Berkeley Political Review Summer 2012

INSIDE: +$00(5,1* 287 7+( &$/,)251,$ %8'*(7

What can

Brown

do for you?

CALIFORNIA REELING Can  the  Golden  State  piece  itself  back  together?

Editor’s Note

T

here is no stranger feeling than trying to make sense of three of the most important years of your life in a few short paragraphs. Like many graduating seniors, I can hardly believe how quickly my time at Cal has come and gone. As I look back, I realize I have a tremendous amount to be thankful for.

This magazine has meant the world to me. I have made some of my closest friendships during late night, bleary-­eyed editing sessions in the Bancroft Library basement. I have also had the distinct pleasure of watching BPR rise from the doldrums to re-­ establish itself as the premier nonpartisan political journal at UC Berkeley.

And yet, these fond memories are somewhat bittersweet. From the moment I became involved with the publication, BPR helped open my eyes to a state in crisis. Through its pages, I began to connect the pain of a 32 percent fee increase in the fall of my freshman year to California’s never-­ending gridlock and budgetary woes. As a writer, and later California Editor, I learned just how intimately the plight of higher education is connected to that of other public services.

Students must look to Sacramento to see how funds are raised and spent in order to combat chronic disinvestment in public education. Cuts to higher education have only deepened since I SLFNHG XS P\ ÀUVW FRS\ RI WKH PDJD]LQH , DP WKHUHIRUH SURXG WKDW my parting gift as Editor-­in-­Chief is one that equips current and future generations of leaders with a student perspective on how the state can move forward, both in the short and long-­term.

Nearly half of this issue is dedicated to a special report on the California budget (p. 8 – 16). Piece by piece, we take apart the major components of the Governor’s proposed spending plan to analyze its potential impacts and suggest necessary reforms. In the face of a $9.2 billion shortfall, this year’s budget is hardly one that will help the state build for the future by reinvesting in critical public services. Rather, through a calculated mix of new revenue (from an ambitious November tax measure) and an ad-­ ditional round of cuts, including about $1 billion to welfare, $500 million to child care subsidies, and $1 billion to health care, the Governor’s plan seeks to prevent the state from falling to pieces in the months and years ahead.

Whether this balance is the right one – or whether more needs to be done to pare down government spending or increase avail-­ able revenue (or both) – is up to you to decide. May the following pages serve as a useful guide.

Yours,

Jeremy Pilaar

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Jeremy Pilaar DEPUTY EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Andrew Postal MANAGING EDITOR Mihir Deo DEPUTY MANAGING EDITOR Daniel Tuchler CALIFORNIA EDITOR Elena Kempf NATIONAL EDITOR Luis Flores INTERNATIONAL EDITOR Hinh Tran OPINION EDITOR Alex Kravitz ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT EDITOR Melanie Boysaw BLOG EDITOR Christopher Haugh LAYOUT EDITORS Niku Jafarnia Feilisha Kutilike COPY EDITOR Justin Lin COVER ART 2H[OSLLU :OLɈLY STAFF Jacqueline Alas, Christina Avalos, Kyle Bowen, Norman Cahn, Christopher Chan, Josh Cohen, Zac Commins, Tom Hughes, Mandy Honeychurch, Alexandra Heyn, Nicholas Kitchel, Anna Bella Korbatov, Tanay Kothari, Julia Kuchman, Alex Lee, Michael 4HUZL[ (THUKH 4J*HɈYL` Katie McCray, Samuel Meyers, Wil Mumby, Nicole Nabulsi, Tina Parija, Doug Perez, Brendan Pinder, Brynna Quillin, Kathleen :OLɈLY (YQHU :PKO\ /HYRHYHU Singh, Charles Smith, Rupa Subramaniam, Matthew Symonds WEB EDITOR Kristin Hunziker ADVISERS Susan Rasky Ethan Rarick

The content of this publication does QRW UHĂ HFW WKH YLHZV RI WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI &DOLIRUQLD %HUNHOH\ RU WKH $68& $GYHUWLVHPHQWV DSSHDULQJ LQ WKH %HUNHOH\ 3ROLWLFDO 5HYLHZ UHĂ HFW WKH YLHZV RI WKH DGYHUWLVHUV RQO\ 7KH\ DUH not an expression of editorial opinion or YLHZV RI WKH VWDII

volume XI, no. 4

6 7

([HFXWLYH 'HFLVLRQV 7KH HYROYLQJ FRQFHSWLRQ RI GXH SURFHVV

7KH 6LOHQFH RQ 3RYHUW\ 6SHDNV 9ROXPHV 3ROLWLFLDQV IRFXV RQ MREV \HW LJQRUH SRYHUW\

the cover 7KLV LVVXH·V FRYHU UHÁHFWV ERWK WKH VFRSH RI -HUU\ %URZQ·V SURSRVHG EXGJHW IRU WKH XSFRPLQJ \HDU DQG WKH GLIÀFXOW\ KH ZLOO KDYH JHWWLQJ LW SDVVHG 7KRXJK JURXQGHG LQ DQ DPELWLRXV PL[ RI GHHS FXWV WR JRYHUQPHQW SURJUDPV DQG EROG UHYHQXH UDLVLQJ PHDVXUHV WKH *RYHUQRU·V EXGJHW LV RQH WKDW ZLOO DW EHVW NHHS &DOLIRUQLD IURP IDOOLQJ RYHU WKH EULQN 'HVSLWH LWV EDODQFHG QDWXUH PDQ\ HOHPHQWV RI WKH SODQ KDYH DWWUDFWHG KHDWHG RSSRVLWLRQ IURP 'HPRFUDWV DQG 5HSXEOLFDQV DOLNH 2QO\ WLPH ZLOO WHOO ZKHWKHU WKH *RYHUQRU WKH /HJLVODWXUH DQG YRWHUV ZLOO ZRUN WRJHWKHU WR SXW WKH JROGHQ VWDWH EDFN RQ D SDWK WR SURVSHULW\

8 9

)ROORZ WKH 0RQH\ %UHDNGRZQ RI WKH VWDWH V EXGJHW

&DOLIRUQLD V (QYLURQPHQWDO %XGJHW :K\ &DOLIRUQLD V HQYLURQPHQWDO SURJUDPV QHHG SUXQLQJ QRW VODVKLQJ

10 11

$ 3HQVLRQ 3ODQ IRU &DOLIRUQLD -HUU\ %URZQ WDNHV RQ SHQVLRQ UHIRUP

17 18

/D %HOOH )UDQFH HW /D %ôWH ÉFRQRPLTXH 7KH )UHQFK (OHFWLRQV DQG 7KHLU *OREDO 6LJQLILFDQFH &KDYH] 'LFWDWRU DQG 'HPRFUDW ([SORULQJ WKH FRQWUDGLFWLRQV IDLOXUHV DQG WULXPSKV RI WKH %ROLYDULDQ 3UHVLGHQW

online 3HUKDSV ,W V 7LPH WR 6ZLWFK WR &DUURWV 7KH OLPLWV RI KDUG SRZHU LQ $IJKDQLVWDQ online 3DSXD 1HZ *XLQHD 7KH 1HZ 3UR[\ 3OD\HU $ QHZ EDWWOHILHOG IRU LQIOXHQFH EHWZHHQ WKH 8 6 DQG &KLQD

INTERNATIONAL: 18

0DQDJHG &DUH 0DQDJHG ([SHFWDWLRQV %URZQ V VWUDWHJ\ WR FXW KHDOWK VSHQGLQJ FRXOG KDYH XQLQWHQGHG FRQVHTXHQFHV IRU GXDO EHQHILFLDULHV LQ &DOLIRUQLD

12 13 14 15 16

0RUH 6HQVLEOH &RUUHFWLRQV" 7KH HQG RI RYHUFURZGLQJ 3HGDJRJ\ RI WKH 8QGHUIXQGHG 7KUHDWV WR .z (GXFDWLRQ

$ *DPH &KDQJHU IRU +LJKHU (G %URZQ V WD[ LQLWLDWLYH LV SLYRWDO IRU &DOLIRUQLD 'RGJLQJ WKH %XOOHW &DOLIRUQLD V 'LVDVWURXV +LJK 6SHHG 5DLO 3ODQ

&DOLIRUQLD V :DWHU %XGJHW 'R 1RW /HW WKH 6WDWH 5XQ 'U\

$ ( 23,1,21

5

&DOLIRUQLD V )DUP :RUNHUV )LJKW 2Q &KáYH] OHJDF\ LQ SHULO \HDUV DIWHU IRXQGLQJ RI 8QLWHG )DUP :RUNHUV

OF 63(&,$/ %8'*(7 5(3257

1$7,21$/ &$/,)251,$

TABLE

,17(51$7,21$/

summer 2012

19

,QGHFHQW 3URSRVLWLRQV 7KH )DLOXUH RI 'LUHFW 'HPRFUDF\ LQ &DOLIRUQLD

21 22

7ULFNV RI WKH 1%$ 7UDGH 7KH 3ROLWLFV EHKLQG 6ZLWFKLQJ 7HDPV :RUGV :DONLQJ :LWKRXW 0DVWHUV 7KHLU (\HV :HUH :DWFKLQJ *RG $ 5DGLR 3OD\

Our president, at-­ torney general, our vice-­president, Hilary Clinton -­ they’re crimi-­ nals, they’re criminals!

Ted Nugent

'R \RX KDYH WR Ă€JKW back some criticism, like ‘My husband isn’t stiff, OK?’â€? Laugh-­ ing, Ann Romney re-­ sponded, “Well, you know, I guess we bet-­ ter unzip him and let the real Mitt Romney out because he is not!

Ann Romney

On April 16, the US Senate voted down the ‘Buffet Rule’ pushed forth by Democrats that would raise taxes on the wealthy to a rate of 30%. The vote was 51 in favor and 45 opposed. Democrats largely knew this vote was not going to pass and saw it as political talking point in the general election, as 72 percent of the nation supports the policy, including 53 percent of Republicans, according to CNN. Though Republicans blasted it as a political gimmick, the move helped set the tone for a campaign likely to focus more attention on income inequality than any in recent memory.

GOP Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich, while visiting St. Louis, MO to speak at the National 5Là H $VVRFLDWLRQ¡V DQQXDO PHHWLQJ ZDV ELWWHQ by a penguin during his tour of the zoo. His in-­ juries required treatment with a small bandage, and Gingrich is now back on the campaign trail against Mitt Romney, who is now the presump-­ tive GOP nominee for President.

[A generous safety net] lulls able-­bodied people into lives of complacency and de-­ pendency, which drains them of their very will and incen-­ tive to make the most of their lives. It’s demeaning.

Paul Ryan

Reporters and political opponents ridi-­ culed French President Nicolas Sar-­ kozy after he lied about visiting the Fukushima power plant in the wake of Japan’s devastating earthquake and tsunami last year. “I went to Fukushi-­ ma,� he told a crowd of 5,000 support-­ ers at an election rally in Normandy. “I can tell you the disaster was caused by the 42-­metre wave from a tsunami.

Frankly, I don’t see the immediate risk of a tsunami in Alsace.� Though Sar-­ NR]\ ZDV WKH ÀUVW :HVWHUQ OHDGHU WR visit Japan after the disaster, records show he never left Tokyo. This is not WKH ÀUVW WLPH 6DUNR]\ KDV KDG WR VWDYH off political embarrassment. In 2010, he claimed he was in Berlin the day the wall came down, a claim that was also later disproved.

.

CALIFORNIA

VXPPHU

5

Chåvez  legacy  in  peril  50  years  after  founding  of  United  Farm  Workers %< -8/,$ .8&+0$1 6WDII :ULWHU

2

PDUNV Ă&#x20AC;IW\ \HDUV VLQFH WKH founding of United Farm Work-­ ers (UFW), a union that advocates for farm worker rights. Numerous UFW campaigns, boycotts and acts of civil disobedience â&#x20AC;&#x201C; beginning with the 1965 Delano Grape Strike â&#x20AC;&#x201C; have drawn the suffering of farm working communities from rural back roads into statewide debates. However, in the years follow-­ ing UFWâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s founding and compromises made in Delano, many workers today feel nearly as vulnerable to harsh work-­ ing conditions as before.

When comparing the plight of Cali-­ fornia farm workers today to when UFW was formed, UC Berkeley Geog-­ raphy Professor Richard Walker says that â&#x20AC;&#x153;the surprising thing is how little itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s changed.â&#x20AC;? Save for the rise in num-­ bers of undocumented workers and in-­ digenous workers coming from south-­ ern Mexican states, Walker says that the plight of farm workers in Califor-­ nia remains substantively unchanged.

Workers continue to face long hours of strenuous physical labor while lacking employer-­provided healthcare. Accom-­ plishments by the UFW over the years have improved basic working rights, such as access to clean water, toilets DQG VKDGH ZKHQ LQ WKH Ă&#x20AC;HOG +RZHY-­ er, UFW membership has declined as growers have become increasingly re-­ luctant to sign contracts or make con-­ cessions that would protect unionized workers. Without promises of wage in-­ FUHDVHV RU KHDOWKFDUH EHQHĂ&#x20AC;WV ZRUNHUV cannot justify paying union dues, and thus labor as non-­unionized workers. ,Q WKH SDVW Ă&#x20AC;IW\ \HDUV IDUP ZRUNHU advocates have lost political promi-­ nence in Sacramento. Following the trend of special interest politics, agri-­ businesses have held a heavy hand in the state politics. According to Walker, agribusiness has numerous outlets to XWLOL]H LWV SRZHU UDQJLQJ IURP LQĂ XHQF-­

ing the decisions of the Department of Agriculture to having clout over the projects of university research. Often-­ times, the business interests of agricul-­ ture companies have been out of step with the human costs of their labor-­ ers. For example, the Monterey County Board of Supervisors passed a resolu-­ tion urging Brown to re-­examine the safety of using highly-­toxic methyl io-­ GLGH LQ &DOLIRUQLD Ă&#x20AC;HOGV 7KH EDQ RI WKLV chemical has been resisted by compa-­ QLHV WKDW Ă&#x20AC;QG LW D UHODWLYHO\ FKHDS HI-­ fective deterrent for pests and weeds.

Governor Jerry Brown cooperated with farm worker communities during his former terms in Sacramento as gov-­ ernor, highlighting these ties again in his 2010 reelection campaign. Walker notes that Brown has taken some pro-­ gressive action by making liberal ap-­ pointments to the Department of Labor and increasing enforcement on local policy. Several bills supported by UFW â&#x20AC;&#x201C; SB 126, AB 243 and AB 469 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; also passed the state legislature this last year. But Brown has not constantly upheld the interests of farm workers, made evident by his June veto of SB 104, a bill that would have made it easier for the workers to effectively organize in unions.

Rather than f o r m i n g unions via elections in front of in-­ timidating employers, farm workers would have been able to form unions through pe-­ titions and card checks.

Brown cited

the Agricultural Labor Relations Act, a bill farm workers lauded when he signed into law in 1974, as part of the reason for vetoing SB 104. He claimed that changes to the original bill were XQMXVWLĂ&#x20AC;HG EHFDXVH LW DOUHDG\ UHFRJ-­ nized the right of farm workers to orga-­ nize as other workers in the state.

Ultimately, Walker says that due to the asymmetric power relationship, try-­ ing to turn around farm worker policy is very hard, bluntly stating â&#x20AC;&#x153;the only freedom you have is to quit.â&#x20AC;? Thus, for the time being, farm workers who need to support themselves and their families will continue to labor in subop-­ timal conditions. Rather than suggest-­ ing Sacramento is solely at fault for the livelihood of workers in the Central Val-­ ley, the continuing suffering that farm workers shoulder sheds light on a well-­ institutionalized economic system that is supported by agribusiness and up-­ held by consumers of cheap produce.

Moving forward, advocates for farm worker rights must stress these struc-­ tural factors when crafting movements to support legislation for social justice, using the spirit and accomplishments RI 8):¡V \HDUV DV D JXLGH Â&#x2021;

&UHGLW $)/ &,2

6

ESU EHUNHOH\ HGX

NATIONAL

The  evolving  conception  of  due  process gued that despite his citizenship status, his designation as an â&#x20AC;&#x153;enemy combat-­ antâ&#x20AC;? precluded constitutional protec-­ ue process and the rule of law tions. The case eventually reached the have been essential components Supreme court in 2004, which ruled of American political theory since that â&#x20AC;&#x153;due process demands that a citi-­ the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s founding. In the Declara-­ zen held in the United States as an en-­ tion of Independence, Thomas Jeffer-­ emy combatant be given a meaningful son lambasted King George III â&#x20AC;&#x153;for de-­ opportunity to contest the factual basis SULYLQJ XV LQ PDQ\ FDVHV RI WKH EHQHĂ&#x20AC;WV for that detention before a neutral de-­ of trial by juryâ&#x20AC;Śâ&#x20AC;? Article III section 2 cisionmaker.â&#x20AC;?

The court did not necessarily guar-­ of the Constitution states â&#x20AC;&#x153;The trial of all crimesâ&#x20AC;Śshall be by jury.â&#x20AC;? And the antee a full-­blown trial, but it did Fifth Amendment strictly prohibits the require the government to provide depravation of â&#x20AC;&#x153;life, liberty, or property, citizens accused of terrorism the op-­ without due process of law.â&#x20AC;? However, portunity to respond to the charges this seminal notion in American juris-­ against them. However, this ruling did prudence has undergone a profound QRW XOWLPDWHO\ VHWWOH WKH GLIĂ&#x20AC;FXOW TXHV-­ transformation as a direct result of the tion of how to balance constitutional rights with national security concerns, War on Terror.

The War on Terror has produced which returned to the forefront of PDQ\ GLIĂ&#x20AC;FXOW DQG FRQWURYHUVLDO TXHV-­ American public discourse less than a tions about the extent to which the Due decade later.

On January 27, 2010, the Wash-­ Process Clause applies to American cit-­ ington Post revealed the existence of a izens accused of terrorism. One notable such case was that of Yaser Esam Ham-­ CIA â&#x20AC;&#x153;capture or killâ&#x20AC;? list that included di, a dual U.S.-­ Saudi Arabi-­ a n Al Qaeda propagandist and American citizen Anwar al Awlaki. Awlaki was citizen detained at placed on this list at the behest Guantanamo. of a secretive panel in the The Bush White Houseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Nation-­ Adminis-­ al Security Council. tration As Reuters notes, a r -­ â&#x20AC;&#x153;There is no public record of the op-­ erations or de-­ cisions of the panelâ&#x20AC;Ś Nei-­ ther is there any law es-­ tablishing its existence or setting out the rules by which it is supposed to operate.â&#x20AC;?

In a March 5th speech, Attorney Gen-­ eral Eric Holder, explained why he believed the target-­ ing of American citizens in the absence of judicial &UHGLW 7KH $WODQWLF oversight was legal:

%< .</( %2:(1 6WDII :ULWHU

D

Some have argued that the presi-­ dent is required to get permission from a federal court before taking action against a United States citizen who is a senior operational leader of Al Qaeda or associated forces. This is simply not accurate. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Due processâ&#x20AC;? and â&#x20AC;&#x153;judicial processâ&#x20AC;? are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process. (em-­ phasis mine).

7KH DSSOLFDELOLW\ RI WKLV MXVWLĂ&#x20AC;FDWLRQ to the Awlaki case presupposes that his role was â&#x20AC;&#x153;operational;â&#x20AC;? an ambigu-­ ous claim according to Yemen expert Gregory Johnsen: â&#x20AC;&#x153;we know very little, precious little when it comes to his op-­ erational role.â&#x20AC;?

However, a careful examination of the language in the next sentence re-­ veals a much bolder assertion. By drawing a somewhat arbitrary distinc-­ tion between â&#x20AC;&#x153;due processâ&#x20AC;? and â&#x20AC;&#x153;judi-­ cial process,â&#x20AC;? Holder is asserting the authority of the Executive branch to circumvent the courts and play judge, jury and executioner of suspected ter-­ URULVWV ZLWKRXW Ă&#x20AC;OLQJ FKDUJHV RU SUH-­ senting evidence. Holderâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s semantic sleight-­of-­hand renders a legal inter-­ pretation that is antithetical not only to Jeffersonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s grievances against King George III and the Supreme Courtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s decision in the Hamdi case, but also to a constitutional understanding ex-­ pressed by Holder himself just four years prior. In a 2008 speech, Holder mocked the â&#x20AC;&#x153;just trust usâ&#x20AC;? approach taken by the Bush-­era Executive, and lamented the fact that the government â&#x20AC;&#x153;denied the Writ of Habeus Corpus to hundreds of accused enemy combat-­ ants.â&#x20AC;?

It seems that in order for the Admin-­ istrationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s targeting of Awlaki to com-­ port with the constitutional guarantee of due process, a radical departure from the traditional understanding of due process is required. The War on Terror has presented some very dif-­ Ă&#x20AC;FXOW TXHVWLRQV UHJDUGLQJ WKH EDODQFH between liberty and security; however, if the right to due process is to remain meaningful, it must prove capable of UHVLVWLQJ WKH VHPDQWLF Ă H[LELOLW\ ZLWK ZKLFK LW KDV UHFHQWO\ EHHQ LPEXHG Â&#x2021;

NATIONAL

VXPPHU

7

Politicians  focus  on  jobs,  yet  somehow  ignore  poverty %< $11$ %(//$ .25%$729 6WDII :ULWHU

I

n the Republican response to Presi-­ dent Obamaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 2012 State of the Union Address, Mitch Daniels, the governor of Indiana, touched on the aspirational nature of the American Dream: â&#x20AC;&#x153;We do not accept that ours will ever be a nation of haves and have nots; we must always be a nation of haves and soon to haves.â&#x20AC;?

The notion that every American has the opportunity to achieve economic advancement and a better life certainly sounds reassuring, but this ethos has been sharply undercut by the reali-­ ties of persistently high unemployment rates and rising poverty. Why does Daniels, like so many other politicians, eschew the â&#x20AC;&#x153;have nots?â&#x20AC;? The unique character of American political culture â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the American Creed â&#x20AC;&#x201C; might offer a few answers. Championing the plight of the poor is antithetical to the â&#x20AC;&#x153;Ameri-­ can Creedâ&#x20AC;? â&#x20AC;&#x201C; individualism, egalitari-­ anism, and equality of opportunity but not outcome. The belief that a strong economy will help alleviate poverty and provide opportunities for economic ad-­ vancement better than any welfare pro-­ gram partially explains the slight atten-­ tion poverty gets.

6LQFH WKH Ă&#x20AC;QDQFLDO FULVLV DQG Great Recession, the buzzword on ev-­ eryone in Washingtonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s lips has been job creation. The bipartisan political IRFXV RQ MRE FUHDWLRQ LQWHQVLĂ&#x20AC;HG E\ the 2012 elections, has eclipsed many other issues, relegating welfare policy to the margins of the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s poli-­ tics. Aside from some major historical breakthroughs and policy initiatives, welfare policy has been the forgotten stepchild of American politics. Ostensi-­ bly, topics such as welfare and poverty DUH QHLWKHU SROLWLFDOO\ SURĂ&#x20AC;WDEOH QRU H[-­ pedient. There are also numerous polit-­

&UHGLW EORJVSRW FRP ical disincentives that preclude politi-­ cians from speaking out vocally on the issues.

In the American political discourse, lionizing the poor or decrying income inequality has the undertones of class warfare, socialism, and demagogic populism, which conservatives view as supremely â&#x20AC;&#x153;un-­Americanâ&#x20AC;? themes more suited to the soft democratic social-­ ism of Western Europe. Democrats act in accordance with this creed as well; they have also adopted the mantle of job creation as a major campaign is-­ sue, as evinced by the 2009 Stimulus Bill. This creed advocates that nanny state policies and cradle-­to-­grave soci-­ eties are best left to Europe, asserting that America is a country of individual responsibility, equality of opportunity but not outcome, and social mobility.

Championing the plight of the poor im-­ plies that economic advancement and social mobility arenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t available to every-­ one, and challenges the mythology of the sacred American Dream.

Shocking statistics show that pov-­ erty remains a major problem in the United States. Data from the 2010 cen-­ sus revealed that almost 48 percent of all Americans are currently either living in poverty or are considered to be â&#x20AC;&#x153;low income.â&#x20AC;? This startling statistic comes GHVSLWH WKH Ă&#x20AC;QGLQJV RI WKH OHIW OHDQLQJ

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities that six initiatives in the 2009 Stimulus â&#x20AC;&#x153;kept 6.9 million people above the pov-­ erty line in 2010.â&#x20AC;? The Centerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s report LGHQWLĂ&#x20AC;HG H[SDQVLRQV LQ WKH (DUQHG ,Q-­ come Tax Credit (EITC) and Child Tax Credit (CTC), The Making Work Pay tax credit, expansions in the duration and level of unemployment insurance, DQG H[SDQVLRQV LQ 61$3 EHQHĂ&#x20AC;WV IRRG stamps) as the key provisions that helped stabilize poverty rates. Yet, the national poverty rate rose to 15.1% in 2010 (46.2 million people), its highest level since 1993. The child poverty rate in America soared to 20% in 2011, with one in four children on food stamps. Of the 15.1% of the general population liv-­ ing in poverty, over half are either black or Hispanic.

Political rhetoric suggests that job FUHDWLRQ LV JHQHUDOO\ D VXIĂ&#x20AC;FLHQW DQWL poverty policy. But when thereâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s little job creation and welfare is only stabi-­ lizing poverty rates¸ what anti-­poverty policy is there to fall back on? We can-­ not continue to ignore that when the economy falters and fails to provide ample opportunities for economic ad-­ vancement, our nationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most vulner-­ able are hardest hit. Politicians have yet to grapple with this reality; at the very least, they can start by breaking WKHLU VLOHQFH Â&#x2021;

8

SPECIAL BUDGET REPORT: STATS

ESU EHUNHOH\ HGX

FOLLOW THE MONEY: A Special Report on the California Budget

GOVERNORâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S PROPOSED BUDGET K-12 Education $39,214,791* Higher Ed $9,803,278 Health and Human Services $42,892,420 Corrections and Rehabilitation $10,718,529

Environmental Protection $1,306,741 State & Consumer Services $1,426,790 Labor & Workforce Development $834,349

Total  Budget $137,327,827

Legislative, Judicial, Executive $5,661,159

Business, Transportation & Housing $11,276,814 Natural Resources $4,643,208

General Government $9,549,748 *  Numbers  in  1,000â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

General Fund Spending:

:KDW D 'LIIHUHQFH D <HDU &DQ 0DNH

$60 70 -121

2011-12 2012-13

Dollar changes Percent changes

Credit: Feilisha Kutilike, editor Source: ebudget.ca.gov

SPECIAL BUDGET REPORT: ENVIRONMENT

VSULQJ

9

CALIFORNIAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S

Why  Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s  environmen-­ tal  programs  need  pruning,  not  slashing of now, these monies will be placed in the Air Pollution Con-­ trol fund intended for investment into carbon reducing strategies as outlined E\ WKH ELOO +RZHYHU VRPH QRQ SURĂ&#x20AC;WV have expressed dismay that Brown and his administration plan to use half of WKH H[SHFWHG UHYHQXHV IURP WKH Ă&#x20AC;UVW auction in the fall ($500 million) to EDFNĂ&#x20AC;OO WKH JHQHUDO IXQG â&#x20AC;&#x153;The state legislature and the gover-­ QRU¡V RIĂ&#x20AC;FH DUH LQWHUHVWHG LQ WU\LQJ WR use some of the income that would be generated from that for programs that were not necessarily designed to reduce FDUERQ Âľ D PHPEHU RI WKH QRQ SURĂ&#x20AC;W Environment California said. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s a bad idea.â&#x20AC;?

While using the funds from the Air Pollution Control Fund could help bal-­ ance the California budget, it would also undermine the goals of AB 32 in combating global warming.

The budget also leaves some areas to face serious cuts. Reduction in fund-­ ing for the Department of Parks and Recreation is projected to result in the closure of up to seventy State Parks beginning in July, including the popu-­ lar Candlestick Point State Recreation Area in San Francisco. Environmental groups have already expressed concern about this measure, as the areas will potentially become vulnerable to devel-­ opment and pollution without govern-­ ment protection.

Of particular concern, however, is the ballot trigger element of the bud-­ get proposal. If Governor Brownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tax proposal does not pass in November, then a whole slew of additional cuts to environmental programs will follow. )LUHĂ&#x20AC;JKWLQJ FDSDELOLWLHV ZLOO EH UHGXFHG by 10 percent, 20 percent of park rang-­

&UHGLW :LNLPHGLD &RPPRQV

%< :,/ 080%< 6WDII :ULWHU

G

overnor Brown is in a precarious situation with regards to his en-­ vironmental budget. Pressured from all sides to balance the budget, KH PXVW Ă&#x20AC;QG DFFHSWDEOH SODFHV WR FXW funding. A common theme at the fed-­ eral level â&#x20AC;&#x201C; particularly within the ongo-­ ing Republican Presidential Primaries â&#x20AC;&#x201C; is blaming environmental protection as a source of excessive and costly regula-­ tions. To many, this is where the cuts need to be made.

However, in the scheme of things, the California EPA and the Natural Resources Agency already make up a mere 4.4 percent of the total budget.

Cuts should be made only sparingly to HQVXUH VXIĂ&#x20AC;FLHQW SUHSDUDWLRQ IRU IXWXUH environmental challenges.

Brownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s environmental budget seems potentially effective in some ar-­ eas. It proposes a timber harvest plan reform to be decided by governmental departments and relevant stakehold-­ ers. In addition, it provides increased funding for protection programs, in-­ cluding $2.9 million for oil spill pre-­ vention and $25.4 million for habitat conservation of the Sacramento-­San Joaquin Delta. The budget proposal also touts new opportunities for alter-­ native energy, heavily supported by the promises of AB 32, which will install a cap-­and-­trade carbon market in Cali-­ fornia.

7KH VSHFLĂ&#x20AC;F XVDJH RI IXQGV JHQHU-­ ated from cap-­and-­trade auctions un-­ der AB 32 has triggered a debate. As

HUV ZLOO EH ODLG RII à RRG FRQWURO SUR-­ grams will be reduced by 20 percent, and funding for marine life protection and management acts will be cut by $15 million.

It is clear that reducing Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s FDSDFLW\ WR UHVSRQG WR Ă&#x20AC;UHV PDLQWDLQ human safety, and preserve impor-­ tant resources and biodiversity comes with serious long term risks. While one can hope that putting so much on the chopping block is enough to scare vot-­ ers into approving Governor Brownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tax proposal, relying on such risky tac-­ tics could prove costly.

The budget should look for addition-­ al plans to generate revenue to reduce costly and environmentally damaging cuts. The Royalty Recovery and Lease Compliance proposal constitutes such an alternative. Under the State Lands Commission, this proposal invests $1 million in a program designed to audit oil, gas, and mineral operations owned by the state and ensure compliance with prompt payment for leasing. This is expected to create $6.6 million in general funds. While relatively insignif-­ icant in the large scale of balancing the budget, more measures like this could accumulate to make a real difference.

Balancing the budget remains im-­ portant, but robbing revenue from environmental programs is not an ef-­ fective strategy. Prescriptive measures RI ERRVWLQJ HIĂ&#x20AC;FLHQF\ OLNH ZKDW ZLOO EH done under the State Lands Commis-­ sion will help the environmental gov-­ ernment agencies do their part in this process. Larger revenue generation may best be left to other more substan-­ WLDO SRUWLRQV RI WKH EXGJHW Â&#x2021;

10

ESU EHUNHOH\ HGX

SPECIAL BUDGET REPORT: PENSIONS

Governor  Brown  takes  on  pension  reform %< 0$1'< +21(<&+85&+ 6WDII :ULWHU

L

ong sought-­after pension reform LV Ă&#x20AC;QDOO\ LQ WKH ZRUNV ZLWK D QHZ plan to revitalize pension policy unveiled by Governor Jerry Brown. The plan falls somewhere between the ben-­ HĂ&#x20AC;WV SODQ RI FXUUHQW SXEOLF HPSOR\HHV and the plans of private sector com-­ panies, where employees have to con-­ WULEXWH PRUH RI WKHLU EHQHĂ&#x20AC;WV ,Q WKH past, Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s pensions have been IRFXVHG RQ D EHQHĂ&#x20AC;WV V\VWHP UDWKHU than a contributions system. However, given the stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s growing pension debt, the current arrangement can no longer be maintained.

With the state now responsible for $240 billion in pension debt, it is not possible to ignore this growing problem.

The amount of people retiring is expect-­ HG WR LQFUHDVH DW D Ă&#x20AC;YH \HDU UDWH RI percent, while the working population will only increase by 5.8 percent. Clear-­ ly, this is not a sustainable system. To help alleviate this debt, Governor Jerry Brown has created a twelve-­point plan to lower the costs of pensions.

To begin, pensions would be calculated as an average of the last three yearsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; sala-­ ries, instead of just the highest paying year. This average salary would not in-­ clude overtime, uni-­ form allowances, car allowances, and other perks that have driven pensions up in the past. Ret-­ roactive pension in-­ creases would also be eliminated, and the plan would abol-­ ish the practice of allowing workers to

buy retirement credit for years they do not work. Additionally, employees would have to pay at least 50 percent RI WKH FRVW RI WKHLU UHWLUHPHQW EHQHĂ&#x20AC;WV The retirement age would increase to 67, and 57 for public safety employ-­ HHV )LQDOO\ SXEOLF RIĂ&#x20AC;FLDOV FRQYLFWHG of a felony related to their employment would no longer be eligible to receive any pension payments.

The plan seeks to put an end to the pension-­spiking practices that have long plagued the system and does a mostly good job of meeting this goal.

However, there are a few problems. As Professor Roy Ulrich of the Goldman School of Public Policy says, â&#x20AC;&#x153;The ba-­ sic problem with it is its applicability to current state employees.â&#x20AC;? Any changes to pensions would only apply to future public sector employees. This is un-­ likely to be altered, though, without changing the California Constitution.

Currently, the state is not allowed to change the terms under which an em-­ ployee was hired. Yet another problem is the existence of loopholes. Employ-­

ees can still receive their pensions even if they take on another full time job after retiring. This particularly affects appointees to state commissions, who may be able to receive another hundred thousand dollar paycheck in addition to their pensions.

Ulrich recommends other means of reform, such as cash-­balance propos-­ als. These pension plans would be a hy-­ brid of pension plans and 401(k) plans.

The state government would run them, taking the burden off of companies. In this system, the employer contributes part of the workerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s salary into an ac-­ count belonging to the worker. The employer would also guarantee a rate of return on that money, regardless of KRZ WKH PDUNHW LV GRLQJ %HQHĂ&#x20AC;WV RI this plan include that employees can take it with them if they change jobs and that their retirement plans will not take a hit even if the economy is do-­ ing poorly. Having a stable return rate would also protect against pension-­ spiking and retroactive increases that currently drive up pensions. The return rate would only be subject to change trans-­ parently through traditional gov-­ ernment budget processes.

Whether this plan or another will reach legis-­ lation remains to be seen. How-­ ever, given that public support is behind pension change, with 83 percent of Cali-­ fornians in fa-­ vor of reforming the system, even radical reform could prove to be &UHGLW $VVRFLDWHG 3UHVV VXFFHVVIXO Â&#x2021;

SPECIAL BUDGET REPORT: HEALTH CARE

VSULQJ

11

Governor  Brownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s  strategy  to  cut  health  spending  could  have  un-­ intended  consequences  for  dual  EHQHÂżFLDULHV LQ &DOLIRUQLD &UHGLW &DOLIRUQLD +HDOWKFDUH )RXQGDWLRQ &HQWHU IRU +HDOWK 5HSRUWLQJ

%< 0$77+(: 6,00216 6WDII :ULWHU

M

edi-­Cal, Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s version of Medicaid, faces massive chang-­ es in the years ahead. Governor Brown seeks to expand managed care SODQV IRU WKH PLOOLRQ EHQHĂ&#x20AC;FLDULHV who receive both Medi-­Cal and Medi-­ FDUH EHQHĂ&#x20AC;WV 7KLV SURSRVDO VHHNV WR cut $842.3 million from Medi-­Cal us-­ ing two mechanisms. First the state hopes to save money by streamlining GXDO EHQHĂ&#x20AC;FLDULHV¡ LQYROYHPHQW LQ ERWK programs and making sure they donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t receive overlapping health services.

Second, the plan hopes to save money by moving to managed care. The cur-­ rent system pays doctors and health care providers based on how many treatments they provide. The Los Ange-­ les Times editorial board explains that â&#x20AC;&#x153;in managed care, by contrast, HMOs receive a set amount per patient,â&#x20AC;? with the goal of making health care provid-­ ers think about quality over quantity.

Governor Brown wants to focus on GXDO EHQHĂ&#x20AC;FLDULHV EHFDXVH WKH\ DUH DQ expensive group, costing 60 percent more to Medicare nationally than their single program counterparts. â&#x20AC;&#x153;On av-­ erage, their costs are much higher,â&#x20AC;?

Laurel Lucia, Policy Analyst at the UC Berkeley Labor Center, explains, â&#x20AC;&#x153;because they are elderly or disabled, [who] tend to need more long term care services, in-­person care, or in-­home care.â&#x20AC;? To demonstrate that the pro-­ gram will work, the California legisla-­ ture previously passed a pilot program IRU GXDO EHQHĂ&#x20AC;FLDULHV LQ IRXU FRXQWLHV The results of these programs are not yet clear, but Governor Brown wants to

move forward with an expansion to the entire state.

Although Medi-­Cal has had some success with managed care programs, expanding the program to include the individuals likely to cost the most could limit their access to care. The tough re-­ DOLW\ LV WKDW GXDO EHQHĂ&#x20AC;FLDULHV FRVW PRUH because the elderly poor are more likely WR KDYH VLJQLĂ&#x20AC;FDQW KHDOWK FKDOOHQJHV that are expensive to address. In order to achieve multi-­hundred million dol-­ lar cuts, the managed care programs would have to make the â&#x20AC;&#x153;set amount per patientâ&#x20AC;? available to care provid-­ HUV VLJQLĂ&#x20AC;FDQWO\ EHORZ FXUUHQW DYHUDJH spending per patient.

It seems inevitable that the most vul-­ nerable participants will lose access to care, especially considering Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s recent budget history. Lucia argues â&#x20AC;&#x153;health and human services spend-­ ing has been cut so severelyâ&#x20AC;? already that there are â&#x20AC;&#x153;very basic services that used to be provided that are no longer provided.â&#x20AC;? Until the governor forwards more details explaining how managed care will reduce spending by $900 mil-­ OLRQ WKURXJK HIĂ&#x20AC;FLHQF\ LPSURYHPHQWV alone, it is natural to be skeptical of the proposal.

Although this assessment of the governorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s proposal might seem harsh, the State of California is stuck between a rock and a Federal hard place. At-­ tempts to make direct cuts to services provided by Medi-­Cal have consistently been blocked by lawsuits brought be-­ fore federal judges. It remains to be seen whether the restructuring of care IRU GXDO EHQHĂ&#x20AC;FLDULHV ZLOO IDFH D VLPLODU challenge. Nevertheless, under federal

law states cannot take steps to reduce the quality of care provided to Medicaid UHFLSLHQWV VLJQLĂ&#x20AC;FDQWO\ EHORZ FRPSD-­ rable private health plans.

President Obamaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s health reform law stepped up the pressure by barring states from limiting eligibility for Med-­ icaid services. Post-­stimulus California receives a 50 percent Medicaid federal matching rate, the lowest available to any state, but has a growing proportion of persons living in poverty. For this reason the federal government has not provided California the assistance it needs to avoid the cuts that have been prevented by federal law. If California does successfully cut Medi-­Cal spend-­ LQJ IRU GXDO EHQHĂ&#x20AC;FLDULHV LQ WKH QH[W year, it risks compounding the conse-­ quences of cuts as the stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s health services lose Medicaid matching funds alongside the state money.

Instead of dog-­piling the conse-­ quences of these budget changes on the backs of Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most vulnerable citizens, the governor and legislature should push for revenue raising mea-­ sures beyond current proposals. Cuts to Medi-­Cal have â&#x20AC;&#x153;a much more severe effect on the economy overall than a similarly sized revenue increase,â&#x20AC;? Lau-­ rel Lucia explains, â&#x20AC;&#x153;because the state brings in Federal dollars when they spend money on Medicaid and also be-­ cause health care dollars stay very lo-­ cal.â&#x20AC;? California can still cut whatever fat remains by transitioning dual bene-­ Ă&#x20AC;FLDULHV WR PDQDJHG FDUH ZKLOH PDNLQJ sure the cap patients experience does not cut into the bulk of their much-­ QHHGHG FDUH Â&#x2021;

12

ESU EHUNHOH\ HGX

SPECIAL BUDGET REPORT: CORRECTIONS

The  End  of  Overcrowding %< =$& &200,16 6WDII :ULWHU

P

olly Klaas was just throwing a Fri-­ day night slumber party with a couple of her friends when a man kidnapped her at knifepoint and later strangled her. She was just twelve years old. Her murderer, Richard Allen Davis, a man with a lengthy criminal record of violent and disorderly conduct, fu-­ eled the passage of Proposition 184, Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s three strikes law. Although measures like Prop 184 have attempted to be tough on crime in an attempt to reduce crime rates, they have dramati-­ cally bloated the California corrections system and left it in a state of disarray.

According to California Depart-­ ment of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), the state prison population was 202 percent of design capacity in 2006, when a three-­judge panel was re-­ quested to review prisoner health and safety. In 2011, the Supreme Court up-­ held the three-­judge panelâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s decision, 5-­4, that the overcrowding of California prisons produced conditions that vio-­ lated the Cruel and Unusual Punish-­ ments Clause under the Eighth Amend-­ ment and inadequate healthcare that amounted to â&#x20AC;&#x153;torture.â&#x20AC;? The Court also upheld an order to reduce the Califor-­ nia prison population to 137.5 percent of capacity. Professor of Law Jonathan Simon believes that California needs a phase of truth and reconciliation to heal from the years of incompetent cor-­ rections. â&#x20AC;&#x153;We have to acknowledge as a state that we have done something really wrong,â&#x20AC;? Simon said. â&#x20AC;&#x153;When the US Su-­ preme Court has to describe your be-­ KDYLRU DV QRW Ă&#x20AC;W IRU D FLYLOL]HG VRFLHW\ and you are a government, thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s the kind of thing that ought to result in the government falling or people going into exile in other societies. Here there has been no attempt to reckon and I think we need reckoning of some sort and real discussion of how we ended up do-­ ing this.â&#x20AC;?

Governor ing down too fast insofar as Brown has funding for various proposed to cut &UHGLW UEJ ODZ FRP kinds of rehabilitation the CDCR budget by programs that have never almost a billion dollars over the course of two years. Although the been all that strong but are presum-­ legislature needs to get a handle on ably supposed to be growing in the sys-­ WKH GHĂ&#x20AC;FLW DQG WR HYHQWXDOO\ UHGXFH tem as we turn from mass incarcera-­ the stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s $361 billion debt, Simon tion.â&#x20AC;?

Simon recommends that, in the expresses restraint in how quickly the name of realignment, the state block legislature cut the CDCR budget. â&#x20AC;&#x153;If youâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve got 25 to 30 thou-­ grant corrections funding to counties sand prisoners to feed and tend plus so that they may invest in certain ar-­ WKH GLIĂ&#x20AC;FXOWLHV RI PDQDJLQJ ZLWK WKH eas, such as mental health treatment, hypercrowded conditions that they had PRUH SUREDWLRQ DQG SROLFH RIĂ&#x20AC;FHUV GH-­ at the worst, which meant a lot of over-­ veloping different strategies to combat time for their staff and drove up the crime, and keeping people in school, at costsâ&#x20AC;? he said. â&#x20AC;&#x153;You would expect that their discretion. â&#x20AC;&#x153;What the state ought to do ideally moving out of the zone of maximum FRQJHVWLRQ DQG WRWDOO\ LQHIĂ&#x20AC;FLHQW RS-­ would be to write those block grant eration would save them a lot of money checks and monitor and require coun-­ even if they werenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t trying hard to cut.â&#x20AC;? ties to collect data on how their vari-­ Brownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s proposed budget slashes ous investments are working out and adult prisoner healthcare costs by ap-­ then promote the things that worked,â&#x20AC;? proximately $150 million, which could he said.

The legislature will most likely have be reinvested in other areas of concern.

Simon sees the current circumstances to cut CDCR funding in a holistic over-­ as a chance to reform the prison sys-­ haul of the state budget. However, if tem and move away from mass incar-­ the state is truly dedicated to reform-­ ceration and does not want a budget ing the California corrections system and progressing toward the end of issue to spoil the opportunity. â&#x20AC;&#x153;The corrections budget under the mass incarceration, these cuts must current circumstances simultane-­ be modest so that we may reinvest our ously must go down and should be go-­ savings in creating a more humane, ing down but itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s a tricky question to sensible corrections system and pre-­ ask how much and in what sequence,â&#x20AC;? cipitate the end of mass incarceration he said. â&#x20AC;&#x153;I fear that it is probably go-­ DV ZH NQRZ LW Â&#x2021;

SPECIAL BUDGET REPORT: K-12 EDUCATION

Threats

 to  K-­12

%< +$5.$5$1 6,1*+ 6WDII :ULWHU

F

Governor is working to put on the November ballot, without which K-­12 education will be cut by a star-­ tling $4.8 billion. Brownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s proposed tax increase, â&#x20AC;&#x153;The Schools and Local Public Safety Protection Act of 2012,â&#x20AC;? would raise rates by 1 percent for individuals making over $250,000 a year, 2 percent for those making more than $300,000 a year, and 3% for those making more than $500,000 a year. Without this critical funding, the stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s school sys-­ tem â&#x20AC;&#x201C; already ranked 47th in the nation â&#x20AC;&#x201C; will suffer a blow from which it will likely not recover for decades.

Further maiming education is not an appealing prospect for Californians, es-­ pecially considering K-­12, CCs, CSUs, and UCs have already experienced drastic cuts for years. Of course, K-­12 education is not alone on the chopping block. Other changes needed to meet Brownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s budget prescriptions include cuts to many welfare programs like CalWORKs (reworking how money is

 Educat

ion

d i s -­ tributed and denying many recipients from the service altogether, saving approxi-­ mately $950 million), over $300 million in cuts to Cal Grants for low-­income college students, as well as over $500 million in cuts to child development services, which Brown says will remove approximately 62,000 kids from early educational and child development programs.

Nevertheless, K-­12 education re-­ mains the most critical building block needed to construct a more prosperous golden state. If Brownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s budget pass-­ es but revenue demands are not met, K-­12 will see cuts that would equate to a shortening of the school year by three weeks. Such a reduction would be detrimental to students, parents, and teachers alike. Voters should keep this in mind when they head to the SROOV WKLV 1RYHPEHU Â&#x2021;

$12,000 $10,000

$10,610

$8,000

$4,000 $2,000 $0

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

352326,7,21

$6,000

$// )81'6

aced with a public reluctant to hike taxes or state educational funding, Jerry Brown has some-­ how managed to garner 68 percent public support for his budget proposal. %URZQ¡V ELOOLRQ EXGJHW IRU Ă&#x20AC;V-­ cal year 2012-­2013 seeks to bridge a $9.2 billion budget rift by cutting sev-­ eral programs and increasing revenue, resulting in a $1.1 billion reserve. The planâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s selling point comes in the form of spending increases to educational programs. This funding will be provid-­ ed in large part through Proposition 98 (P98), an initiative passed in 1987 that sets a base level of funding for schools â&#x20AC;&#x201C; calculated by â&#x20AC;&#x153;1986-­87, General Fund revenues, per capita personal income, and school attendance growth or de-­ cline.â&#x20AC;? Brown intends on exceeding this limit and has outlined a budget that provides higher funding for education WKDQ LQ WKH SDVW IHZ \HDUV ,Q Ă&#x20AC;VFDO year 2012-­13, the pro-­ posed amount for P98 funding is set at $52.5 K-12 EDUCATION SPENDING billion, $37.5 billion of PER PUPIL which will go towards the General Fund â&#x20AC;&#x201C; a Governor Brown proposed $4.9 billion increase VLJQLĂ&#x20AC;FDQWO\ PRUH VWDWH PRQH\ IURP Ă&#x20AC;VFDO \HDU for K-­12 education this year than 12. Total funding for last year, both in real dollars K-­12 education is pro-­ and in percentages. However, jected to be $67.1 bil-­ WKLV VSHQGLQJ IDFHV VLJQLĂ&#x20AC;FDQW lion total in 2012-­13.

Unfortunately, trigger cuts if revenue demands as with most plans are not met. hatched in Sacramen-­ to, there is a catch.

This funding is criti-­ cally dependent on the revenue measure the

13

VSULQJ

14

ESU EHUNHOH\ HGX

SPECIAL BUDGET REPORT: HIGHER EDUCATION

Brownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s  tax  initiative  is  pivotal  for  California %< 1,&+2/$6 .,7&+(/ 6WDII :ULWHU

I

ncrease. Thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s a word analysts of Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s higher education budget havenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t seen in a while.

For his 2012-­13 Budget, Governor Brown has proposed to increase fund-­ ing for higher education by 1.7 percent, or $367.5 million above 2011-­12 levels.

However, the Budget is dependent on the passage of a tax initiative that was created through a compromise between WKH *RYHUQRU¡V RIĂ&#x20AC;FH DQG WKH &DOLIRUQLD Federation of Teachers. This initiative will appear on the ballot as The Schools and Local Public Safety Protection Act of 2012, popularly referred to as the â&#x20AC;&#x153;Millionaires Tax.â&#x20AC;? If it fails, the Univer-­ sity of California will see a trigger re-­ duction of $200 million, which would likely result in further tuition hikes.

Many are critical of the Governorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s revenue projections. Recently, the Leg-­ islatureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s budget analyst declared that UHYHQXH IRU WKH UHPDLQGHU RI WKLV Ă&#x20AC;VFDO year is likely to fall $6.5 billion short of Brownâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s expectations. There is fear that the Governorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 2012-­13 Budget will fall down a similar path.

Additionally, the Schools and Lo-­ cal Public Safety Protection Act is in competition with another put forward by millionaire Molly Munger. While the former involves a sales tax increase and an income tax hike for Californians earning upwards of $250,000, Mung-­ erâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s initiative involves a 1% income tax increase across the board. Since the initiatives are similar and likely to cause confusion amongst voters, it is possible there will be a split vote and

neither will pass. â&#x20AC;&#x153;That seems to be the expectation in Sacramento, [that the initiatives will see a split vote], but there is a lot of ground between now and November,â&#x20AC;? said John Decker, Chief Fiscal Advisor for California Controller John Chiang and Professor at Goldman School of Public Policy.

Decker believes there is reason to prepare for trigger cuts to the Univer-­ sity of California. ´:KDW , Ă&#x20AC;QG YHU\ LQWHUHVWLQJ DERXW the triggers is since weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re [UC] Berkeley and we canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t gauge what can happen in the future, we must assume weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ll get our cut of triggers and prepare for it,â&#x20AC;? said Decker.

Preparing for triggers is no easy task. On March 28, University of Cali-­ fornia President Mark G. Yudof came out in support of the Governorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tax initiative. Yudof warned that failure to pass the initiative would likely result in hefty tuition hikes, although it remains too soon to speculate about their size or timing.

While the Governorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s initiative is certainly a step in the right direction, and Mungerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tax measure would even be an improvement, both are means of circumventing a greater issue: the wreckage caused by Proposition 13.

Proposition 13 was passed in 1978 and included two components that sig-­ QLĂ&#x20AC;FDQWO\ DOWHUHG WKH FRXUVH RI &DOLIRU-­ nia history: it limited the tax rate for real estate and mandated a two-­thirds majority in both houses in order to raise taxes. With this two-­thirds stat-­ ute in place, legislators are effectively

forced to resort to passing initiatives in order to raise taxes. â&#x20AC;&#x153;We are now really paying the price of trying to work around Proposition 13. There is a real stress; if you wanted WR Ă&#x20AC;[ WKH VWDWH DQG ORFDO LVVXHV \RX¡G KDYH WR Ă&#x20AC;[ 3URSRVLWLRQ Âľ VDLG 'HFN-­ er.

Matt Haney, Berkeley alumnus and current Executive Director of the UC Student Association (UCSA), said that the common sentiment amongst the unions UCSA communicates with is that the passage of the Governorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s initiative would begin the movement to reform Proposition 13. â&#x20AC;&#x153;If it [the initiative] doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t succeed, it will be harder to convince the state to allow the voters to make this sort of decision again,â&#x20AC;? said Haney.

The failure of this initiative would likely be perceived as an indicator that Californians are not willing to pay for basic services. Building momentum to generate revenue via the initiative sys-­ WHP RU Ă&#x20AC;VFDO UHIRUP ZRXOG SRVH D VL]-­ able challenge in the future.

For these reasons, this is truly a piv-­ otal election for the future of Califor-­ nia. If the initiative passes, higher edu-­ cation will receive a seat at the table and tuition will remain stable. If the initiative fails, tuition will continue to climb and it will become increasingly GLIĂ&#x20AC;FXOW WR UDLVH UHYHQXHV LQ WKH IXWXUH So, if our ultimate goal is to yield a po-­ litical system that is capable of funding programs like higher education, then the passage of the Schools and Local Public Safety Protection Act of 2012 is DEVROXWHO\ YLWDO Â&#x2021;

&UHGLW SURYVFRQGRWFRP

SPECIAL BUDGET REPORT: HIGH-SPEED RAIL

Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s  Disastrous  High-­Speed  Rail  Plan %< 7$1$< .27+$5, 6WDII :ULWHU

C

aliforniaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s transportation budget for the upcoming year contains few surprises â&#x20AC;&#x201C; given the stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s JHQHUDO Ă&#x20AC;QDQFLDO FRQGLWLRQ LW HPSKD-­ VL]HV HIĂ&#x20AC;FLHQF\ DQG PLQRU XSJUDGHV These steps, however small, are sen-­ sible for the purpose of maintaining Ă&#x20AC;QDQFLDO VROYHQF\ 0RYLQJ 'HSDUWPHQW of Motor Vehicles operations online will VWUHDPOLQH WKH ZRUN FRPSOHWHG DW Ă&#x20AC;HOG RIĂ&#x20AC;FHV ZKLFK ZLOO DOVR EHQHĂ&#x20AC;W IURP around $4 million in direct funding.

More importantly, however, Califor-­ niaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s politicians are mulling over the possibility of a high-­speed railway that would connect the San Francisco Bay Area to Los Angeles. Here, the picture is not quite as rosy. The effort would require over $40 billion, of which only about one-­third has been accounted for WR GDWH $SDUW IURP Ă&#x20AC;QDQFLDO ZRHV WKH program has been plagued by misman-­ agement. Earlier this year, the Califor-­ nia High-­Speed Rail Peer Review Group already recommended that high-­speed rail funding in its current form ought not to exist. The state has essentially chosen to ignore those recommenda-­ tions, despite the fact that the bud-­ get had called for the creation of this JURXS LQ WKH Ă&#x20AC;UVW SODFH 7KH VWDWH KDV

put aside environmental concerns in pursuit of this plan, which it says will create jobs now and generate revenue in the future. In the stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s current eco-­ nomic condition, however, this project has rightfully been opposed. A Penin-­ sula Press report from two months ago indicated that concerns over the source of the funding (primarily its reliance on the federal government as the largest sponsor) have spurred several lawsuits against Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s railway board.

5LGGOHG ZLWK LQHIĂ&#x20AC;FLHQFLHV FORDNHG by private interests, and detrimental to the environment, Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s high-­ speed railway plan nonetheless seems fated to continue. Governor Jerry Brown called it critical in his State of the State address earlier this year. De-­ spite opposition from over two-­thirds of Californians, according to recent polls, Governor Brown stated that more fa-­ YRUDEOH Ă&#x20AC;QDQFLDO HVWLPDWHV FRXOG EHJLQ to pour in by the middle of the year.

At a time when California is in need of critical infrastructure repair, esti-­ mated at a potential cost of $65 billion according to the American Society of Civil Engineers, the high-­speed railway plan is a well-­meaning but likely ill-­fat-­ ed plan. Infrastructure development is certainly critical for California; every $1 billion of infrastructure spending cre-­

VSULQJ

15

&UHGLW LEWLPHV FRP

ates over 14,000 jobs, according to the Bay Area Council Economic Institute, which advocates public-­private part-­ nerships for infrastructure creation.

At the same time, Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s infra-­ structure repair should occur in other areas. The American Society of Civil Engineersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; 2012 report card for Califor-­ nia gave the state a â&#x20AC;&#x153;Dâ&#x20AC;? rating for levee control, and the state fared only slight-­ ly better in the urban runoff category.

The push for high-­speed rail com-­ promises more valuable opportunities for infrastructure reform. Nations that have traditionally implemented high-­ VSHHG UDLOZD\V ZLWK Ă&#x20AC;QDQFLDO VWDELOLW\ such as Japan and France, have man-­ aged to connect proximate, highly-­pop-­ ulated cities. A railway running through the Central Valley, connecting large cit-­ ies that are over 300 miles apart, offers no such opportunity. Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s high-­ speed railway is the worst type of state plan â&#x20AC;&#x201C; one that offers little promise of Ă&#x20AC;QDQFLDO VROYHQF\ GHSHQGV RQ WKH IHG-­ eral government to come to fruition, ig-­ nores the need to cut costs, and pushes back the critical infrastructure reform that California truly needs. High-­speed rail needs to be recognized for what it is â&#x20AC;&#x201C; a luxury. Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s relentless pur-­ VXLW RI WKH V\VWHP MHRSDUGL]HV LWV Ă&#x20AC;QDQ-­ FLDO VROYHQF\ Â&#x2021;

16

ESU EHUNHOH\ HGX

SPECIAL BUDGET REPORT: WATER

Do  Not  Let  the  State  Run  Dry %< $5-$1 6,'+8 6WDII :ULWHU

A

midst the plethora of complex po-­ litical, economic, and social prob-­ lems governments are pressed with, none is more paramount than harnessing scarce natural resources.

In California, 51.2 billion gallons of water are used daily for tasks ranging from agriculture and mining to simple daily household chores. State govern-­ ment must thus prioritize delivering plentiful, high-­quality water to all de-­ mographics in order to safeguard the health, safety, and high standard of liv-­ ing for all 38 million Californians.

The California Water Crisis organi-­ zation underlines the necessity for ur-­ JHQW UHIRUP LQVLVWLQJ WKDW ´IRU WKH Ă&#x20AC;UVW time in the stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s history, the water supply and delivery system may not be able to meet our growing needs.â&#x20AC;? They further declare that our economy, our communities, and our families are at risk due to our waning and unreliable water supply, which can be attributed to record droughts, climate change, and aging infrastructure.

Outside the Northwest coast, Cali-­ forniaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s natural climate is a desert.

This makes our state vulnerable to re-­ curring and inevitable droughts, such as the one we are currently experi-­ encing. The Sierra Nevadas and lower Cascades are posting precipitation 33 percent and 50 percent below average levels, respectively. Like the 2007-­2009 drought, adverse effects will precipitate severe water losses for junior water rights holders such as Kings and Kern FRXQWLHV VLJQLĂ&#x20AC;FDQW UHGXFWLRQV LQ K\-­ dropower, and the loss of thousands of MREV LQ DJULFXOWXUH DQG Ă&#x20AC;VKHULHV Droughts will most notably handi-­ cap smaller, recluse communities that

currently have corroded water systems.

To address this particular concern, this yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s budget increases the Small Com-­ munity Grant Fund by $11 million to support State Water Pollution Control.

Furthermore, to develop more effective and reliable methods to treat contami-­ nated groundwater, the Department of Toxic Substances Control will receive an increase of $40.1 million in lease revenue bond authority to construct the New Stringfellow Pre-­Treatment plant. The state thus appears to be tak-­ ing measures to mitigate unavoidable short-­run crises. Nevertheless, these steps are not bold enough to adequate-­ ly avert long-­run risks.

In critical times of regional climate change, which exacerbate the water supply crisis by creating warmer tem-­ peratures that produce less precipi-­ tation and melt current snow packs, the budget neglects long-­term risk management. The Department of Wa-­ ter Resources pledged a goal of reduc-­ ing water consumption by 20 percent per capita by the year 2020 in efforts WR LQFUHDVH ZDWHU HIĂ&#x20AC;FLHQF\ 8QIRU-­ tunately, progress has stalled as the state advocates for the construction of deeper wells and the further extraction of groundwater. In order to achieve its original goal, the state should allocate resources toward the California Wa-­ ter Plan, a multifaceted action plan to LPSURYH ZDWHU HIĂ&#x20AC;FLHQF\ H[SDQG HQYL-­ ronmental stewardship, and introduce initiatives for reliable water supplies by expanding integrated regional water management.

Alongside investing and innovating ZDWHU HIĂ&#x20AC;FLHQF\ LQ RXU KRPHV DQG JDU-­ dens, a statewide action plan must be GHYHORSHG WR LPSURYH HIĂ&#x20AC;FLHQF\ LQ RXU aqueducts. In California, 70 percent of rain precipitates in the North, but 80

percent of water is consumed in the South. The aqueduct, a 700-­mile long system of canals, transports this wa-­ ter each day. Because the aqueduct is uncovered, unfathomable amounts of water evaporate from it each day. The legislature should therefore provide long-­term solutions that handicap wa-­ WHU DOORFDWLRQ HIĂ&#x20AC;FLHQF\ Our levee network demands even greater scrutiny. The San Joaquin and Sacramento rivers, Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s larg-­ est, meet at a delta that spans 738,000 acres and aggregates water for 25 mil-­ lion Californians. Though an impres-­ sive resource, most of the levees there are nearly a century old and require immediate repair. The government has LGHQWLĂ&#x20AC;HG FULWLFDO VLWHV RQ WKH OH-­ vees that need repair but only 100 sites KDYH EHHQ Ă&#x20AC;[HG 7KH 'HSDUWPHQW RI Water Resources warns that an earth-­ quake of magnitude 6.5 or higher could devastate our levee system completely, FUHDWH XQFRQWUROODEOH Ă RRGV WKDW GH-­ stroy towns, and inhibit water access for several counties.

Alarmingly, the governorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s proposed EXGJHW FXWV IXQGLQJ IRU Ă RRG FRQWURO programs by 20 percent, or $6.6 mil-­ lion, which would reduce channel and OHYHH PDLQWHQDQFH DQG Ă RRGSODLQ PDS-­ ping. While levees remain the most vul-­ nerable cornerstone in our aging infra-­ structure, mitigating short-­term crisis from droughts and averting long-­term harms from climate change are equally crucial. The budget currently under review allocates a mere $2.5 billion, or less than 2 percent of expenditures, to the Department of Water Resources.

Future budgets must place more of an emphasis on the protection of Califor-­ QLD¡V PRVW YDOXDEOH QDWXUDO UHVRXUFH Â&#x2021;

INTERNATIONAL

VXPPHU

Exploring  the  contradictions,  failures  and  triumphs  of  the  Bolivarian  president %< &+$5/,( 60,7+ 6WDII :ULWHU

H

ugo Chavez is a man of glaring contradictions, perplexing mo-­ tivations and numerous delu-­ VLRQV %XW KH LV RQO\ DV EDIà LQJ DV WKH history that spawned him. He is both a socialist and a union buster, a secu-­ lar nationalist and an ally of Iran, and an adversary and dependent of Ameri-­ ca. He has simultaneously battled the West for sway in Latin America while selling his neoliberal enemies oil to spend on lavish weapon deals and so-­ cial programs. Without dubious effect, Chavismo has done more to serve the interests of its founder than for Ven-­ ezuelans and serves as a showcase of geopolitical dysfunction.

Chavez began his political career with a failed coup in 1992 for which he was imprisoned two years. Upon his release he conveniently turned a new leaf, expressing a commitment to de-­ mocracy and founding his social demo-­ cratic political party, The Fifth Repub-­ lic Movement. In 1998 he was elected president with a healthy majority. The coup plotter turned politician rose to power on a platform of anticorruption and antipoverty, railing against the sta-­ WXV TXR V\VWHP RI SXQWRĂ&#x20AC;MLVPR Corruption under Chavez has, how-­ ever, been rampant according to a 2006 study by the Cato Institute. This is in part a result of high oil prices, which now make up about 80 percent of Ven-­ ezuelaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s export revenue. UC Berkeley Professor and expert on Latin American Development, Laura Enriquez, explains that â&#x20AC;&#x153;corruption has been rampant ever since oil has became a major feature of Venezuelaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s economy.â&#x20AC;?

Increasing corruption may be in part a systemic result of higher oil pric-­ es, which have increased by over 250 percent from 2000 to 2008. Regardless of the cause, Chavez has been unsuc-­ cessful in curbing corruption and his

â&#x20AC;&#x153;re-­nationalizationâ&#x20AC;? of the oil industry has done little to help. In 2000, the Corruption Perception Index ranked Venezuela 2.7 on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being the least corrupt). Since then the country has fallen to a 1.9.

Chavez has managed to orchestrate a shift towards a more authoritarian style of governance while maintain-­ ing his support from poor voters. The long list of power consolidating reforms speaks for itself: A law enabling the government to rule by decree for 18 months, another banning legislators IURP VZLWFKLQJ SROLWLFDO SDUWLHV DQG Ă&#x20AC;-­ nally the closure of 32 privately owned radio stations among other opposition media outlets.

Despite the oppositionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s claims that Chavez is destroying democracy and their comparisons between the Boli-­ YDULDQ OHDGHU DQG KLV FORVH FRQĂ&#x20AC;GDQW Fidel Castro, poor Venezuelans have FRQVLVWHQWO\ UHDIĂ&#x20AC;UPHG &KDYH]¡V OHDG-­ ership at the ballot box. Chavez came to power in 1998 with 56.2 percent of the vote. By 2006 his support climbed to 63 percent. Opposition leader, Ra-­ mon Guillermo said â&#x20AC;&#x153;Venezuelan elec-­ tions may be free, but they are not fair.â&#x20AC;?

While there is no evidence of tampering at polling stations, public sector em-­ ployees face enormous pressure to vote for Chavez.

Nevertheless, the president has established a solid base of support amongst the poor by promising sweep-­ ing social reform and by stirring na-­ tionalist sentiments. These reforms have been described as â&#x20AC;&#x153;Bolivarian Missions.â&#x20AC;? They include free eye care WR RYHU RQH PLOOLRQ SHRSOH DQG PLFUR Ă&#x20AC;-­ nancing for the poor.

Despite this, Francisco Rodriguez, former chief economist of the Venezue-­ lan National Assembly, wrote in a 2008 Foreign Affairs article that income inequality has in fact increased dur-­ ing Chavezâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rule. Professor Enriquez counters by pointing out that several

17

of his measures have done much for Venezuelans rural poor. â&#x20AC;&#x153;The health care mission has been incredibly suc-­ cessful. Sectors of the population that never had consistent access to health care now have it.â&#x20AC;?

These new programs are proclaimed as a departure from American style capitalism but ironically are funded indirectly by the US, who is Venezu-­ elaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s leading trade partner. Oil rev-­ enues, earned primarily from the US, now make up about half of government revenues, which are then pumped into private bank accounts and new social programs.

Chavezâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s foreign policy has con-­ sisted of an awkward blend of social-­ ist machismo and strategic free trade agreements rooted in his so called â&#x20AC;&#x153;oil diplomacy.â&#x20AC;? He has pushed for further Latin American economic integration during his presidency. Pipelines to Colombia, energy integration across South America, arms deals with Brazil and a consistent push to end Ameri-­ caâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s embargo on Cuba are among his most notable efforts. Ideological hard-­ headedness and distrust of the United States have led him to reject the largely US-­sponsored Free Trade Agreement of the Americas, a proposal to lower trade barriers between 34 nations in the re-­ gion.

The question remains whether Ven-­ ezuelan voters will continue to support Chavezâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; brand of heavy handed, petro-­ socialism. This question is all the more GLIĂ&#x20AC;FXOW WR DQVZHU FRQVLGHULQJ WKDW Chavez is receiving radiation treatment in Cuba for cancer. Doubt of Chavezâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s survival surely weakens his prospects.

However, â&#x20AC;&#x153;if his health had not been a question I would say he would have a really good chance of winning the elec-­ tionâ&#x20AC;? said Professor Enriquez. Chavez is everything at once: democrat, dicta-­ tor, liberator, oil trader, president, and VRRQ WR EH XQHPSOR\HG Â&#x2021;

&UHGLW SHWFKDU\ ZRUGSUHVV FRP

18

INTERNATIONAL

ESU EHUNHOH\ HGX

French  Elections and  Their  Global  6LJQL¿FDQFH &UHGLW WHOHJUDSK XN %< $/(; +(<1 6WDII :ULWHU

I

n the midst of the exhausting specta-­ cle that is the US primaries, concur-­ rent global elections are often over-­ shadowed. One country with alarming similarities to Greece pre-­euro-­zone crisis is receiving a great deal of inter-­ national attention during its election season â&#x20AC;&#x201C; France.

Franceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s similarities to Greece are numerous and unpleasant. Like Greece, France has battled a decade-­steady Ă&#x20AC;VFDO GHĂ&#x20AC;FLW D JUDGXDOO\ ULVLQJ WUDGH GHĂ&#x20AC;FLW DQG D EXGJHW GHĂ&#x20AC;FLW WKDW KDV skyrocketed to 7 percent of GDP in the past year alone. A stag-­ gering two-­thirds of Franceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s public debt is held by for-­ eigners. To make matters worse, unemployment is at an all-­time high.

7KHVH EOHDN Ă&#x20AC;JXUHV KDYH led Standard & Poorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s to drop France from a stel-­ lar AAA credit rating to the somewhat less-­impressive AA+.

Yet the most surprising thing about the French situation is not the black hole that is the economy, but the way the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s struggles are treated by Franceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s presidential candidates. Having seen the chaos in other parts of Europe, it might be logi-­ cal to assume that the French attitude toward the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s economic strife would be appropriately sober and ur-­

gent. However, neither of the two main candidates, incumbent Nicolas Sarkozy and challenger Francois Hollande, is doing enough to tackle Franceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s grow-­ ing economic woes.

Sarkozy of the conservative Union for a Political Movement is calling for increased taxation on French-­based corporations, which some fear would only drive business out and raise debt and unemployment levels. As the in-­ cumbent, Sarkozy is certainly the better known of all the current candi-­ dates â&#x20AC;&#x201C; though that does not necesar-­ rily play to his advantage. Over the course of his term, the French presi-­ dent made several unpopular politi-­ cal moves, including tax breaks for the wealthy. His growing collection RI XQĂ DWWHULQJ VRXQG-­ bites is likely to over-­ shadow any over-­ tures on the economy.

The president has called journalists â&#x20AC;&#x153;pedophiles,â&#x20AC;? told British prime minister David Cameron to â&#x20AC;&#x153;shut up,â&#x20AC;? and even called a farmer a â&#x20AC;&#x153;sad bastard.â&#x20AC;? Sarkozy has also been criticized by his own electorate for seeming â&#x20AC;&#x153;distantâ&#x20AC;? and â&#x20AC;&#x153;out-­of-­touch.â&#x20AC;?

Nicolas Sarkozy is, in essence, Mitt Romney with chutzpah.

Hailing from the liberal Socialist Party, Hollande has built a campaign platform stressing reinvigoration. In the bright tones of reform, the candi-­ date has promised an eyebrow-­raising

75 percent tax increase on the wealthy and a vague plan to expand Franceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s public service force â&#x20AC;&#x201C; even though pub-­ lic spending makes up over half of the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s total GDP. Nevertheless, Hol-­ lande likely rightly contends that â&#x20AC;&#x153;[Sar-­ kozy] may be the president of the cri-­ sis, but Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;m the president for getting out of the crisis.â&#x20AC;? The French actually like Hollande, which is perhaps more than can be said for Nicolas Sarkozy.

The way to economic recovery rests on both tax increases and spending cuts, yet French candidates seem all WRR HDJHU WR UDLVH WD[HV ZKLOH VQLIĂ&#x20AC;QJ at the very notion of cutting spend-­ ing. Even with rising debt and unem-­ ployment, the French candidates seem unwilling to face the harsh reality that their economy is currently much more like Spainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s than it is like Germanyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s.

As we have learned through our own economic trauma, when one country falters, others follow. As a politically DQG HFRQRPLFDOO\ LQĂ XHQWLDO JUHDW SRZ-­ er, France matters. Its internal politics have implications for not just the euro zone, but the world at large. At least in some part, the fate of the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s still-­ anemic economy now appears to rest upon the unpredictability of a France RQ WKH EULQN RI SROLWLFDO FKDQJH Â&#x2021;

OPINION

VXPPHU

19

The  Failure  of  Direct  Democracy  in  California

&UHGLW ZLUHG FRP

%< -26+ &2+(1 6WDII :ULWHU

I

n ancient Athens, the full voting population of the polis voted on every proposed law. While this vot-­ ing population excluded a majority of FLWL]HQV LW ZDV WKH Ă&#x20AC;UVW DQG RQO\ UHDO experiment with direct democracy on a large scale. California attempts something roughly analogous to direct democracy ev-­ ery year through the ballot initiative sys-­ tem. Beginning with 1933â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Riley-­Stewart Amendment and con-­ tinuing to the present day, Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s initiative and referen-­ dum system of direct democracy has led to constraints on our elected legis-­ lature, eroded our Foundersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; belief in a representative democracy, and given special interests more and more power at a time when voters donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t want them to have it.

Originally, the initiative was a noble goal. California -­-­ though recently ranked by the Center for Public Integ-­ rity as the fourth least corrupt state in the Union -­-­ was initially one of the most corrupt states, controlled almost entirely by railroad tycoons. In 1910, a reformer named Hiram Johnson ZRQ WKH JRYHUQRU¡V RIĂ&#x20AC;FH DQG IHOORZ reformers introduced the initiative, referendum, and recall. It sounded great, and, for a time, it was a useful solution to a vexing problem.

However, the initiative process has PDQ\ Ă DZV )LUVWO\ LW JRHV DJDLQVW the idea of a representative democracy.

Our nationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Founders were adamant that the people as a whole couldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t

always be trusted. Their methods of curbing mobocracy -­-­ such as indi-­ rect senatorial elections through state legislatures, outlawed by the 17th Amendment in 1913 during the same era of reform that swept California -­-­ werenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t always the best, but their idea holds true today. Average voters donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t spend much time following politics, and they donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t pay attention to the impact of their votes in the same man-­ ner legislators do. They will vote for higher spending on projects they like and lower taxes on themselves be-­ cause both those votes will help them on a personal level. Thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s no way to run a government.

Putting aside political theory expos-­ HV WKH WUXH Ă DZV LQ RXU GLUHFW GHPRF-­ racy failure. Firstly, our legislature is nearly completely bound by proposi-­ tions weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve already passed. A full 90% of our budget is already earmarked for certain programs or causes before the Legislature even gets to look at it. Gas taxes must be used for transportation.

A certain percentage of our budget must be spent on K-­12 education.

Fully 40 percent of revenues must go to colleges. Add in pension commit-­ PHQWV DQG RXU /HJLVODWXUH KDV QR à H[-­ ibility whatsoever. And it works both ways: the Legislature has its hands tied and is consistently unpopular, and when they do actually cause a problem on their own, they can blame it on the voters. Nobody wins. If we want to vote for everything ourselves, the least we could do is save money and abolish the Legislature altogether.

We barely let them do anything as is.

And if the Legislature passes some-­ thing unpopular, we can punish them for it at the ballot box. Californiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

irresponsible citizens, sadly, canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t be voted out, even when they spend bil-­ lions on a high-­speed rail catastrophe.

So whatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s the solution? California needs drastic changes. Firstly, we need to abolish the recall. If the peo-­ ple elect someone for a full term, let it be a full term! Politicians shouldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t constantly be worried about making unpopular but necessary decisions because of a fear of getting recalled.

Secondly, abolish the referendum.

If the Legislature needs to ask the people to agree to something theyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve already passed, itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s probably not a good law. Legislators should be proud of smart laws they pass and own the consequences of not-­so-­smart ones.

The initiative, however, should not be completely eliminated. In the past few years, weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve passed laws allowing a simple majority to pass a budget, instituting independent redistrict-­ ing, and creating a top two primary system. If you think the Legislature would ever have considered pass-­ ing any of these into law, you need to take a look at the political landscape; it never wouldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve happened. I op-­ pose term limits, but thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s another example of something the voters have a right to decide since the Legislature never will. Initiatives should therefore only be allowed if they somehow relate to the Legislatureâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s job or composition.

As for bills on spending or taxes, those should be for the Legislature to vote upon with citizen activists of every position advising their representatives if they see the need. I help pay the salaries of elected representatives; I want them to get something done on WKHLU RZQ Â&#x2021;

20

ADVERTISEMENT

ESU EHUNHOH\ HGX

WR .DSODQ 7HVW 3UHS ,QF DQG DOO RI RXU VSRQVRUV 7KLV FRQWHQW ZDV PDGH SRVVLEOH LQ SDUW GXH WR WKHLU JHQHURXV GRQDWLRQV 7KDQN \RX WR RXU GRQRUV $DURQ $]ODQW .HYLQ &KHQ .HOO\ 'XQOHDY\ 'DQLHO (QHPDUN 6KDQH *ROGPDFKHU &KULVWLQH 0DL 'XF 0DWWHHQ 0RNDOOD (ULF 2VWUHP 5HGG\ 3UDVKDQW 5DFKHO 3ULQJOH $ULDQH :X DQG /LVD ;X

,17(5(67(' ,1 :5,7,1* )25 %(5.(/(< 6 21/< 121 3$57,6$1 32/,7,&$/ 48$57(5/<" :H UH DOZD\V ORRNLQJ IRU QHZ ZULWHUV OD\RXW GHVLJQHUV HGLWRUV FDUWRRQLVWV DQG SKRWRJUDSKHUV

*R WR ESU EHUNHOH\ HGX IRU LQIRUPDWLRQ RQ KRZ WR MRLQ

ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT

VXPPHU

Tricks of the NBA Trade %< 1250$1 &$+1 6WDII :ULWHU

S

pectators remain captivated by the ballet of titans televised on ESPN. A complex political system remains the conductor, pull-­ ing the strings and determining what and who we are watching in the NBA. Indeed, in America, the system itself has garnered generations of modern â&#x20AC;&#x153;NBA-­political philosophers,â&#x20AC;? so to speak. When it comes to trade and contract agreements, much goes into a playerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s/teamâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s decision to switch.

While cynics might decry the primary factor as salary driven, many NBA stars switch teams to win. Despite achieving career highs in his 2010-­ 11 season with the Orlando Magic, Dwight Howard felt that the team was not doing enough to be a champion-­ ship contender. A disgruntled Howard claimed, â&#x20AC;&#x153;The stuff that I have asked for, the stuff I felt our team needed to get better, none of it has happened.

Thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s not me being cocky but I want to be involved with the organization.

Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve been here for a long time, I donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t want to sit around.â&#x20AC;?

However, all athletes have not practiced Howardâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s noble efforts at team-­improvement. Many reluctantly recall (and are still trying to forget) /H%URQ -DPHV¡ VKRFNLQJ DFW RI LQĂ&#x20AC;-­ delity in 2010. On July 1, 2010 at 12:01 AM, a moment later riddled with infamy, James became a free agent.

James, planning to leave the Cleveland Cavaliers to play for the Miami Heat, claimed, â&#x20AC;&#x153;I feel like itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s going to give me the best opportunity to win and to win for multiple years, and not only just

21

&UHGLW RUODQGRVHQWLQHO FRP to win in the regular season or just to ZLQ Ă&#x20AC;YH JDPHV LQ D URZ RU WKUHH JDPHV in a row, I want to be able to win championships.â&#x20AC;? To Cleveland Cava-­ liers fans, this was a betrayal of epic proportions. In a scathing condem-­ nation of Jamesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; decision, Cavaliers Majority Owner Dan Gilbert decried that it was â&#x20AC;&#x153;unlike anything ever â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;witnessedâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; in the history of sports and probably the history of entertainment.â&#x20AC;?

Were the fansâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; hysterics kosher?

Linus Huang, a professor of Sociology at University of California, Berkeley believes, â&#x20AC;&#x153;Of course, fans are emotion-­ ally attached to players and donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t want to see their favorites leave. Trades and free agency tend to force fans to confront the reality of players as â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;commodities,â&#x20AC;&#x2122; whereas they prefer not to think about the market dimension of contemporary sports.â&#x20AC;?

Indeed, NBA GMs have been known to brush aside the feelings of their players. Like so many friendship bracelets heartlessly given away, players are traded at the behest of manag-­ ers and franchise owners, leaving them at the wrong end of many a Dear John letter.

But where is the spirit? Where is the underdog team that becomes the Little Engine that Could? Some might say that professional sports have become less about the game, and

more about a playerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s career choice.

Baseball devotees will recall the 1969 season of the â&#x20AC;&#x153;Amazinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Mets,â&#x20AC;? during which the struggling team managed to win the World Series. However, in todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s political climate of trades and free agency, such a triumph against the odds seems almost impossible.

Sure, itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s easy to be a fan of the /DNHUV RU WKH <DQNHHV Ă&#x20AC;QLVKLQJ RQ high ground year after year; but who doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t revel in the team that, through teamwork and despite adversity, rises to the top? Thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s the game I want to VHH 7KDW¡V ZK\ , FRQWLQXH ZDWFKLQJ Â&#x2021;

The  Politics  behind  Switching  Teams

22

ESU EHUNHOH\ HGX

ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT

REVIEW

&UHGLW ZQ\F RUJ

%< -$&48(/,1( $/$6 6WDII :ULWHU

I

t is undeniable that our eyes can deceive us. From a young age, we are taught not to judge a book by its cover for fear of overlooking some-­ thing very meaningful inside. But, as inherently visual creatures, how else are we to make our judgments? Today, even though we are bombarded with visual ads, we still rely heavily on the spoken word to shape our beliefs and opinions. Yet, no word comes without its share of connotations.

In 1997, the Oakland School Board used the term â&#x20AC;&#x153;Ebonicsâ&#x20AC;? to refer to the primary language used by African American students. Just by using the word â&#x20AC;&#x153;Ebonics,â&#x20AC;? some argue that the board was not successful in helping students learn â&#x20AC;&#x153;standard Englishâ&#x20AC;? because it exaggerated English as used by blacks as an entirely different language rather than just a stylistic preference. It almost creates an image of black students as foreigners in their own country struggling to learn what, in reality, is their native language. As this demonstrates, much of how we WUHDW ODQJXDJH LV LQĂ XHQFHG E\ KRZ LW is presented. But more importantly, much of how we treat people rests on how we treat them through our language.

In Their Eyes Were Watching God, Zora Neale Hurston creates a set-­ ting in which black vernacular prose doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t displace itself from the text just because it is a different way of speaking. Instead, conversations are open windows where words like â&#x20AC;&#x153;Gâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;wan,â&#x20AC;? â&#x20AC;&#x153;Lawd,â&#x20AC;? and â&#x20AC;&#x153;Naw,â&#x20AC;? can breathe and perform. American Stud-­ ies Professor Christine Palmer points out that Hurston has a unique way of portraying African American culture by elevating its language. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Before Hurston,â&#x20AC;? Palmer notes, â&#x20AC;&#x153;the point of black dialect in literature was to denigrate speech and the cul-­ ture of black folk in the US. In Their Eyes Were Watching God, Hurston deliberately sets out to elevate black vernacularâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;to illustrate its value, to say that it is poetic, that it is beauti-­ ful, that it is valuable in representing American life as Shakespeare was in representing Elizabethan life. In other words, for Hurston, black speech should be heard, performed, and embraced.â&#x20AC;? It is this very spirit that Arthur Yorinks hoped to capture in his radio play adaption of Their Eyes Were Watching God to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the classic. And capture it, he did.

Each readerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rich tone and saucy

personality demonstrates how Hur-­ stonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s novel uses black speech as an experience. Making seamless shifts from describing hastened anxiety in one character to sheer bucolic reverie in another, narrator Phylicia Rashad does more than simply lend her voice to each characterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s emotional transi-­ tions. Her voice acts as an electric current that vacillates with each characterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s entrance and exit from any JLYHQ VFHQH 5DWKHU WKDQ Ă&#x20AC;OOLQJ EUHDNV in conversations, Rashadâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s voice is an underlying current that merges the radio playâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s settings of physical nature with each characterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s frame of mind.

With her steady voice setting the stage, each readerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s lively southern drawl is brought out, giving the play a natural authenticity and sense of humor. The continuum of experience is especially evident in Roslyn Ruffâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s portrayal of Janie Crawford. Without changing the aesthetics of her voice, Ruff manages to accurately represent Janie both as a child and as an adult.

With collectively stellar perfor-­ mances and a powerfully enduring narrative, this radio play has man-­ aged to give new meaning to the bookâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own phrase, â&#x20AC;&#x153;words walking without masters.â&#x20AC;? Hurstonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s words in Their Eyes Were Watching God are no longer nested between the covers of a book. +HU ZRUGV DUH DOLYH DQG ZDONLQJ Â&#x2021;

ADVERTISEMENT

VXPPHU

23

Attention Undergrads: Need a quiet place to study or host a group meeting?

Reserve the new Robert T. Matsui Center Group Study Room!

Features include: t 55â&#x20AC;? HD TV t Wi-Fi t Whiteboard t Space for 20 people 117 Moses Hall

Reserve our study room

Reserve at politics.berkeley.edu