California will lead the way and other states will follow.

[Cleita]

Not only do we have a Democratic Governor back in office in January but all the state offices except one were won by Democrats. Not only did we keep our two Democratic Senators (yeah I know DiFi is a DINO, but she still one of ours), but we also are sending a Democratic majority to the House even if the Republicans are in charge and I believe they should be able to stir the pot on Capitol Hill. Thirty four of our fifty three Congressmen are Democrats. But most exciting is that we have voted in two-thirds majorities in both houses of our Legislature, which means that California will be able to lead the way in progressive legislation with a Democratic Governor, who won't veto everything on his desk that the Legislature passes. This means we could possibly lead the way in bringing real health care reform and green energy and the jobs that would be produced because of it. California could lead the way and other states might follow when they see how well progressive legislation works.

I'm pumped. My despair from last night is turning into hope. :-)

[leftstreet]

1. wOoT! I bet your Dems won't be willing to compromise with DiFi !!

:hide:

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cleita]

3. You are pretty funny.

We do care, however, we can't twist your arms to do the intelligent thing. However, it looks like no matter what shit the Teabaggers are going to try to throw at the American people, now that they are temporarily in power, it isn't going to stick in our state.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. Actually you are wrong

Cali has led for both good and bad... and it is seen as a trend setter state.

Perhaps it has to do with the 8th largest world economy...

You might not care... but others do.

[Cleita]

Remember when we were the fifth largest world

economy before 2000. Maybe we can get back there soon.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. I got the sneaky we just might

[Raksha]

58. I remember when we were fifth largest world economy.

I remember how I used to brag about it. So now we're in eighth place...it's going to be a long, hard uphill climb back to fifth, assuming we ever make it. But maybe we'll at least stop falling as fast with a Democratic state government.

[kestrel91316]

40. That poster is likely a you-know-what.

[BuelahWitch]

33. Fuck that shit!

I'm in Kansas and I'm DAMN GLAD about what happened in California! It's the only hopeful thing out of the whole fucking election!

[subterranean]

4. Does this mean California can pass single payer?

Or did the health care reform law preclude that?

[Cleita]

6. I believe it can and there is a health care bill already

going through the legislature. I hope they hold it up so Arnold can't veto it again before he leaves office.

[roody]

14. Arnold vetoed it.

[Cleita]

16. He's vetoed it twice but it will come back. n/t

[4lbs]

22. Actually, my local PROGRESSIVE Congressman, Bob Filner, talked about that very thing today.

He said that one of the major things the California State Legislature will do in the next year or so is finally get single payer enacted.

:D

[Cleita]

29. That's great and single payer too.

I wonder if the Feds can override it with the other bill. Well maybe they can give us a buy-in to a state plan that would effectively serve as a public option.

[4lbs]

36. Here's the exact bill they are going to pass again, and was passed previously, but vetoed by Ahhnold

From January 2010:

http://www.truth-out.org/california-senate-approves-single-payer-health-care-bill56521

<snip>
Despite a firm veto threat from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, the California Senate on Thursday passed a measure along party lines to create a $200 billion state-run, single-payer health care system. The bill—SB 810—now heads to the state Assembly for consideration.

The legislation calls for the creation of the California Health System, which would be financed by using a combination of state and federal funds that California already earmarks for health care along with a payroll tax, the amount of which would be decided later.

The Medicare-for-all system would be extended to all California residents and individuals would have the opportunity to purchase private insurance to cover specific types of services not included in the government-run plan.

The bill, sponsored by Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), closely mirrors what Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) had envisioned when he introduced an amendment last summer that would have allowed individual states to create a single-payer system.
<snip>

Additional from the article:

<snip>
Leno said California currently wastes 30 percent of every dollar spent on health care to cover administrative costs, which would be eliminated under his plan. He added that the state already spends $200 billion a year on health care and the single-payer system he proposes would simply use the same funds in a different manner.
<snip>

And more:

<snip>
But Leno noted that the plan "creates no new spending, and in fact, studies show that the state would save $8 billion in the first year under this single-payer health care plan."
<snip>



So, SB810 (or a revised version of it) is making it's rounds through the legislature again and should be hitting Governor Jerry Brown's desk next year.

We in California now have the political structure in place to make it work.

- We have a hugely Democratic State Legislature to pass it.

- We have a Democratic Governor (Jerry Brown) to sign it.

- We (should) have a Democratic State Attorney General (Kamala Harris) to enforce it and deal with abuses of it.

- We have a Democratic state insurance comissioner (Dave Jones) to make sure it is functioning properly.

- We have a Democratic state treasurer (Bill Lockyer) to make sure the finances are working properly.

- We have a Democratic state controller (John Chiang) to make sure that payments are regulated.

[subterranean]

43. Thanks. That's very encouraging.

If it passes, I might have to consider moving back to California!

[laughingliberal]

5. K & R nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Just one correction

all dem...

Kamela Harris won too. Her opponent conceded earlier in the day.

[Cleita]

9. That's great news! n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. Walk it back

it has gone back to too close to call

http://www.mercurynews.com/elections/ci_16516834

Who do you take the LA Times or the Mercury News

California Attorney General
100% of precincts counted.
Peter Allen (G)
2.58%
184,841
Steve Cooley (R)
45.67%
3,277,998
Robert Evans (PF)
1.63%
116,690
Timothy Hannan (L)
2.50%
179,594
Kamala Harris (D)
45.88%
3,292,836
Diane Beall Templin (AIP)
1.74%
124,841
California Secretary of State

100% precincts reporting

[Merlot]

11. I've been waiting ALL DAY to hear that!!!!

She is amazing, and am so glad she's in (and that gangester is gone).

And I do agree that California will lead the way. We've done it before and will do it again!

[OnionPatch]

26. That's great!!

:woohoo:

I don't have words to describe the depth of my hatred for Steve Cooley.

[nadinbrzezinski]

28. She walked it back though

posted the story above

She is AHEAD with 100% reporting, but...

California Attorney General
100% of precincts counted.
Peter Allen (G)
2.58%
184,841
Steve Cooley (R)
45.67%
3,277,998
Robert Evans (PF)
1.63%
116,690
Timothy Hannan (L)
2.50%
179,594
Kamala Harris (D)
45.88%
3,292,836
Diane Beall Templin (AIP)
1.74%
124,841
California Secretary of State

[tomm2thumbs]

45. cool news - thanks for dat update!

[lonestarnot]

10. I for sure have to move!

[Cleita]

12. Yep, you should. I predict we will start seeing a real

turn around in our economy and the mess Arnold left us in about six months.

[lonestarnot]

47. Quakes are my hesitation.

[Cleita]

52. I have lived in Texas and was far more afraid of

the tornadoes there than the earthquakes here. We have really good building laws here and I have been through so many quakes in my lifetime, some really scary, but I'm still here. Yet, I knew of people dying in tornadoes. You can survive earthquakes but it seems if a tornado gets you, survival isn't that easy.

[rtassi]

13. I lived in Calif during both Father and Son administrations

you should all consider yourselves fortunate to have him back ...I'm happy for you

[Cleita]

19. I did too and things were so much better.

We had good and mostly free education, good labor laws and many other things that have disappeared under the Republicans who ruined this state. I hope we never get a Republican near important elected offices again.

[Parker CA]

15. Everything is lined up for Brown and the legislature to really be able to make some progress. K&R!

[cascadiance]

18. Brown should bring back free college tuition there...

like he had in place before there before Reagan took that down. Then perhaps American students could be on an even playing field with Indian students and those in other countries who get their bachelor's degree educations subsidized, along with their lower cost of living advantage.

In effect, Brown then would be "taking California back" to what it was when he was governor. I wonder what Republicans will say in response if he were to steal their talking points line then...

[Cleita]

23. He's going to have to work on de-fanging Prop. 13

which ironically passed when he was Governor and he couldn't do anything about it. Maybe this time he can do something.

[4lbs]

38. The money CA saves by enacting single payer in the state should be used for college tuition.

It is estimated that after the first year of a state single-payer system, California will save $8 billion.

Hmmm... I wonder where $8 billion can be used in the state....

:D

[Cleita]

42. I would like to see the CA State College and

University system go back to being tuition free for CA residents, like it was before Prop 13 shot all our social programs to Hell.

[Raine]

62. You must be referring to his father Gov. Pat Brown

because Raygun was Governor BEFORE Jerry Brown was.

[HuckleB]

20. Actually, California is following Oregon.

We've been there, and we're still there.

[Cleita]

24. True. You guys were moving forward while we were

moving backwards. I hope that, one day like in Oregon, I don't have to pump my gas any more.

[HuckleB]

25. It is nice to sit in the car and listen to the radio.

But I do like the novelty of pumping gas when I'm out of state.

:toast:

[Cleita]

27. Do you enjoy the novelty of paying more for the gas

you have to pump yourself than you do in your own state getting it pumped for you? :-) I sure didn't. It really pissed me off whenever I had to cross from Oregon into California and had to face that gas pump and the inflated price. A couple of times I was tempted to ask for wages from the gas company for working for them.

[HuckleB]

32. There's no evidence that we pay any more for gas because of the law.

Our gas has been among the lowest and among the highest prices, with lots of fluctuation in between, over the last 20 years plus.

[Cleita]

34. I didn't say that.

I said that Oregon still had cheaper gas than California and you don't have to pump your own. I got annoyed every time I crossed from Oregon into California and had to pay more for gas I had to pump myself. Sorry, if I wasn't clear.

[HuckleB]

37. Well, you might have been clear, but I've had a bit of port.

It is possible that California has higher gas taxes than Oregon, which might explain the difference. Whether that's good or bad is another debate altogether.

:toast:

[cascadiance]

48. Oregon needs to work on its regulation of methane in gasoline though...

It is behind California there, which might reflect some of the cost difference there. Oregon allows TOO much methane in its gas and the gasoline companies are way too willing to dump as much as they can in Oregon's gasoline. I think Thom Hartmann has complained about it on his show some. This leads to more problems with air pollution that can cause higher incidences of cancer. I live right next to a freeway now, and am a bit concerned about how much more I ingest those fumes. You can actually smell it more I think. When I buy a house around here, if the housing market and the economy ever settle down again, I'll want to live away from the freeways here...

[cascadiance]

49. We stepped backward yesterday with campaign finance reform though...

When Multnomah county here in Portland voted to shut down public campaign financing that was already in place here. That's about the worst result of yesterday's election here.

[HuckleB]

50. Portland, in Multnomah County, did, yes.

[Cleita]

53. That's sad to hear.

I want that here and instant runoff voting. I believe it's the only way we will get back to a real democracy where the true intent of the electorate is reflected in the elections.

[XemaSab]

30. California isn't ready to lead

Yes, the democrats won.

But we won against terrible candidates.

How big of a victory is this?

[Cleita]

31. We have Jerry and he is ready to lead.

Giving him Democratic majorities means he will be able to get things done and he's so familiar with the quagmire that is Sacramento, he can do it.

[XemaSab]

35. I love Jerry, he's great

But the California democratic party doesn't know its ass from a hole in the ground. x(

[suffragette]

39. Please let it be so

Do you think they can pass single payer now and lead the way on that as well?

[Cleita]

41. Reading posts above this, it looks positive.

We can hope, however, we still are stuck with the present government until next year.

[suffragette]

46. Sorry Cleita

I was so excited I posted before reading the rest of the thread.
It looks positive, indeed!

[tomm2thumbs]

44. true, on the healthcare front and clean energy, the size of California dwarfs Washington inaction

thanks for the boost to spirits around here - your vision is most appreciated

[mmonk]

51. You need to get rid of direct referendum government.

That part hasn't worked. If you do pass single payer though, I will move there.

[cascadiance]

67. I think they need to move to a "two vote" referendum process.

The first vote would require that the voter would just be presented with a paragraph max statement that the voter could agree with or disagree with (vote yes or no) which would in effect be voting on a "mandate message" to send to state government on what the voter wants to have as law, but would have NO effect on the law. It would be purely advisory, and perhaps have some requirement that if passed, the state legislature would look at this issue and try to put together a law (or another proposition later if need be).

The second vote would be one that would have the context of the law that should directly support the mandate in the first vote. It would have the teeth of the law in it, and if voted yes, then would become law.

In this way, the voter could vote yes on the mandate and no on the actual law to be able to give his/her opinion on an issue that he feels the legal system needs to address in some way. But he/she could vote no on the second vote if it is too hard to understand (has too many devils in the details) or if he/she feels it is a bad implementation of what the mandate stated and he/she doesn't want it made in to law.

This would allow the state's resident to exercise clearly how they feel about an issue, but not be fooled in to voting for or against a proposition to show strong feelings on said issue that would have the side effect of putting in to law that they might not understand or don't like otherwise. I think many voters feel frustrated that if they vote no on a topic, those politicians in the state misinterpret their reasons for voting no as being against the issue, when they are more against the proposed legal measure than the issue it is trying to address.

Hopefully this will force those authoring propositions to keep the laws they're proposing simpler and less filled with confusing loopholes, since voters would be more inclined to vote no on more complicated proposals filled with pork for special interests.

[StreetKnowledge]

54. Wait, California's legislature has more than 2/3 Democrats?

Really?

Seriously?

How about first off, they head off their economic problems by scrapping Proposition 13, enacting single payer and raising taxes on the wealthiest of people there. And with a more than 2/3 majority, they can do that now without Republican opposition blocking it.

[Cleita]

55. I'm all for what you say, however, Prop. 13 might prove

difficult since single family home owners rely on the 1% property tax. However, I think it can be amended so that property owners from out of state, those who own more than one home and those who own mansions pay a higher rate of property taxes.

[4lbs]

61. I agree with that. Homes valued under $750,000 keep the 1% property tax rate.

Million dollar homes, and those homes owned by people with multiple homes (likely 'flippers' or out-of-staters like you mentioned), should pay property taxes based on the inflation rate.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

70. I think that is a very fair compromise on 13.

13 is truly the only thing keeping many of us working class natives in our homes here in CA. I am up for amending it - including a small raise for single family homes -- to bring in much needed cash for the State. I want cheaper/better education, single payer healthcare, a green grid -- and I am willing to do my part to help get us there.

[Desertrose]

56. Wish AZ would....we're going the wrong way!!!!!

I am SO disappointed in this state.

:(


:hi: Cleita

[krabigirl]

59. :( I feel for you. Where I live (OC, CA), so many people want to move to AZ!

Because of the recent elections, they love Jan Brewer, etc.

[4lbs]

60. You should tell them: "Here, I'll help you pack!" so that the O.C. can turn blue.

:D

[Cleita]

66. I'll buy one of them a one way bus ticket.

Good riddance.

[Cleita]

65. Hi DR. You guys need to look at what was done to us

in the last decade by outsiders and don't let it happen to you. I believe all your crazies are being funded from outside your state and led by Karl Rove and the Swiftboaters just like they did it to us. Finally, maybe we might be able to get them into jail or at least kick them out.

[bluedigger]

57. When Cali gets there, have 'em say "Hey" to Vermont for me, 'k? n/t

[Tiggeroshii]

63. Kamala Harris won

(if that's the one Dem you are referring to losing)

...so far by 9,000 votes. Fingers crossed!

[4lbs]

64. Yay!

:kick: :bounce: :headbang:

[AsahinaKimi]

68. Someone once said

That the State of California could sufficiently become its OWN country, since we have many of our own resources. I doubt that will ever happen. But it makes me wonder... During the great depression, many people abandoned their homes and dust bowl farms, and headed out to California to make a new living.


To live in California today, its very expensive yet I wonder how many people will decide to come out here in a new wave.

I wonder how many will just MOVE WEST, to get out from under an crumbling economy that has meant jobs lost, companies that have moved over seas for cheaper labor, and other reasons. Will the west become a magnet again for places like Washington State, Oregon and Nevada? Will California have many new residents soon?

[Cleita]

69. Unfortunately, too many.

But as progressives we should welcome them because they do contribute to the economy. Hopefully other states will follow California's lead so that an immigration from other states is lessened. We had that problem when we had better welfare benefits than other states. Every one came so they had to impose a six month residency caveat before benefits could be received. Also, it's impossible to secede without dire consequences. Remember it didn't work so well 160 years ago.