"Forget economic stimulus checks. Same-sex marriages may give California just the financial
boost it needs," reports Alana Semuels in the Times.
"Wedding planners, bakers and hotels began booking more
business almost immediately after the state Supreme
Court's May 15 decision overturning a ban on gay marriage. Citing
pent-up demand, one UCLA study projects that same-sex unions could provide a $370-million shot in the arm to the state economy over the
next three years.
"By some estimates, weddings and commitment ceremonies
for same-sex couples generate $1 billion a year in revenue.
"PlanetOut, a media and entertainment company that conducts
surveys about gay and lesbian consumers, says gay consumers
earn 20% more than their straight counterparts, on average,
and spend about 10% more on nuptials.
"The court ruling comes at a good time for many small
wedding-related businesses, which are finding that their traditional
customers are spending less on weddings because of
the economy."
"While special interests face limits on direct donations,
they can spend unlimited amounts on such independent campaigns, an increasingly integral part of California's political machines," writes Shane Goldmacher in the Bee.
"The only caveat is that independent committees cannot
communicate with candidates in the race.
"In the eight years since voters approved caps on direct
donations to state politicians, more than $98 million has flowed through such committees, according
to campaign reports.
"Government reformers fear that this "orgy of special interest spending" – as Ross Johnson, the head of the state's watchdog agency described it – has made an end run around California's limits on contributions and obscured what interests
are supporting which candidates.
"'How are California voters to know who these groups
really are?' asked a recent report from Johnson's Fair Political Practices Commission. 'For the average voter, it involves far too much detective
work.'
"In the runup to Tuesday's legislative primaries, special interests have showered
more than $8 million on their favored candidates via independent
campaigns. In each of 17 Senate and Assembly contests – roughly half the races political analysts label competitive
– outside spending has topped $100,000.
"'There is no question that the influence of 'independent expenditures' is at the highest point ever,' concluded the FPPC report.
"The list of top donors to independent expenditure campaigns
reads like a who's who of Capitol power players: influential labor unions, powerful health care and
business interests and wealthy Indian tribes, to name
a few.
"'Individuals and groups want to affect the outcome of
elections, and they will always find a way,' said Jack Pitney, a professor of government at Claremont-McKenna College."
The Bee's Steve Weigand reports: "Last week we told you about how AB 2795 – a bill that would have cut way down on the boodle collected
by legislators from special-interest groups – quietly died. This week we tell you how it was killed.
"The measure unanimously passed its first Assembly committee
last month, since no member wanted to have to vote
against it and thus defend his or her desire to suck
up football tickets and theater seats from those with
business before the Legislature. Plus, the folks at
the Fair Political Practices Commission offered assurances
the bill could be enforced without costing the state
more money.
"But when it got to the Assembly Appropriations Committee,
a committee analysis suggested "the FPPC will likely incur initial costs probably up
to $150,000 to provide outreach and education." Just by coincidence, mind you, any bill costing $150,000 or more is automatically being sent to a "suspense" file because of the state's budget problems.
"So no one actually had to vote to kill it. Nothing
like self-interest to stir creativity."
The Bee also reports on a legislative fight involving
one of the state's most vocal, and not exactly sweet-smelling, lobbying groups -- the raw milk contingent. "The battle over raw milk will move from the courtroom back
to the Legislature this week," reports E.J. Schultz.
"A Central Valley lawmaker plans to introduce a bill
that would overturn new state health regulations that
a Kerman dairy has been fighting for months.
"The proposal by state Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, comes just a week after a Superior Court judge
upheld the new standard, designed to promote cleanliness
at the state's two raw milk dairies.
"The legislation, to be co-authored by Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, would eliminate bacteria limits that treat
raw milk like pasteurized milk. Instead, labs would
test more for disease-causing pathogens such as E. coli.
"The bill is supported by the dairies but is likely
to face resistance from farm regulators who pushed
for the current limit of 10 coliform bacteria per milliliter of raw milk."
George Skelton looks at how the state is wrestling to pay for retirement benefits.
Governor Schwarzenegger "ordered his finance director, Mike Genest,
to find a way to pay down the state's $48-billion unfunded healthcare
obligation over a 30-year period without "raising taxes or dipping into
the state's general fund."
"Lots of luck.
"Genest
estimates it will cost the state an extra $1.1 billion annually to
fully fund retiree healthcare. It's already kicking in $1.6 billion,
plus $4 billion for pensions.
"'I don't think you'll see us
raising taxes, but that's one option,' Genest says. 'We'll have to make
room in the budget -- push something aside. . . . The alternative is to
continue to ignore the problem and build up greater
liability.'
"'We've already told employees what they can count on and
haven't yet, as a state, started to put aside the money.'
"He
adds: 'Salaries and benefits are what they are. If people
don't like
it, elect more Republicans. Whatever. Right now, this
is what we have
to finance.'
Keith "Richman, a physician who's vice
president of a healthcare organization, has given up
trying to replace
traditional pensions with 401(k)s. He's now on a more modest crusade,
to raise the retirement age for government employees.
His goal is a
2010 ballot initiative. That probably won't fly either for lack of
bankrollers.
"It will be a major achievement if government merely
sets aside enough money to honor what it has promised."
Dan Walters looks at how San Francisco has managed retirement benefit
costs.
"San Francisco's pension benefits are markedly less generous than
those
of many other cities, largely because any change must
be ratified by
voters. With that restriction, San Francisco politicians
were unable to
boost benefits sharply when the stock market boomed
in the 1990s, as
the state and many local governments did. As a result,
the city's
pension fund enjoys a healthy surplus.
"Current city employees can obtain fully paid lifetime
health benefits
after only five years on the payroll, but under the
agreement affecting
future workers, it would take 20 years on the job to get full benefits.
And new employees would also have to pay, through payroll
deductions,
two-thirds of the cost of those future benefits.
"'We can't afford not to do it,' Newsom said in February as the deal
reached the Board of Supervisors. 'This is about the financial security
of the city. This is much bigger than the discussions
we tend to have
around here about the budget.'"
Note here that Dan Walters has held up San Francisco
as a model of civic responsibility and financial prudence.
The Chron's Zach Coile says the next chapter in the air wars is being written in
Washington D.C. this week.
"The Senate will decide this
week whether to follow in California's footsteps and pass legislation
requiring cuts in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions to
combat climate
change.
"Lawmakers are to vote today to begin debate on a bill
that could
reshape the U.S. economy by requiring industry to pay
to emit carbon
dioxide and other heat-trapping gases. Opponents call it a new tax on
industry that could raise gas prices and energy bills
for consumers.
Supporters say it's a crucial step to advance cleaner energy and
protect the planet.
"There's a growing consensus in Congress that global warming
poses a
serious threat, but the bill's backers still fear they could end up
short of the 60 votes needed to avoid a filibuster in the Senate.
The
measure's sponsors believe that getting a majority of senators
to back
the bill would be a show of strength, laying the groundwork
for passage
in the next Congress under a new president."
The Merc News's Karen de Sá reports that advocates are pushing for a state takeover of kiddie
prisons.
"It's been 3 1/2 years since an Alameda County judge ordered California
to overhaul the institutions that house the state's most serious juvenile offenders. He set a timeline
for sweeping reforms that would transform the youth
prisons into treatment centers.
"But the dates have come and gone with little significant
change, while the price tag has grown astonishingly.
The annual per-inmate cost for each juvenile offender in state custody
is projected to be $252,312 next year - more than six times the cost of a year at Stanford
University.
"Now, hearings under way in an Oakland courtroom will
determine whether state administrators have squandered
years of reform efforts - and whether a court-appointed receiver should seize control.
The call for a takeover follows numerous missed deadlines
laid out in a 2004 settlement between the state and advocates for prisoners
and the disabled.
"'The Division of Juvenile Justice is not capable of
instituting the reforms that are required in this case,' said Prison Law Office attorney Sara Norman. 'So we're going to court and telling the judge it's time for decisive action, because the state is breaking
its promises to the kids and to the taxpayers.'
"Juvenile justice officials oppose the appointment of
a receiver. A similar takeover of the health care system
for adult prisoners remains bogged down, with legislators
balking at the billions of dollars needed for reform."
And, here's the final weekend's take, reported by ElectionTrack.
No 98/Yes 99: $526,206
Robert Rao For Assembly: $160,000
California Republican Party / Victory 2006: $150,000
Democratic State Central Committee Of California: $119,200
Mark Leno For Senate 2008: $113,975
Dean Florez For Lieutenant Governor: $96,000
Campaign For Teen Safety - A Project Of Planned Parenthood Affiliates Of California: $80,000
Committee For A New Economy: $50,000
Fran Florez For Assembly: $43,999
Hancock For Senate 2008: $38,486
Paul Fong For Assembly: $38,250
John A. Perez For Assembly: $35,100
Coalition For A Safer California: $33,000
Dominic Caserta For Assembly: $30,500
Public School Champions For Christopher Cabaldon, A
Project Of Edvoice, Inc.: $30,000
Dymally For State Senate: $29,800
San Diego County Republican Central Committee-State Account: $29,551
Joe Nation For State Senate: $28,500
Friends of Jeff Denham Against The Recall: $28,150
And on this Election Eve, we've got all sorts of final dispatches from the state's hottest races. The LA Times weighs in on Bogh vs. Benoit , the Bee takes one final shot at Ose. vs. McClintock, there are stories on the mayors races in San Diego and Sacramento, and the battle between Bernard Parks and Mark Ridley-Thomas. All the information you need before you fill out
that election office pool.
Finally, "[t]he state that pioneered the quickie divorce is witnessing a potentially ugly breakup that has the
governor of Nevada fighting to get back into his mansion ," reports Brendan Riley for the AP.
"As might be expected, many Nevadans are fascinated
by the spectacle of Gov. Jim Gibbons seeking a divorce and leaving the governor's mansion in Carson City.
"'This isn't a tourist attraction, but it's certainly an attraction,' said Michael Green, a history professor at the College of Southern Nevada
in Las Vegas.
"The Republican governor filed for divorce May 2 after moving out of the 23-room official residence.
"With his wife, Dawn, ensconced in the governor's mansion, he has gone to court to have her evicted
so that he can move back.
"Fighting back, first lady Gibbons on Wednesday challenged
her husband's bid to keep their divorce trial private, contending
he's involved with another woman and relied on an unconstitutional
law in getting a judge to seal the proceedings.
"Gov. Gibbons has denied having a girlfriend.
"Attorney Cal Dunlap, representing Dawn Gibbons, said in a motion filed
with Washoe County Family Court Judge Frances Doherty
in Reno that the state law cited in sealing the divorce
files violates both the U.S. Constitution and the Nevada
Constitution."
