Sat Nov 10, 2012, 11:26 AM
amborin (11,717 posts)
California Democrats Achieve A SuperMajority, One Party Rule in State
California Democrats Likely to Win Supermajority
By NORIMITSU ONISHI SAN FRANCISCO — California’s Democrats were poised on Friday to gain a two-thirds supermajority in the State Legislature, an achievement that would give them the power to raise taxes unilaterally and could potentially ease the gridlock in a state known for its fiscal chaos. A supermajority in Sacramento — last held in 1933 by the Republicans — would effectively bring one-party rule to the nation’s largest state, where Democrats hold all statewide offices and where the Republican Party’s declining fortunes have been hastened by a recent nonpartisan redistricting. Democrats, as expected, quickly secured a supermajority in the State Senate on Tuesday. snip http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/10/us/politics/democrats-likely-to-win-supermajority-in-california-legislature.html?ref=politics&_r=0
|
15 replies, 888 views
| Author | Time | Post | |
| amborin | Nov 2012 | OP | |
| question everything | Nov 2012 | #1 | |
| amborin | Nov 2012 | #3 | |
| lunatica | Nov 2012 | #4 | |
| SHRED | Nov 2012 | #6 | |
| question everything | Nov 2012 | #8 | |
| SHRED | Nov 2012 | #9 | |
| lunatica | Nov 2012 | #2 | |
| amborin | Nov 2012 | #5 | |
| question everything | Nov 2012 | #10 | |
| amborin | Nov 2012 | #11 | |
| lunatica | Nov 2012 | #13 | |
| amborin | Nov 2012 | #14 | |
| Marsala | Nov 2012 | #7 | |
| jody | Nov 2012 | #12 | |
| musiclawyer | Nov 2012 | #15 |
Response to amborin (Original post)
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 11:32 AM
question everything (24,752 posts)
1. No reason to celebrate. Really
|
Democracies work by balancing different groups and policies. You have to have someone that challenges you. Otherwise you can form a groupthink - that led to the Bay of Pigs, that, apparently, was in the Romney campaign.
Perhaps the Republicans will finally get the message. "Sticking to principles" that have long been out of date and thus losing every single seat does not work. |
Response to question everything (Reply #1)
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 11:35 AM
amborin (11,717 posts)
3. yes, I've mentioned
|
that here on occasion, too.
the essence of democracy is factionalism and dissent; when that is stifled in the interest of a unified voice or single viewpoint or agenda, democracy withers.... |
Response to question everything (Reply #1)
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 11:36 AM
lunatica (28,842 posts)
4. What this means is that the Republicans will have to take a vacation from filibustering everything
|
Right now California has more than enough challenges that need to be addressed yesterday.
In the short term this is a good thing. It won't last forever, which is good, but right now it's good. |
Response to question everything (Reply #1)
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 11:41 AM
SHRED (10,105 posts)
6. If you understood CA politics and their rules...
|
...you would understand the celebration.
|
Response to SHRED (Reply #6)
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 12:00 PM
question everything (24,752 posts)
8. I do. I lived in California in the 90s and saw how the Republicans
|
lost all state offices, the last was of Secretary of State. Of course, now open primaries change everything but I saw how moderate Republicans, like former LA Mayor - Riordan - lost the primaries to run against Gray Davis to a rabid right winger. (Arnold was a joke).
The problem of California is the ballot measures systems. I think that some changes were enacted, though. When I first came to California I routinely voted NO on each measure. This is why the assembly and the senate are referred to as debating chambers. Politics is the art of compromise. You debate, you give some and you take some. But ballot measures have to come with a YES or NO results. I've seen a winning ballot thrown out by the court because it was a bit more comprehensive. They are based on yesterday's headlines, like the 3-strike laws. Prop. 13 ruined the school system that used to be the best in the nation in the 50s and 60s. And term limits removes the organizational history that long term members possess. As soon as they get elected they plan their next move. |
Response to question everything (Reply #8)
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 12:01 PM
SHRED (10,105 posts)
9. good points
Response to amborin (Original post)
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 11:34 AM
lunatica (28,842 posts)
2. Rachel Maddow explained it by saying
|
that with a Democratic Supermajority the Republicans don't even have to show up or vote at all to get anything passed. Not a single vote from them is needed. Not one.
I hope this means the issue of climate change will be taken seriously, as one of the top priorities. I hope it means the infrastructure will be fixed, and the bullet train built. I hope they hit the floor running and take full advantage of this advantage. |
Response to lunatica (Reply #2)
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 11:36 AM
amborin (11,717 posts)
5. agree with everything you said, except the bullet train; please, no
Response to amborin (Reply #5)
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 12:03 PM
question everything (24,752 posts)
10. You need some kind of a fast train that connect the main
|
regions: San Diego, LA, Sacramento and San Francisco, as well as one to Las Vega. This will relieve the permanent traffic jams on the major freeways.
And, you can start with extending the blue line (I think, or is it the green one?) to LAX. How stupid did they plan it? All major airports in the world have a light rail to the city connections. |
Response to question everything (Reply #10)
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 12:06 PM
amborin (11,717 posts)
11. yes, although the bullet train project would not accomplish that eom
Response to amborin (Reply #11)
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 12:27 PM
lunatica (28,842 posts)
13. I think the bullet train would cut down on a lot of flights
|
between northern California and southern California. And cutting down on flights is definitely good for the environment. And there are many more benefits financially.
|
Response to lunatica (Reply #13)
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 05:37 PM
amborin (11,717 posts)
14. it would create jobs,
|
but at a tremendous cost, including to the environment.
The train is estimated to take 2hrs and 38 mins from LA to SF. That won't stop many from flying, imo, as a flight takes approx 50 mins from lax to sfo, and you can hop right on bart at sfo. Plus, many want to go to oak, not sfo, so that presents a different issue. Its initial route would be from Bakersfield to somewhere in the central valley; but is there secondary public transportation at the station? Not currently. So.... projected ridership is dubious..... |
Response to amborin (Original post)
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 11:44 AM
Marsala (2,086 posts)
7. This is America in 20-30 years if the Republicans don't moderate themselves
|
Change or die.
|
Response to amborin (Original post)
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 12:11 PM
jody (26,624 posts)
12. Beware what you wish for, you might get it. Now CA Dems can blame no one
|
but themselves for not solving the many problems in California.
I hope CA Democrats can find solutions because the other 49 states have similar problems and need a pattern of success to follow. I write this from a beautiful city in the Inland Empire. |
Response to amborin (Original post)
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 06:43 PM
musiclawyer (2,052 posts)
15. Don't F--k this up CA dems
|
1. Get rid of prop 13 for corporations
2 do single payer Health care 3 do climate change 4 tax incentivize green jobs Pressure any Dino's with a primary challenge Then you are good |

