Clinton leads CA by a mile

Good morning. It’s Thursday and in the spirit of getting through to the weekend, we’ll give a quick rundown of today’s news and happenings.

Here’s something that should come as no surprise: Hillary Clinton has twice as much support as Donald Trump in California, according to a new poll. A 26-point lead. The San Francisco Chronicle has more.

But here’s something you may not have known: Hollywood’s stars are often quick to lend their name to causes, but not always so quick to give their money. Of course, some open their wallets. Robert Downey Jr. and his wife each gave $35,000 to Prop. 57, Gov. Jerry Brown’s parole measure. The Sacramento Bee has more.  

One of the most endangered legislative incumbents, Assemblyman David Hadley, R-Torrance, has been ordered by a Sacramento judge to explain why he hasn’t fully cooperated with a political ethics investigation. This South Bay seat is one of a handful that will decide if Democrats get a two-thirds “supermajority” in the legislature. Capital Public Radio has more. 

Speaking of donors, the Bay Area’s Tom Steyer — the largest donor in the country — is now the largest donor to the $2-per-pack tobacco-tax increase after giving $3.5 million to the cause on Tuesday. The potential gubernatorial candidate has now spent $11.3 million on Prop. 56, including in the primary. The Los Angeles Times has more.

And totally unrelated to the election, San Diego’s City Council will consider banning Airbnb and other short-term rentals, reports The San Diego Union-Tribune.

Legislature:

• Gone till December.

Gov. Brown: 

• No public events announced.

Tips: matt@calwatchdog.com

Follow us: @calwatchdog @mflemingterp

New follower: @mamaloney 

But two years later, however, Schwarzenegger — in full legacy-hunt mode — didn’t say squat when the California Air Resources Board released a “scoping” plan of the economic impact of AB 32 that was full of happy talk that depicted the law as akin to a job-creation program.

Professional economists pushed back. The “peer review” of the findings was harsh. The panel included Harvard’s Robert Stavins — perhaps the world’s leading environmental economist. Stavins backed AB 32 but considered its happy talk ridiculous. “I have come to the inescapable conclusion that the economic analysis is terribly deficient in critical ways and should not be used by the state government or the public for the purpose of assessing the likely costs of CARB’s plan,” he wrote.

Stavins later told The Wall Street Journal that if shifting to cleaner-but-costlier energy were good for businesses, they would have already done it.

That’s such a crisp, simple Occam’s Razor way to frame this issue.

Unfortunately, in the California of 2014, when it comes to economics, we’re in a post-common sense era.

‘Skimp’ on wages? You’ll make less money!

This is playing out in San Diego, where the City Council’s liberal supermajority wants to make a big splash before November elections in which they are likely to lose their power to impose legislation over a veto by Republican Mayor Kevin Faulconer.

The main way they want to make this splash is by sharply increasing the minimum wage in the city. The initial proposal was to make it $13.09 cents an hour by July 2017. That would be nearly one-third higher than the $10 that will be the minimum state rate effective 2016.

Business interests point out that this will hurt San Diego on competitiveness grounds. Advocates initially responded by saying job losses from a minimum wage hike would be minimal. But somewhere along the way, the spirit of the loony air board infected their thinking, and now San Diegans are being told that a minimum-wage hike is, yes, a rising tide that will lift all boats.

Consider this nugget from this op-ed defending the City Council’s plan. The gist is that business operators who try to keep costs down are idiots who don’t know what they’re doing:

“Employers who skimp on wages and benefits don’t make more money, they make less. They have greater turnover, resulting in more training, and they engender less loyalty and more cheating.”

Oh, give me a break.

CA activists lecture business on how to make money

According to this one-size-fits-all theory, Wal-Mart and carwashes and taco stands and all the non-union companies in the world that try to keep wages down are simply buffoons who are lucky to still be in business.

The arrogance of this is stunning.

The truth, of course, is that — as the world’s leading environmental economist told The Wall Street Journal — businesses won’t reject strategies that make them money. They will embrace such strategies.

But as I said, we’re in a post-common sense era in which activists and liberal pundits who have never made a payroll or run a business look at successful businesses and say something akin to the following:

Hey, you idiots, you don’t know what you’re doing.

Surreal. And so California-ish.

Along with then-Mayor Jerry Sanders and then-Councilman Carl DeMaio, Faulconer, 47, was a key member of a cadre of San Diego GOP pols who brought sweeping reforms to City Hall in recent years. But in this campaign, he did all he could to obscure his party membership. He wooed the police officers’ union and celebrated its support. He defended gay marriage and in general avoided every last social conservative issue.

And while he won decisively, it’s worth noting that Faulconer beat an inexperienced, second-tier Democratic opponent. David Alvarez, 33, only became a known figure in city politics in 2010, when he won a City Council seat that traditionally goes to union-backed Latinos. The list of San Diego Democrats with higher profiles and better resumes is a long one: former Councilwoman Donna Frye, Assemblywoman Toni Atkins, state Sens. Ben Hueso and Marty Block, Rep. Susan Davis and interim Mayor Todd Gloria.

Faulconer will serve the remaining 33 months of the term that former Rep. Bob Filner won over DeMaio in 2012. Filner  resigned in August 2013 after an ugly sexual-harassment scandal.

Faulconer, a former communications consultant and San Diego State University student body president, will face tough sledding with any conservative reform agenda. He is certain to be replaced on an interim basis on the City Council by a Democrat, giving them a veto-proof 6-3 majority until Faulconer’s council term ends in December.

Alvarez and at least two of those other Democrats are interested in or ready to nullify or impede three voter-approved reforms, starting with a money-saving measure in which city workers compete with private firms for the right to provide certain government services.

And in the June primary and November general election, Democrats have a solid shot at winning Faulconer’s coastal seat and a central San Diego district configured to encourage the election of an Asian-American council member. The Republican now representing the latter district, Lorie Zapf, is running for Faulconer’s old seat.

Democrats may soon hold 7 of 9 San Diego council seats

By year’s end, Democrats could have seven of the nine City Council seats.

Even with Faulconer’s election, many business interests already have given up on the City Council as a constructive force for job creation and economic growth. They’re using ballot measures to try to overturn City Council decisions to vastly increase fees on commercial development and to rezone a shipyard industrial area in a way that business owners say will destroy thousands of jobs.

Direct democracy appears to be their only chance of getting big things done going forward. San Diego’s parallels with California at large are plain. A well-crafted, conservative ballot measure can still win passage, if voters believe it is constructive or in their best interests.

As for Faulconer, he may be forced to play defense until his 2016 re-election bid — fighting to protect the reforms that until 2012 made San Diego seem a poster city for small-government activism.

By Chris Reed

The longer I’ve lived in California, the more governance here seems to resemble organized looting of taxpayers. It’s not just the showy and ridiculous things, like the longtime president of the CalPERS governing board being a top official in the California Federation of Labor, or the public safety workers in a bankrupt town winning automatic raises. It’s stories like this one, about a defeated Assembly member getting a $128,000 part-time state job:

“Allen, defeated by Marc Levine in his reelection bid for a state Assembly seat representing part of Sonoma County and Marin County, was appointed on Thursday to the state Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board.

“The five-member panel, which meets monthly, is the final arbiter in appeals of unemployment and disability claims involving workers and employers.

“The job pays $128,000 a year. That’s a hefty bump from an Assembly member’s base pay of $95,300.”

Assemblyman aids aide and is aided in return

And it’s stories like this one, about a termed-out Assembly member helping his aide win a narrow election to his old job, and then getting a $102,000-a-year job from his aide until his next elected gig starts paying him:

“Voters in northeast Los Angeles picked former state Assemblyman Felipe J. Fuentes III (D-Sylmar) in March to represent them on the City Council, but that job won’t begin until July, seven months after Fuentes’ term in Sacramento ended. He won’t be struggling to make ends meet, however: Fuentes is bridging the gap by working for his former chief of staff and longtime friend, Raul Bocanegra, who was elected in November to fill Fuentes’ seat in the 39th District.

“Assembly records show that Fuentes went on Bocanegra’s payroll Dec. 3. His title as of February 28 was principal assistant in Bocanegra’s district office; his monthly salary of $8,500 was the second-highest among Bocanegra’s aides. In fact, it’s more than the salaries paid to either Bocanegra or his chief of staff.

“The unofficial tally from the March 5 election showed Fuentes with 51% of the vote in Council District 7, almost twice the percentage of runner-up Nicole Chase. The only candidate in the district to raise a significant war chest, Fuentes spent almost nine times as much in the campaign as all his rivals combined.”

That’s from the L.A. Times.

Question the looting, and you’ll get insulted

Here’s another version of governance as looting involving another Democratic Assembly member, Ben Hueso, and the San Diego City Council. Note that Hueso’s aide characterizes questioning the looting as being “obnoxious.”

What’s obnoxious is this status quo, and how government watchers are so used to it that it’s barely considered news any  more.

Here’s more from the Times story on Fuentes:

“Fuentes has tapped public funds at least once before while moving from one public-sector job to another. He was chief of staff for Padilla in the 7th District until Padilla won a seat in the state Senate in 2006. Fuentes then ran for and won a special election to replace Assemblyman Richard Alarcon (D-Panorama City), who had won the seat Padilla vacated on the council. The day after Fuentes won that election, he obtained a $7,500 contract from the [Los Angeles] City Council to brief Alarcon’s council staff. Not that Alarcon was new to the council; he’d represented the 7th District before heading to Sacramento.”

Showing it’s not just Sacramento and San Diego. It’s L.A. It’s all of California government.

Great, just great.