5. One of my biggest concerns is transparency in government. I think the state of California does an extremely poor job in the area of open government, particularly with regards to public records access. As a state senator, what changes would you like to make, if any, to California’s open government policies?
Having been a member of the city council and board of supervisors, we worked under the Brown Act and we made an effort to be transparent and where we weren’t, citizens would remind us that we needed to be and they had access to whatever they needed under the law. I support that; I always have. When I got to the legislature, I was amazed at the very different way we conduct business and the lack of accountability that you see with departments.
I support and have supported every effort that has come before me to increase transparency. I think it is important to do that. There is enough distrust of government that we don’t need to add to it by keeping things secret. It’s just not anybody’s interest.
The newspaper publishers are the ones that come forward with some legislation each year that extends the right to have open records. I support that strongly.
6. Many communities seem to develop housing in flood prone areas. What steps do you believe are needed to ensure protection from floods given growing population pressures?
That’s one of the areas that I have been the most active in—flood protection. I am very proud of the package that we put together. It was landmark legislation, signed by the governor last year that connects land use to local government decision making. Beginning in 2011 and ending in 2016, there will be no more development in flood plains by local government in deep flood plains, without adequate protection. That is the keystone of a flood protection policy for the Sacramento-San Joaquin area that frankly is well overdue.
There has been tremendous growth just in the last twenty years since the last floods in the 80’s and the 90’s. There has been tremendous growth in areas that were under 10 and 12 feet of water twice in the last twenty years. That’s foolhardy and that’s a major safety risk. Natomas, Plumas Lake, River Islands—these are areas that do not have sufficient protection and need to have protection. We are in the flood plain. We flood all the time. We aren’t on a hill. Davis is, we have a slight elevation. But the fact is most of the area, especially on the rivers, a very beautiful area, but not the place you want to put housing.
I am very proud of this package it includes a change in the relationship between local government and the state. We negotiated it with the governor, with local government, with the developers, it took us three years, but it’s a good piece of legislation. I’m looking forward to watching it so that it doesn’t get weakened in any way.
7. I am going to ask two specific but related questions. The first is, tell us why a Democrat should vote for you rather than your Republican opponent? The second part, is tell us why someone who is in the middle should vote for you, as opposed to your Republican opponent?
I suggest that if you look at my record, you’ll see someone who has spent years in public service trying to solve problems and I do it with anybody in any part of the spectrum. If there are problems and concerns, I try to work through those. If you look at my legislation, you will see a focus on seniors, children, the environment, education, health care; areas that I think are very strong Democratic values. But they are also values that transcend party. I think that record is one that I’m very proud of. Those are the same issues that I would take to the Senate.
I also work in a bipartisan fashion; I don’t let party get in the way of good legislation. Whether it is flood protection or transportation, I make it a point to convince those, persuade those, and involve those who have an interest in a particular area. For instance Route 12, which was a major safety problem in Solano and San Joaquin County. I represent Solano as do many Democrats, but as you cross into San Joaquin, Route 12 is represented by Republicans—Senator Cogdill, Allen Nakanishi, Guy Houston. I convened the meeting, we talked about safety problems on Route 12 and we worked to fix them. They did the things they could do on their side of the aisle; I did what I could do on my side of the aisle. And when it came down to the final votes, they were there and we were there together. That’s how that unity achieved success on Route 12—a road in which people were dying, in fact there was one week in which there was a death almost every day because of the head on collisions.
I think it’s important to note that the values that attract Democrats to me are the same that would attract Republicans or Independents to me. That is that I solve problems and I do it with whoever is at the table or whoever is effective.
8. How can the state better get money to local jurisdictions such as cities or counties?
There is a difference between them. I started my career in the Davis City Council and I went to the board of supervisors, so I’m very much aware of local government and its needs. Cities are more independent from the state than counties, which are more and more the arm of the state taking care of many of the services that the state provides certain health and social services and justice. The state took a great deal of funds away from local government when I was in City Hall and I vowed that when I got to state that I would do what I could to protect the city sources of revenue and the county ones and we did that through Prop. 1A.
The result is that in downturns of the economy like now, they will be more protected than they’ve ever been. That doesn’t mean that in a time of economic recession, they will feel no hurt. They will. They should tighten their belts, just as we’re going to have to. Counties, just because of who they serve, I have spent a good deal of time making certain that the kinds of cuts we’re going to be forced to make, will not affect the federal funding we get. We get a lot of funding that is put together through many different sources at the county level. All of it is focused on those who are the poorest, the most in need, aged, blind, the disabled, children, and all with the fewest resources. We have combinations of funding from the federal government. I want to make sure that we are careful to maximize the resources that we get from the federal government, and not leave any of those dollars on the table. Make sure that we get as much as we possibly can down to the local level.
This is an unusual year. We are in a very serious recession, no matter what the President tells us. We are in a very serious recession and we have a budget deficit that is approaching $14 billion. While we can make cuts in some areas, and will, $14 billion worth of cuts would be devastating to many of the poorest among us, and I don’t intend to see that happen. I don’t intend to see education harmed either. But in order to protect local government, or anyone else, it is important to recognize that there are three states that have a two-thirds budget requirement. It is the only vote where we cannot vote what we wish to do as Democrats. We need Republican support and right now they’re not willing to put any revenues on the table. So that really creates a standoff at this point in time. I don’t know how that’s going to come off.
We’re certainly going to fight for the areas that I think people care deeply about—education, health care, transportation, all of these areas are so important to people’s live. There are more and more needs that people have. People want more and more. There are problems that need to be solved, and our revenues are declining. If you adjust for inflation and population growth, in fact over the last twenty years we are spending less per capita in the state of California, the eighth largest economy in the world, than we did twenty years ago. It is an untenable situation.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
I am hearing a lot of criticisms from Lois about what the problems are, but not much in the way of solutions. Most of us citizens perfectly understand that education is taking a terrible hit in this tight budget year. But Lois doesn’t seem to be offering any solutions, short or long term. She talks about local gov’ts receiving less and less funding from the state, but doesn’t really say how to solve that particular problem.
In this entire discussion, it seems as if about the only thing she has really been able to accomplish is making sure homes are not built in flood areas, although the wording is a bit ambiguous. I am still not clear from what she said whether developers can build inside a flood plain so long as mitigation measures are taken. And she noted that fixed were some of the problems with Highway 12, an accident prone stretch of road.
I find an interesting parallel here. Vic Fazio tried like heck to represent CA to the best of his ability, and the one thing he did get done was make what is now Highway 113 much safer. He also pushed for a lot of wilderness preservation. But as far as anything else, he ran up against inertia in the federal legislature – and was termed out before he was able to achieve any real seniority on substantive committees. It is very difficult for legislators to get anything much done beyond working on whatever few committees they are assigned to.
Unfortunately I see a lot of campaign rhetoric here yet again, that articulates what the problems are. But what I don’t see is good problem solving skills. I want to see more suggested solutions. How can we structure things better so that more money trickles down from the state to the local level? Is there some way we can foster better use of educational funding, to make sure there is not a massive shortfall when the state budget gets tight? How can we make sure certain unions loosen their stranglehold on the state gov’t budget process, when budget decisions are front and center for consideration?
For instance, some years ago, the Sacramento Bee ran a series of articles on educational programs that were eating up a lot of money with no accountability as to their efficacy. Huge chunks of money that school districts like Los Angeles were given with no requirement to show efficacy; sustainability; importance relative to basic programs, money handed out with impunity with almost no follow up of any kind.
I think what angers me so much about our governor’s proposed 10% cut across the board is how indiscriminate it is. Cutting 10% out of “essential” programs will be devastating; whereas a 10% cut out of discretionary programs won’t even touch all the “pork” that exists. And trust me, tons of “pork” occur all over the place. But no legislator seems willing to attack the enormous amounts of legislative “pork” that exists in our budget.
It is far easier to facilitate an across the board cut of 10%, saying everyone will have to “tighten their belts”. But in so many cases, that will cause essential programs to fail – such as the closure of Valley Oak, and proposed closure of Emerson. Yet big school districts will continue to get huge pots of money for which they are unaccountable. School Boards will continue to act with impunity, wallowing in corruption such as the Total School Solution debacle, with no appropriate oversight in the way they spend educational funding.
We need to demand better from our representatives…
I am hearing a lot of criticisms from Lois about what the problems are, but not much in the way of solutions. Most of us citizens perfectly understand that education is taking a terrible hit in this tight budget year. But Lois doesn’t seem to be offering any solutions, short or long term. She talks about local gov’ts receiving less and less funding from the state, but doesn’t really say how to solve that particular problem.
In this entire discussion, it seems as if about the only thing she has really been able to accomplish is making sure homes are not built in flood areas, although the wording is a bit ambiguous. I am still not clear from what she said whether developers can build inside a flood plain so long as mitigation measures are taken. And she noted that fixed were some of the problems with Highway 12, an accident prone stretch of road.
I find an interesting parallel here. Vic Fazio tried like heck to represent CA to the best of his ability, and the one thing he did get done was make what is now Highway 113 much safer. He also pushed for a lot of wilderness preservation. But as far as anything else, he ran up against inertia in the federal legislature – and was termed out before he was able to achieve any real seniority on substantive committees. It is very difficult for legislators to get anything much done beyond working on whatever few committees they are assigned to.
Unfortunately I see a lot of campaign rhetoric here yet again, that articulates what the problems are. But what I don’t see is good problem solving skills. I want to see more suggested solutions. How can we structure things better so that more money trickles down from the state to the local level? Is there some way we can foster better use of educational funding, to make sure there is not a massive shortfall when the state budget gets tight? How can we make sure certain unions loosen their stranglehold on the state gov’t budget process, when budget decisions are front and center for consideration?
For instance, some years ago, the Sacramento Bee ran a series of articles on educational programs that were eating up a lot of money with no accountability as to their efficacy. Huge chunks of money that school districts like Los Angeles were given with no requirement to show efficacy; sustainability; importance relative to basic programs, money handed out with impunity with almost no follow up of any kind.
I think what angers me so much about our governor’s proposed 10% cut across the board is how indiscriminate it is. Cutting 10% out of “essential” programs will be devastating; whereas a 10% cut out of discretionary programs won’t even touch all the “pork” that exists. And trust me, tons of “pork” occur all over the place. But no legislator seems willing to attack the enormous amounts of legislative “pork” that exists in our budget.
It is far easier to facilitate an across the board cut of 10%, saying everyone will have to “tighten their belts”. But in so many cases, that will cause essential programs to fail – such as the closure of Valley Oak, and proposed closure of Emerson. Yet big school districts will continue to get huge pots of money for which they are unaccountable. School Boards will continue to act with impunity, wallowing in corruption such as the Total School Solution debacle, with no appropriate oversight in the way they spend educational funding.
We need to demand better from our representatives…
I am hearing a lot of criticisms from Lois about what the problems are, but not much in the way of solutions. Most of us citizens perfectly understand that education is taking a terrible hit in this tight budget year. But Lois doesn’t seem to be offering any solutions, short or long term. She talks about local gov’ts receiving less and less funding from the state, but doesn’t really say how to solve that particular problem.
In this entire discussion, it seems as if about the only thing she has really been able to accomplish is making sure homes are not built in flood areas, although the wording is a bit ambiguous. I am still not clear from what she said whether developers can build inside a flood plain so long as mitigation measures are taken. And she noted that fixed were some of the problems with Highway 12, an accident prone stretch of road.
I find an interesting parallel here. Vic Fazio tried like heck to represent CA to the best of his ability, and the one thing he did get done was make what is now Highway 113 much safer. He also pushed for a lot of wilderness preservation. But as far as anything else, he ran up against inertia in the federal legislature – and was termed out before he was able to achieve any real seniority on substantive committees. It is very difficult for legislators to get anything much done beyond working on whatever few committees they are assigned to.
Unfortunately I see a lot of campaign rhetoric here yet again, that articulates what the problems are. But what I don’t see is good problem solving skills. I want to see more suggested solutions. How can we structure things better so that more money trickles down from the state to the local level? Is there some way we can foster better use of educational funding, to make sure there is not a massive shortfall when the state budget gets tight? How can we make sure certain unions loosen their stranglehold on the state gov’t budget process, when budget decisions are front and center for consideration?
For instance, some years ago, the Sacramento Bee ran a series of articles on educational programs that were eating up a lot of money with no accountability as to their efficacy. Huge chunks of money that school districts like Los Angeles were given with no requirement to show efficacy; sustainability; importance relative to basic programs, money handed out with impunity with almost no follow up of any kind.
I think what angers me so much about our governor’s proposed 10% cut across the board is how indiscriminate it is. Cutting 10% out of “essential” programs will be devastating; whereas a 10% cut out of discretionary programs won’t even touch all the “pork” that exists. And trust me, tons of “pork” occur all over the place. But no legislator seems willing to attack the enormous amounts of legislative “pork” that exists in our budget.
It is far easier to facilitate an across the board cut of 10%, saying everyone will have to “tighten their belts”. But in so many cases, that will cause essential programs to fail – such as the closure of Valley Oak, and proposed closure of Emerson. Yet big school districts will continue to get huge pots of money for which they are unaccountable. School Boards will continue to act with impunity, wallowing in corruption such as the Total School Solution debacle, with no appropriate oversight in the way they spend educational funding.
We need to demand better from our representatives…
I am hearing a lot of criticisms from Lois about what the problems are, but not much in the way of solutions. Most of us citizens perfectly understand that education is taking a terrible hit in this tight budget year. But Lois doesn’t seem to be offering any solutions, short or long term. She talks about local gov’ts receiving less and less funding from the state, but doesn’t really say how to solve that particular problem.
In this entire discussion, it seems as if about the only thing she has really been able to accomplish is making sure homes are not built in flood areas, although the wording is a bit ambiguous. I am still not clear from what she said whether developers can build inside a flood plain so long as mitigation measures are taken. And she noted that fixed were some of the problems with Highway 12, an accident prone stretch of road.
I find an interesting parallel here. Vic Fazio tried like heck to represent CA to the best of his ability, and the one thing he did get done was make what is now Highway 113 much safer. He also pushed for a lot of wilderness preservation. But as far as anything else, he ran up against inertia in the federal legislature – and was termed out before he was able to achieve any real seniority on substantive committees. It is very difficult for legislators to get anything much done beyond working on whatever few committees they are assigned to.
Unfortunately I see a lot of campaign rhetoric here yet again, that articulates what the problems are. But what I don’t see is good problem solving skills. I want to see more suggested solutions. How can we structure things better so that more money trickles down from the state to the local level? Is there some way we can foster better use of educational funding, to make sure there is not a massive shortfall when the state budget gets tight? How can we make sure certain unions loosen their stranglehold on the state gov’t budget process, when budget decisions are front and center for consideration?
For instance, some years ago, the Sacramento Bee ran a series of articles on educational programs that were eating up a lot of money with no accountability as to their efficacy. Huge chunks of money that school districts like Los Angeles were given with no requirement to show efficacy; sustainability; importance relative to basic programs, money handed out with impunity with almost no follow up of any kind.
I think what angers me so much about our governor’s proposed 10% cut across the board is how indiscriminate it is. Cutting 10% out of “essential” programs will be devastating; whereas a 10% cut out of discretionary programs won’t even touch all the “pork” that exists. And trust me, tons of “pork” occur all over the place. But no legislator seems willing to attack the enormous amounts of legislative “pork” that exists in our budget.
It is far easier to facilitate an across the board cut of 10%, saying everyone will have to “tighten their belts”. But in so many cases, that will cause essential programs to fail – such as the closure of Valley Oak, and proposed closure of Emerson. Yet big school districts will continue to get huge pots of money for which they are unaccountable. School Boards will continue to act with impunity, wallowing in corruption such as the Total School Solution debacle, with no appropriate oversight in the way they spend educational funding.
We need to demand better from our representatives…
Thanks for ALL your service but I’m not convinced FLOOD protection is the issue to spend so much time and energy discussing. For all the time and years of service you have provided I often read stories which leave me wondering where the new ideas are-new solutions-different approaches but so far, nothing…
Thanks for ALL your service but I’m not convinced FLOOD protection is the issue to spend so much time and energy discussing. For all the time and years of service you have provided I often read stories which leave me wondering where the new ideas are-new solutions-different approaches but so far, nothing…
Thanks for ALL your service but I’m not convinced FLOOD protection is the issue to spend so much time and energy discussing. For all the time and years of service you have provided I often read stories which leave me wondering where the new ideas are-new solutions-different approaches but so far, nothing…
Thanks for ALL your service but I’m not convinced FLOOD protection is the issue to spend so much time and energy discussing. For all the time and years of service you have provided I often read stories which leave me wondering where the new ideas are-new solutions-different approaches but so far, nothing…
A brief point of historical clarification. Vic Fazio retired after 10 terms in the House. He wasn’t termed out (no federal term limits), but just decided it was time for a change. Moreover, his centrist approach to political problem solving and collaboration (and record of success over the span of his 20 years in Congress) was dictated by the politics of his congressional districts. When you represent Red Bluff and Davis in the same CD, you’ve got to find your solutions and common ground somewhere in the middle. I think Lois’ approach is very similar and that’s what’s made her a very successful legislator. In a body dominated by the extremes of both parties, she has succeeded with a moderate political style that works well in the Assembly and in Yolo County. It will serve her well in the state Senate.
A brief point of historical clarification. Vic Fazio retired after 10 terms in the House. He wasn’t termed out (no federal term limits), but just decided it was time for a change. Moreover, his centrist approach to political problem solving and collaboration (and record of success over the span of his 20 years in Congress) was dictated by the politics of his congressional districts. When you represent Red Bluff and Davis in the same CD, you’ve got to find your solutions and common ground somewhere in the middle. I think Lois’ approach is very similar and that’s what’s made her a very successful legislator. In a body dominated by the extremes of both parties, she has succeeded with a moderate political style that works well in the Assembly and in Yolo County. It will serve her well in the state Senate.
A brief point of historical clarification. Vic Fazio retired after 10 terms in the House. He wasn’t termed out (no federal term limits), but just decided it was time for a change. Moreover, his centrist approach to political problem solving and collaboration (and record of success over the span of his 20 years in Congress) was dictated by the politics of his congressional districts. When you represent Red Bluff and Davis in the same CD, you’ve got to find your solutions and common ground somewhere in the middle. I think Lois’ approach is very similar and that’s what’s made her a very successful legislator. In a body dominated by the extremes of both parties, she has succeeded with a moderate political style that works well in the Assembly and in Yolo County. It will serve her well in the state Senate.
A brief point of historical clarification. Vic Fazio retired after 10 terms in the House. He wasn’t termed out (no federal term limits), but just decided it was time for a change. Moreover, his centrist approach to political problem solving and collaboration (and record of success over the span of his 20 years in Congress) was dictated by the politics of his congressional districts. When you represent Red Bluff and Davis in the same CD, you’ve got to find your solutions and common ground somewhere in the middle. I think Lois’ approach is very similar and that’s what’s made her a very successful legislator. In a body dominated by the extremes of both parties, she has succeeded with a moderate political style that works well in the Assembly and in Yolo County. It will serve her well in the state Senate.
“Vic Fazio retired after 10 terms in the House. He wasn’t termed out (no federal term limits), but just decided it was time for a change.”
My understanding was that term limits were instituted at the federal level at just about that time or a bit before, and Vic Fazio had to go because of them, which lost us seniority on whatever committees he was on. I thought I remembered the press saying at the time that it spelled the death knell for any chance of CA ever getting a water project out of the US Congress. Correct me if I am wrong… Are there not term limits at the federal level for CA Congresspersons?
“When you represent Red Bluff and Davis in the same CD, you’ve got to find your solutions and common ground somewhere in the middle.”
Yes, that is a tough nut to crack. But Fazio also hit up against the inertia of our nat’l politicians, who refused to worry about water problems in the West, even though it is a prime food source for this nation. Fazio repeatedly tried for water projects in the US Congress and could get nowhere – so his record for achievements was modest but nothing spectacular because of it.
I, personally, would like to see Lois get a little more creative, and try to come up with some solutions to all those problems she keeps reminding us about. Same goes for all politicians. Citizens pretty much know what the problems are, but are looking for leadership in solving them.
“Vic Fazio retired after 10 terms in the House. He wasn’t termed out (no federal term limits), but just decided it was time for a change.”
My understanding was that term limits were instituted at the federal level at just about that time or a bit before, and Vic Fazio had to go because of them, which lost us seniority on whatever committees he was on. I thought I remembered the press saying at the time that it spelled the death knell for any chance of CA ever getting a water project out of the US Congress. Correct me if I am wrong… Are there not term limits at the federal level for CA Congresspersons?
“When you represent Red Bluff and Davis in the same CD, you’ve got to find your solutions and common ground somewhere in the middle.”
Yes, that is a tough nut to crack. But Fazio also hit up against the inertia of our nat’l politicians, who refused to worry about water problems in the West, even though it is a prime food source for this nation. Fazio repeatedly tried for water projects in the US Congress and could get nowhere – so his record for achievements was modest but nothing spectacular because of it.
I, personally, would like to see Lois get a little more creative, and try to come up with some solutions to all those problems she keeps reminding us about. Same goes for all politicians. Citizens pretty much know what the problems are, but are looking for leadership in solving them.
“Vic Fazio retired after 10 terms in the House. He wasn’t termed out (no federal term limits), but just decided it was time for a change.”
My understanding was that term limits were instituted at the federal level at just about that time or a bit before, and Vic Fazio had to go because of them, which lost us seniority on whatever committees he was on. I thought I remembered the press saying at the time that it spelled the death knell for any chance of CA ever getting a water project out of the US Congress. Correct me if I am wrong… Are there not term limits at the federal level for CA Congresspersons?
“When you represent Red Bluff and Davis in the same CD, you’ve got to find your solutions and common ground somewhere in the middle.”
Yes, that is a tough nut to crack. But Fazio also hit up against the inertia of our nat’l politicians, who refused to worry about water problems in the West, even though it is a prime food source for this nation. Fazio repeatedly tried for water projects in the US Congress and could get nowhere – so his record for achievements was modest but nothing spectacular because of it.
I, personally, would like to see Lois get a little more creative, and try to come up with some solutions to all those problems she keeps reminding us about. Same goes for all politicians. Citizens pretty much know what the problems are, but are looking for leadership in solving them.
“Vic Fazio retired after 10 terms in the House. He wasn’t termed out (no federal term limits), but just decided it was time for a change.”
My understanding was that term limits were instituted at the federal level at just about that time or a bit before, and Vic Fazio had to go because of them, which lost us seniority on whatever committees he was on. I thought I remembered the press saying at the time that it spelled the death knell for any chance of CA ever getting a water project out of the US Congress. Correct me if I am wrong… Are there not term limits at the federal level for CA Congresspersons?
“When you represent Red Bluff and Davis in the same CD, you’ve got to find your solutions and common ground somewhere in the middle.”
Yes, that is a tough nut to crack. But Fazio also hit up against the inertia of our nat’l politicians, who refused to worry about water problems in the West, even though it is a prime food source for this nation. Fazio repeatedly tried for water projects in the US Congress and could get nowhere – so his record for achievements was modest but nothing spectacular because of it.
I, personally, would like to see Lois get a little more creative, and try to come up with some solutions to all those problems she keeps reminding us about. Same goes for all politicians. Citizens pretty much know what the problems are, but are looking for leadership in solving them.
“But Lois doesn’t seem to be offering any solutions, short or long term. She talks about local gov’ts receiving less and less funding from the state, but doesn’t really say how to solve that particular problem.”
Lois has sponsored dozens of bills in her years in the assembly. You can find details at her web site. They deal with school facilities and financing, water supply, local government funding, highways, and more. You can see what happened to each bill if you’re interested. She didn’t outline her achievements in this interview, but her record is available. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/
“My understanding was that term limits were instituted at the federal level at just about that time or a bit before, and Vic Fazio had to go because of them…”
There are no term limits at the federal level except for the executive branch. Vic Fazio retired after 18 years and now works for one of the most powerful lobbying firms in Washington DC.
Trivia quiz question: who remembers the man he replaced as congressman, and why that member left office?
“But Lois doesn’t seem to be offering any solutions, short or long term. She talks about local gov’ts receiving less and less funding from the state, but doesn’t really say how to solve that particular problem.”
Lois has sponsored dozens of bills in her years in the assembly. You can find details at her web site. They deal with school facilities and financing, water supply, local government funding, highways, and more. You can see what happened to each bill if you’re interested. She didn’t outline her achievements in this interview, but her record is available. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/
“My understanding was that term limits were instituted at the federal level at just about that time or a bit before, and Vic Fazio had to go because of them…”
There are no term limits at the federal level except for the executive branch. Vic Fazio retired after 18 years and now works for one of the most powerful lobbying firms in Washington DC.
Trivia quiz question: who remembers the man he replaced as congressman, and why that member left office?
“But Lois doesn’t seem to be offering any solutions, short or long term. She talks about local gov’ts receiving less and less funding from the state, but doesn’t really say how to solve that particular problem.”
Lois has sponsored dozens of bills in her years in the assembly. You can find details at her web site. They deal with school facilities and financing, water supply, local government funding, highways, and more. You can see what happened to each bill if you’re interested. She didn’t outline her achievements in this interview, but her record is available. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/
“My understanding was that term limits were instituted at the federal level at just about that time or a bit before, and Vic Fazio had to go because of them…”
There are no term limits at the federal level except for the executive branch. Vic Fazio retired after 18 years and now works for one of the most powerful lobbying firms in Washington DC.
Trivia quiz question: who remembers the man he replaced as congressman, and why that member left office?
“But Lois doesn’t seem to be offering any solutions, short or long term. She talks about local gov’ts receiving less and less funding from the state, but doesn’t really say how to solve that particular problem.”
Lois has sponsored dozens of bills in her years in the assembly. You can find details at her web site. They deal with school facilities and financing, water supply, local government funding, highways, and more. You can see what happened to each bill if you’re interested. She didn’t outline her achievements in this interview, but her record is available. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/
“My understanding was that term limits were instituted at the federal level at just about that time or a bit before, and Vic Fazio had to go because of them…”
There are no term limits at the federal level except for the executive branch. Vic Fazio retired after 18 years and now works for one of the most powerful lobbying firms in Washington DC.
Trivia quiz question: who remembers the man he replaced as congressman, and why that member left office?
Don — That would be the man with two wives, former Rep. Bob Leggett, who wisely decided not to seek re-election when it was discovered that he was a polygamist.
Don — That would be the man with two wives, former Rep. Bob Leggett, who wisely decided not to seek re-election when it was discovered that he was a polygamist.
Don — That would be the man with two wives, former Rep. Bob Leggett, who wisely decided not to seek re-election when it was discovered that he was a polygamist.
Don — That would be the man with two wives, former Rep. Bob Leggett, who wisely decided not to seek re-election when it was discovered that he was a polygamist.
LOL! Yep, that’s him. If I recall, he wasn’t actually implicated in KoreaGate, but was married to or having an affair with one of the principal characters.
LOL! Yep, that’s him. If I recall, he wasn’t actually implicated in KoreaGate, but was married to or having an affair with one of the principal characters.
LOL! Yep, that’s him. If I recall, he wasn’t actually implicated in KoreaGate, but was married to or having an affair with one of the principal characters.
LOL! Yep, that’s him. If I recall, he wasn’t actually implicated in KoreaGate, but was married to or having an affair with one of the principal characters.
This is very good. Some useful information on the vanguard.
This is very good. Some useful information on the vanguard.
This is very good. Some useful information on the vanguard.
This is very good. Some useful information on the vanguard.