Jerry Brown’s bill signing marathon wrap-up. Feds launch major crackdown against California marijuana industry. Light bulbs to light rail – the essentials of energy in the 21st century.
Bill signings and Jerry Brown's 'canoe theory of politics'
Gov. Jerry Brown had until Sunday to sign or veto hundreds of bills that the Senate and Assembly sent to his desk during the legislative session. In the aftermath of his decision making, Brown signed 760 bills and vetoed 128.
John Myers of the California Report told KPCC’s Larry Mantle that some may think the percentage of vetoed bills is high for the Democratic governor, but he said Brown downed certain bills for a reason.
“He thinks the legislature is spending too much time on issues that are not mission-critical, things that local governments should do, things that should wait until the state’s finances and its fiscal house gets put in order. You saw the governor saying ‘Hey look, we don’t have time for that right now,’” Myers said.
Brown vetoed other bills because he said their issues would tangle with federal law, such as a bill that would have allowed California farmers to sell industrial hemp.
Of those that were signed, many bills tackled controversial issues. Brown approved AB 144 and 809, two bills that limit the rights of gun owners, and SB 946 that would force insurance companies to cover autism treatments for children. Another signed bill, one Myers calls “the most notable middle-of-the-night bill,” would make it mandatory for ballot initiatives to be moved to November ballots in order to ensure higher voter participation.
Brown also signed the California Dream Act (SB 202), which allows undocumented college students access to financial aid. Myers said the governor’s decision came as no surprise.
“When he ran against [Meg] Whitman, he made it very clear […] that he supported these kinds of changes for the students,” Myers said. “Whether it remains as it is, is a good question."
One assembly member is looking to issue a referendum on SB 202, which if successful, would push the issue to the November ballots.
Brown’s decisions sometimes seem contradictory — he signed a bill that would allow girls as young as 12 to seek treatment for HPV without their parents consent, yet passed another that outlaws people under 18 from using tanning beds. Myers said that the governor has followed his “canoe theory of politics” closely.
“He paddles a little to the left, a little to the right, and he thinks that gets you down the middle of the political stream,” Myers said.
Myers said that Brown may be anticipating the political ramifications of some of his decisions. He vetoed a measure that would have required an economic impact report if a big box store like Walmart wanted to open in a particular community.
“The governor has a budget to resolve next year, he wants to revisit the issue of revenues and he has talked about putting on the ballot in November 2012, some kind of tax measure. What he does not need […] is the business community to oppose that tax measure,” Myers said.
Myers cited an anecdote from the L.A. Times, which described the governor calling those he trusted, including police chiefs and his personal doctor, to discuss tougher issues or answer his questions.
“It does show, I think, that the governor, in trying to weigh these, was not afraid to come down and make controversial decisions if he thought it was the right thing to do,” Myers said.
WEIGH IN:
Did Brown make the correct decisions? In a message to the California State Senate about a bill that allows dead mountain lions to be stuffed and displayed, the governor wrote curtly:
"This presumably important bill earned overwhelming support by both Republicans and Democrats. If only that same energetic bipartisan spirit could be applied to creating clean energy jobs and ending tax laws that send jobs out of state."
Is he being too harsh?
Guest:
John Myers, Sacramento bureau chief for KQED's “California Report”
Feds launch major crackdown against California marijuana industry
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) is no longer turning a blind eye to pot shops across the state. On Friday, it took legal action against eight marijuana storefronts in Orange County, a trafficking ring in the San Fernando Valley and issued warning letters to 38 more stores across the state.
In case words speak louder than actions, the US State Attorneys for California held a joint news conference in Sacramento to announce the major crackdown. US Attorney Andre Birotte Jr. said "While California law permits collective cultivation of marijuana in limited circumstances, it does not allow commercial distribution through the store-front model we see across California."
Since Proposition 215 cleared the way for medical marijuana dispensaries, thousands of stores have opened across the state. Under President George W. Bush, the Drug Enforcement Administration raided some marijuana operations. But when President Barack Obama first took office it was said DEA raids would stop. During his campaign, Obama said, "I'm not going to be using Justice Department resources to try to circumvent state laws on this issue." Reportedly, his position inspired even more pot shops to open.
At last week's (FRI) DOJ news conference, the US Attorneys stressed they believe the shops were commercial, for-profit enterprises. Deputy Attorney General James Cole said, "The department has maintained that we will not focus our investigative and prosecutorial resources on individual patients with serious illness like cancer or their immediate caregivers."
WEIGH IN:
What do you think inspired the crackdown? Will these marijuana operators be able to use state laws to mount an effective defense? What about medical marijuana dispensaries in your neighborhood? Will they be forced to shut down almost immediately? Will California Attorney General Kamala Harris step in to defend Proposition 215?
Guests:
André Birotte Jr., US State Attorney in Los Angeles, Department of Justice
Light bulbs to light rail: the essentials of energy in the 21st century
When Daniel Yergin published his Pulitzer Prize-winning book "The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money and Power" in 1991, China was not a factor in the world oil market.
Since then, China has urbanized at a speed and scale the world has never seen, developing buildings, powerplants, roads and high-speed rail. That’s just one of the major changes that have occurred in the 21st century that have radically reshaped our geopolitical future and our global scramble for oil. This year’s tsunami and nuclear disaster in Japan, the shifting political sands that make up the Arab Spring, the development of new areas and technology for oil production that could lessen our Middle East dependence and the push toward renewable energy are some of the many factors that are changing the way we think about oil.
While many fear that we’re reaching the end of the Earth’s oil supply, a theory known as “peak oil," Yergin argues that we have decades of future production growth ahead of us – that the peak is more of a “plateau” that we won’t reach until mid-century. But anxiety about oil supply persists, not least because of our increasing appetite for energy. As billions of people become part of the global economy, their incomes and their energy needs increase exponentially. Currently, oil use in the developed world averages 14 barrels per person per year and three barrels per person in the developing world.
WEIGH IN:
How will the world cope when billions of people go from three barrels to six? Do we truly have enough? How does the continuing quest for energy shape our planet’s political and economic future?
Guest:
Daniel Yergin, author of "The Quest: Energy, Security and the Remaking of the Modern World," and chairman of IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates
Yergin has a talk and book signing Tuesday, October 11 at 7:30 p.m. as part of Zócalo Public Square.