When one listens to a lot of politicians and lawmakers, both local and national officeholders, one finds oneself noticing that—aside from their politics (with which one might agree or disagree)— their thinking isn’t all that….well….clear. They are short on the ability to follow logic. They are ill informed. And some of them, while not stupid exactly, are not going to score off anybody else’s charts intellectually.

That is never the issue with Edmund G. Brown Jr.-–otherwise known as Jerry.

Agree with him or don’t, but Brown is inevitably fun to talk with because he enjoys following a thought down any kind of challenging intellectual pathway—his own or yours—if you offer one in the course of a conversation or interview.

He reads maniacally, and he’s genuinely curious. And he knows how to think, which is, after all, a skill, and a rarer one, it seems, in all professions, than would be ideal.

This doesn’t mean Jerry Brown would be the best governor for this moment in California’s history—although he also might be.

I’m simply pointing out that Jerry is very, very smart. I cannot listen to him without being reminded of that fact. And, all things being equal, in my book, smarter is better.

In an Op Ed in Monday’s LA Times, Jerry Roberts and Phil Trounstin of CalBuzz, analyze the two declared candidates for California governor, Republican eBay diva, Meg Whitman, and Insurance Commissioner, Steve Poizner —and the undeclared candidate, the once and maybe-would-be governor, Jerry Brown.

I can at least answer one question that Roberts and Trounstin pose:

Q: When will Jerry formally announce?

A: This Tuesday. (Call it an informed bet.)

UPDATE: Like I said.

For me the other question to be answered is this: now that Jerry’s spent the last two years madly courting every law enforcement organization, agency and union in California, how progressive will he have the nerve to be on criminal justice issues in a state that desperately needs wise criminal justice management and reform?

On an unrelated topic, Marc Cooper’s ongoing commentary on the Chilean earthquake has been excellent.

Okay, Gavin Newsom has dropped out of the race for California Governor, for “family” reasons (AKA bad polling numbers).

Meg Whitman is a rich witch [It's Halloween and that's a technical term.] who believes she can buy an election, can’t remember when she last voted and won’t show up for debates. (In terms of her chances to win the 2010 race: Ebay, shmEbay. Snowball meet hell.)

Thus far, the rest of the Republican field—Tom Campbell and Steve Poizner—ain’t strong enough to stand up to the once-and-would-be-future Gov: Jerry Brown who, even though he’s an old guy, he still has enough energy to lite several medium-sized cities and is running an excellent pre-campaign campaign, what with all his high profile nabbings of mortgage fraudsters and other nasty types.

But, then also yesterday there was the kerfuffle bannered on the front page of the SF Chronicle, about how Jerry’s press guy illegally taped a conversation with a reporter and now, as it turns out, a lot of conversations with reporters.

Quite a scoop—except that painting the taping as illegal is quite a stretch.

Federal law says that if one side knows about the taping, the other side doesn’t have to know. However, yes, California law requires that both sides must know, but only if the conversation is a “confidential communication.”

California penal code defines “confidential communication” as:

….any communication carried on in circumstances as may reasonably indicate that any party to the communication desires it to be confined to the parties thereto, but excludes a communication made in a public gathering or in any legislative, judicial, executive or administrative proceeding open to the public, or in any other circumstance in which the parties to the communication may reasonably expect that the communication may be overheard or recorded.

An on-the-record interview for the purposes of later publication does not snugly fit within the covers of confidential.

On the other hand, if you are working for the state’s top cop and you do this stuff without mentioning it to those whom you are recording, and then defend yourself by saying, “you guys do it so we get to,” you look like an idiot.

A little while ago, Jerry wisely suspended the staffer, Scott Gerber.

Which brings us to…….Antonio.

I heard late on Friday afternoon that after the twinned news announcements of Gavin’s bow out, and Jerry’s guy’s Nixonian moment, there was chatter among high level staff in the Villaraigosa’s office about what a “great governor” the mayor would make.

One assumes that this is merely wishful thinking, and that Antonio and his people are not (gulp) actually contemplating such a move.

It is just wishful thinking, right Mr. Mayor?

Even though he’s California’s “top cop,” Attorney General Jerry Brown got two of his tires stolen yesterday. “No matter,” he tweeted on Twitter. ” I got 2 new ones and I’m rolling again.”

Jerry sometimes goes quiet with his Twitter posting but this week he’s been entertaining.

For instance, he planned a “recession reception” and solicited possible songs for a playlist, which he has posted on his Facebook page.

(In case you also have need of such a playlist-–and who doesn’t?—I’ve pasted in below.)

Name – Artist
Brother? Can You Spare A Dime? – Abbey Lincoln
Why Don’t You Do Right (Get Me Some Money Too) – Peggy Lee
Money Blues – Camille Howard & Her Boyfriends
Money – Pink Floyd
Busted – Ray Charles
Money Honey – Elvis Presley
Get A Job – Sha Na Na
I Walk The Line – Johnny Cash
Bad Moon Rising – Creedence Clearwater Revival
Come Together – The Beatles
For The Love Of Money – The O’Jays
I Get Lifted – George McCrae
Take the Money And Run – Steve Miller Band
Sad Songs (Say So Much) – Elton John
Cash Machine – Hard Fl
Crumblin’ Down – John Mellencamp
Once In A Lifetime – Talking Heads
Under Pressure – David Bowie
Get Up Offa That Thing – James Brown
Youthless – Beck
Black Friday – Steely Dan
Takin’ Care of Business – Bachman-Turner Overdrive
Money (That’s What I Want) – Barrett Strong
Emotional Rescue – The Rolling Stones
Road To Nowhere – Talking Heads
Like A Rolling Stone vs. Times Are Changin’ – Bob Dylan
I Need A Miracle – Grateful Dead
Don’t Stop Believing – Journey
Try Me (Remix) – Bob Marley
Born To Run – Bruce Springsteen
Wild World – Cat Stevens
Working On A Dream – Bruce Springsteen

He also directed our attention to the latest polling information on the Dem side of the 2010 governor’s race.

Yes, Jerry’s ahead. Otherwise would he have told us to go look at the poll? Uh, no.

He’s 71 years old. So, as everyone reporting on the issue has noted, if he wins, he would become California’s oldest governor.

Or as Republican contender Steve Poizner put it on his own website, “When it comes to Jerry Brown and Election Day for California voters, it reminds us of the film ‘Groundhog Day.’ Every day is the same. Jerry’s always on the ballot.”

THE LA TIMES PULLS PLUG ON PRINTING THE NATION’S BIGGEST NON-PROFIT TEEN NEWSPAPER

LA Observed has this story. Kevin and I talked about the issue at the LA Times Festival of Books, and we were both shocked and saddened by the Times’ short-sightedness .

LA Youth is a remarkable project that has been around for two decades, and the LA Times has always helped out by picking up the tab for the printing. Not anymore. Yes, we understand they’re cost-cutting to the bone. But I bet if I looked at a few executive salaries (cough….publisher…cough) I could find the $15 grand it takes to put out this newspaper that has done so much to give LA’s kids a voice.

LA Observed also has ways that you can donate to help out. (Or click here.)

To give you an idea of what is worth saving, here’s a story by a 15-year-old video journalist who found, through reporting, what in his South LA community really matters.

******************************************************************************************************************

ATTORNEY GENERAL JERRY BROWN GOES AFTER THE MAYWOOD POLICE DEPARTMENT

Today, AG Jerry Brown will release a 30-page report saying that the City of Maywood Police Department “routinely used excessive force, did not obtain probable cause to justify arrests and searches, and operated without adequate oversight by the Maywood City Council and the City’s Chief Administrative Officer.” This report is the result of a 16-month investigation which exposed “gross misconduct and widespread abuse,” including unlawful use of force against civilians.

According to the press release, Brown has sole legal authority under California Civil Code 52.3 to ensure that police departments do not deprive “any person of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States or by the Constitution or laws of California.”

Okay, Jerry, now that you’re on a roll, and we’ve discovered you have that “sole legal authority” thingy, how about taking a look at Men’s Central Jail?

*************************************************************************************************************

SWINE FLU….AND SWINE-ISH POLITICS

USC sent out a Swine Flu Alert yesterday-–as did, I imagine, a lot of other institutions, even though the number of confirmed cases in the US are still few, located mostly on the East Coast, and thus far there have been no fatalities.

But the CDC is sending out jittery warnings because this is a nasty flu that, in Mexico anyway, has spread uncomfortably quickly out of season. So caution is appropriate. Thus USC, as the responsible parent, is appropriately telling everyone to be cautious too.

Which brings us around to the political side of this story—namely when certain Republican lawmakers elected not to be appropriately cautious, but to play politics instead by insisting that pandemic preparedness be stripped out of the stimulus package.

My pal Marc Cooper also has a smart take on the issue.

********************************************************************************************************

PAKISTAN’S POOR TURN TO THE TALIBAN AS THEIR GOVERNMENT IGNORES THEM

Fatima Bhutto, niece of the late Benazir Bhutto, has written an excellent and alarming column for the Daily Beast that I hope the right people in the Obama administration manage to read. It says that the biggest cause of the rise of fundamentalism in Pakistan is the government’s failure to provide the simplest of desperately services for the nation’s poor. The Taliban has moved into that vacuum handily with schools, with medical relief and with generators when the government does not even provide electricity.

She writes:

In Pakistan things move at a leisurely South Asian pace. We missed our goals to eradicate polio recently because we, a nuclear nation, could not sustain electricity across the country long enough to refrigerate the vaccines. Garbage disposal is a nonexistent concept, and plush neighborhoods in Karachi boast towers of rubbish piled on street corners and alleyways. Prisons and police cells are full of prisoners awaiting trials, and our justice system, despite the reinstatement of the Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudry, leaves a lot to be desired in terms of meting out free and fair access to justice.

One thing moving ridiculously fast, however, is the Taliban’s stranglehold on the country…..

In a conversation a year and a half ago, Fatima warned me the fundamentalists could gain power if the government continued to neglect its most poverty-stricken citizens. Her views turned out to be prescient.

When Pakistan’s weak and notoriously corrupt president, Asif Zardari, comes to Washington next week to ask for money, Fatima suggests that the U.S. should instead, insist that Mr. Zardari’s government do its job.

Okay here’s the full story I mentioned earlier in brief.

California Attorney General Jerry Brown announced this morning that he had filed suit against three Wells Fargo affiliates to recover $1.5 billion for California investors who purchased auction-rate securities based on “false and deceptive” advice that these financial instruments were “as safe and liquid as cash.”

Here’s the deal according to Jerry’s press release:

“Wells Fargo’s affiliates promised investors auction-rate securities were as safe and liquid as cash, when in fact they were not, and now investors are unable to get their money when they need it,” Attorney General Brown said. “This lawsuit seeks to recover $1.5 billion for Californians and holds these companies accountable for giving investors false and deceptive advice.”

Auction-rate securities are investments with long-term maturity dates (e.g., bonds) that Wells Fargo and other banks marketed as short-term investments equivalent to cash. These investments paid a slightly better rate of return than a bank account. And, investors could sell the securities at regular weekly or monthly auctions which provided the promise of liquidity.

In February 2008, these auctions froze up nationwide, and investors were no longer able to redeem their securities for cash, as promised. This left approximately 2,400 Californians who had invested with Wells Fargo without access to more than $1.5 billion. Almost 40% of Wells Fargo’s auction-rate securities were held by Californians, far more than any other state nationwide.
In total, 5,687 investors purchased $2.9 billion worth of auction-rate securities from these companies nationwide.

By August 2008, major financial institutions including UBS, Citigroup, Wachovia, and Merrill Lynch met their obligations to investors and restored the cash value of these securities. The three Wells Fargo affiliates, however, have refused to do so.

I’m in the middle of a several crazed project deadlines, and I realize that most news is either AIG or Obama related, which for the moment I’m ignoring.

But, it is worth noting Attorney General Jerry Brown will hold a press conference this morning to announce that he is suing Quest Diagnostics, along with six other diagnostic labs—five of which are based in Los Angeles. He hopes to recover hundreds of millions of dollars that Quest and the others fraudulently overcharged the State’s MediCal system—which means you and me. (Again.)

(The fact I’ve used Quest for myself and my son on several occasions does not make any of this at all comforting. The woman I talked to on Jerry’s staff was similarly uncomforted by the news, she told me.)

The Sacramento Bee appears has written most of the advance story so I don’t have to. Here are some clips.

Eight medical laboratories defrauded California of hundreds of millions of dollars by billing the state’s Medi-Cal program up to 500 percent more for tests than it billed other patients, the attorney general has alleged in a whistle-blower lawsuit.

Attorney General Jerry Brown will unveil details of the complex case, outlined in a 41-page civil complaint filed under the California False Claims Act, at a morning news conference today in Los Angeles.

The defendants include the two largest diagnostic lab companies in the United States: Quest Diagnostics Inc., which has 500 facilities in California, and Labcorp, which has more than $3 billion in annual revenue. The firms, which have had trouble with the state in the past over billing issues, could not be reached for comment.

The fraud allegations were first made by lab industry whistleblower Chris Reidel and Hunter Laboratories of Campbell in November 2005 and remained sealed until recently, San Mateo Superior Court records show.

[SNIP]

The state and the whistle-blowers said they have records showing that Quest charges Medi-Cal $8.59 each for the most frequently ordered blood test – an automated hemogram. Quest charged other clients as little as $1.42 for the same test, court records state.

Labcorp charged the state $35 for a testosterone test given to Medi-Cal patients, while billing other clients only $7.36 for the test, the court records add.

I realize that since we now routinely talk about giving away hundreds of billions of bucks, the odd hundred million may seem frighteningly like chump change.

But as our state grows ever more broke and budget strapped, the chumps in Sac’to can use all the spare change they—and we—can get.

Yesterday, both the NY Times and the Sacramento Bee had editorials that turned a harsh light on California’s inexcusable bungling of its incarceration policy, which has resulted in Monday’s tentative ruling by a trio of federal judges who have demanded that the state’s prison population be drastically reduced.

Then just as I was getting ready to chide the LA Times for not putting out their own editorial on the issue, I saw they did so this morning. It is scathing—-and excellent. Kudos to the Times editorial board. This is a matter worthy of many, many angry words—and theirs are angry, informed and elegant.

First a clip from the NY Times that points to how and why all this awful mess has occurred in the first place:

In San Francisco last week, a federal court was hearing final arguments in the prison overcrowding lawsuit that led Monday to an unprecedented decision to reduce the nation’s largest prison system by one-third. Just a few blocks away, a state appellate court was affirming a life sentence for Ali Foroutan, convicted of possession of 0.03 gram of methamphetamine.

Critics of California’s justice system say Mr. Foroutan’s sentence under the “three-strikes law,” which mandates 25 years to life in prison for three-time felons, is the kind of punishment that has made the state’s prisons the most overcrowded in the nation.

Federal judges tentatively ruled Monday that packed facilities were the chief impediment to adequate health care in prisons — a system so flawed it was tantamount to a violation of the Eighth Amendment.

[SNIP]

The case is significant because of the scale of the proposed prisoner reduction, and also because it shines a harsh light on the failures of state government to address the problem for years.

Decades of tough-on-crime laws coupled with a failure to finance prison programs have left prisoners stacked three bunks high in prison gymnasiums and hallways throughout the state. With few probation and parole programs available, about two-thirds of all ex-convicts return to prison within three years.

Here’s a clip from the Sac Bee regarding what Gov Arnold and AG Jerry ought to do about it:

The wholly predictable outcome to California’s refusal to address prison overcrowding has occurred.

A panel of three federal judges has tentatively ruled that the only remaining course to fix unconstitutional prison conditions is to reduce or limit the prison population.

California has reached this juncture because its political branches – the governor and Legislature – have utterly failed to come up with a solution.

This abdication of duty has thrown the responsibility for action onto the court system.

With their tentative ruling, the judges have given Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and legislators another chance to act. But don’t hold your breath. The first words from the Schwarzenegger administration were that the state would appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court if the judges make their ruling final.

Rather than resorting to legal back flips, gyrations and contortions, Schwarzenegger and legislators should get down to real negotiations toward a settlement.

Schwarzenegger, you’ll recall, declared a state of emergency in 2006 because of “severe overcrowding” in the prisons, which he said caused “substantial risk to the health and safety of the men and women who work inside these prisons and the inmates housed in them.”

Finally the LA Times wraps it up and puts it away:

Now that a panel of three federal judges is calling for California to cut its prison population by as much as a third, effectively ruling that our dysfunctional state government is incapable of overseeing the prison system, it makes us wonder what other legislative duties could be delegated to the judiciary. Redistricting? Schools? The budget process? It wouldn’t exactly be democratic, but it would beat the anarchy in Sacramento.

The judicial order on prisons isn’t final and can be appealed, but it’s an unmistakable statement about how spectacularly our lawmakers have failed. California’s prison conditions are so bad, and the standard of medical care that inmates receive is so poor, that the state is violating protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. In other words, you don’t have to go to Guantanamo Bay to find abuses of human rights and American law — just go to Lompoc.

Now the ball is in your court, dearest Mr. Schwarzenegger and Mr. Brown. If you don’t do the right thing, the judges will. And we who care deeply about the health of this state and its inhabitants—even those who are in prison—will back the judges against you.

Monday a panel of three judges did what U.S. Judge Thelton Henderson has been threatening to do for several years now: they told California that the state has to reduce the number of people in its prisons by up to 57,000 inmates. Period. No arguments. No more excuses.

(The text of the ruling is here.* A well-reported LA Times story is here. The NY Times’ Tuesday story is here.)

And here’s the text of the fit Attorney General Jerry Brown has thrown in response to the ruling.

It didn’t have to come to this.

The governor and the state legislature should have found ways to lower the prison population long ago— through sentencing reform, parole policy reform, and by instituting “best practices” rehabilitation and reentry programs that would slow the state’s ghastly recidivism rate.

Yet, except for a few outliers like State Senator Gloria Romero, nobody in Sacramento has made the slightest effort to slow California’s inmate growth, which has now led to an overcrowding catastrophe and a slew of lawsuits.

It has also produced a health care system that is too broken to leave as is, and too expensive to fix properly, given our budget woes.

So Henderson and his fellow judges have stepped in.

Here’s what the SF Chron said about the move by Henderson and his federal colleagues:

In what it labeled a tentative ruling, the three-judge panel said prison populations must be reduced so inmates’ health care can be brought up to constitutional standards. Crowding at prisons can be eased by measures that will not flood the streets with dangerous inmates, such as changing parole policies and sending some low-risk inmates to county custody, the panel said.

“The evidence is compelling that there is no relief other than a prisoner release order that will remedy the unconstitutional prison conditions,” said the judges, who held a trial on prison overcrowding in San Francisco last fall.
California’s 33 prisons hold nearly 160,000 inmates, about twice their designed capacity. The judges said they were prepared to impose a limit of between 120 and 145 percent of capacity…..

In other words, if the ruling becomes final, the state will have to cut the population by between 36,000 to 57,000 inmates.

The minute the ruling came down, the governor said he would appeal when and if the order became official.

At the same time, AG Jerry Brown fulminated mightily against what he characterized as judicial meddling:

“This order, the latest intrusion by the federal judiciary into California’s prison system, is a blunt instrument that does not recognize the imperatives of public safety, nor the challenges of incarcerating criminals, many of whom are deeply disturbed.”

Yes, well. The above harrumphing sounds wonderfully righteous. Unfortunately, it’s not particularly true.

Read the rest of this entry »

I’m in DC for the rest of the week, but as Washington embraces its new president (and the last minute souvenir buyers jam the temporary Obamanalia Obamabilia* stores, some of which, in all seriousness, were open until 2 a.m. to accommodate the frenzied shoppers) I’ve begun turning my eyes back toward California where I note that Jerry Brown, after having been in town for several days worth of inauguration glad-handing, is now back to work challenging federal judges and filing legal briefs.

For instance:

After California’s November election produced the loathsome Proposition 8, Jerry urged the California Supreme Court to review the initiative for its constitutionality.

And, indeed, in short order, as expected the court decided to hear three lawsuits that challenge Prop 8 on Constitutional grounds.

As the wheels of justice move forward, last week, 63 amicus briefs were filed for and against the challenges: 20 supporting the ban on gay marriage, 43 opposing it.

Then late yesterday, Cali Attorney General Jerry filed a pithy response to the 20 briefs filed by Prop 8 supporters.

Referring to his response to the briefs, Brown said that “…the amendment process cannot be used by a bare majority to strip away the fundamental and inalienable rights of a protected minority without a compelling justification. Since there is no compelling justification, Proposition 8 must be stricken.”

I think he’s right. And, after reading Jerry’s response (which you can find here), I think there’s a very good chance that the California Supremes will think so too.

Kenneth Starr, who is one of those leading the legal charge to protect Prop. 8, contends otherwise and says that, “Proposition 8 is a moderate measure that represents a deeply rooted, multigenerational judgment of the people of California about the definition of marriage.” Blah, blah, blah.

The state Supreme Court may begin hearings as soon as March.

PS: When Melissa Etheridge was in town for the inauguration, she told a reporter at Bay Windows, New England’s largest GLBT newspaper, that while they were both in DC Jerry Brown had told her that he was “very, very confident that, in March, Proposition 8 will be overturned.”

Bets anyone?

**********************************************************************************

*Need more sleep soon to avoid making up odd and wrongly-suffixed words.