Accountability for State Legislators

It is the time of year when truth is the first casualty: election time. This year, one example comes in the guise of a “reform” Prop 93, the “change term limits” measure. When groups we should trust—firefighters and public safety personnel—send deceptive mailers talking about “reducing” the time the politicians can serve, it is, indeed, the depths of degradation. I can only conclude that they believe the end justifies any means. This particular end is the perpetuation of selected leaders in office, and increased benefits to those unions who play ball with them. It’s a sad situation and you wonder how any self-respecting person could have so little regard for the truth.

In breaking their word, the Democratic leaders of the California State Legislature refused to tie a term limit measure to a reform of redistricting. The Republican leaders were happy to be pulled along. They promised the voters and the editorial boards and the columnists that if they would reject the governor’s measure two years ago, they would reform themselves; of such transparent and odious liars is the current leadership composed.  Under Prop 93, 34 current lawmakers would be allowed to stay in office much longer. Although the total number of years is reduced from 14 to 12, all could be served in one chamber and the leaders who put it together are grandfathered in, making the sham complete.
     
Millions of dollars from gambling, unions and businesses with items before the legislature are funding the “Yes on 93” campaign. Even the surprising endorsement of the governor—in a move to break loose some needed legislation—does not come as a total surprise; Sacramento is an odd place and the “art of the deal” is often the first and last resort.
     
But what of our local legislators: Beall, Coto, Alquist, Lieber, Simitian, and the rest?  When the ethics of our mayor were called into question in the past, council members were forced to answer tough questions from the press, and even take a stand on “censure” publicly. How different this situation is. Either through cowardice or expediency, those legislators refuse to take a stand. Although they surely support it, and donate money directly or indirectly to the “yes” campaign, the silence is complete. They should at least be forced to declare their positions.

Most of these individuals are from local government and used to the glare of attention and scrutiny. They should have more self-respect than to remain silent during this shameful exercise. The citizens deserve no less, but are getting considerably less each time one of these individuals refuses to speak. I know that such silence it is not usual. In the face of such self-serving hypocrisy, we might at least expect the common decency of a straight answer: “we want it because we want to stay in office longer.” It would be far more honest, but it will never happen. So much for the “new” silent majority.

53 Comments

  1. TOM,  GOOD PIECE.
    Lying, cheating and taking money for favors (otherwise known as bribes).  If this were done in the private sectors, they would be fired or put in jail.  And speaking of which I wonder where these POLS would be working if there were no entity such as politics?

  2. It is too bad the Mercury News is too lazy to cover this issue in depth, especially the positions of our local legislators.  Maybe the few reporters left are too busy “rethinking”.

  3. “Electile Dysfunction: the inability to become aroused over any of the choices for president put forth by either party in the 2008 election year.”

    This also holds true for any of the items on our local ballot.

    Excessive staff,  free autos, pensions and health take away from the maintainance of the plant so they have to call for bonds!

  4. Good post.  I already voted No on 93…and NO on the Indian Casinos.  (Speaking of which…instead of giving the Indian Tribes gaming rights-I presume as some sort of payback for taking their lands and killing them-why doesn’t the government instead give free college tuition to Native Americans who achieve a minimum high school GPA)? 
    -I’m serious!—

    Pete Campbell

  5. I agree that this is a good piece from Tom.

    The only thing I trust in any election is the ballot text sent to me from the county and state election office.  Yet, I find that too many people base their vote on who has the best ad and not on the issue or candidate in question.

    Here are some rules I practice for these big elections:

    * Mailers on any election issue – regardless of cause – automatically get shredded.
    * Make sure you are on the national “Do Not Call” telemarketing list.  If not,  screen out ALL phone calls via caller ID.  If a phone number you don’t know calls, don’t answer it.  For voice mail and answering machines, if it sounds like a political ad, delete it immediately.
    * For ballot measures dealing with sales taxes or bonds, read the ENTIRE ballot text.  Where does the money go?  Does the measure have a committee that will monitor all funding collected, and whether or not that committee has veto power over the agency responsible for the measure?  If the answer to either question is NO or is not given in the ballot text, that sales tax or bond measure merits an automatic NO.
    * Silence or “I’ll get back to you on that” from a current or potential elected official indicates the suspicions of the questioner are true.  Example: ask current County Supervisor Liz Kniss (who’s the current VTA Board Chair) what happened to over $200 million in missing retiree benefits from VTA.  If you get anything but a straight answer, it says the money went somewhere else with(out) her knowledge.

    In the end, trust only what you get from the office of your Registrar of Voters.  Ask tough questions of all candidates on all issues.  Given current local media coverage so far, don’t expect the press to ask everything.  If needed, make a trip to the library or thru the Internet and learn about these sales taxes, bond measures, and other issues for yourself. 

    Take responsibility for who you elect and what you elect for.  Otherwise, you will continue to get the failing leadership and government you deserve.

  6. Very well said Tom. Great column on a vital issue. I personally am disgusted with the things I’m seeing each time we are asked to vote. I am seeing more and more why people have just quit voting. I say it is time for some accountability, and some serious discussions on how to stop this bait and switch being perpetrated on the public.
    I spend hours reading my voters books trying to figure out just what the hell I’m being asked to vote on. I usually end up calling the Registrar of Voters, and/ or the League of Women’s Voters because I can’t understand some of the propositions. They are written in such a way that I just don’t feel comfortable voting on them without help in understanding them.
    I am also fed up with the media. Every Presidential election, they don’t give every candidate running the opportunity to be heard. They seem to direct all questions to the top, one or two big money candidates, and ignore the rest of them. That really makes me angry. So, I always, and I mean always have to vote between the lesser of two evils.
    The media also seems to pick questions they want answered and screw the rest of us. I want to know where Social Security is headed, how we can help small businesses stay a float, how are we going to ensure families have health care, jobs, food on the table, who is going to get on the credit card companies for robbing people, and a hundred other vital issues to we common folks.
    I don’t know how the rest of you feel but I’ve had it with these deceitful politicians who put Propositions like 93 on the ballot, lie, and get a way with it. We voted on term limits, passed it because we want new blood in our Assembly, Senate, Congress, and on our Council, and Board of Supervisors. I’m tired of watching these politicians go from one job to the other, just to stay employed and well insured. They need to get a dam job like the rest of us. People, STOP voting for these losers! Teach them a lesson and fight back by NOT putting them back in office!

  7. #10 Kathleen

    You express well the thoughts and feeling of many of us.  PR firms and lawyers have a booming industry packaging information and choices that are grossly misleading and impossible to fully understand.  Your concerns about issues that need to be address are right on spot.  Thanks.
    As you probably noticed, I got a bit wound up about what it might cost the County and City to bring BART down here.  I always thought it was a given and I would dearly love to see it happen…  that is until I started to understand what it would cost and how that might impact an already underwater SJ, SCC, VTA, State and such. 
    It seems to me that if VTA and the voters were to commit to this, it could bankrupt SJ, SCC and VTA; or at the very least make it near impossible to ever overcome our structural deficit.  All the issues you mention that need help and solid financial support could die on the vine if we don’t turn things around.  And that’s just one issue that has not received a lot of press or honest talk of late. 
    I’m not going to generalize about all folks in public office.  Heaven knows those who truly are trying to do the right thing for all the people and not just the money that put them in office deserve all the support we can muster.

  8. David D.- You have some very good points. It seems very wrong to me that big corporations, PR firms, special interest groups, and the media are influencing our votes by out right lying to us on the issues. It is difficult enough for we English speaking voters, and life long citizens of the US to figure these propositions out, imagine if English was your second language!
    I am rather shocked at how little I know about VTA. I hear so many different things about it I don’t know which way is up any more! YIKES! Hopefully, you SJI folks will be able to properly educate me on this issue before we either vote on it, or have to pay for it.
    I was just reading the Merc, and there is an article about John Edwards. I was honestly shocked to see them touting that he is harming the Democratic Party by continuing to run for President. Who the hell are they to tell any one to quit a race that is important to them? It is unbelievable to me. Just like the Clintons, I don’t think people are voting for Hillary, so much as they are voting for her husband!
    It deeply saddens me that our society has come to this. When did corporate America, politicians, and the media get to a point where they think they can lie and deceive us out of our right to vote in an informed an educated manner? God it just makes me sick.

  9. Firefighters and fire captains are taking positions on everything these days, from term (expanded)limits to the Indian Casinos.

    What is being promised/given to these folks for their shameless support?  Jeez, if firefighters are so easily bought & sold, what hope have we?

  10. 14 Kathleen

    Follow the money.  It explains a lot. 
    Not always bad.  Not always self serving.
    But it sure explains a lot.
    Who pays; who foots the bill?
    Who gains; who stands to benefit?
    Follow the money.  It explains a lot.

  11. Very well explained should be on ballot so people could understand what they are voting for in this another rip off year.  Arnold has sold out completely now I’m very disappointed.

  12. Kathleen #14 asks:“When did corporate America, politicians, and the media get to a point where they think they can lie and deceive us out of our right to vote in an informed an educated manner? “

    Answer: some years before President Eisenhower warned the American people about the power of the military-industrial complex.

  13. Why do we think that our little righteous objection to gambling is going to make a dent in it’s expansion?  If not here in our state, then it will be elsewhere.  I’m waiting to see what happens to San Jose when the city no longer has it’s annual $5M city tax from Garden & Bay 101.  I’m hardly a gambler, bingo is my speed, but in today’s world, it seems that gambling is here to stay.

  14. #14 Kathleen:

    Your concerns about how little you know about VTA are very common.  Many people I’ve talked to do not know that VTA also builds and designs the county’s roads and freeway interchanges, in addition to the buses and light rail:

    http://www.vta.org/inside/about/index.html

    Other good ways to educate yourself about VTA that you won’t (likely) hear from the press:

    http://www.vtaridersunion.org/
    http://vtawatch.blogspot.com/

    County Supe Liz Kniss is the current VTA Board Chair, with Dolly Sandoval of Cupertino as the vice chair.

    VTA has its Board meetings every first Thursday of the month at 5:30pm at the County Supes’ Chambers, 70 W. Hedding Street in San Jose.  Any member of the public can attend and speak out on the issues the Board addresses.

    My group’s mailing list is fairly active and also serves to educate people like you about what VTA doesn’t tell you, and what YOU can do about it:

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vtaridersunion/

    There’s currently over 160 people on board, educating each other (and themselves) about VTA.  You’re more than invited to join.

  15. #17 johnmichael,

        BINGO…great answer ! Ike warned us, now look what happened, we`re in IRAQ.

      Answering your question on #50 on Tom`s previous subject.
      Yes, I listened to KLIV @ 7pm. The lady that got my attention on that show, she should be quoted on John`s blog Friday. Did I hear her say something like BART to San Jose if built is going to make a lot of money for San Jose with all the $ it will collect from its riders…did you hear something like that ? Tell Mayor Reed the great news,he`s looking for new revenue streams. sounds like a windfall for San Jose.

  16. Kathleen #18—So was I.

    The media have had an agenda since Day One.  Honest reporting died with Edward R. Murrow.  One must read foreign papers to get a view of how America operates.

    Eugene #20—has the decision already been made before people speak out at VTA meetings, just like it is already made at SJ City Council meetings, and has been since at least the McEnery years?  Public comment sessions have been a sham since at least the ‘80s, when I began attending council meetings.

  17. #23   “American Value System”

      Near the end of his far to short life, M.L. King said, “he began rethinking many of the ideas about America`s values that he had previously accepted”. He was slowley coming to the conclusion that American values were deeply flawed,…He called for a “revolution of values”.

      We can use one of his famous questions here in San Jose…Where do we go from here:Chaos or community ? Realizing where he was going with this, in a differant sence, this quote can be used in San Jose…“public comment sessions have become a sham since at least the 80`s…

      San Jose needs to take a look at the road our leaders have chosen to travel. Maybe it`s time to change to a better road to make San Jose a better community, city…

  18. #23

    Honest reporting died with Edward R. Murrow.

    I just watched “Good Night and Good Luck” the other night, and it is a good movie.  It should be required viewing for Jr High students.  But then the conservatives will start crying about liberal agendas in the schools.

  19. #24 John:

    If it’s true that decisions at the City level are really discussed and made at Committee meetings held midday and not at night, then it can be argued that VTA shares the same DNA.  Remember: nearly half the City Council (including Mayor Reed) also sits on the VTA board.

  20. #26

    PC running NT 4.0.  Nothing but the best.  smile

    To post in bold you need to put the text between HTML bold tags.  The tags indicate the starting point and the ending point for the bold to be applied.

    An HTML tag is enclosed between an left angle bracket, <, and a right angle bracket, >.  The closing tag is the same as the opening tag except that a ‘/’ is also inside the tag.

    The bold tags are <b> and </b>

    If this does not correctly display visit
    http://www.htmlgoodies.com/primers/html/article.php/3478151

  21. I just heard Mayor Reed interviewed this morning on KGO radio. I thought it is very interesting that he spoke out very much in favor of Prop 93 passing.

  22. #29- Steve,
    I heard that on the news last night! Pretty shocking. I voted no on it, and so has everyone I know. I voted for terms limits years ago, and I’m not going to change my mind. I agree with Tom, I think we’re being duped into thinking 93 is a good thing, but it isn’t.

  23. I’m not too surprised that Reed spoke in favor of 93.  Everyone who needs a favor has endorsed.  If you don’t endorse, you risk payback from Perata and Nunez. 

    Failure to endorse could mean less money for San Jose, so he didn’t really have a choice.  There is no way to know what he really thinks.

  24. #28

      “Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos Or Community”?

        Power and Procrastination once again are in play, just in a different way. Our local politicans are constantly running for cover here in San Jose. They suffer from “Power can Destroy, Fear. They remind me of the “Cowardly Lion in the Oz”.

  25. I hope I’m not too late on this to open a couple cans of worms.

    I’m against term limits overall for a variety of different reasons.  I truly believe it limits (in our case) a city’s ability to make quantum leaps forward, especially where a massive undertaking like Downtown redevelopment is concerned.  Our Downtown situation at its inception was much more dire than 8 years of redevelopment could fix.  Full marks to Tom McEnery for beginning the project and the progress he made.  But being term-limited out forced a new mayor with a new agenda.  Hammer served her 8 years and took Downtown in the direction she saw fit.  Then Mayor Gonzo served his 8 years with a far different agenda.  Now Mayor Do-Right is in the dome and no one really knows his agenda.  And where is Downtown redevelopment?  No closer to “done” than we were 16 years ago.  Would we have been better off if McEnery were allowed to continue as mayor?  We’ll never know.  Would McEnery even have wanted to take on that challenge?  Tom?

    But larger than that, I believe that term limits are tantamount to throwing the baby out with the bathwater.  Public service is a noble calling.  However, we’ve allowed our public servants to be labeled “politicians” (say that with your nose upturned)—we’ve turned the word into a dirty word (listen to the No on 93 ads on TV and you’ll hear the tone).  Oh, and “career politicians”…heavens, no, we can’t allow that.

    Term limits came to be because of “the other guy”.  The constant cry was “my guy’s honest, but the other guy’s a crook, get him out.” 

    Here’s my real point.  EVERY ONE OF US HAS ALREADY BEEN GRANTED THE POWER OF TERM LIMITS…IT’S CALLED A VOTE.  A vote, used wisely, properly, and thoughtfully has the power to remove ineffective leaders from office.  However, in the media generation, the last 50 years, the “informed vote” has become a lost art.  People vote not based on what they know or have learned about a candidate, they vote based on the name they recognize.  That’s what’s created the perpetual politician.  That’s why Minnesota elected Jesse Ventura.  That’s why California elected Ahn-old.

    We need voters to use their votes wisely.  We also need courageous candidates to step up and challenge those office-holders who are not doing their jobs to our satisfaction.

    It’s not the media’s fault.  It’s not the lobbyists’ fault.  It’s not the “politicians’” fault.  IT’S OUR FAULT.

    End of rant.

  26. #35 RIP, my sentiments exactly.  Of course, we’ll never convince the majority that term limits are bad, so we need small fixes.  Prop 93 is a small fix that solves the problem you mentioned.  To get anything of significance accomplished in the Assembly takes more than 6 years.  By the time folks get the hang of it and build momentum for their policy priorities, they are booted out the door by an arbitrary term limit.  At least Prop 93 gives them 12 years.  Result: better policy and governance.

  27. #35- I respectfully disagree with you. Term limits came about because politicians fed off the trough for way too long doing nothing other than collecting big pay checks and perks off the hard work of the taxpayers. Terms limits ensure us that these elected keep their campaign promises, and have something to show us when they run for a higher or different office.  I say enough is enough.
    Politicians need to be held accountable and voting is and never has helped “out” a politician who is already in that office. People live by the “Better to vote for the Devil you know, rather than the Devil you don’t.”  The proof is in the pudding, hence our pinhead of a President Bush, former Mayor Gonzales on, and on. People keep voting in the same useless people over and over again.
    As to Mayor Reed’s plan, he’s made his intentions clear from the start. He is striving to get the budget under control, cut unnecessary spending and costs, get streets, pools, and other necessities taken care of, as well as making San Jose a much greener city. I say Yes to Mayor Reed’s agenda. It’s these issues that needed solving a long time ago!

  28. I agree that term limits are bad and only got approved because the electorate is too lazy to get better informed. But, I voted against 93 because it is a deceptive bit of policy. If it were a clean proposition and only adjusted the term limits I would have voted for it, but it allows 30 – 40 existing legislators to end-run the current law. If it passes, these end-runners will be allowed to serve way beyond the current term limits.
    As I said, I don’t like term limits but it’s the law and this group is trying to get around the law. As usual, that odor you smell is coming from Sacto.*

  29. #39- “But, I voted against 93 because it is a deceptive bit of policy. If it were a clean proposition and only adjusted the term limits I would have voted for it, but it allows 30 – 40 existing legislators to end-run the current law. If it passes, these end-runners will be allowed to serve way beyond the current term limits.”
    Exactly, and that is being supported by the “old guard,” you know the ones people against term limits keep re-electing into office.
    I just want someone to explain this theory of needing more time to get things done in public office. If private corporations can jump through all the hurtles of government, raise money for a project, and get it completed in a timely manner, then what excuse do these crusty old politicians have for wanting extended time in office? This isn’t rocket science. They raise millions to run a campaign, but they can’t seem to raise money for health care, to keep small businesses a float, but they can raise millions for deceptive ads like 93!
    Also, how could anyone vote for 93 when you know it was purposely designed to trick us into thinking we are getting one thing, and not another? Who would support anyone running for office that perpetrated that kind of bait and switch on the American people?

  30. #40

    I just want someone to explain this theory of needing more time to get things done in public office.

    Unfortunately, not everyone knows everything like you do.  You have a solution for everything, and have no problem lecturing people on it.

    You should run for office since you are so smart, and a mediator.

  31. Nice Poli-Sci theory #34, but the reality is that everyone rages against Congress, for instance; but they continually re-elect their Congressperson.  The single greatest component in an election at any level is incumbency.  We DON’T vote out the idiots…because they give us pork, uh, earmarks, and remind us of it daily.

    Major donors get access.  The rest of us suck wind.

  32. #40 – Kathleen –

    This proposition is being supported by the organizations that will benefit from it – every organization from lobbyist groups, corporations, to State Employee Union groups.  Anyone who needs experienced legislators to help them get things done in Sacramento will support this.

  33. Kathleen #38 opined:“Term limits came about because politicians fed off the trough for way too long doing nothing other than collecting big pay checks and perks off the hard work of the taxpayers.”  I agree.

    She went on to say:“Terms limits ensure us that these elected keep their campaign promises, and have something to show us when they run for a higher or different office. ”  I disagree.  Cite me a case or two of how term limits ENSURED that a politician kept a campaign promise to anyone other than a major donor, or that we had something to show for their time in office DUE TO term limits.  Yeah, yeah, I know you’ll be able to do it; but term limits for the most part do not ensure either of those goals.  Now they just jump from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.  What we need is real term limits—“X” # of years in all offices at every level COMBINED.  Twelve years, let’s say, and your barred from feeding from the public trough forever…or maybe fifteen years.  Go out and get a REAL job.

    Career politicians are like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton—never EARNED a paycheck, just sucking off someone else (taxpayers, donors, whatever) for their relatively high standards of living, and butting in where they are neither needed nor wanted.  Too many laws, almost no funding and even less enforcement.

  34. #44- Okay JMO, you got me on a technicality. Ensure is too strong a word. I guess my naivety was showing. I agree with you that “—“X” # of years in all offices at every level COMBINED.  Twelve years, let’s say, and you’re barred from feeding from the public trough forever…or maybe fifteen years.  Go out and get a REAL job.”
    I also agree that, ” Career politicians are like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton—never EARNED a paycheck, just sucking off someone else (taxpayers, donors, whatever) for their relatively high standards of living, and butting in where they are neither needed nor wanted. ” You could add Sally Liber into that group for me. Spanked your kids lately? Geech.
    #41- Your sexist attitude, and low self esteem are showing. You remind me of fellow students I attended high school with. You either don’t know the subject, and/or when someone else does, or if you know the subject, but someone tops your argument with a better one, you have to resort to name calling and personal attacks. Grow up will you. I admittedly, don’t know everything and am open to learning, that is when someone actually has something credible, and intelligent to say that is. Or is the real issue here that you just like to attack women because you think we should be brainless, have no opinion on important issues and leave that to your big strong men, or stay home and clean the house? I really don’t think, nor have I seen you call the men on here know it alls, or personally attack them, when they express their opinion on something. Think about it.

  35. #48 – wow, how did you get that 41 is sexist?  or even a man?  I see no indication.  I tend to agree with him/her, and I’m a woman.

  36. #49- “I tend to agree with him/her, and I’m a woman.”
    How do we know that with a name like Whoa? If you and blah, blah, blah, had any real integrity you’d post your real name rather than hiding behind fake names so know one can hold you accountable for your immature remarks, and personal attacks.
    Now do you want to remain on topic and have a civil conversation, or act like you’re in elementary school? Dog pile! Move on or contribute to the conversation.

  37. #‘s 41 and 49 –

    Can we move on from the personal attacks, and disecting the words in each post, and focus on the issues being discussed?  If you don’t like what is being posted on here, just skip it.  These tactics are incredibly reminicent of those that are used in High School, and add nothing to the conversation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *