Why I Will Vote "YES" on California Proposition 15 in June

The recent Supreme Court decision regarding campaign finance opened my eyes to the inequities of campaign finance with the act of making it anything but equitable. It's been apparent for some time that the voice and contribution of the "average Joe" has been lost in the impact of the big dollar donors. And with this loss, we have seen a stagnation in the legislative process, not only here in California, but in Washington as well.  Why? My thinking is that to a certain extent the large donors cancel each other out.  For every cause, there is an anti-cause, or a group that will be negatively effected by said cause and wants to impede it. For every Big Business, there is a Union, or a Coalition, and vice-versa. With Legislators beholden to these various organizations for campaign donations, they can't really annoy too many groups, or they will have no chance at re-elections. So in order to do what is right by their constituents, they tend to do little or nothing so as to offend the fewest possible donors. Additionally, Legislators spend a considerable amount of their time campaigning or soliciting donors for contributions rather than doing what the voters put them in place to do.

One need only look at the U.S. Senate, or the California legislative process to see the net effect of this.  Yes, one can point to procedural issues, but at the heart of it is campaign dollars.

Something must clearly be done, but what? The Shumer-Van Hollen Bill may be a very good start on the National level if passed as designed, but here in California we have the opportunity take a different approach to the problem. Specifically, the California Fair Elections Act, or Proposition 15.

Proposition 15 is a pilot program that will create an optional public finance option for candidates for the California Secretary of State in 2014 and 2018. It will allow for candidates showing sufficient popular support levels to receive public funds for their campaign and set stringent rules around campaign finance disclosure.

Why is this a good thing?

1. Candidates that receive public funds will no longer have to solicit donations, and will no longer be beholden to large organizations, which will allow them to focus on their jobs, and not their campaign donors.
   
2. Candidates taking donations will have to disclose the amounts and sources very quickly so that the public will see where their interest lie.
3. A pilot effort allows us to see how the system will actually work in practice, and, if needed, adjust it.
4. The California program is modeled on other programs that are working in other states.
   

Why the California Secretary of State?

1. The California Secretary of State is in charge of two really important things: they are the Chief Elections Officer, and they are responsible for electronic filing and publishing of lobbyist information.
2. After number one, does there need to be another reason??

If we really want to bring the legislative process back in line with what the voters who put them into office want; if we really want to break the deadlocks that plague the legislative process; and if we really want to curtail the influence of well financed special interests, than we really have to implement public campaign financing. 

Please join me by volunteering, donating, or just showing your support on Facebook.

Dems and GOP Unite versus SCOTUS

It seems that very few people like the recent Supreme Court decision giving corporations-foreign and domestic the ability to contribute directly to Congressional campaigns. According to this article on Politico.com Republicans are not entirely happy with the decision either, with 56% of them falling into this category.

Therefore it's time to take action.  One alternative is The Fair Elections Now Act. This bill should level the field enormously, and give true "grass roots" candidates a chance against "big money" politics.

There are other alternatives.  One of those being considered is forcing corporations to have a shareholder vote on whether or not funds should be given to a specific campaign or not.  This only makes sense given the SCOTUS' assertion that a corporation is just another form of public assembly.  Let the public assembly vote on how their money is spent.

Another alternative being bandied about but not being taken too seriously at the moment is the concept of a Constitutional Amendment that would "fix" what the SCOTUS has done. I'm pretty leery of this path, as it's almost irrevocable, and it would need to be REALLY well thought out, and, well, Congress isn't doing too many things that are really well thought out these days.

Regardless of which path you think is best, I urge you to write your Congressman/woman and Senators and urge them to get to work to resolve this issue before the campaign season gets into full swing!

Will Studen Loan Reform Start the Complete Corrpution of Congress

Everyone thought that student loan reform was a legislative gimme. Billions of dollars are given to banks to make risk free loans to students.  This program could easily be assumed by the Federal government, and the amount lent would increase and students would get more money, and the world would be a better place.  Obama mentioned it in his State of the Union Address, and it just makes sense.

HOWEVER, the banks are squealing.  They want their free money. And what are they doing? Lobbying.  Hard. While they are going through all of the "traditional" lobbying motions, one thing that the recent Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission  decision and sitting down with our Representatives and Senators and saying, "We want this bill killed, and we are prepared to help your re-election effort significantly if you are willing to play ball with us.  However, we are just as willing to help your opponent if you feel the need to pass this bill.  Think about it." Do they even need to be that explicit??

Is this "Free Speech"? I don't think so.  If you agree, write Congress and/or your Senator and urge them to do something to close this hole that the Supreme Court wrought!

In the meantime I'll keep an eye on this legislation and see how it moves along.