My impressions of Jared Huffman have been mixed since I met him in December of 2006. I moved from being not impressed at all to loving his stated position on water in California. His recent statement regarding the budget priorities have given me hope. But my hope is cautioned with great skepticism. I am really writing this to gain some clarity regarding Mr. Huffman. Here’s why.
A favorite politician of mine has been known to say, whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting over. At the Glaser Center in 2007 Jared spoke eloquently about the need to reshape our development policies and the need to treat our water supply in a sustainable fashion. His wonderful generalized statements don’t match with the following actions.
Jared Huffman’s support for the water bill of last year was played as providing environmental controls on the delta waterways. It’s a complex bill and I don’t claim to understand its ramifications very well, however Food and Water Watch (FWW), a group I am beginning to respect, is mounting a campaign against the bond measure that the water bill generated because they believe it will put California water under the control of private interests. I think that Mr. Huffman was the only state legislator from the north coast to vote for this bill. I think that this bill will eventually allow for a peripheral canal to drain the SF Bay estuary.
Since I have moved back to Marin I have been educated around Marin Municipal Water District’s attempt to build a desalination plant, a project also opposed by FWW. I am a builder or was until recently. My first impression of this concept was positive. But now that cities and counties across the state are trying to cut back on their carbon footprint I find it unacceptable that MMWD is planning to double its greenhouse gas output. And that’s only if it builds the smallest of the planned desalination plants. If Marin were incapable of finding water for the current residents by any other means I might be persuaded that this is a reasonable thing to do -- although the treatment of our wastewater would be my first option as it is the much more environmentally sustainable thing to do. However, MMWD’s customers have been conserving water at rate greater than the desalination plant will produce, and there are many more options for the district to conserve further.
The only possible rationale for building this project is that it will allow for development of the bay front wetlands. This is an unsustainable policy that asks current users to fund the development projects of the landed gentry. What this has to do with Mr. Huffman is that he appears to be the kingmaker behind the scenes for this project. These are two strikes against him and in my tally sheet that’s all that is needed to strike out. The desalination plant is now on hold supposedly because the water users have been able to conserve. But in reality the reason is that 4 of the 5 board members are up for re-election this November and a grassroots initiative has collected enough signatures to require future voter approval for this project.
I have been down the road before of having some bright lawyer espouse squishy good feelings about policies only to see the reality dash the common folk on the tines of the powerful. It is not the balanced budget that is proposed in May just before an election that matters. It is the budget and all the other deals that will be produced later in June, or July, or even August that scare me. Last year’s deal included Prop 14, which it seems will pass. This open primary bill robs me of my right to freely associate with members of my own party.
Every day I work with people totally dependent on a state budget for health and human services. Their caregivers are very concerned about the funding of these supportive programs. Mr. Huffman is being challenged this year, even if ineffectively, because of his votes that cut these programs. Part of the problem with term limits is that by the time we get to know a candidate and understand how they will operate in the long run they are termed out and running for another office. Term limits and the 2/3 rule on budgets and taxes won voter approval because Democrats did not stand on principle but gave in to what seemed expedient for the short term. That’s the Democratic Party way. We cal it Realpolitik as if spelling selling-out improperly will make it OK. And when we say we want to take the party back it is in part from those who are wiling to give away long term gains to the powerful for short term self interest.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Saturday, May 22, 2010
The Gaia Principle
When faced with overwhelming oppositional force I do what I can. At this time of our culture of death, of war and corporate greed, of an unresponsive government by and for the rich, I choose to connect with those close to me. I walk my precinct. Last night I met a group that also chooses to focus on the present and close. These were transition and sustainability and resiliency movement folks with much more optimism than me. They gave me some hope. I watched the movie DIRT with them at a church, where the only god spoken of was Gaia.
For this last month I have been struggling with images of our earth and life on it coming to an end as a result of human nonsensical activity, specifically from the Gusher in the Gulf but also in anticipation of a renewed nuclear energy plants. In its arrogance the Obama administration believes in the mostly male driven theory that everything can be done even stepping close to the edge of disaster because the men in charge intend to be in control.
The movie was of the opinion that if humans choose life for the dirt beneath our feet, if we nurture it by avoiding chemical farming, that the earth, or Gaia, in response will heal itself from the ravages we have inflicted upon it for the last 15,000 years. Well maybe, but there was a lack of conversation about the other 70 percent of the earth’s surface, our oceans, and of our atmosphere. We are consuming fossil fuels, ancient sunshine from tens of millions of years ago, pumping carbon into the atmosphere but also into the oceans. The source of the majority of our breathable oxygen, the oceans have filled themselves to capacity, absorbing of as much carbon dioxide and excess heat as they can. They are acidifying and like the dirt, the living part of our land, are dying.
I am a believer in modern day myths, stories taught us that come from our science. As a species we claim to know what happened as far back as the birth of the universe. I think it was a Pope Pius that attributed to the theory of the Big Bang the creationist theory of the separation of light and darkness. In a real way it is only the scientists that do the experiments and work with the results that can claim the knowledge of our modern life. The rest of us are either believers in their work or believers in some alternative story. My beliefs include the story of the meteor that struck down most living organisms about 65 million years ago. Like the pope’s view of the Big Bang, myths can generate great power when their stories of ancient periods combine with current events. That meteor struck just a few miles from where the Deepwater Horizon well is spewing the fossilized remains of million year old life.
See the movie DIRT, and buy organic.
For this last month I have been struggling with images of our earth and life on it coming to an end as a result of human nonsensical activity, specifically from the Gusher in the Gulf but also in anticipation of a renewed nuclear energy plants. In its arrogance the Obama administration believes in the mostly male driven theory that everything can be done even stepping close to the edge of disaster because the men in charge intend to be in control.
The movie was of the opinion that if humans choose life for the dirt beneath our feet, if we nurture it by avoiding chemical farming, that the earth, or Gaia, in response will heal itself from the ravages we have inflicted upon it for the last 15,000 years. Well maybe, but there was a lack of conversation about the other 70 percent of the earth’s surface, our oceans, and of our atmosphere. We are consuming fossil fuels, ancient sunshine from tens of millions of years ago, pumping carbon into the atmosphere but also into the oceans. The source of the majority of our breathable oxygen, the oceans have filled themselves to capacity, absorbing of as much carbon dioxide and excess heat as they can. They are acidifying and like the dirt, the living part of our land, are dying.
I am a believer in modern day myths, stories taught us that come from our science. As a species we claim to know what happened as far back as the birth of the universe. I think it was a Pope Pius that attributed to the theory of the Big Bang the creationist theory of the separation of light and darkness. In a real way it is only the scientists that do the experiments and work with the results that can claim the knowledge of our modern life. The rest of us are either believers in their work or believers in some alternative story. My beliefs include the story of the meteor that struck down most living organisms about 65 million years ago. Like the pope’s view of the Big Bang, myths can generate great power when their stories of ancient periods combine with current events. That meteor struck just a few miles from where the Deepwater Horizon well is spewing the fossilized remains of million year old life.
See the movie DIRT, and buy organic.
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Know Your Neighbors
The results from walking my neighborhood precinct for the Right to Vote on the Desalination Plant are found in more than just the number of signatures I collected. Three hours of walking netted 25 valid signatures, plus those that two neighbors will give me when they return the petition forms they offered to circulate. Most of the people I talked to signed and some went into their house to get their roommates to sign also. Today I will walk again.
The other more important result came because this was not the first time I contacted these folk. Last month I had walked my neighborhood precinct for a very hotly contested supervisor race. This classic local contest is between a candidate backed by a very big business and the landed gentry versus a candidate of the environmentally concerned grassroots.
I received a lot of push back because my candidate has taken an unpopular stance in my neighborhood. Her missteps in office have left the door open for the opposition. She allowed the other candidate for big business and the ‘develop land for private profit’ forces back into the political arena.
In the spirit of full disclosure she knows I am actively organizing to change her position and that of the rest of the board of supervisors regarding my neighborhood. My house, literally, and my neighborhood are divided.
But yesterday my reception in the neighborhood was much warmer. Once folks realized that I was walking for another cause they were willing to listen. And something happened for me. These folks were no longer the opposition, no longer unclear thinkers, nor did they have a heated rejection of my existence on their doorstep.
What I learned is what I have been preaching but not practicing for some years now. When you walk your neighborhood and get to know your neighbors on a political level you become a powerful new form of opposition media. You become a means to put humanity into the political discourse. You open doors with folks that you disagree with on some issues and agree with on others. You build trust. You break down isolation.
Rose Aguilar said at a recent forum of people she interviewed for her book, “Red Highways: A Liberal's Journey into the Heartland,” once you get past the sound bites you hear a more true story. I found this to be true yesterday.
I owe thanks to an organization and two great political women who a few years ago separately taught me about walking a precinct. Thank you Barbara and Liz. And thank you Know Your Neighbor.
The other more important result came because this was not the first time I contacted these folk. Last month I had walked my neighborhood precinct for a very hotly contested supervisor race. This classic local contest is between a candidate backed by a very big business and the landed gentry versus a candidate of the environmentally concerned grassroots.
I received a lot of push back because my candidate has taken an unpopular stance in my neighborhood. Her missteps in office have left the door open for the opposition. She allowed the other candidate for big business and the ‘develop land for private profit’ forces back into the political arena.
In the spirit of full disclosure she knows I am actively organizing to change her position and that of the rest of the board of supervisors regarding my neighborhood. My house, literally, and my neighborhood are divided.
But yesterday my reception in the neighborhood was much warmer. Once folks realized that I was walking for another cause they were willing to listen. And something happened for me. These folks were no longer the opposition, no longer unclear thinkers, nor did they have a heated rejection of my existence on their doorstep.
What I learned is what I have been preaching but not practicing for some years now. When you walk your neighborhood and get to know your neighbors on a political level you become a powerful new form of opposition media. You become a means to put humanity into the political discourse. You open doors with folks that you disagree with on some issues and agree with on others. You build trust. You break down isolation.
Rose Aguilar said at a recent forum of people she interviewed for her book, “Red Highways: A Liberal's Journey into the Heartland,” once you get past the sound bites you hear a more true story. I found this to be true yesterday.
I owe thanks to an organization and two great political women who a few years ago separately taught me about walking a precinct. Thank you Barbara and Liz. And thank you Know Your Neighbor.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)