-By Martha Montelongo

Gov. Jerry Brown has an interesting definition of “third world.”

In an interview with a San Francisco radio station last week, Brown said California would become “a Third World country” unless the state builds a ghastly $100 billion high-speed rail line that’s been fraught with mismanagement, cost overruns and shaky ridership projections.

It’s an odd claim, considering many third-world nations are characterized by crumbling infrastructure, failed boondoggle projects and constant budgetary trouble. In much of the third-world, a new leader will pour massive amounts of a nation’s fortune into a single prestige project, only to have it fail when poor planning, bureaucratic incompetence and malfeasance slowly eat up all the funds.

By this definition, California seems currently on track to become America’s third-world state. Just like high-speed rail, the same spending lobby is promoting a nearly $1 billion per year tax hike so that a politically appointed panel can dole out favors to cronies. The $1 billion in new taxes under Proposition 29 goes into a lockbox that only this politically-influenced commission can access. Not even in cases of waste or abuse can the Governor or the Legislature make any changes! Proposition 29 sounds like it was plucked straight from the playbook of some Latin American dictator or Middle Eastern sheikh.

Jerry Brown ought to find the nearest dictionary. Pouring money into boondoggle projects while neglecting vital services like education and public safety is the surest way for California to join the third-world. Until California can figure out how to pay for what it already has, voters need to say no to more new spending.

(Published with permission)

When Howard Dean became a surprise front runner in the Democrat primary of 2004 doing so on the basis of a strong Internet-based campaign effort, tongues began to wag that the Internet might replace old fashioned retail politics. This time ’round Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich served to get people to question the old way of organizing a campaign.

But this week we’ve seen in Virginia why these airy claims of the Internet’s new dominance is a bit chimerical. We see that old fashioned, boots on the ground politics is still the best method to election.

By all methods of measure, Texas Governor Rick Perry is still a strong candidate in the 2012 GOP Primary race. He sometimes comes in second, third or fourth in polls, but is still considered a top contender for the nomination. Yet as the time came to file his petition signatures in Virginia, it turned out his campaign could not collect enough to get his name on the ballot. So, a reputed front running candidate for the nomination, Rick Perry, will not even appear on the Virginia primary ballot.

Perry isn’t the only one. Neither Bachmann, Huntsman, nor Santorum had the organization in the Commonwealth to gather enough signatures to make the ballot. Further, it was thought Newt Gingrich barely had enough to make it but as the final tally was made he didn’t have enough to make the ballot, either. And Newt is a resident of Virginia!

In the end, as the file date came and went only Mitt Romney and Ron Paul ended up clearly succeeding in turning in enough signatures to make the ballot.

So, what happened here? It all comes down to retail politics. Both Romney and Paul had the organizations with enough people right there in Virginia to pass around their candidate’s petitions and gather the requisite number of signatures. The others simply did not have the campaign staff or enough support in individual workers ready to hit the streets for them that Romney and Paul had.

This shows that the Internet really isn’t enough. It shows that organization still reigns supreme in the primary process. After all, if one can’t even get his name on a ballot, how does one take the next step toward becoming the nominee?

Since the beginning of this primary race there were only three candidates with a ground game. Mitt Romney who spent the last four years creating his organization, Ron Paul whose absurdly young army of acolytes will do anything for him — and which Paul spent six years assembling — and the first major candidate to quit the effort, Tim Pawlenty.

All the rest have been flying by the seat of their pants with little money and fewer numbers in their state-to-state organizations. They’ve been relying on good showings in the many debates — which has been a bigger factor than it has in the past, admittedly — and the Internet to make their dent.

Clearly it hasn’t been enough for the lower tier, however. Regardless of their suitability for the nomination, only Ron Paul and Mitt Romney have the ground game to appear on every state’s primary ballots. It’s the old fashioned game of retail politics that has made the difference for them. Both spent years and tons of cash to make that happen, too.

Fair or not, until there is some major change in our primary system the ground game will make all the difference.

This week there is even more evidence that the ruinous taxation and out-of-control spending of California politicians and the state’s big spending lobbyists have pushed the Golden State over the edge. Today, the state announced massive cuts to essential services like schools and police. About $980 million will be slashed from the budget, with K-12 education and law enforcement bearing some of the biggest cuts. And yet, Sacramento politicians are handing out fat pay raises to their staffs.

As California circles the drain financially, each and every year more and more expensive ballot measures and initiatives are proposed to sap the state’s resources. And despite the fact that California can’t pay for the basics, the spending lobby wants to add other massive obligations to the budget. One in particular is the so-called California Cancer Research Act, a plan that creates a brand new $855 million spending program that duplicates many programs already in place. This boondoggle, which will come before voters on the June ballot, commits the state to the same kind of auto-pilot spending that bankrupted her in the first place. It includes an additional $16 million per year to spend on new government employees, adding to California’s growing pension burden.

Voters need to send a clear message to Sacramento that the way out of this financial crisis is figuring out how to pay for what the state already has before spending more money on new programs and entitlements. Voting no on this ballot box boondoggle in June is a good first step.

Despite all the talk of fixing it, California’s budget is still a mess. One of those “fixes” was implemented last summer when the state Legislature increased revenue projections by $4 billion to avoid balancing the budget. Of course, the problem with using such “phantom money” is that it often has a habit of disappearing when you need it most. And it has disappeared just when money for schools is needed. Now deep cuts are on the table. The people lose again.

Naturally the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office recently reported that the state will receive virtually none of the $4 billion in projected revenue, forcing the state to make some tough decisions in the coming weeks. On the table are major cuts to the education budget, including shortening the school year by a week, not to mention cuts to in-home healthcare programs, and programs for people with developmental disabilities.

Obviously Californian’s budget needs all the help it can get but it looks like it’s business as usual in Sacramento. For instance, an upcoming ballot measure sponsored by a career politician would baffle anyone that truly understands the mess California is in. The so-called California Cancer Research Act coming before voters in June, asks California voters to raise taxes by nearly $1 billion for a whole new perpetual bureaucracy. That is unacceptable to voters. Maddeningly this new program doesn’t even guarantee that the money will be spent in the state! Apparently former state Sen. Pro Tem Don Perata, the career politician pushing the measure, thinks Californians who already paying some of the highest taxes in the nation should reach deeper into their pockets just to potentially send that money across state lines to benefit others. And all the while the budget for the education for those same taxpayer’s kids is about to be slashed.

So, what is the “solution” proposed by Democrats in Sacramento? Raise taxes, of course.

“Today’s numbers make it clear that the state’s first priority must be to get to the ballot in November and raise needed revenues to avoid any more damage to Californians,” said Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento. “The notion of cutting deeper into education, public safety and services for those in need is unthinkable. I imagine an overwhelming majority of Californians agree.”

The “damage” to Californians is not too little “revenue” (the Democrat’s favorite new word for high taxes) being raised. It’s waste and abuse coming right out of our state houses and Washington.

Raising taxes during record unemployment and massive budget deficits and creating whole new bureaucracies when government is already strangling the state just to potentially ship the money out of state is exactly the sort of dysfunctional thinking that got California into the mess it’s in today.

Think you came up a bit short trick-or-treating this year? It’s nothing compared to California, whose revenues in October came in $800 million below projections. Overall, California is about $1.5 billion in the red for the current fiscal year, which may trigger some nasty cuts to schools and public safety if revenues don’t start pouring in soon.

Of course, California didn’t get into these dire straits by accident. Years and years of reckless overspending pushed the state over the fiscal precipice resulting in the sorry state of affairs we’re seeing today. Apparently, despite billions in cuts to education and other critical programs, some people still haven’t gotten the message. Consider the so-called California Cancer Research Act, pushed by a former legislator. This nearly billion dollar tax increase not only would duplicate existing programs, but would spend up to $16 million annually on additional overhead and up to $117 million a year for new buildings and facilities. In short, it would create another new bureaucracy to pay for, even though we can’t pay for the programs already on the books.

California dug itself into the hole it’s in by giving in to wild spending schemes time and time again. Perhaps this June, voters will finally get the message.

–Written By Matthew Cunningham (Posted with permission)

Matthew Cunningham is a writer and new media pioneer in the public and private sectors. In 2004, he founded Orange County’s first political blog, OC Blog, which spawned the most influential regional blogosphere in California and evolved into a national network of more than 30 local blogs under the RedCounty.com banner. He’s also a contributor to the FlashReport Blog, California’s leading statewide conservative blog, and a regular guest on “The Filter with Fred Roggin,” NBC 4’s daily public affairs program.

In 2008 a pipeline operated by Pacific Gas & Electric exploded destroying several homes and killing 72-year-old Wilbert Paana. Since that time authorities have been attempting to determine what sort of fines PG&E should face for its negligence. Recently administrative law judge John Wong proposed that a fine of $38 million — and an end to the whole matter — would be enough. But is this enough to assure the protection and safety of California’s ratepayers?

To his credit, Judge Wong rejected an even lower proposal of a $26 million fine noting that if found guilty the utility would face at least a $97 million if found guilty of all the charges and safety violations leveled against it. Yet, he’s willing to let PG&E get away with less than half of what it could face were it to go the distance in the courts.

Whatever is fair or not, though, one thing must be noted. PG&E’s board recently rewarded CEO Peter Darbee with a $35 million severance package even though he presided over multiple violations of safety including that Rancho Cordova incident that took the life of Mr. Panna, not to mention eight more deaths in the San Bruno incident. He also headed up the utility as it wasted $46 million on the ballot initiative Prop 16 which was an attempt to enshrine in law PG&E’s California monopoly.

So, Mr. Darbee has been involved in the waste of $81 million of PG&E’s funds, at the very least. One would think that if PG&E has this much money to throw around that it should be held accountable properly for the deaths of so many of its customers!

Unfortunately Judge Wong’s proposal wasn’t rejected by the California Public Utilities Commission as it should have been. A more careful examination of the violations should have been made in order to fulfill the CPUC’s charge of Enforcing, “consumer protection laws and service standards, investigate fraud and illegal activity,” and to, “prosecute violators of the Public Utilities Code, CPUC orders, and utility tariffs.”

In fact, even as this proposal by Judge Wong was being floated, state officials were finding that PG&E may have used substandard “junked pipe” in its system in the 40s and 50s raising the specter of many other San Brunos and Rancho Cordovas just waiting to happen.

With these constant violations and the public obviously still in danger sweeping this case under the rug with this fine and an end to the case does not seem like the best idea. The people of California deserve to learn the full extent of what PG&E is responsible for perpetrating against them. Let’s hope that as time goes on the people of California finally get their day in court.

I cannot support Mitt Romney in this coming GOP primary. The one reason why can be summed up simply as this: he flip flops. Romney has more flip flops than a California beachfront. Mitt has been proven a man without anchor adrift in a sea of issues that push him and pull him with the tides. Even worse, maybe, is that he jumps from one ship to the other on those political tides with the sole purpose of scoring a political win. So, how could I say that such a rudderless sailor could be an OK president?

Well, there is one way that a shiftless Mitt Romney might be good for both the country and the conservative cause but it certainly isn’t because he cares at all about conservative issues. It isn’t that he’ll champion them himself, either. But think about this. What does an unmoored boat do but drift with the tide? This is where, if played correctly, Romney could actually work for conservatives.

In fact, a President Romney could be good for Congress no matter which side of the political divide is in control. And control is the word, too.

For far too long Congress has been slowly giving away its Constitutional powers to legislate. Through sloth and selfish re-election needs Congressmen have been allowing the courts to take an unconstitutional role in determining our legislation as well as standing aside as one president after another grabs power unto the executive branch that he wasn’t supposed to have — the latter of which both left and right have complained about for decades.

Up until today we’ve had presidents with strong ideological principles that serve as the guide by which they’ve made policy. Clinton had a liberalism tempered by some centrism, George W. Bush the opposite. Reagan came to Washington with specific ideals on what he wanted to achieve and Obama has too, though in the entirely opposite direction as Ron’s.

But Mitt Romney is a marshmallow. He’s been on every side of every issue throughout his decades as a politician. These days, of course, he’s edged toward conservatism and this gives conservatives an “in” if you will.

I am not suggesting that Romney will stay with these principles. A recent Romney apology by Michael Gerson weakly claimed that because Romney has switched to conservative ideals this time around he’d look too foolish to switch again. But that is simply poppycock. Once a flip flopper always a flip flopper. He’ll easily justify the next flip flop and it will only be Gerson left looking foolish.

So, here is the good news. The fact that Romney is easily led by the political winds gives Speaker Boehner as well as Congressional conservatives the opportunity to become an unmoored president’s pilot. If Boehner and conservatives make their issues winners, this will lead President Romney by the nose down the right path.

The best thing is it gives Congress the opportunity to again take back some of its powers and begin to right the ship of state (if I can get nautical again for a moment).

But it will take a concerted effort to push these conservative issues. None of this working with the left business will do. Romney, will likely start bending his newfound conservative ideas the first time the intelligentsia at The New York Times squawk at his policy ideas. He’ll likely rediscover his linguine spine the second some Democrat calls his conservative policy ideas “racist.” He’ll suddenly want to “work with” every left-winger that comes down the pike.

But because he has no real principles he’ll be apt to pushes from conservatives, as well. If we mount a strong campaign of conservative ideas, budget cuts and all, we can keep a President Romney on the straight and narrow. But it will require a very active Congress not a Congress content to let everyone else take the lead so that at election time they can point fingers everywhere else.

Conservative ideas are winners with the voters. We’ve seen many issues come our way in the last few decades. Abortion is becoming less popular every year. Pro-Second Amendment issues are such winners that the Democrats hardly even talk about their gun banning ideas any more. People are down on unions, agree that government is too large, and think that taxes are too high. These winning issues can only get stronger if Congress pushes them hard. And a weak President Romney will give conservatives the opportunity they need to push his presidency in the right direction.

But I’ll leave you with this reiteration: the left will have the very same opportunity to push a weak-willed President Romney. So, we can’t just sit back and enjoy a win if Romney should happen to win both the GOP primary and the 2012 general election. The second Romney enters the White House our work must begin in earnest. Don’t wait for this flip flopper to take the lead. Push him, conservatives, push him. If you don’t you’ll be on the outside looking in as Romney is bent, twisted, and mutilated by the political left.

I’ll work to defeat Mitt Romney in the primary. But if he wins I’ll work to make his presidency a conservative one despite him.

Voter-Approved First 5 LA Program Spends $200 Million of Taxpayers Money without Oversight

As the Los Angeles Times reports, a recent independent audit of the First 5 LA Commission revealed massive problems with the agency, including lack of accountability, spending oversight or competitive bidding. First 5 LA is part of a statewide program created in 1998 by Prop 10, a measure which was supposed to use funds from a tobacco tax to promote health and education of young children. According to the audit, it’s not exactly fulfilling its mission. From the Times:

An audit by Harvey M. Rose of San Francisco found First 5 LA’s commission was unable to monitor money that was being spent “since monthly programmatic expenditures are not presented relative to a budget.” Auditors also concluded the agency was overstaffed while under-spending on programs for children.

So, First 5 LA is spending too much on public employees and not enough on kids. Not to mention doling out $200 million without a competitive bidding process and operating with such a lack of oversight that there’s no way to determine if the agency has signed agreements “for inappropriate purposes or with unqualified vendors or grantees”. Sounds like standard operating procedure in California, which has seen similar accountability and oversight problems with other initiative-created agencies as well.

And yet, former pro Tem and career politician Don Perata is pushing another measure – the so-called California Cancer Research Act – to create yet another unaccountable bureaucracy with six political appointees that can spend nearly a billion each year, including millions on staff salaries and pensions and overhead. With huge budget problems and public pension costs spiraling out of control, the last thing California needs is another big-spending bureaucracy with no oversight or accountability.

The measure is slated for the June 2012 ballot in California.

Posted with permission from Stephen Kruiser.

A popular, longtime Doctor from central Illinois has been sidelined by employer Springfield-based Memorial Health System because he has not become proficient with the electronic medical records system that they purchased and implemented. Patients are so incensed that they’ve started a Facebook page as well as a blog to rally to his defense.

This situation brings into focus the problem of top-down medical solutions, calling into question the efficacy of healthcare by committee, not to mention Obmacare itself. Do we really want to sacrifice good doctors in favor of good followers of top-down rules? Do we want good users of computers or excellent doctors?

The doctor, Steven Kottemann, 63, was placed on paid administrative leave in September because they felt he was not properly utilizing the new electronic medical records system that his employer, Family Medical Center, instituted.

Kotteman initially tried to upload verbal recordings of his notes made when meeting with patients, but the system failed to accept the recordings. The only other option was to type in by hand all his patient notes. Kottemann tried to input the notes while actually with his patients but eventually came to feel that typing at a computer while trying to give care to his patients was not conducive to good care.

Dr. Kottemann then began staying late after office hours to type in all the notes but due to a stroke of his own the effort became too much for him.

“It got to the point where I was going in seven days a week to keep up,” Kottemann told the State-Register newspaper.

For its part, the employer says that Kottemann’s lack of proficiency with the computer system was not the only reason they fired him but Memorial Medical Center refused to comment further on this story when I contacted them.

Kottemann’s patients, though, are not as reluctant to comment. His patients have become incensed that their favorite doctor has been fired merely because he doesn’t meet administrator’s expectations for computer savvy.

They started a blog to come to his aid. There blog one patient praised Dr. Kottemann saying, “I don’t need a 15 min Dr, or a computer whiz… I need a doctor that cares about me and my family. I have that in Dr. Kottemann.”

There are other equally laudatory entries.

Kottemann is now afraid to say much about this incident because lawyers are involved, so he demurred fro offering a comment for this story.

But the upshot of this whole thing is that good care seems to be being sacrificed to push electronic medical records systems. This is happening across the country, too. We have hospital administrators driving hard to implement Obama’s medical records solution — such as the one called EPIC Systems being pushed by his medical records czar, Judith Faulkner. And in so doing they are acing out excellent doctors whose only deficit is that they are not proficient with the new records technology.

Are we really willing to stand by as Obama’s representatives bully those good doctors that criticize these electronic medical records systems? Are we willing to sacrifice good doctors for merely competent computer jockeys?

As a result of years of budget deficits and wasteful spending by the state legislature, California faces difficult budget challenges for the next ten years. This bad news is courtesy of a recent analysis of the state’s long-term debt obligations by state Treasurer Bill Lockyer (Download .pdf of Lockyer’s Report). The analysis adds to a growing list of bad fiscal news for California, a state already struggling under the nation’s worst credit rating not to mention suffering the highest unemployment in the country at 12%.

Even as California deals with this financial crisis, a career politician is pushing a ballot measure that would raise taxes by nearly $1 billion — but doesn’t allocate one penny to balance the state budget, pay down its debt, or to fund existing critical programs like education and public safety. This measure, the so-called California Cancer Research Act, would mandate a new bureaucracy with six political appointees that can spend tax money on buildings and salaries and benefits. This includes $16 million spent on overhead and $117 million on new buildings and facilities. These are no one-time expenditures as such spending will continue year after year.

The Golden State is already on the verge of bankruptcy, to be sure, and California can’t afford this kind of spending right now. Californians should expect their legislature to fix the deepening budget deficit and fund existing programs before starting new costly spending programs like this.