Andy Stanley

The Bakersfield Californian has been reporting problems the County and City are facing regarding their employee pension plans.  On Sunday, 9/6/09, they printed an editorial titled “Leaders failed to be good stewards” that concludes that giving out lavish benefits like 3% at 50 to public safety employees, or 3% at 60 for non-safety, showed our local leaders were fiscally irresponsible.

Of course the BakCal’s new found passion for pension reform is right and good, but it must make one wonder, why did it take so long? And why didn’t they do more, sooner, to help us avoid this mess?

Going back through the online records of BakCal’s past we do find one person who, for years, has held pension reform as a top issue. That person is Zack Scrivner.

In October 2006 the Bakersfield Californian reported on a debate between Scrivner and Sheryl Mitchell during the race for City Council in the 7th Ward.

In the article David Burger writes, “The two differed on one of Scrivner’s pet issues — the reduction of pension and benefits for future city employees. Scrivner has been at odds with the firefighters union and the Central California Association of Public Employees because of his charges that their demands would bankrupt the city and cut services. Mitchell said that with the city lacking manpower, it needed to offer talented employees incentives to join and stay in the public sector.

Mitchell has been endorsed by the firefighters union and announced Tuesday she also has been endorsed by CCAPE (Central California Association of Public Employees).”

And from another October 2006 article by David Burger, “”Sheryl has a good business background,” said Chuck Waide, CCAPE rep. “She won’t use city employees as a whipping post to make a name for herself,” alluding to Scrivner.

CCAPE and the firefighters union have criticized Scrivner for targeting pensions and benefits. Scrivner claims that exorbitant benefits and pension plans for new hires could bankrupt the city.”

The unions have been fighting this for years

And of course the local unions, Bakersfield Police Officers Association and  Bakersfield Firefighters IAFF Local 246, have continued the attacks on Zack, City Manager Alan Tandy, other City Council members and anyone else supporting pension reform.  Click to hear the BPOA radio ad.  And there were plenty of letters to the editor. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here.

But in return for being a champion of pension reform, the BakCal portraited Scrivner as a political opportunist.

June 2009 Gretchen Wenner “Bakersfield police and fire departments have the 3-at-50 pension plan. Councilmembers Zack Scrivner and Ken Weir have set their political sights on killing it off.” (emphasis added)

June 2009 Gretchen Wenner “Blame for a negotiating impasse with police and a predicted impasse with firefighters has been put mostly on the council’s two newest members, Zack Scrivner and Ken Weir, who lambasted 3-at-50 during election campaigns.” (emphasis added)

June 2009 Lois Henry “He wants to be the guy who broke the 3-at-50 benefit, which would be a first in the state and would virtually guarantee Scrivner ascent to higher office.” (emphasis added)

In their 2006 “endorsement“ of Scrivner’s re-election bid, where they called him a “divisive, partisan figure” who was lacking in leadership, they referenced his interest in the pension issue as such, “Scrivner demonizes the mounting costs of public employee pensions, but offers no solutions to what he says is a looming crisis.”

As a disclaimer I would like to state the fact that I have worked with Zack and I was appointed to the Bakersfield Planning Commission by him.  But I believe the impartial observer has to agree that Zack has played a major part in bringing this issue to the forefront.  And contrary to the Californian’s claim, he has offered solutions from the very beginning.  Ideas such as increasing the age to receive the maximum 90% benefit, shifting to a defined contribution plan for new employees, employees sharing pension costs and even potentially returning to the 2 at 50 pension system that the city had for years.  Here is a recent article Zack wrote about pensions.

So it is interesting that due, in part, to his view on pension reform, Zack is a ”divisive, partisan figure,” but it is now the same view held by the Bakersfield Californian.  And for all of his work, no recognition in the BakCal’s shaming of fiscally irresponsible local elected officials.

Also interesting is the similarity between their editorial and the fire union’s talking points:

Bakersfield Fire Department employee Alan Neumann said in July 2009, “But rather than keeping the monies aside for the day when it was not overfunded, they chose instead to spend it on ice rinks, water parks and new offices for City Manager Alan Tandy.”

The Bakersfield Californian editorial in September 2009 said, “With no pay raises to pay and with no retirement contributions to contribute, that left more for the politicians to spend on say, oh, aquatic centers, ice skating rinks and sports arenas.”

(Note: The current unfunded liability amount is $100 million, approximately 1/3 of the city’s yearly operating budget.  It is a stretch to think saving pay raises and retirement contributions would come close to filling this hole.  This hole is here for two reasons only: high expense providing 90% of income at 50 years of age (or 60) for the rest of the employee’s natural life and poor performance from CalPERS investments.)

Ideally, the Californian and other local media would have helped tell this story sooner, so the public could help push the unions to accept these needed reforms.  Now, with a hurting economy and many individuals without jobs, let alone lavish pensions, advocating for bringing pubilc employee benefits down to earth is an easy sell.  It is a message that resonates with BakCal readers.  (At least the taxpayers out there who will not receive 90% of their income for life.)

Perhaps the Californian could be accused of failing to be a good steward as well, by not getting in front of this issue.  Luckily we have some leaders in Bakersfield who are willing to take a stand even when it is unpopular in the pages of the local paper.

Bakersfield, Politics

First, hats off to Congressman McCarthy, his staff, event volunteers and the thousands of people who showed up last night.  It was a great opportunity for people to listen, speak and be heard.  From my perspective, as someone who has been a part of numerous public hearings and town halls where only a handful show up, it is inspiring to see so many people willing to participate in a policy-related forum.  As with the Tea Parties, my hope is that this interest and willingness to participate did not evaporate when the attendees passed through the exit.  There are meetings every week where decisions are made that impact the quality of life of local residents.  Many of these meetings go on without much attention from the press or the public.  I truly believe that if just a fraction of those who attended last night continue to engage at the local level, we as a community would all benefit.

Norman Rockwell’s Freedom of Speech from his Four Freedoms paintings

The roundup:

Nick over at Facenews.org reports “The overall temperament of the Bakersfield town hall meeting on health care reform was mostly well behaved. There were few moments calling for McCarthy’s calmest tone, as only a couple of people jumped up and spoke out of turn.” 

Also be sure to check out his pre-town hall video featuring a very suspicious looking squirrel.

Great to see former BakCal reporter, now BakersfieldExpress.com reporter James Geluso at the event.  Here is his report.

James writes, “At times the meeting felt more like a rally than a town hall.  Angry tirades drew applause, and the angrier they were, the more applause they drew.”

Steven Mayer at BakCal has a report here, while the BakCal front page shows us the angry.  (Photo 2 of 9 here is on the print front page with headline “NO THANK YOU!”.)

And I would be remiss to not acknowledge BakCal’s discovery of Planet Stanley.  The planet’s existence is not widely known, but it is rumored to be sparsely populated, painfully lacking in natural resources and stubborn in its strong anti-civility stance.  Fortunately, I have been in contact with their ambassador and I am assured that they are ardent supporters of civil behavior and even politeness and kind acts from time to time.  What the Planet Stanleyians are less receptive to are misguided attempts to correct problems that don’t exist by hoping and praying that the unwashed hordes will find within themselves the strength not to hoot and holler. 

Welcome to Planet Stanley, we hope you enjoy your stay.

The Stanleyians join the BakCal in their desire for folks to mind their manners, but the honest citizens of this humble planet just had to correct the record when the paper trotted out four examples of misconduct which were both 1) more complex than they simply stated and 2) giving the distinct impression of angry mobs roaming the countryside.  (Of course the Stanleyians were very surprised to find BakCal capture one of these roaming mobs on the front page of, as they described, the daily pamphlet.)

The BakCal found it amusing to juxtapose my harangue against civility with Rep. Moran’s (D) town hall in Reston, VA. So here is some video.  And another.  WSJ report here. NYT report here.  More videos here too. Or watch the whole thing here.

Above is Congressman Moran’s town hall on 8/25/09.  Right before it spiraled into chaos I guess.

A few things gleaned from these sources: activist Randall Terry was there to disrupt and after he was removed, things calmed down; Organizing for America (the DNC “grassroots” arm) was out in full force handing out their printed signs and hand-made signs; former DNC Chair Howard Dean was on stage with Rep. Moran and this all took place 20 miles from D.C..  Rep. Moran was so suspicious of one detractor that he had his identification checked before he could ask a question.  The man was a local and the Congressman later apologized.

The New York Times leads with “Did anyone think that a highly publicized health care town hall within easy driving distance of Washington would not draw a massive display of Astroturf?” 

The bottomline is that if any town hall in America were to fail, this would have been it - easily accessible to special interest groups’ recruits just there to shout down the other side and hosted by strong supporters of the bill, drawing even more intensely passionate counter-arguers. Instead,  it ended up 95% civil, just 5% chaos.  But those are strictly Planet Stanley numbers.

Congressman McCarthy, Health Care, Politics

Tonight is our local turn at experiencing the healthcare town hall cultural phenomenon and much like the Tea Party I expect a large turnout.  Congressman Kevin McCarthy, (R) CA-22, is hosting the forum at California State University Bakersfield’s Icardo Center which can seat up to 3,800.  As a longtime associate and former employee on his staff, I know that the Congressman will be very appreciative of the comments he will receive and give his honest and sincere views on the issues.

In Bakersfield we have a Republican/ Democrat registration split of 45%/ 36%.  Even among our Decline to State and Democrat voters, there are many with conservative leanings so we should expect the vast majority at tonight’s Town Hall to be opposed to the creation of a new $1,000,000,000 government entitlement program while jobs are being lost and taxes and fees continue to increase.  What I don’t expect to see is any kind of problem from our residents. (Wait, we are supposed to fear the angry mob, right?)

Today’s Bakersfield Californian has an editorial calling for civility at tonight’s event.  It is titled “Prescription for healthy debate: respect, civility” but might as well read “Heading to the town hall? Beware the angry mob.”

They cite problems at recent town halls held by Rep. Lamar Smith (R), Rep. Charlie Gonzalez (D), Rep. Rob Andrews (D) and Rep. Mark Kirk (R).  Of course a limited review shows that at Rep. Smith’s town hall, the problems were caused by Joel Benavente, a trouble making heckler who was detained by police after the event.  No angry mob here.  And at Rep. Gonzalez’ town hall, the good Congressman started the meeting by having a powerpoint presentation of George Washington’s Rules of Civility and then as the San Antonio Express-News reports:

“At one point, John Hall, 38, a self-described libertarian, addressed Gonzalez by announcing that he plans to run against the congressman next year. Gonzalez quickly responded, “And I’m intent on beating you. What’s your question, big boy?””

Congressman Gonzalez
People to Congressman respect: required
Congressman to People respect: optional

In this case it would have been accurate for our local newspaper’s editorial to explain that as an elected representative, Rep. Gonzalez was blatantly disrespectful of his constituents and that if a Congressman in Bakersfield, California ever said “What’s your question, big boy?” we could probably expect similar shouts of protest.

Congressman Andrews
the right way to do it

Here is an account of Rep. Andrews’ town hall.  Summary: There were passionate people on both sides, signs were handed out as people came in, some people disagreed with the message and either ripped them or put NO in front of Thank You but in the end the Congressman was respectful and the meeting ended without punches.  From the article:

“To his credit, Representative Rob Andrews handled himself well. He never lost his patience, and he constantly called on the crowd to allow everyone to speak, whether for or against the plan. He also spoke of a willingness to listen to all ideas on healthcare reform. He conducted himself with class unlike many of his house colleagues…”

Congressman Kirk
set up second meeting to accomodate consituents
repeat with me: Democracy is good

 Here is an accountof Rep. Kirk’s meeting.  Basically the Congressman didn’t get a big enough room and some people were turned away.  He then did the right thing and scheduled another town hall to accomodate anyone who wishes to express their opinion.  How is that a cautionary tale about the evils of the angry mob?  This is an example of the beauty of representative government.  You, the representative, should listen to the people you serve and treat them with respect.

Oh, and this too: “Police Capt. Pecora said despite the strong opinions, orderly behavior ruled the day. “There was no lawlessness,” he said.”

Of course this collection of facts flies in the face of the Californian’s editorial view that the empassioned masses have trouble controling themselves in a town hall setting.  If it is true that these groups have in fact been relatively civil, filled with individuals who simply desire to have their voices heard and that the vast majority do not want a change that is as risky and radical as what has been proposed in H.R. 3200, then it would be a genuine, grassroots rejection of the direction that the Democrat majority in Washington, D.C. wants for our country. 

Fortunately for grassroots movements, they do not need the media to play as idiological co-conspirators to be successful because there is always an election around the corner.  If the message of the town halls is not heard by the majority in D.C. and course is not altered, there is sure to be a change in 2010.  Thankfully our Congressman gets it.  Our newspaper on the other hand doesn’t seem to, and their tone deafness to the community has been losing subscriptions for years.

Congressman McCarthy, Health Care, Politics

I was recently watching an interview of Sig Rogich on Jon Ralston’s Face to Face from earlier this year.  For those that don’t know Sig Rogich, he is and has been a major force in Nevada politics for many years.  He previously was a top consultant for Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and in 1992 served as U.S. Ambassador to Iceland.

The interview takes place in February of this year and it is very typical of the discussions that were going on at the time following the passage of President Obama’s stimulus.  A clip of New York Times’ columnist David Brook is featured saying that ”in a time when only the federal government is big enough to do stuff” for the GOP to oppose this massive spending is “a form of nihilism.”  The conversation that follows between Rogich and Ralston focuses on the prospects of Republican annihilation if the stimulus is successful in creating jobs.  Watch the video at the link:

Sig Rogich 

In the previous segment Rogich very appropriately states that “We are a forgetful nation, yesterday’s news is old hat.”  And here we are seven months later and the debate and politics have almost completely shifted.  Talk of stimulus has shifted to talk of healthcare reform and prospects of big Democrat gains in Congress have shifted to prospects of big Democrat losses.  In the video there is a discussion of the possible reversal of fortunes if the stimulus were to fall flat but neither saw the coming storm that is now healthcare reform.

From that point seven months ago to now, it is clear that continuing poor economic performance has provided the underlying reason for the public’s diminished support of the President but I think without the popular uprisings of the Tea Parties and now Healthcare Town Halls, the proposed Healthcare Reform package would have sailed through Congress, been signed by the President and would now be law.  Having the public’s attention on this issue now, will guarantee that any misstep, by forcing it through or by having limited oversight and transparency, will result in a continued decrease in trust for the policies of the President and Congressional Democrat majorities and will hurt their chances in 2010, 11 and 12.

Health Care, Politics