supports renewed
elephant-ivory trade
November 12, 2002 National Park Service proposal would allow
1,100 snowmobiles a day in Yellowstone, Grand Teton
November 21, 2002 Natural-gas drilling at Padre Island
National Seashore in Texas approved
November 22, 2002 EPA proceeds with weakening Clean Air Act
rules for power plants
November 27, 2002 Forest Service proposes rule changes to
increase logging, grazing, mining on 192 million acres
December 2, 2002 Bush administration plan for oil drilling
off California coast ruled illegal by federal judges
December 4, 2002 Bush administration asks for five more years
of study before acting on global warming
December 12, 2002 Federal court rules against administration,
upholds roadless rule for 58.5 million acres
December 12, 2002 White House proposes tiny increase in
automobile fuel economy: 1.5 mpg in five years
December 13, 2002 Federal judge blocks Army Corps of
Engineers' Snake River dredging plan in Pacific Northwest
December 16, 2002 EPA's new factory-farm rule favors big
agribusiness polluters
December 18, 2002 White House budget office values elderly
lives 63 percent less in environmental cost-benefit analysis
December 20, 2002 Federal judge blocks Interior Department
from permitting oil exploration in eastern Utah
December 30, 2002 EPA proposes two-year exemption of oil and
gas industry from storm-water pollution rules
January 6, 2003 Bureau of Land Management rule change gives
states leeway for new roads in wildlands
January 10, 2003 Bush budget requests $6.4 billion for Energy
Department's nuclear weapons activity
January 10, 2003 Bush administration proposes pulling federal
safeguards from 20 percent of U.S. wetlands
January 13, 2003 Pentagon plans to ask for exemption from
environmental laws on millions of acres
January 16, 2003 Environmental personnel scratched from USAID
policy bureau
January 17, 2003 Interior Department proposes oil exploration
on up to 9 million acres of Alaska's North Slope
January 19, 2003 Pentagon continues lobbying for exemptions
from environmental laws
January 21, 2003 EPA refuses to ban weed-killer atrazine, a
possible carcinogen
January 22, 2003 EPA retains unsafe limits for toxic
perchlorates
January 24, 2003 Manatees get federal protection, thanks to
lawsuit settlement
January 27, 2003 Bush administration proposes privatizing
thousands of National Park Service jobs
January 27, 2003 California's giant sequoia threatened by
Forest Service proposal to resume logging nearby
January 29, 2003 Bush administration wins court ruling that
legalizes mountaintop-removal mining permits
January 30, 2003 Bureau of Land Management proposes rollback
of Clinton-era restrictions on grazing
January 30, 2003 Exemptions to phaseout of ozone-destroying
methyl bromide planned by Bush administration
February 11, 2003 EPA drafts new rules to relax toxic-air-
pollution standards
February 20, 2003 National Park Service finalizes rules
allowing snowmobiles in national parks
February 25, 2003 National Academy of Sciences panel strongly
criticizes Bush's global-warming plan
February 27, 2003 Bush's "Clear Skies" plan allows much more
pollution than if Clean Air Act were enforced, critics charge
February 27, 2003 Transportation Department speeds up
environmentally harmful road projects
February 28, 2003 Oil drilling in Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge his "greatest wish," says high-ranking Interior
official
February 28, 2003 Wilderness protection for millions of acres
in Alaska's Tongass forest rejected by Forest Service
March 4, 2003 National Park Service slaughters 231
Yellowstone bison
March 7, 2003 Paul Wolfowitz tells military leaders to find
reasons to exempt military from environmental rules
March 10, 2003 EPA exempts oil and gas industry from
President Clinton's tighter water-pollution rules
March 13, 2003 EPA withdraws another Clinton-era water-
pollution cleanup rule
March 13, 2003 EPA official testifies in Congress in favor of
exempting military from environmental laws
March 18, 2003 EPA allows sludge dumping in Potomac River to
continue for seven more years
March 18, 2003 Fish and Wildlife proposes removing
protections from endangered wolves
March 18, 2003 Federal judge orders Interior Department to
continue protecting manatees
March 18, 2003 GAO again criticizes Bush administration for
failing to reduce security risks at chemical plants
March 25, 2003 Park Service adopts plan for Yellowstone/Teton
allowing1,100 snowmobiles a day
April 1, 2003 Bush administration drops court battle to allow
California offshore drilling
April 1, 2003 Bush administration barely raises SUV gas
mileage requirements, to 1.5 mpg more by 2007
April 3, 2003 Bureau of Reclamation again diverts water from
Klamath River, where salmonid kill occurred
April 4, 2003 New U.S.-Mexico pollution treaty signed, but
lacks funding
April 7, 2003 Bush administration asks UN to remove
Yellowstone from endangered world heritage status
April 8, 2003 Protection plan for 76-mile stretch of
California coast abandoned by National Park Service
April 9, 2003 Interior Department paves way for new roads on
federal lands in Utah
April 10, 2003 U.S. Fish and Wildlife signs off on plan to
reopen Imperial Sand Dunes to off-road vehicles
April 20, 2003 Toxic cleanups still lagging: 41 percent fewer
Superfund sites cleaned up by EPA, report says
April 21, 2003 Sharp criticism of Bush administration air-
pollution policies by independent panel
April 24, 2003 White House unveils pro-industry chemical
security bill
April 28, 2003 White House bans EPA from discussing
perchlorate pollution
May 2, 2003 Vehicle fuel economy drops to 22-year low of 20.8
mpg, says EPA report
May 2, 2003 Permits for cross-border power lines from Mexican
power plants illegal, says federal judge
May 5, 2003 Navy's use of sonar causes "stampede"–and
possibly death–of marine mammals in Puget Sound
May 7, 2003 EPA drops "senior death discount" calculation
(see December 18, 2002)
May 13, 2003 Fish and Wildlife Service signs off on mining in
Montana's Cabinet Mountains Wilderness
May 14, 2003 White House's $247 billion transportation plan
slashes environmental protection
May 14, 2003 EPA proposes easing, delaying smog-control rules
May 21, 2003 Christine Todd Whitman, embattled EPA chief,
resigns
May 30, 2003 Park Service opens Maryland and Virginia's
Assateague Island National Seashore to Jet Skis
May 30, 2003 Forest-fire plan eliminates environmental review
of logging projects under 1,000 acres
June 2, 2003 Energy Department announces$2 billion to $4
billion plan to build new "mini" nukes
June 3, 2003 Energy Department funds study on how to ease
effects of global warming for Alaska oil drillers
June 5, 2003 Forest Service plan would triple logging limits
in California's Sierra Nevada
June 9, 2003 USDA reverses Clinton ban on most logging and
roadbuilding on 58.5 million acres
June 20, 2003 Defense Department reneges on plan to test for
perchlorate pollution at U.S. bases
June 23, 2003 Bush administration again deletes references to
dangers of global warming from EPA report
June 27, 2003 Federal judge halts timber sale in Montana's
Kootenai National Forest
July 1, 2003 Autopsies link Navy sonar to porpoise deaths,
environmentalists charge
July 8, 2003 Federal court rejects Cheney's argument for
keeping energy-task-force records secret
July 12, 2003 EPA refuses to regulate perchlorate and other
drinking-water contaminants
July 17, 2003 Energy Department lobbies Congress for law to
get around court ruling on nuke waste
July 17, 2003 Federal judge rules administration must redo
water plan for Oregon/California Klamath River
July 22, 2003 Army Corps of Engineers ruled in contempt for
defying order to change Missouri River flows
July 24, 2003 Bush administration softens demand for
outsourcing of federal jobs, including at national parks
August 8, 2003 Bush administration settlement of timber suit
could double logging in Northwest
August 11, 2003 Bush taps anti-environmental Utah governor
Mike Leavitt to head EPA
August 26, 2003 New EPA rules ignore mercury pollution from
chlorine plant
August 27, 2003 EPA excludes 17,000 facilities from upgrading
pollution controls when installing new equipment
August 29, 2003 U.S. court rules against EPA's loopholes in
mountaintop-removal-mining regulations
September 2, 2003 EPA weakens ban on selling polluted sites
by reinterpreting law
September 2, 2003 EPA refuses to regulate ballast-water
discharges from ships
September 4, 2003 EPA finds 274 violations of laws for
dumping mountaintop-mining debris
September 22, 2003 White House's own study concludes benefits
of environmental regulations far outweigh costs
September 23, 2003 Forest Service estimates $2 million lost
in timber sale from Alaska's Tongass
September 24, 2003 White House recommendations would
undermine public participation in environmental planning
September 25, 2003 EPA proposes deal that would let polluting
factory farms avoid prosecution
October 1, 2003 Bush fails to renew energy-conservation
program that saved government $300 million a year
October 6, 2003 EPA rules that farmers can't sue pesticide
makers if chemicals fail to meet stated claims
October 10, 2003 Interior Department overturns limits on
acreage where gold mines can dump waste
October 10, 2003 Judge orders Interior Department to stop
stalling on owl habitat protection
October 10, 2003 EPA proposal to allow warmer waters behind
Oregon dams threatens salmonids
October 10, 2003 EPA inspector general criticizes agency for
lax enforcement
October 13, 2003 Bush administration proposes lifting ban on
importing endangered species
October 13, 2003 $18.6 million Forest Service study says
outsourcing its jobs would rarely be cost-effective
October 17, 2003 EPA announces it will not regulate dioxins
in sewage sludge dumped on land
October 31, 2003 EPA declines to restrict use of pesticide
atrazine
November 4, 2003 Superfund cleanups lag for third straight
year
November 4, 2003 Environmentalists criticize revised
everglades-recovery plan for failing to ensure natural water
flow
November 13, 2003 Park Service workers charge that Bush
policies will "destroy the grand legacy of our national
parks"
November 14, 2003 Bush administration loses bid to increase
ozone-depleting methyl bromide
November 18, 2003 Administration admits blame for kill of
34,000 salmonids in Klamath River (see September 21, 2002)
November 18, 2003 EPA proposes looser regulations on dumping
low-level radioactive waste in landfills
December 3, 2003 Bush signs "Healthy Forests" bill: more
logging, less species protection on millions of acres
December 4, 2003 EPA seeks to reclassify mercury as
"nontoxic"
December 5, 2003 Bureau of Land Management proposes weakening
rules for grazing livestock on federal land
December 9, 2003 Federal violation notices to polluters down
almost 60 percent; almost 30 percent fewer fines
December 16, 2003 White House abandons plans to weaken Clean
Water Act protections for wetlands
December 17, 2003 Defense Department urged to protect
endangered tortoise during robot race
December 17, 2003 Federal judge overturns administration
decision not to protect orcas in Puget Sound
December 19, 2003 Forest Service opens grizzly bear habitat
to snowmobiles in Montana's Flathead National Forest
December 23, 2003 Forest Service continues to allow logging
in Tongass, world's largest temperate rainforest
December 24, 2003 Federal court blocks EPA plan to weaken
Clean Air Act by exempting power plants from review
January 1, 2004 Only 50 companies agree to Bush
administration's voluntary plan to cut global-warming
emissions
January 8, 2004 $175 million Superfund shortfall prevents
cleanups at 11 sites, slows down others
January 7, 2004 White House proposes overturning ban on
mining near streams
January 9, 2004 Pentagon to seek more environmental
exemptions
January 9, 2004 Forest Service limits citizens' right to
challenge logging plans by appeal or in court
January 13, 2004 Federal court overturns Bush
administration's weakening of energy efficiency for air
conditioners
January, 21 2004 Interior secretary asks to triple number of
gas-drilling permits in Wyoming
January 22, 2004 EPA scales back monitoring of smokestack
pollution
January 22, 2004 Interior Department opens 9 million acres on
Alaska's North Slope to oil drilling
January 23, 2004 Forest Service plans to boost logging on up
to 3.2 million acres of Appalachian forests
January 27, 2004 White House says EPA doesn't have to study
pesticide effects on imperiled wildlife
January 29, 2004 Bush administration proposes letting
contractors police federal nuclear-plant safety
January 30, 2004 Parts of EPA's mercury-pollution plan lifted
verbatim from industry memos
February 2, 2004 Bush budget proposes $10 million cut in
funds for endangered species
February 5, 2004 EPA admits twice as many children (630,000)
in danger from mercury exposure
February 6, 2004 Clean Air Act changes undermining
enforcement, says former EPA official
February 9, 2004 Energy development allowed inside Colorado
and Utah's Dinosaur National Monument
February 11, 2004 Forest Service plan allows mining, drilling
in Alabama's national forests
February 13, 2004 EPA no longer to require "worst case
scenarios" from industry
February 15, 2004 Forest Service allows poisoning of prairie
dogs in four states
February 16, 2004 White House ignores threat from gasoline
additive MTBE
February 18, 2004 U.S. Navy plans to dredge endangered turtle
habitat in Key West
February 18, 2004 20 Nobel Prize-winning scientists say
administration distorts science for political gain
February 24, 2004 Federal mine-safety official demoted after
questioning mine accident investigation
February 27, 2004 Missouri River management plan ignores fish
protections
March 3, 2004 Administration proposes to relax rules on
killing wolves in Idaho and Montana
March 9, 2004 358 conservation scientists urge administration
to halt plan to import endangered species
March 10, 2004 Forest Service hires PR firm to promote Sierra
Nevada plan that would triple logging
March 11, 2004 EPA inspector general says agency's rosy
drinking-water assessments used false data
March 12, 2004 Forest Service relents: no snowmobiles in
grizzly habitat in Montana's Flathead National Forest
March 15, 2004 Court rules BLM illegally opened Montana area
to off-road vehicles
March 16, 2004 EPA approves plan to inject toxic waste
underground in Michigan wells
March 19, 2004 FDA warnings on mercury in tuna not strong
enough, scientists charge
March 24, 2004 NRDC sues Bush administration for withholding
records on perchlorate in drinking water
March 25, 2004 BLM suspends plans for energy development at
Dinosaur National Monument, Colo. and Utah
March 26, 2004 Delay in phaseout of dangerous methyl bromide
pesticide negotiated by United States
March 30, 2004 Federal court orders Bush administration to
release forest-planning documents
March 31, 2004 Federal judge orders Energy Department to
release more Cheney energy-task-force records
March 31, 2004 EPA prosecution of environmental crimes even
weaker under new administrator
April 1, 2004 Bush administration worked behind scenes to
weaken European Union chemical safety rules
April 1, 2004 Mining whistleblower accuses Bush
administration of cover-up in huge coal-sludge spill
April 2, 2004 Bush administration sells 155 acres in Colorado
to Phelps Dodge Corporation for $875
April 6, 2004 EPA weakens safety rules for rat poison at
industry's behest
April 7, 2004 White House downplays effects of mercury from
coal-fired power plants
April 8, 2004 Interior secretary allows aerial hunting of
Alaska wolves to continue
April 9, 2004 Interior Department blocks release of data on
oil drilling to Environmental Working Group
April 11, 2004 Bush administration budget asks for $35
million cut in lead-poisoning prevention
April 13, 2004 Administration spending more on nuclear
weapons research than in Cold War, report says
April 15, 2004 Fish and Wildlife Service rejects protection
for Yellowstone trumpeter swans
April 19, 2004 39 state attorneys general urge denial of
Pentagon's request for environmental exemptions
April 20, 2004 Yellowstone Park employees advised to wear
hearing protection from snowmobile noise
April 22, 2004 National Council of Churches strongly
criticizes Bush's air-pollution policies
April 28, 2004 USDA weakens organic-food standards, allowing
hormones, feed raised with pesticides
April 28, 2004 Interior Department limits designations of
critical habitat for endangered species
April 29, 2004 Report shows that more than half of all
Americans live in areas with hazardous levels of smog
May 3, 2004 Power companies have raised $6.6 million for
Bush, Republicans, report says
May 12, 2004 Scientists say Yucca Mountain nuclear facility
could leak far sooner than Energy Department claims
May 21, 2004 Whistle-blowing federal biologist quits over
politicized decision-making
May 21, 2004 EPA officials with timber ties weaken toxic
formaldehyde standards for plywood industry
May 26, 2004 USDA backs down, keeps organic-food standards
(see April 28, 2004)
May 27, 2004 U.S. Army retracts order to cut some
environmental-protection practices
May 28, 2004 Army Corps lets sewers, ditches "mitigate" loss
of streams to mountaintop-removal mining
May 28, 2004 A dozen major national parks hit by cutbacks to
visitor services and staffing
June 1, 2004 Federal court rejects EPA's proposed snowmobile
standards
June 1, 2004 Administration delays greater protection for
marbled murrelet to benefit timber industry
June 2, 2004 Exemption of military from migratory-bird-
protection rules proposed by administration
June 2, 2004 New EPA rules allow more fine-particle pollution
from 1,000 industrial plants
June 3, 2004 Bush's 2005 budget zeroes out funding for
research on abrupt climate change
June 7, 2004 Bush wins ruling to allow Mexican trucks into
U.S. without meeting clean-air standards
June 8, 2004 Reduction in Snake and Columbia River water
releases, harming Northwest salmon, announced
June 15, 2004 Administration's pro-oil, pro-nuke energy
proposal stalled in Congress
June 24, 2004 Supreme Court ruling allows Cheney to keep
energy-task-force secrets until after election
July 8, 2004 Bush team pushes one of biggest timber sales in
U.S. history under guise of fire protection
July 12, 2004 Administration proposes forcing states to pay
2.5 times more for public transit than for roads
July 12, 2004 Administration to eliminate Clinton-era
roadless rule, ending protections for 58.5 million acres
July 16, 2004 Fish and Wildlife Service to end protection for
eastern wolves and abandon reintroduction plans
July 16, 2004 Bush refuses to release $34 million for
international family planning appropriated by Congress
Source: Natural Resources Defense Council
SIERRA magazine, September/October 2004
http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra
January 20, 2001 White House freezes all rules set at end of
Clinton term - including tougher ones for raw sewage
January 20, 2001 Bush proposes opening Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling
February 12, 2001 Energy Department puts off enforcing new
efficiency standards for air conditioners
February 15, 2001 EPA delays new rule protecting wetlands
from mining and development
March 7, 2001 Fish and Wildlife Service withdraws report
calling for protection of endangered salmonids
March 9, 2001 Bush appoints oil and mining lobbyist as deputy
secretary of Interior
March 13, 2001 Bush reneges on campaign promise to reduce
carbon dioxide emissions
March 16, 2001 Bush administration refuses to defend in court
rule protecting 58 million acres of wild forest
March 20, 2001 Bush withdraws proposed stricter limits on
arsenic in drinking water
March 28, 2001 Bush administration rejects Kyoto Protocol on
Climate Change
April 9, 2001 Bush budget proposal cuts $500 million from EPA
May 10, 2001 Bush administration refuses to name industry
participants in Cheney energy task force
May 12, 2001 Bureau of Land Management allows continued
grazing on endangered-tortoise land in California
May 17, 2001 Bush releases energy plan heavily favoring
fossil fuels and nukes
May 17, 2001 Forest Service reduces citizen and scientific
participation in decision-making
May 22, 2001 EPA officially suspends stricter limits for
arsenic in drinking water
June 19, 2001 States and others sue Energy Department over
air-conditioner rules (see February 12, 2001)
June 21, 2001 Timber lobbyist Mark Rey appointed to key post
in Forest Service
July 2, 2001 Oil drilling off Florida coast proposed by Bush
administration
July 23, 2001 Bush budget proposes cutting 270 EPA inspector
jobs
August 2, 2001 Army Corps of Engineers kills plan to protect
Missouri River wildlife by changing stream flows
August 8, 2001 Army Corps of Engineers weakens wetlands
protections by slackening permit requirements
August 12, 2001 National forests opened to roadbuilding and
logging by Forest Service rule changes
August 14, 2001 EPA delays tougher rules for toxic power-
plant emissions
August 17, 2001 Federal judge's decision to ban drilling off
California's coast appealed by administration
August 27, 2001 Cattle still grazing on tortoise habitat in
California, despite BLM agreement to move them
August 28, 2001 Bush administration proposes missile-defense
test installation in Pacific; environmentalists sue
August 28, 2001 Bush administration reconsiders ban on
recycling radioactive metals into consumer products
September 13, 2001 EPA lies about Manhattan hazards after
9/11, calls area safe despite extreme toxic pollution
September 20, 2001 Forest Service proposes further reduction
in citizen participation in policymaking
October 25, 2001 Interior Department weakens environmental
rules for mining operations
October 31, 2001 Arsenic flip-flop: Under public pressure,
EPA adopts higher standard after all (see May 22, 2001)
November 2, 2001 Army Corps of Engineers retreats from policy
of "no net loss" of wetlands
November 5, 2001 Bush signs bill to boost spending for
national forests, but with harmful logging riders
November 29, 2001 Minnesota's Voyageurs National Park reopens
winter lakes to snowmobiles
December 3, 2001 Army Corps of Engineers decides not to
decommission Snake River dams in Pacific Northwest
December 14, 2001 Administration announces weaker standards
for nuclear waste storage at Nevada's Yucca Mountain
December 14, 2001 Forest Service announces more roadbuilding
on undeveloped forestlands
January 9, 2002 Administration backs hydrogen-car research,
but most hydrogen to come from fossil fuels
January 10, 2002 Study shows big drop in enforcement of
environmental laws under Bush
January 10, 2002 Bush administration fights in court for new
oil drilling off California coast
January 14, 2002 Report shows Interior secretary squelched
her own agency's criticism of weaker wetlands rules
January 14, 2002 Wetlands protections weakened nationwide in
flip-flop from Bush campaign promise
January 14, 2002 Park Service okays more oil drilling in
Florida's Big Cypress National Preserve
January 21, 2002 BLM preliminarily approves gas drilling in
Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument, Montana
January 22, 2002 Forest Service sues to overturn ban on
salvage logging in Montana's Bitterroot National Forest
January 28, 2002 Bush supports Cheney's refusal to release
secret energy-task-force records
February 4, 2002 Bush slashes environmental-education
spending
February 4, 2002 Bush budget proposes cutting $1 billion from
environmental spending
February 4, 2002 Bush budget proposes $404 million to support
timber sales in national forests
February 11, 2002 Environmentalists sue Park Service for
allowing motorized vehicles in Georgia wilderness
February 14, 2002 Bush gives power plants ten more years to
cut mercury and sulfur dioxide emissions
February 14, 2002 White House unveils global-warming plan
that lets C02 emissions continue at present rate
February 15, 2002 Bush endorses plan to store 77,000 tons of
nuclear waste in Nevada's Yucca Mountain
February 15, 2002 Forest Service approves mining exploration
in Missouri's Mark Twain National Forest
February 16, 2002 Bush administration asks court to delay
endangered-species protection in California
February 19, 2002 Phaseout of snowmobiles in national parks
delayed
February 22, 2002 BLM proposes to let states allow vehicles
in previously off-limits federal lands
February 23, 2002 Bush's budget asks that taxpayers pay for
Superfund cleanups instead of polluters
February 27, 2002 Top EPA official resigns to protest Bush's
effort to weaken rules for polluting industries
February 27, 2002 Federal judge orders Bush administration to
release Cheney's secret energy-task-force records
March 12, 2002 Bush administration belatedly complies with
court order to protect desert tortoise
March 18, 2002 EPA exempts large category of power plants
from lawsuits for Clean Air Act violations
March 25, 2002 Discovery that White House misspent $135,612
of clean-energy funds to print its energy plan
March 29, 2002 Pentagon seeks exemption from environmental
laws
April 1, 2002 Deadline passes for administration to set first
new fuel-economy standards since 1996
April 11, 2002 Army Corps of Engineers approves mining
limestone in 5,400 acres of Florida's everglades
April 14, 2002 White House kills program that funded
environmental research for graduate students
April 22, 2002 EPA citizen-watchdog resigns in protest,
charging that agency |officials muzzled him
May 3, 2002 New EPA rules allow mining operations to dump
waste in waterways
May 13, 2002 Administration asks judge not to limit waste-
dumping from mountaintop mines
May 13, 2002 Bush signs farm bill that pays big subsidies to
polluting agricultural operations
May 21, 2002 Ban on mining in and around Oregon's Siskiyou
National Forest ends
May 23, 2002 Energy Department cuts air-conditioner
efficiency standards
May 24, 2002 Bush-Putin summit produces nuclear treaty that
puts no long-term limit on nuclear weapons
May 24, 2002 Bush administration drops plan |for contractors
to put environmental protection into projects
June 3, 2002 Oil drilling leases on more than 500,000 acres
in Alaska signed by Interior Department
June 7, 2002 Interior secretary rejects proposal to limit
offshore oil drilling in California
June 13, 2002 Missouri River restoration halted indefinitely
by Army Corps of Engineers
June 13, 2002 EPA proposes weakening clean-air rules for
17,000 power plants
June 13, 2002 Judge halts Bush administration move to end
habitat protection on 500,000 acres in California
June 17, 2002 Judge rejects Army Corps of Engineers plan to
allow mine-waste dumping
June 24, 2002 EPA abandons plan to clean up storm-water
pollution
June 25, 2002 Bush administration blames wildfires on
environmentalists
June 25, 2002 Snowmobiling allowed to continue in national
parks, though with some restrictions
June 25, 2002 EPA ombudsman testifies Bush administration
pressured him to halt study of radiation standards
July 1, 2002 Bush administration cuts funding for toxic
cleanups to half of that requested by EPA
July 2, 2002 Bush administration rescinds 4 million acres of
protection for endangered California frog
July 10, 2002 Judge orders administration to protect 400,000
Calif. acres for endangered Alameda whipsnake
July 15, 2002 Navy given permit to use low-frequency sonar, a
known threat to whales
July 17, 2002 Bush administration opposes Senate bill to
require 10 percent renewable energy by 2020
July 22, 2002 Bush's State Department says it will withhold
$34 million from UN family-planning program
July 25, 2002 Another top EPA official quits in protest
July 26, 2002 Bush administration backs congressional
proposal to exempt companies from disclosing hazards
August 7, 2002 EPA proposes weakened water-cleanups; asks for
"voluntary" efforts
August 15, 2002 Conservatives praise Bush for skipping United
Nations summit on sustainable development
August 22, 2002 Interior Department claims new power plant
won't harm air at Mammoth Cave National Park, Ky.
August 22, 2002 Bush calls for increased logging in name of
fire prevention
August 27, 2002 U.S. opposes targets for renewable energy use
at World Summit on Sustainable Development
August 29, 2002 Interior Department approves billion-dollar
plan to store water under Mojave Desert
August 30, 2002 Foe of ecological restoration Allan
Fitzsimmons named head of federal wildfire prevention
September 3, 2002 White House asks exemption from Freedom of
Information Act in energy-task-force suit
September 4, 2002 Federal officials reject call to add white
marlin to endangered list
September 9, 2002 States' EPA air-quality inspections shown
to have dropped by 34 percent
September 13, 2002 EPA weakens proposed anti-pollution
standards for off-road vehicles
September 15, 2002 EPA deletes global-warming section from
pollution report
September 17, 2002 Bush replacing most scientists on
chemical-hazard panel with those tied to chemical industry
September 18, 2002 Bush executive order cuts citizen
involvement in review of road and airport projects
September 21, 2002 Killing of 34,000 salmonids results from
federal diversion of Klamath River water in Oregon
September 27, 2002 Interior secretary okays gold mining on
sacred Indian site in California
September 30, 2002 New EPA water-quality report shows U.S.
waters are getting dirtier
October 1, 2002 Fish and Wildlife Service reverses order to
increase Missouri River flow to protect species
October 3, 2002 Conservationists urge White House to release
$36.5 million in conservation funds for farmlands
October 4, 2002 Bureau of Land Management approves largest
oil and gas drilling exploration ever in Utah
October 8, 2002 EPA water administrator says war on terror
leaves little money for water cleanup
October 8, 2002 Bush stacks panel on lead poisoning with
people tied to the lead industry
October 8, 2002 Federal workers reveal memo from EPA chief
encouraging them to support president when off-duty
October 9, 2002 Bush administration sides with auto industry
in suit against California's emission rules
October 10, 2002 Administration failed to assess
vulnerability of chemical facilities to terrorists, GAO says
October 15 2002 Superfund cleanups drop to 42 per year from
average of 76 under Clinton, report shows
October 16, 2002 Judge finds Forest Service violates
Endangered Species Act by not protecting spotted-owl habitat
October 17, 2002 Bush administration told by federal judge to
release energy documents in Sierra Club lawsuit
October 31, 2002 EPA halts funding at seven Superfund sites
November 1, 2002 Bush administration threatens withdrawal
from historic UN population accord
November 5, 2002 Polluters paid 64 percent less in fines
under Bush than in last two Clinton years, report shows
November 11, 2002 Bush administration supports renewed
elephant-ivory trade
November 12, 2002 National Park Service proposal would allow
1,100 snowmobiles a day in Yellowstone, Grand Teton
November 21, 2002 Natural-gas drilling at Padre Island
National Seashore in Texas approved
November 22, 2002 EPA proceeds with weakening Clean Air Act
rules for power plants
November 27, 2002 Forest Service proposes rule changes to
increase logging, grazing, mining on 192 million acres
December 2, 2002 Bush administration plan for oil drilling
off California coast ruled illegal by federal judges
December 4, 2002 Bush administration asks for five more years
of study before acting on global warming
December 12, 2002 Federal court rules against administration,
upholds roadless rule for 58.5 million acres
December 12, 2002 White House proposes tiny increase in
automobile fuel economy: 1.5 mpg in five years
December 13, 2002 Federal judge blocks Army Corps of
Engineers' Snake River dredging plan in Pacific Northwest
December 16, 2002 EPA's new factory-farm rule favors big
agribusiness polluters
December 18, 2002 White House budget office values elderly
lives 63 percent less in environmental cost-benefit analysis
December 20, 2002 Federal judge blocks Interior Department
from permitting oil exploration in eastern Utah
December 30, 2002 EPA proposes two-year exemption of oil and
gas industry from storm-water pollution rules
January 6, 2003 Bureau of Land Management rule change gives
states leeway for new roads in wildlands
January 10, 2003 Bush budget requests $6.4 billion for Energy
Department's nuclear weapons activity
January 10, 2003 Bush administration proposes pulling federal
safeguards from 20 percent of U.S. wetlands
January 13, 2003 Pentagon plans to ask for exemption from
environmental laws on millions of acres
January 16, 2003 Environmental personnel scratched from USAID
policy bureau
January 17, 2003 Interior Department proposes oil exploration
on up to 9 million acres of Alaska's North Slope
January 19, 2003 Pentagon continues lobbying for exemptions
from environmental laws
January 21, 2003 EPA refuses to ban weed-killer atrazine, a
possible carcinogen
January 22, 2003 EPA retains unsafe limits for toxic
perchlorates
January 24, 2003 Manatees get federal protection, thanks to
lawsuit settlement
January 27, 2003 Bush administration proposes privatizing
thousands of National Park Service jobs
January 27, 2003 California's giant sequoia threatened by
Forest Service proposal to resume logging nearby
January 29, 2003 Bush administration wins court ruling that
legalizes mountaintop-removal mining permits
January 30, 2003 Bureau of Land Management proposes rollback
of Clinton-era restrictions on grazing
January 30, 2003 Exemptions to phaseout of ozone-destroying
methyl bromide planned by Bush administration
February 11, 2003 EPA drafts new rules to relax toxic-air-
pollution standards
February 20, 2003 National Park Service finalizes rules
allowing snowmobiles in national parks
February 25, 2003 National Academy of Sciences panel strongly
criticizes Bush's global-warming plan
February 27, 2003 Bush's "Clear Skies" plan allows much more
pollution than if Clean Air Act were enforced, critics charge
February 27, 2003 Transportation Department speeds up
environmentally harmful road projects
February 28, 2003 Oil drilling in Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge his "greatest wish," says high-ranking Interior
official
February 28, 2003 Wilderness protection for millions of acres
in Alaska's Tongass forest rejected by Forest Service
March 4, 2003 National Park Service slaughters 231
Yellowstone bison
March 7, 2003 Paul Wolfowitz tells military leaders to find
reasons to exempt military from environmental rules
March 10, 2003 EPA exempts oil and gas industry from
President Clinton's tighter water-pollution rules
March 13, 2003 EPA withdraws another Clinton-era water-
pollution cleanup rule
March 13, 2003 EPA official testifies in Congress in favor of
exempting military from environmental laws
March 18, 2003 EPA allows sludge dumping in Potomac River to
continue for seven more years
March 18, 2003 Fish and Wildlife proposes removing
protections from endangered wolves
March 18, 2003 Federal judge orders Interior Department to
continue protecting manatees
March 18, 2003 GAO again criticizes Bush administration for
failing to reduce security risks at chemical plants
March 25, 2003 Park Service adopts plan for Yellowstone/Teton
allowing1,100 snowmobiles a day
April 1, 2003 Bush administration drops court battle to allow
California offshore drilling
April 1, 2003 Bush administration barely raises SUV gas
mileage requirements, to 1.5 mpg more by 2007
April 3, 2003 Bureau of Reclamation again diverts water from
Klamath River, where salmonid kill occurred
April 4, 2003 New U.S.-Mexico pollution treaty signed, but
lacks funding
April 7, 2003 Bush administration asks UN to remove
Yellowstone from endangered world heritage status
April 8, 2003 Protection plan for 76-mile stretch of
California coast abandoned by National Park Service
April 9, 2003 Interior Department paves way for new roads on
federal lands in Utah
April 10, 2003 U.S. Fish and Wildlife signs off on plan to
reopen Imperial Sand Dunes to off-road vehicles
April 20, 2003 Toxic cleanups still lagging: 41 percent fewer
Superfund sites cleaned up by EPA, report says
April 21, 2003 Sharp criticism of Bush administration air-
pollution policies by independent panel
April 24, 2003 White House unveils pro-industry chemical
security bill
April 28, 2003 White House bans EPA from discussing
perchlorate pollution
May 2, 2003 Vehicle fuel economy drops to 22-year low of 20.8
mpg, says EPA report
May 2, 2003 Permits for cross-border power lines from Mexican
power plants illegal, says federal judge
May 5, 2003 Navy's use of sonar causes "stampede"–and
possibly death–of marine mammals in Puget Sound
May 7, 2003 EPA drops "senior death discount" calculation
(see December 18, 2002)
May 13, 2003 Fish and Wildlife Service signs off on mining in
Montana's Cabinet Mountains Wilderness
May 14, 2003 White House's $247 billion transportation plan
slashes environmental protection
May 14, 2003 EPA proposes easing, delaying smog-control rules
May 21, 2003 Christine Todd Whitman, embattled EPA chief,
resigns
May 30, 2003 Park Service opens Maryland and Virginia's
Assateague Island National Seashore to Jet Skis
May 30, 2003 Forest-fire plan eliminates environmental review
of logging projects under 1,000 acres
June 2, 2003 Energy Department announces$2 billion to $4
billion plan to build new "mini" nukes
June 3, 2003 Energy Department funds study on how to ease
effects of global warming for Alaska oil drillers
June 5, 2003 Forest Service plan would triple logging limits
in California's Sierra Nevada
June 9, 2003 USDA reverses Clinton ban on most logging and
roadbuilding on 58.5 million acres
June 20, 2003 Defense Department reneges on plan to test for
perchlorate pollution at U.S. bases
June 23, 2003 Bush administration again deletes references to
dangers of global warming from EPA report
June 27, 2003 Federal judge halts timber sale in Montana's
Kootenai National Forest
July 1, 2003 Autopsies link Navy sonar to porpoise deaths,
environmentalists charge
July 8, 2003 Federal court rejects Cheney's argument for
keeping energy-task-force records secret
July 12, 2003 EPA refuses to regulate perchlorate and other
drinking-water contaminants
July 17, 2003 Energy Department lobbies Congress for law to
get around court ruling on nuke waste
July 17, 2003 Federal judge rules administration must redo
water plan for Oregon/California Klamath River
July 22, 2003 Army Corps of Engineers ruled in contempt for
defying order to change Missouri River flows
July 24, 2003 Bush administration softens demand for
outsourcing of federal jobs, including at national parks
August 8, 2003 Bush administration settlement of timber suit
could double logging in Northwest
August 11, 2003 Bush taps anti-environmental Utah governor
Mike Leavitt to head EPA
August 26, 2003 New EPA rules ignore mercury pollution from
chlorine plant
August 27, 2003 EPA excludes 17,000 facilities from upgrading
pollution controls when installing new equipment
August 29, 2003 U.S. court rules against EPA's loopholes in
mountaintop-removal-mining regulations
September 2, 2003 EPA weakens ban on selling polluted sites
by reinterpreting law
September 2, 2003 EPA refuses to regulate ballast-water
discharges from ships
September 4, 2003 EPA finds 274 violations of laws for
dumping mountaintop-mining debris
September 22, 2003 White House's own study concludes benefits
of environmental regulations far outweigh costs
September 23, 2003 Forest Service estimates $2 million lost
in timber sale from Alaska's Tongass
September 24, 2003 White House recommendations would
undermine public participation in environmental planning
September 25, 2003 EPA proposes deal that would let polluting
factory farms avoid prosecution
October 1, 2003 Bush fails to renew energy-conservation
program that saved government $300 million a year
October 6, 2003 EPA rules that farmers can't sue pesticide
makers if chemicals fail to meet stated claims
October 10, 2003 Interior Department overturns limits on
acreage where gold mines can dump waste
October 10, 2003 Judge orders Interior Department to stop
stalling on owl habitat protection
October 10, 2003 EPA proposal to allow warmer waters behind
Oregon dams threatens salmonids
October 10, 2003 EPA inspector general criticizes agency for
lax enforcement
October 13, 2003 Bush administration proposes lifting ban on
importing endangered species
October 13, 2003 $18.6 million Forest Service study says
outsourcing its jobs would rarely be cost-effective
October 17, 2003 EPA announces it will not regulate dioxins
in sewage sludge dumped on land
October 31, 2003 EPA declines to restrict use of pesticide
atrazine
November 4, 2003 Superfund cleanups lag for third straight
year
November 4, 2003 Environmentalists criticize revised
everglades-recovery plan for failing to ensure natural water
flow
November 13, 2003 Park Service workers charge that Bush
policies will "destroy the grand legacy of our national
parks"
November 14, 2003 Bush administration loses bid to increase
ozone-depleting methyl bromide
November 18, 2003 Administration admits blame for kill of
34,000 salmonids in Klamath River (see September 21, 2002)
November 18, 2003 EPA proposes looser regulations on dumping
low-level radioactive waste in landfills
December 3, 2003 Bush signs "Healthy Forests" bill: more
logging, less species protection on millions of acres
December 4, 2003 EPA seeks to reclassify mercury as
"nontoxic"
December 5, 2003 Bureau of Land Management proposes weakening
rules for grazing livestock on federal land
December 9, 2003 Federal violation notices to polluters down
almost 60 percent; almost 30 percent fewer fines
December 16, 2003 White House abandons plans to weaken Clean
Water Act protections for wetlands
December 17, 2003 Defense Department urged to protect
endangered tortoise during robot race
December 17, 2003 Federal judge overturns administration
decision not to protect orcas in Puget Sound
December 19, 2003 Forest Service opens grizzly bear habitat
to snowmobiles in Montana's Flathead National Forest
December 23, 2003 Forest Service continues to allow logging
in Tongass, world's largest temperate rainforest
December 24, 2003 Federal court blocks EPA plan to weaken
Clean Air Act by exempting power plants from review
January 1, 2004 Only 50 companies agree to Bush
administration's voluntary plan to cut global-warming
emissions
January 8, 2004 $175 million Superfund shortfall prevents
cleanups at 11 sites, slows down others
January 7, 2004 White House proposes overturning ban on
mining near streams
January 9, 2004 Pentagon to seek more environmental
exemptions
January 9, 2004 Forest Service limits citizens' right to
challenge logging plans by appeal or in court
January 13, 2004 Federal court overturns Bush
administration's weakening of energy efficiency for air
conditioners
January, 21 2004 Interior secretary asks to triple number of
gas-drilling permits in Wyoming
January 22, 2004 EPA scales back monitoring of smokestack
pollution
January 22, 2004 Interior Department opens 9 million acres on
Alaska's North Slope to oil drilling
January 23, 2004 Forest Service plans to boost logging on up
to 3.2 million acres of Appalachian forests
January 27, 2004 White House says EPA doesn't have to study
pesticide effects on imperiled wildlife
January 29, 2004 Bush administration proposes letting
contractors police federal nuclear-plant safety
January 30, 2004 Parts of EPA's mercury-pollution plan lifted
verbatim from industry memos
February 2, 2004 Bush budget proposes $10 million cut in
funds for endangered species
February 5, 2004 EPA admits twice as many children (630,000)
in danger from mercury exposure
February 6, 2004 Clean Air Act changes undermining
enforcement, says former EPA official
February 9, 2004 Energy development allowed inside Colorado
and Utah's Dinosaur National Monument
February 11, 2004 Forest Service plan allows mining, drilling
in Alabama's national forests
February 13, 2004 EPA no longer to require "worst case
scenarios" from industry
February 15, 2004 Forest Service allows poisoning of prairie
dogs in four states
February 16, 2004 White House ignores threat from gasoline
additive MTBE
February 18, 2004 U.S. Navy plans to dredge endangered turtle
habitat in Key West
February 18, 2004 20 Nobel Prize-winning scientists say
administration distorts science for political gain
February 24, 2004 Federal mine-safety official demoted after
questioning mine accident investigation
February 27, 2004 Missouri River management plan ignores fish
protections
March 3, 2004 Administration proposes to relax rules on
killing wolves in Idaho and Montana
March 9, 2004 358 conservation scientists urge administration
to halt plan to import endangered species
March 10, 2004 Forest Service hires PR firm to promote Sierra
Nevada plan that would triple logging
March 11, 2004 EPA inspector general says agency's rosy
drinking-water assessments used false data
March 12, 2004 Forest Service relents: no snowmobiles in
grizzly habitat in Montana's Flathead National Forest
March 15, 2004 Court rules BLM illegally opened Montana area
to off-road vehicles
March 16, 2004 EPA approves plan to inject toxic waste
underground in Michigan wells
March 19, 2004 FDA warnings on mercury in tuna not strong
enough, scientists charge
March 24, 2004 NRDC sues Bush administration for withholding
records on perchlorate in drinking water
March 25, 2004 BLM suspends plans for energy development at
Dinosaur National Monument, Colo. and Utah
March 26, 2004 Delay in phaseout of dangerous methyl bromide
pesticide negotiated by United States
March 30, 2004 Federal court orders Bush administration to
release forest-planning documents
March 31, 2004 Federal judge orders Energy Department to
release more Cheney energy-task-force records
March 31, 2004 EPA prosecution of environmental crimes even
weaker under new administrator
April 1, 2004 Bush administration worked behind scenes to
weaken European Union chemical safety rules
April 1, 2004 Mining whistleblower accuses Bush
administration of cover-up in huge coal-sludge spill
April 2, 2004 Bush administration sells 155 acres in Colorado
to Phelps Dodge Corporation for $875
April 6, 2004 EPA weakens safety rules for rat poison at
industry's behest
April 7, 2004 White House downplays effects of mercury from
coal-fired power plants
April 8, 2004 Interior secretary allows aerial hunting of
Alaska wolves to continue
April 9, 2004 Interior Department blocks release of data on
oil drilling to Environmental Working Group
April 11, 2004 Bush administration budget asks for $35
million cut in lead-poisoning prevention
April 13, 2004 Administration spending more on nuclear
weapons research than in Cold War, report says
April 15, 2004 Fish and Wildlife Service rejects protection
for Yellowstone trumpeter swans
April 19, 2004 39 state attorneys general urge denial of
Pentagon's request for environmental exemptions
April 20, 2004 Yellowstone Park employees advised to wear
hearing protection from snowmobile noise
April 22, 2004 National Council of Churches strongly
criticizes Bush's air-pollution policies
April 28, 2004 USDA weakens organic-food standards, allowing
hormones, feed raised with pesticides
April 28, 2004 Interior Department limits designations of
critical habitat for endangered species
April 29, 2004 Report shows that more than half of all
Americans live in areas with hazardous levels of smog
May 3, 2004 Power companies have raised $6.6 million for
Bush, Republicans, report says
May 12, 2004 Scientists say Yucca Mountain nuclear facility
could leak far sooner than Energy Department claims
May 21, 2004 Whistle-blowing federal biologist quits over
politicized decision-making
May 21, 2004 EPA officials with timber ties weaken toxic
formaldehyde standards for plywood industry
May 26, 2004 USDA backs down, keeps organic-food standards
(see April 28, 2004)
May 27, 2004 U.S. Army retracts order to cut some
environmental-protection practices
May 28, 2004 Army Corps lets sewers, ditches "mitigate" loss
of streams to mountaintop-removal mining
May 28, 2004 A dozen major national parks hit by cutbacks to
visitor services and staffing
June 1, 2004 Federal court rejects EPA's proposed snowmobile
standards
June 1, 2004 Administration delays greater protection for
marbled murrelet to benefit timber industry
June 2, 2004 Exemption of military from migratory-bird-
protection rules proposed by administration
June 2, 2004 New EPA rules allow more fine-particle pollution
from 1,000 industrial plants
June 3, 2004 Bush's 2005 budget zeroes out funding for
research on abrupt climate change
June 7, 2004 Bush wins ruling to allow Mexican trucks into
U.S. without meeting clean-air standards
June 8, 2004 Reduction in Snake and Columbia River water
releases, harming Northwest salmon, announced
June 15, 2004 Administration's pro-oil, pro-nuke energy
proposal stalled in Congress
June 24, 2004 Supreme Court ruling allows Cheney to keep
energy-task-force secrets until after election
July 8, 2004 Bush team pushes one of biggest timber sales in
U.S. history under guise of fire protection
July 12, 2004 Administration proposes forcing states to pay
2.5 times more for public transit than for roads
July 12, 2004 Administration to eliminate Clinton-era
roadless rule, ending protections for 58.5 million acres
July 16, 2004 Fish and Wildlife Service to end protection for
eastern wolves and abandon reintroduction plans
July 16, 2004 Bush refuses to release $34 million for
international family planning appropriated by Congress
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
