XPost: alt.politics.socialism.democratic, sac.politics, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh   
   XPost: talk.politics.guns, alt.politics.economics   
   From: slothe@netcom.com   
      
   Despite facing a $12 billion deficit this year, California’s Legislature   
   still managed to spend at least $415 million for local projects to help   
   lawmakers win their next elections.   
      
   CalMatters found close to 100 earmarks inserted into just one of the   
   state’s budget bills for local projects and programs that had little   
   apparent benefit to anyone outside the lawmakers’ districts.   
      
   Some of the earmarks raise concerns about legislative priorities in a   
   difficult budget year, such as lawmakers spending millions from the   
   general fund on museums, trails, parks and other amenities in wealthy   
   communities.   
      
   The spending includes $5 million in general fund money for a LGBTQ+ venue   
   in high-cost San Francisco, $2.5 million for a private day school in   
   Southern California and $250,000 for a private farm-animal rescue on the   
   North Coast.   
      
   Around $250 million of the local-project earmarks were funds taken from   
   the $10 billion Proposition 4 climate bond California voters approved last   
   year.   
      
   Some of the Prop. 4 earmarks included:   
      
   $26 million to programs paying farmers for private land conservation.   
   $20 million to help the public access a Southern California beach gated   
   off by a wealthy community.   
   $15 million for “geologic heritage sites” including the La Brea Tar Pits —   
   whose fossils have been used to study climate change in the last epoch.   
   The earmarks were approved at the same time Gov. Gavin Newsom and   
   lawmakers left state worker positions unfilled, suspended some health care   
   benefits, forewent raises for firefighters, filled budget holes with high-   
   interest bond money and took billions of dollars from the state’s “rainy   
   day” emergency fund.   
      
   Kristen Cox, executive director of the Long Beach Community Table   
   foodbank, said the money lawmakers spent this year to enhance communities   
   in their districts — often for projects that some would consider frills —   
   isn’t going to the neediest Californians.   
      
   “It’s misprioritization,” she said. “My priorities are to help the people   
   that need it the most. Their priorities seem to be ‘Let’s make this city   
   look gentrified and pretty and beautiful.’”   
      
   A Secret Process Benefits Lawmakers   
   Many of the earmarks — one-time allotments of cash for a specific purpose   
   or project — are fairly benign and went to local infrastructure needs such   
   as fire stations, parks, public schools and environmental projects.   
      
   They also represent just a small portion of the state’s $321 billion   
   budget, which pays for programs and services that typically are intended   
   to help all of California.   
      
   But inside the notoriously secretive budget negotiation process, lawmakers   
   also have the ability to set aside sizable chunks of money to benefit   
   their districts through an even more opaque earmark system.   
      
   It allows them to direct money to their pet projects without leaving a   
   fingerprint — at least until they issue a press release touting a new   
   community perk or show up for ribbon-cutting and check-passing ceremonies.   
      
   Such spending, disparagingly called “pork-barrel spending” or “pork” for   
   short, is hardly new or unique to California, said Thad Kousser, a former   
   legislative staffer and political science professor at UC San Diego. He   
   has extensively studied equity in how politicians divide up budgets for   
   local needs.   
      
   There’s a reason it’s pervasive: When politicians keep the cash flowing   
   back home, it helps them get re-elected, he said.   
      
   “Politicians across generations — and in every country — try to use some   
   portion of the budget on these clear signals that they’re directing the   
   flow of government dollars to real people and real organizations right at   
   home in their district,” he said. “Voters reward that.”   
      
   Eyeing Higher Office? Send Pork Home   
   The biggest recipient of the earmarks in Senate Bill 105 appears to be the   
   North Coast Senate district of Democratic Senate President Pro Tem Mike   
   McGuire. After losing his legislative leadership seat this year, he seems   
   to be positioning himself for a congressional bid, according to The Santa   
   Rosa Press Democrat. If he does run, he’ll be able to tout all the cash he   
   brought to his Senate district this year.   
      
   His district was the recipient of more than two dozen earmarks totalling   
   more than $100 million, accounting for a quarter of the earmark funds   
   CalMatters identified. They went to fund a regional hospital, harbors,   
   habitat projects, schools and fire stations. His district also received   
   $250,000 for the farm-animal rescue.   
      
   His largest earmarks included $50 million in Prop. 4 funds for a redwood   
   trail that’s to run 320 miles across his district.   
      
   McGuire’s office didn’t make him available for an interview. McGuire   
   instead sent an emailed statement defending the earmarks.   
      
   “Our state’s budget includes smart, one-time investments across   
   California,” McGuire said. “Many in our state have been working on these   
   projects for years to make California safer, stronger and more resilient.”   
      
   Sen. Scott Wiener, the powerful Senate Budget Committee chairperson from   
   San Francisco, is definitely running for higher office. Wiener announced   
   last month he’s running for Nancy Pelosi’s congressional seat.   
      
   The budget included at least $9 million in general fund earmarks   
   benefiting the voters of San Francisco who will decide whether to send him   
   to Washington, D.C. The money went for parks, restroom improvements and   
   “to support the preservation and revitalization of a historic LGBTQ+   
   venue” in the city’s Castro neighborhood, according to the budget bill   
   which doesn’t name the venue.   
      
   San Francisco is also slated to receive $1 million for a new oncology   
   clinic and chemotherapy center for Chinese Hospital and $250,000 for   
   “accessibility improvements” to Wah Mei child development center.   
      
   Wiener’s office didn’t respond to interview requests.   
      
   Earmarks Aren’t Public Records   
   None of the earmarks have a lawmaker’s name on them, making it extremely   
   difficult for members of the public — or even other lawmakers — to   
   decipher whose they are and which districts benefited. The governor’s   
   administration is responsible for some.   
      
   Legislative staff told CalMatters while reporting this story that earmark   
   requests sent to budget committees aren’t public records.   
      
   CalMatters instead used the Digital Democracy database’s ‘Find your   
   legislators’ tool to triangulate which pork projects are in which   
   lawmakers’ districts from earmarks inserted into SB 105. That’s one of 40   
   budget-related bills Newsom signed this year.   
      
   There are almost certainly more earmarks buried in the other budget   
   measures.   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)