For the life of me, the thing about L.A. that's hardest for me to understand is why not one single politician in this city has stepped forward and embraced the tens of thousands of people who work so hard on their own time to make this a better place.
Everywhere I go I meet dedicated and passionate people doing good works, volunteering in charities and service clubs and residents' groups and neighborhood councils and youth sports leagues and Neighborhood Watch to name just a few of the ways people express their commitment to a greater L.A.
Yesterday, I played golf as a guest of a friend in an event that raised money for the In-N-Out charity foundation and saw an outpouring of generosity and goodwill. A friend told me about another event yesterday for the Little Tokyo Service Center, which now provides help mostly to poor Latinos in that changing downtown neighborhood. Every day there are events like this all across L.A.
On Wednesday, I went to the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Association's monthly meeting and heard from all kinds of people who have been working hard for years to make their community better. Earlier that day, I spoke with Sunland-Tujunga community activist Nina Royal who has spent 20 years working with her neighbors to preserve the semi-rural nature of the community against the onslaught of developers aided by City Hall.
In my nearly 30 years in L.A., I have never seen so much energy out in the community, so much passion to fight for healthy communities, so much fear about where the city is headed.
When I ask political insiders to explain this phenomena -- the Marie Antoinette-like indifference to the people -- they usually look at me like I'm crazy or at least ridiculously naive.
"Because they'd lose,'' one told me recently. "The political reality makes it virtually impossible for a poorly-financed populist to be elected citywide or to the council..
"If you ever attended a strategy meeting for any of these campaigns as a non-journalist,and suggested they take advantage of 'the people and the energy out there,' they'd roll their eyes, shove the polling numbers up your ass and send you out for coffee. It's worse than you can imagine."
I've worked a lot of places all across America, in small towns and big cities, and I've met some really villainous characters in politics. But as well as I know so many politicians and political operatives in L.A., I remain convinced it's the system that's corrupt and not the players.
Most of them have little or no experience outside of the L.A. political scene. They are products of it and really don't know what the world looks like outside the bubble of consciousness they live in. It's like people who grew up in a small town where everyone was the same race and religion and knew little about the world beyond so they share common beliefs and feed off of each other.
Perhaps, the LAPD is a good example of an institution that was difficult to change until an experienced outsider came in and knew how to create a new culture, someone who saw that the way things are is not necessarily the way they have to be or should be.
There aren't any outsiders in L.A. politics today and unless something dramatic happens, there won't be any tomorrow.
That's why I'm working to try to find a way to help create a big tent that will bring together the community activists from Westchester to Granada Hills, from Studio City to San Pedro.
The political class will only change and support the people when they come to believe they will win elections. They can't see beyond the next election.
The sense of selfless service that motivates so many out in the neighborhoods is not what moves the pols. Elected office is a career for them and they'll do whatever it takes to stay in office.
So a new political calculus is what's needed and that will open happen if a coalition of concerned citizens comes together and takes on City Hall.
Ron Kaye is the former editor of the Los Angeles Daily News where he spent 23 years helping to make the newspaper the voice of the San Fernando Valley and fighting for a city government that serves the people and not special interests.
Twice in recent years, Los Angeles Magazine listed Kaye among the city’s most influential people, specifically in the area of politics. Kaye has been variously described in the media as the “accidental anarchist,” “the Patrick Henry of the San Fernando Valley” and a “passionate populist.” He is now committed to
carrying on his crusade for a greater Los Angeles as an ordinary citizen. Previously, Ron worked at the Los Angeles Herald Examiner,
Associated Press, Cleveland Plain Dealer and The Australian as well as papers
in Fairbanks, Alaska and Yakima, Wash. He also wrote for Newsweek magazine, The Guardian in London and the Naitonal Enquirer.
In "The Audacity of Hope," Barack Obama writes frankly about the perils of being forced to raise huge sums of money for political campaigns from the very rich and eloquently reinforces your insider's point when he observes:
"The problems of ordinary people, the voices of the Rust Belt town or the dwindling heartland, become a distant echo rather than a palpable reality, abstractions to be managed rather than battles to be fought."
Check lately on how much it costs to run for office in LA? The same is true here.
The need for so much money to win elections has not been explained to me very well. I can only assume the worst. Corruption. Organized groups who sell their votes.
The people paying the money in such large amounts - want a return on their money. Corruption.
So the ordinary people havn't got a prayer.
Unfortunately, the large amounts of money no longer are used to run full time ads - in newspapers or on radio and tv. That used to be the way to communicate. It seems gone. The Dems get a lot of media attention by creating incidents and having two candidates. At the rate things are going, unless the last two months before the election in November sees change (there is that word again - for better or worse? That is my question).
I am one of those volunteers who write letters, telephone, study for information and speak up at
meetings. And every mail asks for money, money, money for party, candidates, charitable organizations, it is an industry in itself. My only defense is support what I wish and only once a year. Because once you are known as a contributor, there is at least one request from them a month. Sometimes an organization will have more than one name. It is a way to make money and the trick is to know which is honest.
I know most of us will agree.
So has anyone any good ideas to share about how to rid ourselves of this corrupt system? Maybe if we started talking to each other, the pols will get the message - we are going to organize for all the rest of us. For one, I think the areas that want to secede should force another election on that issue starting now for 2010.
How are we going to
Cutting the stranglehold of the unions would be a good start. They demand more and more in the name of "the workers," but unions did so even knowing our budget crisis, and their bosses openly insisted they'd hold tight on their demands even if it meant cutting vital services like trash pickup and street cleaning and basic maintenance. When you have people like Maria Elena Durazo boasted they're kingmakers, something's very wrong. And D'Arcy controls DWP maybe more than Nihai and the Council.
Mark Ridley-Thomas already got $2.5 million from unions, who've pledged another $1.5 million, leading to claims from Parks' camp and others like Earl Ofari Hutchinson, that he's already been bought and any belt-tightening at County level is already doomed. Then Bernie Parks got an endorsement today from developer Magic Johnson, who'll probably bring in more developer and business support.
Maybe worst of all is Steve Cooley, whose main backers and financial contributors include the criminal defense attorneys that his own prosecutors have to go up against, and he's allegedly let them influence his not going after felons, from illegal felons to those in the Mexican-style corrupt cities of Bell Gardens, Cudahy, etc. I'm not sure how community groups can compete against this kind of money, but I'd start with unions that intentionally hold the taxpayers over the barrel. In cases like Cooley, they'd need a DA to investigate the DA, or at least, vote for challenger Ipsen.
I do think with the Internet and other local voices, people are being more heard than usual. Also, I'm kind of skeptical about the notion that HOA's and NC's can always represent "the community" better: some work, many other become bogged down with the kind of internecine fighting for control you see in any grass-roots org, even Church Committees, and they become self-selecting of mostly retired, older people with the time and financial freedom to do this. There will always be a need for career politicians, we just have to be better watchdogs, especially over how they spend our money.
Our editor, Ron Kaye, worked hard as a watch dog on all of this stuff but altho' I have told everyone about this site, do you think they are here with us and sharing this information with their friends and neighborhood meetings? I just don't think that enough of us older people have pcs, and I think the younger people are off in another completely different direction.
Knowing the councilman is not going to do any good. They speak nice and do as they please. At least mine does.
I agree that union members can be in a tight place when the leaders accept money and guarantee votes. We have to let everyone know that you still have a private vote no matter what they say. Except, if you don't vote for any of the candidates you should write that on the ballot so that someone does not fill in the spot next to his/her favorite. I know I did not vote for either Hahn or Villaraigosa and wrote
and I did write on the ballot that I did not.
Remember the hanging chads in Florida, I did not want that as my vote here in California.
who you calling old?
Successful Politicians focus on two things; getting elected and getting reelected.
We must rally our communities and focus on two things; electing our leadership and directing our leadership.
Until then we get to watch the circus. (not even good seats!)
Leadership? Where are our true leaders? Who are our true leaders? Those individuals who are now in office are not leaders, they are opportunists.
Right now we must be our own leaders - yes. we the people, in order to form a more perfect union, must go back and read the Declaration of Independence. The first paragraph describes the situation perfectly. And the following paragraphs are incredibly accurate in describing
our situation right now. 1776? It is 2008. And the beat goes on. We have taken our city for granted and trusted the people to be honest.
Now we find we have been betrayed. They are out to take us for all they can get. Surely, it cannot continue.
I have not called anyone old, but some of us do care more than others - everyone looks at me and thinks:she is an old lady. But those who truly know me know that I am experienced, not old. We must be involved and we must be faithful. That is not old. The future of this country depends on those who love and care about it.
The solution is hiding in plain sight. It's full public financing of political campaigns, or "Clean Money" as it's commonly called. Neighborhood Councils are now holding workshops throughout the city to gather feedback for the city council, which is scheduled to take up the issue later this year. Here's a link to a good CityWatch article on it.
http://www.citywatchla.com/content/view/1147/
Sorry, Troubled Mind, but you're dreaming. This from the article you linked:
" ... after raising a baseline amount of money, candidates who opt for public financing cannot take any private contributions to their campaigns."
So those who can raise millions of dollars in this incredibly expensive media market will just "opt out." Eric, Wendy and Bill aren't really trying to change the system. They're just as guilty as everyone else.
Balancing Budget on Backs of the Voiceless
Taxes
By Thomas Elias
In a remarkable letter to his supporters, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger claims his May budget revision "solves the state’s long-term budget problem without tax increases."
If that were true, Schwarzenegger’s favorite word — fantastic — would apply. But not even the governor calls his austere plan anything like that. Even he conceded elsewhere that it might trigger one tax increase. Just in case legislators don’t put his planned $15 billion in lottery anticipation bonds on the November ballot, or if voters turn the bond down, he wants a 1 percent sales tax increase for at least the next three years.
Not exactly no new taxes. But it gets worse. Rather than tax any services or risk proposing even a slight increase in state income levies, Schwarzenegger seeks to foist a host of new costs and fees on the often-voiceless people who can least afford new expenses. These include legal immigrants, college students, ill people shut in their homes, low-income working parents and children of mothers on welfare.
Almost everyone in these categories would see expenses rise considerably just to maintain current levels of healthcare, education and even nourishment.
Would this balance the budget "without new taxes," as Schwarzenegger bragged? Not really. Rather, it would transfer the state’s deficit to those who don’t vote, or don’t vote much. And if taxes are defined as payments one must make, like it or not, this plan features plenty. Many expenses the governor would cut are just not optional. Which makes them amount to taxes under a different name.
It has also never been more clear that those who can’t or don’t vote end up paying for it.
Every group most impacted by this proposed budget is one that’s either not represented at all or under-represented among both the state’s registered voters and those who actually turn out.
Besides that, there was Schwarzenegger’s boast about solving the state’s long-term budget problems. He’s apparently the only one who thinks this is the Eureka! solution.
For his plan hinges on another $15 billion worth of borrowing, this time against anticipated receipts of a hyped-up state lottery, which the governor estimates would pull in well more than $5 billion a year above what it does now. Question: If the lottery can be juiced up that much by some private company, why can’t the state fix it and keep all the new money? Either way, apparently, voters would have to approve a change in today’s prescribed 34 percent contribution of lottery proceeds to public schools.
But the big problem with this budget plan is not its borrowing, which would add to the already huge $5.2 billion the state pays each year to service existing bonds — half of which goes toward bonds issued under Schwarzenegger. That’s right, half the current bond payments are for debt run up in just five years of a governor who vowed to "throw away the credit card."
Even worse is what this plan does to people least able to defend themselves.
Its deep cuts aim to save $627 million by ending assistance to many adult immigrants who have been in America legally five years or more. Those immigrants could still get treatment for emergencies, pregnancies, breast and cervical cancer, but would be on their own for everything else, including all preventive services and routine doctor visits.
The reductions would eliminate dental benefits for adult Medi-Cal beneficiaries and cut payments to doctors who accept Medi-Cal patients by about 10 percent. That would cause hundreds, maybe thousands, of doctors and dentists to refuse treatment to the poorest Californians.
Other health cuts would reduce Medi-Cal rolls of children from low-income families by about 430,000 over four years, according to an analysis by the Sacramento-based California Budget Project.
Meanwhile, the proposed spending plan would put a $1,000 limit on yearly dental expenses for poor children in the Healthy Families program.
Then there’s the 10 percent increase in tuition and fees for students in the Cal State system, with University of California costs increasing only slightly less.
Plus slashes in funding for in-home supportive services for the ill and a 5 percent cut from CalWORKS grants going to welfare mothers who meet work-participation requirements. For a family of three, this planned reduction amounts to $36, from $723 per month to $687.
Add it up, and you have severe penalties and a need for increased payments by poor people of many types and ethnicities. The main thing they have in common is that they either can’t vote or don’t vote in large percentages. So much for spreading the pain among all Californians.
No one can claim anymore that Schwarzenegger fails to prioritize, as was the accusation when he proposed across-the-board cuts in January. It’s just that his current plan imposes the most on those who can least afford it and can do the least to fight it. (Thomas Elias article was published first in the Redding Record Searchlight. For more news and views from RRS: http://www.redding.com/ .) _
CityWatch
Vol 6 Issue 43
Pub: May 27, 2009
[ Back ]
==============================================================
by reshaffer@csupomona.edu Re: Reduce a budget morass in LA? and across the country ?
You just made a great argument for democratic socialism. That LA school board majority you vilify was elected a year ago by the same crowd now condemning them. You want honest, efficient government? Then stop sending into office at all levels of government the shysters who talk of efficiency, market-driven solutions, and all that other hogwash that goes with the "free market economy" and instead elect honest socialists who tell you precisely what they'll do. But no, you give us family-values demagogues who proceed to line the pockets of their friends, if not there own, handing over the national treasures to private interests in the guise of "efficient government." I hold no love for Democrats or Republicans. Party hacks of neither party can be trusted. Yet in one election naive voters put in one party, then the next election they see they've made a mistake and turn to the other scoundrels. Enough already.
I'll bet you welcomed the election of the LAUSD majority last year. Now you can suffer as you pay the penalty. These clown you castigate are the very same ones who turned Locke over to money-hungry Green Dot. If you think charter operators aren't in it for the money, think again.
Maotl@aol.com wrote:
Anyone, who can read, and that number is dropping, as we speak:
You would think at least one electred representative would take the time offered to him by his electorate, to investigate further the multimillions of fraud and waste purported to them by a forensic accountant, and endorsed by a auditor, and many others, especially, when; it is purported to be by a public entity that spending the largest single account in the state budget, and, also, probably federal budgets outside of defense.
Education with a marginal return to 50% of its servicees, (those it doessn't reach at all, becasue the drop out demoralized ) and, their families, thus holding back the economy and returning us to am also ran economy, like we were before, the two WW's.
Guess a billion here, a billion there, after; a while, we are talking real money, takes charge here.
What the hell, unless, it makes marginal C-span and local channel 36 & 35 viewing of them doing the publics bidding, by and to the few who watch, it, it is not news worthy, & ranks in the area of news like that about Countrywide's Mozillo, who after almost, taking down the american and european economy along with Bear Stearns, and leaving a multi millionaire with no jail time, and was, has in fact. been awarded the economic man of the year in & by the Valley Economic Alliance in 2003 or 2004.
What fools, we all are to expect honest governance for the dollars; we send to our pristinely clean and always right, taxing agencies.
Go figure !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ?????????????