Boy can these guys dance, and it’s always two-step time in our state legislature when it comes to reform. Whenever they sense that there is a legitimate attempt to enact reform, as in fair redistricting or term limits, there is a headlong, panicked, and bipartisan rush to work together. They blunt the reform and maintain the status quo and vow that “they” will reform themselves.
Ah, Sacramento politics. You gotta love it if you are an incumbent.
It happened in 1990 when I was state chairman of the Clean Government Initiative and again in the 2005 attempt by Gov. Schwarzenegger to take redistricting away from the inside fixers. The lineups are always the same: on one side, usually, are the League of Women Voters, Common Cause and most of the editorial pages in the state, oh, and most of the people too; on the other, the Democratic and Republican Party apparatuses, all incumbent legislators, and a mountain of special interest money. The results are predictable.
Now is finally the time to hold our own legislators accountable. Jim Beall, Joe Cota and Sally Lieber must take a stand on restricting—without equivocation and promises this time. And, while they are at it, why not take a stand on ethics in general. If a local official was guilty of egregious and improper actions, like the assembly speaker now is accused of, council members would be called on by citizens and editorial writers to speak out. Why are our representatives silent? Are they more in hock to their leadership than to their voters?
Recently in San Jose, the amazing and correct action occurred when a unanimous vote of Democrats and Republicans censured our last mayor for outrageous, unethical behavior. Should we expect less from these members of the state legislature, many of who began in local government? Have they forgotten so much? These incumbents, with as much chance of a political defeat as a Saudi prince, have in the past counted on apathy and distance to insulate them from scrutiny. Is it any wonder that they and Congress are held in such low repute? But if they have lost self-respect, we should remind them of one simple fact: they still work for the people, not the bosses or the special interests.
It is time to make a change and take a stand. And, it is high time to break the cycle of special interest money and gerrymandered districts that often elect the most pandering and extreme of both parties. The old two-step in Sacramento is a familiar movement, but it is not a substitute for good government.
I believe the previous mayor was “censured” not “censored.” Leave the censoring to our moral compasses Pete Constant and Larry Pegram.
Hello,
Whats even more disturbing than this is after a 5.4 moderate earthquake I was not able to make a phone call for over an hour. What if this was a major emergency. A lot of people could die while trying to make a phone call.
Is there anything government can do to force telcos and cell phone companies to increase call capacity for emergencies?
Dear Mr.Shark Attack – oh, I like that name. Just rent the hall, and I’ll be there. “I am not now or have I ever been a
secret lobbyist” – have you no shame, Senator McCarthy.! I lived as mayor under term limits and campaign regs and ethcial refoms ( I proposed them) and still support them. I joined the Shark Bd. 4 yrs. after I left office -how’s that for a revolving door. You can even debate me w. a bag on your head or like a Mafia informer w. voice altered. You know the special interests who feel so threathened would buy a few more lobbyists and pay a few more ‘success fees’ – they
might even hire you, Shark man. TMcE
#3: From the “First Aid and Survival Guide” found in your telephone book:
“…It is important that you limit phone calls to emergencies only. Do not call 911 or the police for the comfirmation of an earthquake.”
Telco equipment is not engineered to handle huge local call volumes. There are only so many paths available. All of those “Hey, did you feel that?” use up capacity. So, the reason you couldn’t call was because everyone else was making those same, non emergency calls, too.
East Side,
My post-quake experience was that my DSL stayed up and running but dial tone on my land line was delayed for about 10 to 15 seconds. The dial tone issue is a common one as everyone picks up the phone at the same time.
Wireless calls are another story. Since there was no damage to speak of, this was not a case of cell towers being down. It was I’m sure a case of too many people trying to make cell calls at the same time. People need to keep this in mind for the next incident. I doubt the wireless telcos would be willing to beef up their towers’ capacity for a situation that only happens once in a great while.
Bottom line for people addicted to their cell phones is that they had better keep their land lines connected. Almost invariably, land line phones still keep working even when the power has been knocked out, providing you aren’t using a cordless phone.
Tom,
I mean this with the utmost respect, our elected officials do not care what the public thinks, unless it is right before an election. Secondly, I agree that back room deals and lobbing are still going on, and always will, so what chance does the public have of effecting any real change, other than in the voting booth?
Many times I have voted for a candidate that promised one thing, got in office, and did the complete opposite. It is a complete crapshoot, when supporting a certain politician. It seems they start out clean, get into office and then turn to dirt.
-dc-
Of course I was making a non emergency call to check on disabled and elderly relatives who live alone to assure they were not injured during the earthquake. I was assuring there was no emergency. I am aware that phone systems do have limitations. But, what can be done to expand those limitations so that we can assure a dial tone when there are real emergencies and injured and dying people have a lifeline? How much would that cost government and how much of these companies profits can be sacrificed to assure that in an emergency we have a reliable communications service?
#2 Teacher
You are so right. I have corrected the mistake. The earthquake interrupted my final edit last night and my hands finally stopped shaking this morning!
#2 Teacher, don’t get me started on Constant and his faith-based and hateful (the two terms go hand in hand) puppeteer Mr. Pegram. WHEN are the people in this town going to realize that you DON’T elect ex-cops to the Council?????
#8- You bring up an excellent point. I too called several elderly, and disabled friends, and family. I did get a line out on my cell, after a few minutes of trying. I had an easier time from my landline. I know Jack was thinking of doing a column on the issue of disaster preparedness. I hope he does!
Kathleen #11
As promised, my column tomorrow is about San Jose’s Emergency Operations Plan. With the SoCal fires and earthquake fresh in our minds, it seems a good time to discuss it.
#12- Thank you so Jack. I think it is going to be a great topic for a column!
Tom—Nasty anonymous “Shark Attack” nee Sneak Attack: really carefully thought out scurrilousness. Probably the webmaster for that other SJ Blog the Murky interviewed on Sunday. But good answer.
Anyway, your excellent point about Republicrats seguing into their two step to keep their selfish interests intact can’t be argued against, either by the 5 thoughtful voters in the state, or the millions of gullibles, allmost all well intentioned but clueless. UNLESS—the dysfunctional “two” (ha!)party system, stinky with partisanship, collapses, as with Gray, Gray, Gray Davis bankrupting the state because the personal needs and activities of Republicrats overwhelmed the available taxes. Then, in a rare flash of insight,
the lumpenelectorate correctly discerned the Governator amidst the confusion. Arnie, un- aware that clear thinking was only temporary, proposed ending gerrymandering, ending the nurses assault on health care costs, the CTA’s grip on tax money, etc., but machine politics spent millions convincing the moron voters that the worse was the better cause. Chastened, Arnie became aware that pandering to stupidity is necessary to get any reforms passed, and voila! he’s baaaack!! And just in time. How refreshing that the Repubs hate him and so do the demos. Perfect. He’s in about the same place you are in San Jose—unaligned, outspoken, and hopeful we can yet make democracy work for the people.
Still, San Jose has to prove that prying the sticky fingers of the unions and other special interests off the public purse, and getting accountability into government where it is now NOT, is a trend, not fluke. Chuck’s win, his non-partisan victory, is so encouraging, but Zoe’s democrats are still enraged that the invincible machine broke down just once, and now Cindy is about to test its viability. Her run for Zoe’s old Soups seat is the first check. Shirakawa was talked to by Zoe’s bud, Mike Honda; his run for the Soup seat looks to be off so the machine can get behind Cindy. And the union majority on the City Council is still getting in the way of reform, and may get reelected. Until Joe and Mabel Voter can’t water their lawn because government is completely broken, I think our democracy is still just incipient. Was George Washington ever right way back THEN about the evils of the party system. He may be an American hero, but he hasn’t been an American mentor. George Green
#1 – Your bitter comments belong on San Jose Revealed.
Kathleen #7: I still use Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, published in 1986. Definition 2b of “politician” says it best:“a person primarily interested in political offices from selfish or other narrow usu. short-run interests.” That really says it all, doesn’t it?
Dre# 8 asked:“But, what can be done to expand those limitations so that we can assure a dial tone when there are real emergencies and injured and dying people have a lifeline? How much would that cost government and how much of these companies profits can be sacrificed to assure that in an emergency we have a reliable communications service? “
Dre reveals a mindset when he asks how much it would cost GOVERNMENT to give everyone failsafe phone reliability no matter what. Sory, DRE, but GOVERNMENT does not provide us phone service.
And as for the private companies providing failsafe bandwidth no matter what, just who do you think will pay for all that?
To provide an analogy—NASCAR cars are built to withstand huge impacts at incredibly high speeds, fires, etc. They cost half a million bucks. Can we provide a safe car like that for everyone, DRE? Sure, but who would pay for it? Same thing with milspec, reliable under the worst conditions phone service. Are you willing to pay $500.00/month for that?
Checking up on loved ones during an emergency is great. This piddly quake hardly qualified as an emergency, though. But think about it, while you are using bandwidth to do your checking, you may have prevented an injured person from calling for help ‘cuz you got that last bit of available bandwidth.
Hey Shark Attack: You may not agree with all of the former mayor’s positions and policies, but i think he’s always been out in the open about everything. (full disclosure: I am not a season ticket holder!)
On redistricting, of course we should have it…and of course we won’t. (My solution would be to present the problem to a couple of out of state colleges. Have them devise an equation based on geography and population, and ask for a formula to draw the boundaries. The end result would be a resonable model that was constructed with no bias).
Pete Campbell
The personal attacks here shouldn’t distract from the fact that districting is a disgrace. Just looking at the map is enough to make one sick. It serves no one except the incumbents.
Let us all call on our state representatives to take the right stand. And please, SJ Inside, keep this issue alive and remind us of how they vote!
JohnB
Maybe our state legislators can learn from you and help a pro sports team come to San Jose so when they leave office they can then go to work for that sports team—or—maybe they should take a page from your playbook and become unregistered lobbyists and ply their trade on the city council and mayor to do their bidding by closing other outlets for alcohol in downtown so that the ones that you rent to in San Pedro Square, who pay a portion of their profits to you on a sliding scale, can get more customers and hence make more money which puts more money into your pocket. When you opine on ethics it’s as if you have amnesia of the ethical lapses and violations that occur daily in the Life of McEnery, oh what a wonderful world it must be to point fingers at others knowing full well that the current lobbyist laws passed in San Jose were intended to stop the back room deals that you continue to cut day in and day out. Hey maybe you can also write a blog on how to pick up a lunch or dinner tab since you don’t do that very often either.
Let’s move on. On this particular topic at this particular time, Tom is right.
The State Senate and Assembly district maps can not be defended.
I’ve asked several state senators and assembly members to do so and they frankly refuse. More than one said basically, its about power. Those who have it, do not want to give it up.
Many, even in the Democratic Party, believe this course is very unwise and a backlash could happen with an poorly written initiative that will win just because people are simply pissed off.
The Governor had the best plan and it might still happen. Combine redistricting with a minor change in term limits. The members of the legislature get a little extra time, but the people get decent districts that actually represent real communities.
Unfortunately, at this particular moment the odds are not good on this happening.
This might be one of those times that the initiative process lives up to the billing. Sometimes, the people do have to step in. We just need to hope that the writers really do their homework and aren’t just playing party politics.
The basic issue is that elected officials should not be able to choose their voters. The voters should choose their elected officials. Districts should try to represent intact communities that share common issues. Not a snake thin weed that follows a path created to support the specific person or party in power. That is exactly what we have now.
Term limits was a wonderful idea to break the bottleneck of power brokers. However, it went a bit too far. The Assembly limits may indeed be a bit extreme. Extending Assembly to one more term probably would benefit the system. I’m not convinced about extending the term limits for the Senate, whose members should and do primarily come from the Assembly.
There should be a way to write a common sense initiative, something less complex than calculus, that allows an independent commission to redraw districts while also extending term limits for the Assembly.
Anyone have $2 million to get something like that on the ballot?
Sally Lieber is unlikely to support real reform. She sponsored prop 60, which killed the open primary. Why? To make sure that the extremes of each party keep control.
That said, I’d love to be proven wrong.
In reference to redistricting our state by Republicrats, isn’t it the job of every politician to get elected and stay elected?
Tom, you ran for congress against Zoe Lofgren and lost. Had you won that election, and looking at Zoe’s record since taking office, what would you have done different to improve on Zoe’s work? If you had won the election against Zoe, would you do something in the interests of ethics that would run you out of office before your term limit expired?
Wow, Tom !
Well old friend, I love your points, well said,“sacramento politics…and vow “they” will reform themselves…take a stand on ethics in general”,…“It is time to make a change and take a stand…and it`s high time to break the cycle of special interest money”.
This is all fine, but how do you expect them to pay their bills?
An example that comes to mind Tom is “BAREC” part of the state of California`s University property. What happened with this project… it certianly went side way as everyone turned their heads the opposite way. Now they have an opportunity to do the right thing and correct the wrong, it`s time like Spike Lee said, “time to wake up”.
Why didn`t this land go to San Jose State University and the local citizens and put this land to good use for the residents, “not special interests”!
We need to solve the problems at the I-280/ I-880 interchange, and the serious traffic problems on I-280 before we build more condos on BAREC that will just add more misery to our lives. Consider all the high density residential being built in Downtown S J and in Willow Glen and the “impact they will have on I-280 ??? Is this good planing ???
#23
Another axiom, “The people with the gold make the rules”.
The problem with BAREC going residential is it will make all of us living in the south bay suffer. If the Santa Clara City Council does not do the right thing, then we all will pay the price, not just Santa Clara residents !!!
It`s time for all of us to “WAKE UP”.
Vindication
McEnery registered as a lobbyist with the City of San Jose just as I had said he should the other day.
Can you all say, hypocrite? I doubt this will get posted but it is being also sent to the Mercury News to demonstrate that this site blocks posts from those who have a fact based different take on politics in San Jose.
Excuse me, but every time I boot up someone is whining that SJ has too many homes and that Santa Clara and other cities aren’t doing their part to build more bedrooms. Now these same folks are whining that Santa Clara wants to build a bunch of homes in BAREC.
Can’t have it both ways, folks.
25 – So much for your conspiracy theory. Apology accepted.
26 – Doesn’t mean that every open space is appropriate for housing. Clearly the BAREC site is not the right spot for the kind of housing density that is proposed.
Oh #25, Mr. Shark imposter, or “bag man” – since I suggest you debate me and can wear a bag on your head – did you get tired of talking to yourself and howling in the mirror on your blog site? Oh well, here is your great scoop: I am a member of the ownership group at the Sharks and all owners/employees should disclose contacts w/ the city. This results from the secrecy of the past few yrs. Hence my listing. I will look forward to your next 4 mystery posts – glad you like ‘sanjoseinside’ so much. Give my best to your pals. Until our “ethics” debate, best regards, TMcE
It is an axiom of politics, if not life in general, that the greatest resistance to change comes from those with the most to lose.
When Proposition 77 lost in 2005, it got 71% support from GOP voters, 44% from independent voters, and only 10% from Dem voters (according to a study conducted by Caltech.
The math is left to the student.
I can attest that my union (which has not endorsed a GOP candidate for ANY office ANYWHERE in the last six years) was almost psychotically opposed to the measure, as it was to the remaining other measures in that year’s so-called “reform” packages.
There is no way that any kind of redistricting reform is going to come out of the legislature, not while Perata and Nunez are in control, or while the unions are pulling their strings. As far as they are concerned, the district layouts are just ducky. And oh by the way, Perata and Nunez are angling for a couple more terms in office for themselves via their execrable “term limits reform” measure.
The only way redistricting is going to occur is to jam it down the legislature’s throat via initiative – even if only to have the legislature (or the unions) make every attempt to void the initiative in the courts.
And no, the GOP is not blameless in this matter either. They went along with the current “you get yours, we get ours” gerrymander back in 2001 as a means to guarantee their incumbents a means by which they could swap around safe seats with very little effort or time. Their cowardice to stand up for what is right back in 2001 is paying bitter dividends today, as no one in their right mind would believe anything a GOP incumbent may say about the need for redistricting reform.
It sucks all the way around. No one in this state lives in any kind of legislative district that has any chance of changing party hands, so there’s no need for them to be anything short of a straight party-line ideologue. I don’t even think the old Huey Long “dead girl or a live boy” maxim would apply to incumbent legislators in California any more, whether they be GOP or Dem.
Tom,
Mayor Watch, San Jose Revealed, and the great white Shark are one in the same. The only reason he/she has swum over to your blog is because the abuse people received when they differed from Shark and his cronies’ point of view drove them all away. These folks like to bring misinformation, and personal attacks to an all-new level. You should not be surprised, but rather flattered, that his comments of jealousy and anger are appearing here, since the Merc’s article. They have to do something to have a forum for their opinion; no one reads their blog!
As to Shark’s efforts to enlighten us of your ownership/ involvement with the Shark’s, he’s pretty naive if he thinks none of us knew that, or even cared. Oh yeah, I won’t need to forward this on to the Mercury News, I understand they read this blog regularly, so I’ll just save them and myself the time of writing it, and them reading it twice.
Have a great weekend Tom, I’m going spear fishing…..
#26 Dear John,
I`m not opposed to the building of more homes. I`m opposed to building any more homes along the I-280 corridor. I have explained my reasons. Go pick another area, maybe another freeway or…maybe build the infrastructure to handle all these new residents along the interstate. Build a rapid transit system in our city that can handle all the new residents. My god in San Francisco and NYC you don`t need a car to get around. These two cities have many different types of transportation to choose from. We have built a city dependent on car traffic and now we have the worst roads for cars in the USA.
I saw something very strange yesterday in S J, “a” taxi cab. We have a incomplete light rail system that has no supporting systems.
Why don`t we connect the Light Rail and BART before we go spending $9billion building BART to downton SJ, we need this too, but we need a better system around the city first.
Light Rail ends at the end of Milpitas, Bart ends in Fremont, there is a very small distance involved in connecting the two. Maybe add some Express Light Rail trains to connect to BART in Fremont.
If you live in the Santa Teresa area and take the Light Rail to a job in the S J Golden Triangle and get off on North First Street, you have to walk many long blocks to work on streets without sidewalks. Try that on a day it rains. We need to build a citywide rapid transit system.
#30
Richard – One already exists, and it’s called “VTA.”
Of course, VTA isn’t very rapid, and the “mass” aspect depends on those to whom you ask the question. However, it can be said that any aspirations to “rapid” transit that VTA may have had went out the window the moment the decision was made to route the VTA light rail through the “Transit Mall” instead of up the center of the Guadalupe Parkway.
The Santa Clara Valley just is not set up, nor is it amenable to, MUNI- and BART-style mass transit capability.
Those Bay Area residents who feel the need for life in that type of mass-transit-oriented community do have the ability to choose to do so, and by and large live in and around San Francisco and Central Oakland.
Conversely, those Bay Area residents who feel the need for the detached home with more than ten feet between walls (or even a 1/4 acre lot or more) also have the ability to do so, and by and large will live in San Jose and the Santa Clara Valley, along with the Tri-Valley and Central Contra Costa.
Mr. Zappelli # 30 wrote:“My god in San Francisco and NYC you don`t need a car to get around. ” True enough. Indeed in NYC you can’t get around very quickly by car.
But in the rest of the Bay Area you can’t get around easily without a car. We are too “horizontal” for effective mass transit. Neither light rail nor BART are RAPID transit systems; and VTA has been abysmal in its management.
#32
OK , I agree, meanwhile high density construction continues on both sides of the I-280 corridor. Now we toss in BAREC. What is the solution, build more? What are our leaders thinking of ????
We have City planners, what`s there solution, build more, close our eye`s, build build, build?
#33—But who would ride this transit system? We have always had ridership WAY lower then the rosey predictions of the consultants and proponents; and we have the lowest % of revenue from the fare box of any system in North America.
Only transit evangelists and people with no real options ride it.
#27 opined:“26 – Doesn’t mean that every open space is appropriate for housing. Clearly the BAREC site is not the right spot for the kind of housing density that is proposed.”
Just bolsters my argument that no-one wants a downtown, either. Downtowns are about density. Density is about traffic. People here all hate traffic, yet none, well few, won’t give up their cars. So, density breeds traffic, which everyone hates.
#30 opines:“I`m not opposed to the building of more homes. I`m opposed to building any more homes along the I-280 corridor.” So do we have a new acronym—NIMTC (not in my transit corridor)?