In The News

EDITORIAL: Help for the severely mentally ill (San Francisco Chronicle)

March 06, 2013

Californians with seriously mentally ill family members rejoiced when voters passed the Mental Health Services Act, which created a robust stream of tax revenues for their loved ones' treatment. Eight years later, the funding is a huge success, but the spending has proved a bait-and-switch.

The 1 percent tax on a millionaire's income is generating about $1 billion a year, but instead of spending it on the seriously mentally ill, county agencies are spending it on the not seriously mentally ill.

EDITORIAL: Require disclosure of ‘dark money’ political donors (Riverside Press Enterprise)

January 07, 2013

Campaign funding should operate in full public view, not hide behind a veil of legal technicalities. California legislators should back state efforts to compel greater disclosure of the “dark money” flowing into California elections. But Congress and federal elections officials should also close loopholes that allow such secrecy.

EDITORIAL: Disclose donors -- State Senate bill would close nonprofit loophole (Los Angeles Daily News)

January 08, 2013

Anonymous voting -- our democracy is built on that.

Anonymous political donations, though, subvert the process that our secret ballots protect.

Californians were outraged this past election season when an Arizona group made an $11 million donation to a campaign committee based in this state that was opposing Gov. Jerry Brown's Proposition 30.

EDITORIAL: We vote yes - Senate Bill 240 (California Aggie)

February 26, 2013

On Feb. 12, Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco/San Mateo) introduced Senate Bill 240. The bill would establish polling places at California State University and University of California campuses. It is slated to go through the Senate on or after March 15.

EDITORIAL: Federal assault weapons ban should be reinstated (San Bernardino Sun)

December 18, 2012

The wickedly incomprehensible massacre of little children and their teachers in Connecticut last week is occasion for deepest sorrow. But it is also time for action dealing with firearms and mental illness.

The best place to start is to reinstate the federal assault weapons ban that was in place between 1994 and 2004, when it was allowed to expire.

EDITORIAL: We were way beyond 'tipping point' on gun violence before Connecticut (Sacramento Bee)

December 18, 2012

Twelve killed at Columbine High in 1999. Thirty-two people murdered at Virginia Tech in 2007. Six killed and 13 wounded, including then-Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, in Tucson, Ariz., last year. Twelve murdered by a gunman in Aurora, Colo., in July.

EDITORIAL: High court acts wisely on life terms for juveniles (San Francisco Chronicle)

June 26, 2012

ON LIFE SENTENCES FOR JUVENILES

The Supreme Court was wise to ban mandatory sentences of life imprisonment without parole for juvenile offenders on Monday.

The 5-4 decision declared that it's cruel and unusual punishment for underage murderers to be given the irrevocable mandatory sentence. There are nearly 2,500 juvenile offenders serving the harsh terms in the United States. About half were sentenced to life terms as a mandatory punishment for their convictions, and 80 of them were convicted when they were 14 years old or younger.

EDITORIAL: Court's decision sensible on teen killer sentences (Ventura County Star)

June 27, 2012

The law cannot fly on automatic pilot, which is what state legislatures periodically try to do by taking certain decisions out of the hands of judges and juries, particularly with mandatory minimum sentences.

A particularly egregious example of bypassing judicial discretion are laws requiring youths younger than 18 convicted of murder to be sentenced to life without parole, regardless of the circumstances of the crimes or such factors as a brutally dysfunctional home life.

EDITORIAL: Let's permanently protect rules of open government (Redding Record Searchlight)

July 15, 2012

Strictly speaking, your government representatives no longer have to tell you in advance what they're going to discuss at the next meeting, and they don't have to report actions they've taken in closed session.

If that sounds absurd, it is; and for now at least there's little chance that local municipalities or counties will risk the public's wrath by doing any such thing. And yet ... they could.

EDITORIAL: Transparency is an asset, not an expense (Santa Rosa Press Democrat)

July 18, 2012

California's public meeting law is a model of clarity:

• City council members, county supervisors, school board trustees and other local elected and appointed officials can't act on any item that isn't on their meeting agenda.

• Barring an emergency, agendas must be posted at least three days in advance of the meeting.

• Executive sessions are, for the most part, limited to litigation and labor and real estate negotiations, and any decision made behind closed doors must be disclosed as soon as the public meeting reconvenes.

Syndicate content