CA-32: Two Weeks Out

The League of Women Voters sponsored a forum in Baldwin Park last night for candidates in the May 19 special election to replace Hilda Solis in the Congress. The two front-runners in the race, Gil Cedillo and Judy Chu, emphasized their strengths.

Cedillo said he has had about 80 of his bills signed into law and said he has worked with the governor to save 25,000 jobs. Chu told the audience that she was proud to have the endorsement "of everybody in the family" of Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, who held the congressional seat until her cabinet appointment this year.

At the forum at Baldwin Park's Julia McNeill Senior Center, many of the candidates agreed on some issues, including the need for immigration reform that provides a path to citizenship, eliminating tax loopholes for corporations using offshore accounts to shelter income and the need to reform education, especially regarding the federal No Child Left Behind law.

Calitician and Judy Chu netroots advisor Todd Beeton has more at his Twitter feed.

With two weeks to go, the signals I'm getting suggest that Gil Cedillo is nervous. The massive unforced error of those negative Emanuel Pleitez mailers makes me believe that Cedillo fears Pleitez is capturing a good bit of the Hispanic vote. The earlier negative mailers on Judy Chu showed a similar lack of substance (attacking someone for returning tax refunds OWED?). Negative mailers don't inspire turnout, they suppress it. And the May 19 election will already feature low turnout. Which magnifies the importance of GOTV, and with the Democratic Party and key labor groups having endorsed Chu, I would probably be throwing the kitchen sink at everybody in the race myself if I were Cedillo.

What I'd prefer to hear about, instead of who endorsed whom and such and such negative attack, are concerns of the local area. El Monte is crashing. The city made 60% of its tax revenue off of the auto dealerships that lined the city, and with the demise of the auto industry throwing auto sales off the cliff, revenue has shrunk. Many cities with clusters of dealerships will soon face the same problem. What can be done at the federal level to diversify the local economy, and shouldn't the efforts to revive the economy in auto manufacturing states like Michigan extend to cities with a proliferation of car lots like El Monte? If anyone from the campaigns is reading, maybe we can get an answer to that.

CA-32: Field (Mostly) Cleared For Cedillo-Chu Matchup

I have to admit that this is kind of unexpected. Not only did State Sen. Gil Cedillo announce his intention to run for Congress in the seat soon to be vacated by incoming Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, but Gloria Romero, who was widely expected to run for the seat, abruptly decided to bow out, endorsing Cedillo and announcing her intention to run for State Superintendent of Public Instruction instead.

Here's a bit from Romero's statement:

I have evaluated the wonderful opportunities before me and have chosen to listen to my heart.

My passion is education. I understand that education is the civil rights issue of our time -- the great equalizer in America . My commitment -- particularly now as the Chair of both the powerful Senate Education Committee and Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee on Education -- is to lead the Senate's effort to transform and hold accountable our state's public education system.

It is for this reason that I have chosen to decline to run for Congress and to pursue my dream of becoming California 's next Superintendent of Public Instruction [...]

I endorse Senator Cedillo and look forward to working with him to continue the "change we can believe in" both in California and Washington in these troubling times.

And here's a bit from Cedillo's:

State senator Gilbert Cedillo (D-Los Angeles) today confirmed his intention to run for the 32nd congressional seat being vacated by Rep. Hilda Solis, the Obama administration choice for Secretary of Labor.

“This is a tremendous opportunity for Latinos and the working people of East Los Angeles and San Gabriel Valley. Hilda Solis has been a strong leader on labor and economic issues for the 32nd District. As a candidate I seek to continue that focus, creating a competitive workforce, securing access to affordable healthcare and investment into public safety and transportation,” shared Cedillo.

This changes the calculus of this race a bit. Gloria Romero represented most of this district in the State Senate. Gil Cedillo actually does not. In fact, Judy Chu has represented maybe more of this area than Cedillo has. Chu has already grabbed the endorsements of local Assemblymen Kevin DeLeon and Ed Hernandez. And if more Hispanics join the field, that could certainly chip away at Cedillo's support among low-information voters. One of the Calderon brothers may still jump in. And Dante noted last week that Emanuel Pleitez may run.

This kind of makes this astroturf piece by Paul Hefner, playing down expectations that Chu could win in a divided race and playing up Romero's chances while disclosing midway through that he WORKS for Romero, kind of ridiculous in retrospect. (What's even funnier is the dueling astroturf comment in that piece from Judy Chu's former chief of staff.)

I would be careful with assuming that ethnic support is monolithic. The last special election we saw with an ethnic divide, in CA-37, was decided more because of strong labor support for Laura Richardson than identity politics, though it never stopped Richardson from trying to frame the entire race that way. Chu absolutely can garner support in Latino areas, as much as Cedillo can in Monterey Park. Labor's endorsement is going to mean a lot.

On the merits, I would say that Cedillo would certainly be a strong progressive with a particular interest in immigration policy, and Chu has a good background through the Board of Equalization on taxes and economics. Hopefully we'll have both of them on Calitics in the near future to discuss their candidacies.

(P.S. This HuffPo article about the new Progressive Change Campaign Committee suggests that they might play in CA-32. That ship has pretty much sailed, though if they got on board with Sen. Cedillo it may make some sense.

CA-32: Judy Chu Enters The Race

Last night at a holiday party for the West Los Angeles Democratic Club, state Board of Equalization Chair Dr. Judy Chu announced her intention to run for the Congressional seat vacated by Hilda Solis, who will become the Secretary of Labor in the Obama Administration. Before getting on the Board of Equalization, Chu served the 49th Assembly district, which is inside Solis' Congressional district and includes the heavily Asian Monterey Park, as well as El Monte and Rosemead. Her husband, Mike Eng, currently holds that seat (I guess that means Eng isn't running). Before that, Chu served on the Monterey Park City Council.

Chu and likely candidate Gloria Romero have faced each other before, in a primary for state Assembly in 1998. Romero won, but when she moved up to the State Senate in 2001 (replacing Solis) Chu took over the Assembly seat. I think the race may depend on who else is in the field. If Gil Cedillo or one of the Calderon brothers decide to run, Chu may have an advantage as the only Asian candidate among a field of Latinos. Also, a lot may depend on whether or not Solis endorses. Union support will also be critical.

Chu was an professor for 13 years, and in the Assembly she sat on the Transportation Committee and the Health Committee. Her ratings in the Assembly from the major interest groups were all top-rate. It should be a spirited race, and I hope to hear Chu's stands on key national issues.

CA-32: Who Will Replace Solis?

Let's have a brief respite from the coming California apocalypse to try and figure out which politician will beat a fast retreat out of Sacramento and into DC to replace Hilda Solis in the Congress. There are actually some good progressive possibilities here, which one would hope considering that Solis was such a progressive leader. The CapAlert early line matched with my expectations.

Democratic state Sens. Gil Cedillo and Gloria Romero say they're exploring running for the East Los Angeles County congressional seat that's expected to be vacated by Rep. Hilda Solis, reportedly President-elect Barack Obama's pick for labor secretary.

While Cedillo was expressing his interest Thursday to reporters on the floor of the Senate, Romero wandered by and said she was "definitely" looking at jumping into the race.

Told that in addition to Cedillo, the Calderon brothers -- Assemblyman Charles and state Sen. Ron -- could be contenders, Romero declared, "I can beat them all" -- and walked off.

I like the confidence.

Both Cedillo or Romero would be great additions to the House. I would give Romero the edge because it's actually her district - Cedillo serves a contiguous district. Romero would be a rare voice for prison reform in Washington, and while her advocacy proved fruitless in Sacramento, ultimately she will be proven right if we see mass releases in the next few months, and having her on the national stage would be very helpful to the prison reform movement. For Cedillo it's the same, only on immigration reform. I would imagine that both of them would join the House Progressive Caucus.

As long as the Calderons stay out of this seat, I'd be happy.

Other contenders are the sitting Assemblymembers in the district, Ed Hernandez and Mike Eng, as well as state Board of Equalization chair Judy Chu, who in a twist is married to Mike Eng, which would make for an interesting primary. I think Chu is good in her position but I can't say I know much about her on other issues.

The last special Congressional election gave us Laura Richardson. Hopefully we'll do much better with this one.

Prisoners Out Of Sight, Prisoners Out Of Mind

On Sunday, the LA Times reported the results of an investigation which revealed that the Department of Corrections has routinely miscalculated prison sentences, costing state taxpayers as much as $44 million dollars and clogging the worst prisons in the country, which has a cumulative effect.

Records obtained by The Times show that in August, the state sampled some inmate cases and discovered that in more than half -- 354 of 679 -- the offenders were set to remain in prison a combined 104 years too long. Fifty-nine of those prisoners, including (Nicholas) Shearin, had already overstayed and were subsequently released after serving a total of 20 years too many, an average of four months each [...]

The errors could cost the state $44 million through the end of this fiscal year if not corrected and more than $80 million through mid-2010. But California's overburdened prison agency waited more than two years to change its method of awarding credit for good behavior after three court rulings, one as early as May 2005, found it to be illegal.

Officials were giving some inmates 15% good behavior time instead of the 50% to which they were entitled. The state fixed release dates for only those inmates who requested it, according to a spokesman for the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, who said there was no evidence in Shearin's file that he complained.

In addition to having a flawed corrections system, it's just flat-out incompetent as well.

I believe that a fish rots from the head down, and this kind of inattention at the Department of Corrections can reasonably be seen as a direct result of a political leadership in Sacramento that is obsessed with being Tough On Crime (tm) and really doesn't want to see prisoners leave state jails. Aside from the fiscal issues, this is essentially taking away the fundamental rights of citizens of the state. As State Senator Gloria Romero notes:

State Sen. Gloria Romero (D-Los Angeles), who chairs the Senate's public safety committee, said inmates have a fundamental right to a timely release. She criticized the prison agency's "arrogance in the face of the law to simply say that these people's lives don't matter, but they can just lock them away and essentially throw away the key."

The more errors like this, the more inmates locked up for more periods of time. This causes overcrowding, which strains treatment and rehabilitation services and creates an environment where the inmates are in more control than the corrections officials. Suddenly nonviolent offenders are in a school for how to commit violent offenses rather than a means to turn around their life. And the recidivism rate soars, as those who actually get to leave prison are not equipped to do anything to go back.

This all feeds on itself. If we want to get serious about prisons, we'll do the work to reverse it.

Failure on Sentencing Reform a Model for Failure of Legislative Leadership

There will be no sentencing and parole reform coming out of Sacramento this year. Do you know what that means? It means that this man will be in our state's corrections system for the next 12-20 years because military doctors addicted him to opiates.

Sargent Binkley is a high school classmate of ours and West Point graduate who is currently facing twenty-odd years in prison for robbing a Walgreens under California's minimum sentencing laws. He used a gun (unloaded) and robbed the drugstores of only Percocet - no money, harming nobody.

Here's the kicker -- he was addicted to the opiates after smashing his hip while serving abroad in the Army -- the military medical system kept misdiagnosing him, and feeding him more of the painkillers. Add in some serious PTSD (he guarded mass graves in Bosnia from desecration at one point) and he spiraled down.

Sargent turned himself in, has been in a rehab program in county jail for over a year and a half while he awaits sentencing, and by all accounts is doing well. The Santa Clara DA wants to chuck the book at him, and he'll be gone.

Because the leadership in Sacramento - Republicans and Democrats - have no sense of how to legitimately deal with the crisis in our jails, and would rather look like tough guys and gals while putting sick people in prison. Sargent Binkley is a sick man. He needs treatment and aid from a nation which has abandoned him. Because of our mandatory minimum sentencing law, an angry DA is going to make him spend the next 20 years in a crowded cell.

Sargent was sent to Bosnia after his graduation, where he served as a peacekeeper by guarding the mass graves of genocide victims. From there he was sent to Central America, where he participated in drug interdiction operations. At one point he was ordered to open fire on a truck that contained a civilian teenage boy, an act that haunts him to this day. While on duty in Honduras, he fractured his pelvis and dislocated a hip. This injury was consistently misdiagnosed by Army physicians over the next several years, resulting in chronic pain and an addiction to prescription painkillers.

This is a textbook example of where we are today in Sacramento. There's a complete failure of seeing beyond narrow political gamesmanship rather than stepping up to solve problems. Sentencing commissions have worked all over the country. They have succeeded in returning corrections systems to its mission, of rehabilitation and treatment. The current system threatens public safety and needlessly puts sick people behind bars. If you want to know why nothing gets done in Sacramento, look no further.

It's beyond obvious that we're going to have a federal takeover of our prison system. Schwarzenegger tried to prevent any cap on the population but that was blocked on Tuesday. The three-judge panel is going to have to take it away from these mewling children who can't look past their next election to actually do their jobs.

P.S. THE PHARMACIST SARGENT BINKLEY ROBBED is on the record supporting him. You can support him too. And one way is to demand that the politicians we elect actually move the state forward instead of this ugly slow motion. If not, we'll get new politicians.

Today Is The Day For CA Leadership To Shine Through On Prison Reform

Sentencing reform is one of the many bills on the docket today, which looks to be the last day for the California Legislature, though that's subject to change. In my view this is the signature issue the legislature faces: will they step up and respond to an crisis, or will they cower in the face of having to be "tough on crime" and reject anything but building our way out of the prison problem. Frank Russo defines the terms here. Basically there are two bills, each of which has passed their respective chamber. SB 110 (by Sen. Gloria Romero) calls for an independent sentencing commission without restrictions on what sentences they can look at; AB 160 appears to restrict anything passed through the initiative process, which shields three strikes. Apparently there's a third bill in the mix:

• Both SB 110 (Romero), which failed on the Assembly floor 34 to 38 and which can be brought up under reconsideration, and AB 160 (Lieber), which had been holed up in the Senate Rules Committee and has been sprung to the Senate floor, can be voted on. If Romero’s bill advances, there is a play with AB 1708 (Swanson) on the Senate floor that could amend SB 110, clean it up, and perhaps make it more acceptable to the Assembly. Both houses of the legislature have passed fairly similar sentencing commission bills, although with heated debates and opposition from Republicans.

Whether it's intra-legislative jealousy between the chambers or a desire to look tough to voters, if nothing moves on sentencing today, our representatives will have a lot to answer for. This is worth a phone call to your Assemblymember and Senator today.

A Complete Failure Of Leadership

The State Assembly rejected the only sensible reform that would do anything to deal with the root causes of a prison crisis that has been built by 30 years of progressively draconian sentencing laws. SB110 (Romero) would have created an independent sentencing commission with the ability to rewrite sentencing laws outside of a political culture obsessed with "tough on crime" poses. Everybody with even a modicum of understanding of the prison crisis knows that the overcrowding (at a time when crime is down) is a direct result of mandatory minimums and three strikes and the multitudes of nonviolent offenders serving long sentences in our jails, some as a result of the War on (some kinds of) Drugs.

Now, there is a bill, AB160 by Sally Lieber, voted out of the Assembly earlier this year, that is similar to the bill Sen. Romero authored. But, there are some substantive differences, otherwise how do you understand these quotes:

Romero likened the defeat of her bill to the Legislature's throwing up its hands and telling federal judges to take control of the troubled prison system.

Don Specter, an attorney with the inmate advocate group Prison Law Office, said the vote "certainly emphasizes the one-dimensional approach California has to crime, which is to build more prisons."

You can read the Romero bill and the Lieber bill, still pending in the State Senate (It passed the appropriate committee by a 9-7 vote). The Lieber bill can't touch sentences established through the initiative process (so this is probably about saving three strikes from scrutiny). The Romero bill would have made recommendations to amend those types of sentences. Overall the Romero bill is more comprehensive. This could be some kind of petty jealousy between the chambers.

Hopefully the Senate shows some leadership and passes the Lieber bill, which would at least move things in the right direction. Until then, I'm going to list those Democrats who would rather hang on to their little fiefdoms of "tough on crime" sentencing than enact the only proper reform to deal with a crisis that now will almost certainly be handled by the courts.

Voting No:

Arambula, AD-31 (Fresno)
Fuentes, AD-39 (Sylmar) (WHAT???)
Galgiani, AD-17 (Tracy)
Lieu, AD-53 (Torrance)
Nava, AD-35 (Santa Barbara)
Parra, AD-30 (Hanford)
Salas, AD-79 (Chula Vista)
Torrico, AD-20 (Fremont)

Absent, Abstaining, or Not Voting (occasionally a craven tactic often so they can say that they didn't vote against it):

Charles Calderon, AD-58 (Whittier)
De Leon, AD-45 (Los Angeles)
Karnette, AD-54 (Long Beach)
Levine, AD-40 (Van Nuys) (Maybe he was absent, but EXCUSE ME????)
Wolk, AD-8 (Davis)

These legislators need to answer to their constituents and explain why they want to keep an unsustainable and broken prison system alive. Furthermore, the leadership needs to explain why they failed to whip the proper number of votes to get this reform passed.

Federal Judges Join Department Of The Obvious

Let me build on this post regarding the decision by two separate US District Court judges to convene three-judge panels to consider capping the California prison population. This should have been completely expected to everyone in the state government.

There is a near-term and a long-term crisis in our state prisons. So the Governor predictably offered a medium-term solution. Prisons don't build themselves overnight, so "adding 53,000 beds" which can only phase in over the course of a couple years does absolutely nothing to address the current situation. Furthermore, the continued overcrowding, which impacts rehabilitation and treatment and the high recidivism rate, means that by the time those new beds are constructed, the problem will be bigger, and any additional capacity (which doesn't even cover the CURRENT overcrowding numbers) will be only a temporary solution. So with root causes unaddressed, there was no way any judge with any sort of conscience could sit idly by and watch as the prison system continues to spiral out of control. A state government that has COMPLETELY FAILED TO LEAD forced his hand.

This is the first time since the law was established in 1996 offering for this kind of option for federal judges that it has been invoked. No other system in America is as out of control as the prison system in our state. And so the judges stepped in because we are violating the Constitution:

First of all, this is not just one judge making findings and a ruling. There are two cases, one before Judge Henderson (Plata) on the prison medical system in which orders were stipulated to (agreed upon) by the parties which included the state of California in 2002 and 2004. The judge has found that those orders have not been complied with. He has based his ruling on the evidence presented, including reports of the Receiver he appointed, last year, Robert Sillen, that document in great detail the problems in the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation system.

The other case (Coleman) before Judge Karlton, concerns the medical treatment received by state prisoners with "serious mental disorders," and has been going on since 1995. In that case, a Special Master, John Hagar, has been appointed by the Judge to investigate and report back to him on how the needs of these mentally ill prisoners have been met. After almost 12 years and 77 orders, the Special Master and the Judge have found the prisons to not be in compliance with the United States Constitution.

Gov. Schwarzenegger is talking about appeal, but there is a voluminous public record documenting this total failure in leadership that has brought our prisons to the crisis point. But such an appeal will likely take close to a year. That's another year where root causes will not be addressed as everyone awaits this decision.

But there's another way. The judges have rejected that AB 900, which authorized the construction of the prisons, will be insufficient to deal with the problem. But if Gloria Romero's sentencing reform bill, SB 110, can offer a real sea change in empowering an independent commission to recommend and review changes to sentencing law, perhaps the judges can be persuaded that the state is finally moving in the right direction on understanding what needs to be done. Romero is a lonely voice for sanity on this issue, and with her bill now in the Assembly, she needs to be joined by we the people. The California Democratic Party has come out in support of sentencing and parole reform. Every Democratic member of the Assembly needs to be made aware of that fact, and the fact that SB 110 is the ONLY vehicle to get a handle on this unconscionable state prison crisis. It's worth a call today.

ACTION: Tell Your Legislators To Support Sentencing Reform

Grassroots progressives are picking up on my plea to call representatives to publicize what the party has voted to endorse and ensure that state and federal lawmakers will answer the call of their party and support these initiatives. The first resolution I mentioned was net neutrality; now we should push the resolution on sentencing reform, which I've included in the extended entry.

We know that our criminal justice system nationwide is perverse. For violent and nonviolent offenders alike, it has become a crucible which demands MORE violence as a means to survive.

This is what our system of justice does: It takes the unlawful and makes them more violent. It takes criminals and makes them worse, reducing their future options, encouraging them to become more physically brutal, cultivating their marginalization from society. Such is the irony of the politics of crime in this country. We are so afraid of violent criminals that we force our politicians to continually worsen their punishment, condemning them to prisons that have been shown to make inmates more violent.

This is especially true in California, home to the highest recidivism rate in the nation, because all of the overcrowding has for all practical purposes eliminated any treatment or rehabilitation programs and turned the jails into human waste dumps. This is not something we can build our way out from under; it's too far gone. Only some meaningful reform that silences the "tough on crime" crowd and revisits the role of incarceration as an opportunity for redemption and a return to civil society will fix this crisis. AB 900, which enabled the Governor to add 53,000 beds in exchange for token accountability, is already causing concern that even that accountability will be circumvented. Enough. The Governor's plan is overly cautious and seeks to kick the can down the road. We need real reform.

Schwarzenegger's prison managers have begun to implement a program to assess each inmate and give him or her an individual program to follow while in prison. They have also begun a comprehensive re-evaluation of every rehabilitation program to determine which work and which should be abandoned.

But the biggest reductions in overcrowding would come from changes in sentencing laws and parole policies. On those issues, Schwarzenegger must lead the way.

California has the highest recidivism rate in the country, with 70 percent of inmates returning to prison within three years after release. What the state has been doing for a generation is not working. The current policies are draining the treasury and making the streets less safe. It's time to try a new approach.

This weekend at the CDP E-Board, progressives passed a parole and sentencing reform resolution that mirrors Gloria Romero's legislation to create an independent sentencing commission to address this runaway train we've created with our prisons.

CDP RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT PAROLE & SENTENCING REFORM TO ADDRESS OVERCROWDED PRISONS

PASSED at E-Board meeting of the California Democrats in Sacramento

WHEREAS Governor Schwarzengger and California legislators decided to build 53,000 new prison and jail beds at a 25-year cost of $15-billion dollars in construction and debt service funds;

WHEREAS this legislative decision was made without a single public hearing in a state that, according to the California Legislative Analyst, currently incarcerates 240,000 inmates in prisons and jails, almost 70% of whom are people of color, 29% African American, even though African Americans constitute only 6% of the Adult population;

WHEREAS the current plan to build new prison and jail beds ignores the Governor's Independent Review Panel and the Little Hoover Commission recommendations for parole and sentencing reform that would immediately and drastically reduce California's prison population and address the problem of overcrowding in a state that, according to the California Legislative Analyst, spends $43,000 each year to incarcerate but only $8,000 to educate a student in our public schools;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the California Democratic Party supports implementation of the state's Independent Review Panel and the Little Hoover Commission's parole and sentencing reforms: releasing selected low-risk non-violent offenders without parole; moving parolees off parole automatically after 12 clean months; providing community alternatives, not prison, for technical violations of parole; creating a sentencing commission that would recommend changes to penalties.

THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the California Democratic Party, recognizing a disproportionate percentage of minorities is behind bars, supports implementation of these reforms to address overcrowding in prisons and jails.

Time to call your Democratic legislators in the state and tell them that their party has endorsed this resolution and that you would like them to support it as well. Make sure you get an answer. The Romero bill is in the Assembly right now, so that's where your phone call will do the most good. Please give our prisons a chance at success and make this state safer by calling now.

Gloria Romero Stands Tall Against The Tough On Crime Crowd

State Sen. Gloria Romero, a.k.a. the only one in Sacramento who gets the prison problem, is really sticking her neck out to deny the rapacious fearmongers more sentencing laws, and she deserves our support.

Republicans are outraged that more than two dozen bills in the Legislature that would create new crimes or lengthen sentences will languish until next year in a committee controlled by Democrats.

Sen. Gloria Romero, who chairs the Senate Public Safety Committee, imposed a one-year moratorium earlier this year on all Senate and Assembly bills that would worsen crowding in California's prisons and jails.

That's what you do when there's a CRISIS. And considering that there have been nearly 1,000 laws in the past 30 years raising sentences for criminal offenders, I would guess that every additional law is completely unnecessary. Of course, that's the bread and butter for those so wedded to the "Tough on Crime" label. So Republicans are miffed:

But Sen. Dave Cogdill, vice chairman of the committee, maintains the panel "shouldn't be holding the safety of the people of California hostage to this situation."

The Modesto Republican concedes prison crowding "is very real, but the reality is any bill that we take action on this year wouldn't become law until January 2008."

Right, because new prison facilities can be conjured in a matter of months. Who's the architect, Merlin?

Romero, the chief force behind the bill to create an independent sentencing commission, is dead right on the optics of the whole prison crisis.

Romero noted the prisons' medical system already is being run by a receivership established by the federal courts. And two federal judges have indicated they are leaning toward creating a judicial panel charged with setting a population cap for the entire system.

"We can try to look like we're tough on crime, but how tough are we if at a certain point the receiver takes over the entire system?" she said, noting that 30 of the state's 58 counties already have established population caps for their jails.

That's all some of these legislators care about, looking tough while in actuality squandering our tenuous hold on the prison crisis, increasing recidivism rates, destroying rehabilitation and treatment, and making everyone in this state less safe. It's a simple-minded approach that neglects the very real issue of overcrowding.

Romero is really putting herself out there on this. It may not be a popular position but it's the right one. And she should be applauded, as well as supported in her efforts to create a sentencing commission outside of the political sphere so that this "Tough on Crime" nonsense can be muted.

Is The Term Limit Initiative Destroying This Legislative Session?

I don't think it's any secret that there's been a growing disquiet from progressives with how the California Legislature is doing business. We won't know the final tallies until the end of the session in September, of course, but just in the past couple months, Democratic leaders have given the Governor the ability to build 53,000 new beds for prisons without addressing rehabilitation programs that are the only way to cut costs and reduce recidivism. They approved a shockingly anti-worker set of tribal gaming compacts, with only token protections in the side deals, and then tried to make the dishonest claim that they didn't negotitate the deals in the first place so they can't be blamed for them (um, then don't approve them and force the Governor to start over, you have the power to do that, you know). They combined their healthcare bills to negotiate with the governor without them even including guaranteed issue, meaning that insurance companies can continue to deny coverage to patients for pre-existing conditions (a separate state-run system would be set up to provide for these ill patients, which would make insurers even more loath to spend money on care, given the crutch afforded them by the parallel system for sick people). And they allowed hostile amendments on patient-dumping to pass the Assembly Health Committee. We don't yet have a state budget, as it passed its deadline, and progressives are crossing their fingers that this trend won't continue and some of the worst cuts for the needy preferred by the Governor won't be allowed to remain.

So what is going on here? Why is a Legislature with wide majorities in both houses, sufficient to pass pretty much everything but the budget and tax measures, seemingly caving in on all sides? One article in the SF Chronicle offers a compelling explanation:

Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez's decision this week to end an impasse with Indian gaming tribes and ratify new gambling compacts is designed to help pass a proposed ballot initiative that would allow him and other lawmakers to keep their jobs longer, his critics and political observers said Thursday.

For Núñez, the compacts landed him between the state's two major special interest forces -- wealthy Indian tribes that want to greatly increase the number of slot machines on tribal lands and labor unions that pressed for provisions that would make it easier for workers to organize at casinos.

The standoff between the two groups had placed Núñez in a politically precarious position of having to choose between his political base in labor or mollify tribes that have not been shy about using their deep pockets to buoy or sink political campaigns [...]

"I think what (Núñez) wants to do is to make sure there is no opposition to term limits, not necessarily building support for it," said Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies, a nonprofit research group in Los Angeles. "He may have just removed a major monied interest against the measure."

If this is the motivating interest, then this term limits measure is killing the state, and the ability to make any progress for Californians. And there's even more evidence for this.

Schwarzenegger, however, is not alone in squeezing Núñez, et al. An even more blatant threat came from the Professional Peace Officers Association, an umbrella group for rank-and-file police who bitterly oppose a bill that would allow public access to police disciplinary proceedings.

The measure, Senate Bill 1019 by Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, cleared the Senate but was stalled in the Assembly after John R. Stites, president of the police association, sent messages to legislators that were the bill to be passed, the union would oppose the term limit modification and added ominously, "Ensure that it be understood that this will only be the beginning." Thereafter, the Assembly Public Safety Committee held the bill without a vote -- an action that had to have leadership blessing.

You can read more about how SB 1019 was bottled up in an Assembly Committee.

Obviously, Democratic leaders don't want the Governor against them when the term limits measure comes up for a vote in February, and so the budget and the health-care debate may suffer in the process. But they also appear to be determined to silence any potential interest group that may criticize the measure and fund its opposition. Therefore you see these caves on sunshine for police disciplinary actions and the tribal compacts, and perhaps the homeless dumping bill as well.

This fits with a consistent pattern that is doing nothing but angering Democratic activists. The vast majority of the public isn't paying attention to such matters, due in no small part to the fact that media outlets are abandoning their Sacramento bureaus. But progress in California has completely stalled in this legislative session, perhaps out of a small-minded desire to stay in power for an extra six years. It calls into question why such "leaders" would want to remain in power in the first place. But we can all surmise the answer to that one.

Single Payer, Sentencing Commissions Moving Through The CA Legislature

Thanks to Frank Russo for informing us that Sheila Kuehl's SB 840, the single-payer health care plan which is the the result of years of work and refining, has passed the California State Senate for the second straight year. The mostly party-line vote was 22-14, with only Lou Correa voting with the Republicans against the bill.

Speaker Nunez and President Pro Tem Perata have health care bills up for votes, likely tomorrow, that are expected to pass. Then the other chamber gets a crack at them all, then there will be some process of negotiation and merging of all of these health care-related bills resulting in whatever the Governor and the Legislative leaders decide is an acceptable final product. It's great that, by virtue of continuing to push SB 840 and not backing down, Sen. Kuehl will be in that room for those negotiations. So this is not a fool's errand, it's a vital step to continue to push this state toward universal single payer healthcare and show the nation that it can be done.

In other news that really warms my heart, Sen. Gloria Romero's SB 110, providing for an independent sentencing commission that will have the power to recommend sentencing guidelines, the TRUE way to reform our broken prison system, passed the State Senate. Better yet, a companion bill passed the Assembly, so it looks like this sentencing commission proposal has a very good chance of winding up on the Governor's desk. Lou Correa again was the only Democratic Senator to vote against the bill. I sense a pattern. But it passed, and that's spectacular news. Hopefully the final bill will give the commission some teeth to actually mandate sentencing reform, and take the process out of the hands of "tough on crime" legislators.

And the Senate also voted to put the nonbinding Out of Iraq resolution on the February 2008 ballot. I only really appreciate this in the sense that I'd love to see the Governor have to sign it. Will he protect his party or "let the people decide?" Other than that, I'm apathetic toward it, and I do believe it's a stalking horse to get more Democrats to the polls in February, who may be more disposed to approving the term limits initiative that would allow the Democratic leadership to stay in office.

Sellout on CA Prison Reform

The State Legislature decided to run away from hard choices and add brick and mortar to simply delay our prison crisis without addressing root causes.

Legislative leaders brokered a deal Wednesday to add 53,000 beds to the state's prison and jail systems while increasing rehabilitation opportunities for inmates with added drug treatment, vocational and education programs.

The $7.4 billion agreement to help ease California's severe prison overcrowding contained no provisions for any early releases of inmates.

At the same time, it did not include any changes to the state's parole or sentencing systems. And it drew heavy criticism from the prison system's two largest public employee unions over a provision that would allow the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to transfer 8,000 inmates out of state in a program now on hold in the appellate courts.

The transferring 8,000 inmates part won't get through the courts. And holding firm on sentencing and parole is lunacy, absolute lunacy. It just means that we'll all be back here in 5 years. Meanwhile construction money will be doled out and more nonviolent offenders will be locked up. And the "increasing rehabilitation opportunities"? Lip service.

What does the proposal by Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, Senate leader Don Perata, Assembly GOP leader Mike Villines and Senate GOP leader Dick Ackerman say about rehabilitation?

According to some prison advocates, not much. In addition to $7.4 billion in spending to build new jails and prisons, it would allocate just $50 million in the first year on substance abuse, education and mental health services. The system currently has about 170,000 prisoners, and a recidivism rate close to 70%.

That's a crime. This state government won't even fully fund Prop. 36, passed by voters to move drug offenders into treatment centers and not prisons. We have 94 year-old men in walkers who have been rejected for parole six times. And now there's a prison "solution" that is notable only for its cowardice, its refusal to address sentencing guidelines and its big talk on rehabilitation without action. More beds is not the answer; it's embarrassingly obvious.
A couple good Democrats had some sense, but were not backed up by their leaders:

While Republican lawmakers hailed the agreement, enthusiasm was more muted among Democratic lawmakers, many of whom declined to comment. Two sources familiar with a meeting Wednesday evening among Senate Democrats said that state Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, a leading advocate in the Legislature of prison reform, had criticized the plan at the meeting.

State Sen. Carole Migden, D-San Francisco, noted the deal "will mark more growth for the prison industry."

Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, said policymakers had no choice but to increase the size of the prison system.

"This is a compromise among bad alternatives," Perata said. "Now we vote and light candles. That's a reference to St. Jude, the patron saint of lost causes."

Are you kidding me? Apparently the Democrats aren't in the majority in Sacramento. I don't know if you were aware of that. But that's what Perata is telling me by this statement.

It's scandalous. The political will to actually fix the prison crisis is nonexistent. This capitulation to try to build our way out of it is fated not to work. I'm disgusted by this absolute spinelessness.

Prison Policy No Longer Invisible

This was surprising to me: grassroots action last week protesting the Governor's prison policy.

Busloads of protesters fighting the construction of new penitentiaries swarmed the Capitol on Wednesday, while inside the statehouse, the simmering politics surrounding the prison overcrowding crisis boiled into full view.

The protesters attacked Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's plan to build 78,000 new prison and jail beds, saying that $11 billion worth of "bricks and mortar and debt" are no substitute for true reform.

Instead, the demonstrators — some dressed in orange prison jumpsuits and standing in makeshift cells — said lawmakers could quickly thin the inmate population by releasing geriatric and incapacitated convicts and by sanctioning thousands of parole violators in their communities rather than in state lockups.

I would add revising sentencing guidelines through a newly-created independent commission, but just the presence of these protesters at all suggests that this issue will not be as invisible as it has been in previous years. Which makes sense, as we're two months from a court-imposed deadline to do something about overcrowding.

And good for Gloria Romero for stepping out on something that will win her no friends in the voting public, but is simply the right thing to do.

Meanwhile, political fireworks were flying over a decision by Senate Democrats to place a moratorium on bills that would lengthen criminal sentences and thereby exacerbate prison crowding.

The maneuver infuriated Republicans, but Sen. Gloria Romero (D-Los Angeles), chairwoman of the Senate Public Safety Committee, said it could not be "a business-as-usual year" in Sacramento given the overcrowding emergency.

"The Legislature bears a share of the responsibility for the crisis, and we must accept that," Romero said. "We can't keep having bills fly out of committee like pancakes just because we want to appear tough on crime."

There have been over 1,000 such bills in the last 30 years. They look good on glossy mailers and they can easily be used as a club to damage opponents. But they have a major indirect impact on our quality of life.

And this mass incarceration is a symptom as well, a function of increasing inequality in the Bush years. As the chasm between haves and have-nots grows, desperation leads to increased crime. And then the imprisonment itself keeps the snowball rolling down the hill:

Imprisonment does more than reflect the divides of race and class. It deepens those divides—walling off the disadvantaged, especially unskilled black men, from the promise of American life. While violent criminals belong in jail, more than half of state and federal inmates are in for nonviolent crimes, especially selling drugs. Their long sentences deprive women of potential husbands, children of fathers, and convicts of a later chance at a decent job. Similar arguments have been made before, but Western, a Princeton sociologist, makes a quantitative case. Along the way, his revisionist account of the late 1990s detracts from its reputation as an era of good news for the poor…

The 1990s were said to be a time when rising tides finally did lift all boats. Western warns that part of the reason, statistically speaking, is that many poor men have been thrown overboard—the government omits prisoners when calculating unemployment and poverty rates. Add them in, as Western does, and joblessness swells. For young black men it grows by more than a third. For young black dropouts, the jobless rate leaps from 41 percent to 65 percent. "Only by counting the penal population do we see that fully two out of three young black male dropouts were not working at the height of the 1990s economic expansion," Western warns. Count inmates and you also erase three quarters of the apparent progress in closing the wage gap between blacks and whites.

The increased recidivism rate and the drive to incarcerate more and more for longer and longer walls off opportunity to families on the wrong side of the race and class divide. Prison policy is job policy, poverty policy, family policy, education policy, and so on. It took a massive crisis to get anyone to focus on it, but I hope that in the future, we can understand it in these terms.