by ortcutt [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

Mayor Gavin Newsom said today the city will take legal action against the company or agency deemed responsible for the 58,000 gallons of oil that spilled into the bay after a container ship rammed into the Bay Bridge Wednesday.

Newsom and City Attorney Dennis Herrera also expressed frustration over incorrect information disseminated early on by the Coast Guard about the extent of the spill.

"We'll be doing everything to make sure that those who are responsible are held accountable and that the costs born by this will be born by the appropriate agency or agencies... or individuals or companies that are responsible," Newsom said. (SF Chronicle 11.8.07)

Damn straight.  I guess there is some uncertainty whether Cosco or the San Francisco Bar Pilots are responsible for the spill, hence the hedging about "company or agency deemed responsible".  The Coast Guard's role in this has been ridiculous.  140 Gallons?  Who were they kidding?

by Julia Rosen [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

The buzz around Sacramento is that the big announcement the No on 93 (term limits) folks are making tomorrow that uberrich State Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner (he of the gubernatorial ambitions) will be backing the campaign with a significant contribution.  I guess he gave up on the whole dedication to recovery after the fire thing and is instead leaping headfirst into a pretty charged political battle.  CapWeekly:

Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, a Silicon Valley millionaire who has heavily bankrolled his own political races, has decided tofinance the campaign against a February ballot initiative that would allow the current crop of legislative leaders to stay in power for several more years, Capitol Weekly has learned.

A public announcement was expected Thursday at a Capitol news conference at which Poizner was expected to attend. On Wednesday evening, Kevin Spillane, a spokesman forthe No on Proposition 93 campaign, declined to confirm or deny Poizner's role.

Note that Poizner's consultant Wayne Johnson is reportedly serving as a media consultant for the No on 93 campaign.  This is well orchestrated to build the buzz and create interest in the announcement.

by Brian Leubitz [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

The Governor made today the Flood Control day I guess.  He signed 6 bills dealing with flooding, which is a major threat in the Central Valley due to the levees' tenuous position these days. The bill of note here was AB 70, authored by Dave Jones.

In an effort to force local governments to consider flood risks in the planning process, one new law, Assembly Bill 70, will hold cities and counties potentially liable if they "unreasonably" approve new projects in previously undeveloped floodplains starting next year. (SacBee 10/10/07)

Why is this important? Well, developers have money. Money influences county supervisors to overlook the best interests of the land and their community in favor of a few bucks.  Not that anybody would do that or anything... 

by wu ming [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

In a recent report in the Bee, CA State Treasurer Bill Lockyer brainstorms ways to balance the state budget, including a suggestion that that we consider cutting the UC system off of all public funds, and having "public" universities raise their own funds by - you guessed it - raising student fees. As if the state hasn't already kicked students in the gut repeatedly by jacking up tuition and fees, turning our public universities into de facto private institutions.

This from the same "Democrat" who proudly said he voted for Schwarzeneggar for the recall in 2003. And a graduate of UC Berkeley in 1965, back when tuition was so low as to be nearly free. But I guess those were different times, eh Bill?

But in a sense, Lockyer is right despite himself. The state infrastructure is woefully underfunded and underbuilt, given our growing population. We've got a 25 million person infrastructure in a 37 million person state, and we're headed towards 50 million in the decades to come. Yet his proposals largely suck. So what else could we do, since we're in modest proposal mode?

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

By Roy Gayhart

Officially, Gore has made it clear, "I'm not a candidate and I'm not planning on being a candidate for President." He told Time magazine, "It would take a lot to disabuse me of the notion that my highest and best use is to keep building that consensus." What it would take, specifically? "I can't say because I'm not looking for it. But I guess I would know it if I saw it."

by Julia Rosen [courtesy of Calitics - Front Page]

by jody finver [courtesy of Blog for America]

Recently, I called Senator Martinez's office to discuss his opinion on the Petraeus Report. It was a back and forth exchange with his staffer about what qualified a body count, how the Senator could think the present strategy was working, and concluded with an admission she probably regretted making. Yet, she made it. Twice.

I wish I had the conversation taped. That flippant response and the lack of thinking that went into it represents the Senator and how he views "we the people. Me the people."

When I saw the photos on his website of him and Petraeus, I guess I snapped. And this letter came to be. I read it to the President of DFAM and she said send it out as an Op-Ed which I did.. We'll see if anyone picks it up. At any rate... here it is...

Senator Martinez,

I think it is high time that someone defined the function of your job as Senator of the United States from the State of Florida. (Senator Nelson you could stand to take a lesson here as well so pay attention. Close attention.)

Your job is to represent the will of the people, the will of your constituents, the will of the voting public. Your job is to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Technically, I am your boss. You work for me.

You do not work for the President. In fact, your job is to keep him in line and in check. You do not work for a political party. You work for the citizens of your State. Even the ones who don't have a right to vote or are not old enough.