UPCOMING BASE CLOSURES: CALIFORNIANS IN CONGRESS MUST PULL TOGETHER

CALIFORNIA FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2012, OR THEREAFTER

BY THOMAS D. ELIAS

“UPCOMING BASE CLOSURES: CALIFORNIANS IN CONGRESS MUST PULL TOGETHER”

It’s almost impossible to get California’s massive 53-member delegation in the House of Representatives to pull together on anything. They can’t even agree that action is needed to alleviate the housing foreclosure crisis.

That makes it all the more urgent to let this corps of ideologues on the left and right know they must make an exception for the coming round of military base closures.

California still suffers heavily from the last two rounds of closings, which shuttered landmarks like Ft. Ord, the Long Beach Naval Shipyard, March Air Force Base, the Presidio of San Francisco and the El Toro Marine Air Station. Some closed bases have been converted at least partially to positive use, one good example being the campus of Cal State Monterey Bay rising on some of Ft. Ord's former turf, but there’s been little progress on others.

Overall, there’s no doubt about the huge negative effects of the closures, nor about the fact that California has taken more of a beating in base closings than any other state. The closings are the main reason federal per capita spending in California ranks 43^rd among all states, getting back just 78 cents on every tax dollar residents send to Washington, D.C.

Now comes the certainty of another round of base closings atop those of the mid-1990s and the mid-2000s, which did away with so many California fixtures.

It behooves every Californian in Congress to make certain that this state’s interests are well represented on the reactivated Base Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC) that undoubtedly will recommend which facilities the military should mothball or sell off in the next round. It would be a positive if they opted to vote against any plan that closes even one California base.

Reactivation of BRAC became all but certain the moment the Obama Administration pledged last month to cut $487 billion from military spending over the next five years.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, well aware of base closures after working from an office at Cal State Monterey Bay while out of office during the George W. Bush Administration, immediately pledged there would be no significant program cuts that might endanger the lives of soldiers and sailors. About the only other big-money areas that can be cut are military bases and new weaponry.

The last two times around, Californians in Congress overwhelmingly backed both creation of BRAC and its reauthorization. By doing this, they left themselves helpless to stop the massive hits California took, which saw the state slide fully 20 places in its rank among the states in federal spending.

That slippage occurred because the closures caused a large drop in the salaries paid to military and related personnel in California. The Pentagon spent just $10.3 billion on salaries in California in 2010, compared with $19.7 billion in Texas.

Can anyone doubt the extra $9.4 billion going into the Texas economy had a lot to do with that state weathering the Great Recession better than most others? Is there any doubt the loss of all those salaries contributed heavily to the drop in California housing values? Did having a former Texas governor in the White House during the last round of cuts have anything to do with that?

If nothing else, the huge California congressional delegation – which includes some of the most influential members of both parties – should insist the House and Senate get some control over who serves on the new BRAC commission.

Last time out, there was no Californian on the commission, and this state took by far the lion’s share of cuts. That should never be allowed to happen again, and by dint of their sheer numbers, the Californians in Congress could assure it – if they work together.

The delegation should also insist that the new plan be presented on something other than the all-or-nothing basis which governed the last two rounds of closures, forcing all Congress members and senators to vote yes or no on the recommendations, with no options for any amendments.

Doing these things would mean working together for the good of California, and there’s been no instance of that in recent history. This time it’s absolutely essential.

Or else we could have a California with no Seabee base in Ventura County, no Camp Pendleton Marine base in San Diego County, no Travis Air Force Base near the East Bay area and no Lemoore Naval Air Station in the Central Valley. And as many as 120,000 related jobs dying out, just as happened before.

Losing any of these installations, or any more bases at all for that matter, can only worsen the California economy at the same time it substantially weakens the military’s ability to reach out into the Pacific Rim. Both of which should be avoided at almost any cost.

-30-
Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough: The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It," is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, go to www.californiafocus.net.

WHY ROMNEY COULD TURN CALIFORNIA EVEN MORE BLUE

CALIFORNIA FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2012, OR THEREAFTER

BY THOMAS D. ELIAS

“WHY ROMNEY COULD TURN CALIFORNIA EVEN MORE BLUE”

As he pushed farther and farther to the right in his effort to fend off the corps of arch-conservative rivals for his party’s presidential nomination, Republican front-runner Mitt Romney probably didn’t think some of what he was doing would have much effect in the larger states that will provide most of the popular and electoral votes this fall – especially California.

But one Romney move in South Carolina’s January primary might have more impact than he ever guessed, if it's used effectively by Democrats.

For he campaigned side-by-side there with the Kansas secretary of state, not exactly a well-known national figure even if he probably should be.

Kris Kobach, whose endorsement Romney eagerly sought, is the primary author of the draconian anti-illegal immigrant laws adopted first in Arizona and later in southern states like Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina. Those laws compel police to check the immigration status of anyone they encounter who offers the slightest indication of being undocumented. Essentially, this compels anyone not obviously Anglo or black to carry identification at all times. Go jogging in the neighborhood? You’d better bring your drivers license. Take a quick stroll to the corner market? You’d better bring more than mere cash.

In Alabama, some police chiefs have lately advised officers not to do much with that state's law. “That ‘illegal’ you stop,” one chief told his force, “is probably a scientist at NASA Huntsville, an executive of the Mercedes Benz factory outside Tuscaloosa or a medical researcher at the University of Alabama-Birmingham.” All those prestige outfits employ many skilled – and swarthy – immigrants.

The immigration measures may be somewhat popular where they’ve passed, but Romney’s association with their main author will almost certainly be exploited by President Obama’s reelection campaign elsewhere, especially in large states like Illinois, Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania and, of course, California – places where the ever-increasing Latino vote can be decisive.

In California, where Romney owns a beachfront home near San Diego, an increase in Hispanic voters converted the state from steadily Republican (GOP in all but one presidential election from 1952 through 1988) to solidly Democratic.

No, Obama won’t advertise much in California. The state is too emphatically blue for him to need many ads here. But his party will be foolish if it doesn’t exploit Romney’s embrace of Kobach in several upcoming competitive campaigns for lesser offices in Congress or the Legislature. The Democratic hope would be for a kind of reverse coattail effect.

Such an effect might significantly reduce the already puny Republican vote among California Latinos. Meg Whitman, the GOP’s last candidate for governor, got just 34 percent of Hispanic votes, where it would have taken at least 40 percent to give her any chance against Democrat Jerry Brown.

Several surveys taken by Miami-based Sergio Bendixen, usually the most accurate pollster of Latino sentiment, show immigration the top issue for most Hispanics in America. Cuban-Americans, whose votes in Florida contributed heavily to Romney’s big win there, are a conservative exception among Latinos, but even most of them want amnesty for many illegal immigrants.

Bendixen’s polls indicate that Latinos who are U.S. citizens believe they are adversely affected when tough anti-illegal immigrant rhetoric or laws become common.

So Romney’s full embrace of Kobach and the stop-on-suspicion approach Kobach grew to favor while an attorney for the strongly anti-illegal immigrant Federation for American Immigration Reform may have helped him ward off his far-right opposition in the early primaries and it may help him secure the nomination, but it would likely make California even more Democratic.

The Romney embrace of Kobach also demonstrates that he may not fully understand modern communications. For within days of campaigning with Kobach in South Carolina, Romney was on the hustings in Florida with Hispanic Republican (read: Cuban-American) state legislators who back varying forms of amnesty.

Three of those he was with support the proposed federal DREAM Act that aims to open university and employment opportunities to children of illegals. Romney pledges to veto that act if it ever passes Congress. Yet, his Spanish-language TV commercials in Florida promised to “open doors” for immigrants of all types.

Does he believe no one elsewhere will note his contradictions or that they won’t become tools for Obama this fall?

With even fellow Republicans accusing him of “pandering,” the main California effect of all this would likely be more distaste for Republicans than Latino voters already manifest. Which could delay for years any significant GOP recovery here.

-30-

Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough: The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It," is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, go to www.californiafocus.net

NEED GROWS FOR ‘TAX OIL FOR EDUCATION’ INITIATIVE

CALIFORNIA FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 2012, OR THEREAFTER

BY THOMAS D. ELIAS

“NEED GROWS FOR ‘TAX OIL FOR EDUCATION’ INITIATIVE”

Amid the welter of prospective initiatives and referenda whose sponsors hope they’ll reach the ballot this year, one stands out as increasingly necessary: The proposed “Tax Oil for Education” measure.

It’s true that as with several of the others, California voters have previously seen and rejected parts of this idea. Less than four years ago, another initiative to tax oil pumped from California wells was resoundingly defeated after an advertising campaign that convinced many that it would substantially raise the price of gasoline.

A lot has changed since then, including the specifics of the proposal. Last time around, the oil severance tax money would have gone to the state’s general fund, where it could be used for anything at all. This time, the money is earmarked just for education, with elementary and high schools to get about $1.48 of the $3.5 billion the initiative sponsors expect it to raise each year, while the California State University system would get $560 million, the University of California $440 million and community colleges about $1.5 billion.

Those would be neat chunks of change for educational systems that have fallen on hard times since voters last considered a tax on oil drilling.

In that time, budget cuts eliminated many school libraries, school nurses, some athletic teams and many counselors, while reducing curricular offerings and increasing class sizes. Tuition has risen about 30 percent at Cal State campuses, about 20 percent at UC campuses and community colleges. Yes, this state’s campuses are still a bargain compared with some other state systems, but the higher price tag is forcing out more and more promising students.

One thing that hasn’t changed is that California remains the only oil producing state in America with no severance tax. Oil severance taxes are the reason every Alaskan gets an annual stipend of about $2,000 from state government. That’s a gift of just under $10,000 yearly for every family of five. Oil severance taxes also provide the funds that allow Texas to entice businesses away from California with free or discounted land, free infrastructure for their new facilities and tax breaks for the first few years they’re in Texas. And so on. California gets no benefit to speak of from oil produced here – despite the fact it ranks seventh among the states in oil production, gasoline prices here are the highest anywhere in the nation.

This picture translates into the simple reality that the oil severance levy is needed to ensure California's future more than any other single initiative now proposed. For when deserving students are denied the opportunity to attend public universities or to get the most possible out of public elementary and high schools strictly for financial reasons, the state’s future starts looking uncertain. For sure, California’s colleges and universities have been the cornerstone of its status as a world leader in fields like technology, entertainment and agriculture. That can’t be maintained without a well-educated populace.

One other reality has not changed since the last time voters saw an oil severance measure: Oil companies still price gasoline based on their worldwide costs rather than the expense of drilling in any one locale. Because of this, drivers in the Czech Republic will share in the cost of a California severance tax, just as Californians now pay their share of the severance taxes levied by states from Alaska to Louisiana. So the cost of a gallon of gas will not rise noticeably because of a severance tax, despite what oil company-financed ads opposing the measure will surely say.

And then there are the specific terms of the initiative: The money raised could only be used for class size reductions, instructional materials like books and computers, hiring new teachers and rehiring some who have been laid off, plus restoring class offerings that have been cut.

Put it all together and you have a more compelling measure than Californians were offered the last time. Also one that’s needed by many more people than other planned initiatives now circulating, including ones to legalize and regulate marijuana, prevent teaching of gay history in public schools and repeal many of the state’s environmental laws and regulations.

The question now is whether voters who constantly tell poll takers they would gladly support new taxes to fund education will put their votes where their mouths have been.

-30-

Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough: The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It," is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, visit www.californiafocus.net

STATE DEMOS START TALKING TOUGH TO OBAMA ON HOUSING

CALIFORNIA FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2012, OR THEREAFTER

BY THOMAS D. ELIAS

“STATE DEMOS START TALKING TOUGH TO OBAMA ON HOUSING”

Pinpointing the prime cause of California’s slow recovery from recession is easy: Too little has been done about the crisis in housing construction, values and foreclosures.

While only one in 579 homes nationally is “under water,” with resale value deflated beneath the balance of its mortgage loan, that figure is one in every 211 here. In some California counties, the scene is exponentially worse: Fully 51 percent of mortgages in San Joaquin County (65,230 homes) were “upside down” in that manner in the third quarter of last year. The crisis may be worse in a few other places, like Nevada and Arizona, but it is plenty bad here and precious little has been done to fix it.

The result is that construction jobs are not yet coming back and housing-related businesses from carpeting to air conditioning, tile sales to swimming pools, all still suffer. So do other firms that depend on them, including everything from newspapers, whose advertising from such companies has tanked, to truckers who now haul far less than in pre-housing-bust days.

Summed up Nancy Pelosi, the San Francisco Democrat and former speaker of the House, “Our economy is never going to be fully well until something is done about foreclosures.”

That’s why it's refreshing to see both Gov. Jerry Brown and most of the Democrats in California’s congressional delegation at last begin putting significant political pressure on President Obama to do something about this.

Of course, Obama pledged he would do plenty about it when he won office three years ago and took over ex-President George W. Bush’s historical half-trillion-dollar bailout of many banks and the country’s biggest mortgage lenders, the Federal National Mortgage Assn. and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp., better known as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Or simply Fannie and Freddie in the lexicon of many politicians.

The trouble is that Fannie and Freddie have done little or nothing to ease things for homeowners, failing to provide much motive for under-water borrowers to stay in their homes and keep making loan payments. This despite the fact that together they took about $169 billion in bailout money intended to help homeowners get back on their feet.

But Obama has left Edward DeMarco in charge of the Federal Housing Finance Authority as acting director, even though – in Brown’s words - he has “ignored” the California foreclosure crisis by “failing to exercise…full authority over residential mortgages underwritten by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,” both of which were seized by the government in 2008 as mortgage losses mounted.

Agreeing with Brown, 27 Democratic California representatives in late January formally requested a housing-focused meeting with Obama. Their language was heated, by the standards of talk by party mates to a sitting President: “We have concluded that efforts both by the government and the private sector have not addressed (the) foreclosure crisis with sufficient urgency.” One possible result: Obama pledged once again in his State of the Union speech to do something. Just not much, and what he does plan could be stymied by Republicans in Congress, unlike actions by the Housing Finance Authority, which can often act on its own.

The California Democrats griped that they’ve already met with Obama underlings like Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan and DeMarco, with nothing to show for it.

All, they said, expressed interest in a bill by San Mateo County’s Zoe Lofgren which would excuse under-water homeowners who file for Chapter 13 bankruptcy from making interest payments for five years, during which time they would still make loan payments, with all the money going toward lowering the principal balances on their loans.

Opposed by banks, this idea has received no support from California Republicans, some of whom represent areas most impacted by the housing crisis, including areas like Merced, Madera, San Bernardino and Riverside counties. So it’s unlikely to pass a House vote. And despite their alleged interest, the Obama appointees have done nothing to put the Lofgren idea into action, even though some legal authorities believe they could do it without a congressional vote.

The California Democrats accused DeMarco of placing the interests of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac “above those of struggling homeowners.”

That’s language Obama needs to hear and might respond to, since anything he does to ease the foreclosure crisis can only help his reelection changes.

Other members of Congress have suggested Obama “did not realize how significant the crisis was.” Surely, he should by now.

Whatever its cause – and some blame policies adopted under Presidents Bush and Bill Clinton for promoting loans to people with no ability to pay them back – the crisis has been bad enough that Brown says it was the single biggest factor in California’s portion of the national recession.

That means Obama needs to act, should have done so long ago. If pressure from Brown and the California Democrats in Congress can get him moving, it will be all to the good.

-30-
Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough: The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It," is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, visit www.californiafocus.net