Yes on 45

This will require the elected State Insurance Commissioner to sign off on health insurance rate increases just like is done for other forms of insurance in CA, and just like 35 other states do for health insurance.  I just got a letter from Anthem today informing me that my Covered California insurance for Mike and Russ is going up 20% over last year...to $950/month! We need someone answerable to the voters to keep an eye on this.  The insurance companies are spending buckets of money to stop it. Ignore them. Yes on 45.

Yes on Measure P

This Santa Barbara County measure will prohibit new oil operations that involve fracking/ acidification/ steam injection.  I see this as an oil development vs. water resource protection issue. New, intensive oil extraction technologies are proliferating around the country and the environmental risks are not fully understood or are being minimized. The only protection our local ground water has from risky oil extraction is a 3 to 2 vote on the board of supervisors. If the always closely divided third district goes to a pro-oil candidate in the future, that's it. We can wait forever for the State or Feds to regulate while we risk more and more high intensity projects getting into the pipeline, or the people of the county can say that we prioritize water over oil and hold any future board to that standard. The is a lot of talk about how this will cause a raft of lawsuits.  Possible. The oil interests often sue when they hear NO and it will happen without Measure P as well.  The only alternative to lawsuits is to let powerful unscrupulous people get their own way regardless of the cost to the community. We need to prioritize our tourism, agriculture and the integrity of our water over oil extraction. That is prudent self governance.

Ann's Voter Guide

The Election is Nov 4 and it is important that you vote!  I have put in some serious time thinking about the ballot propositions and have summarized below. I am not going to bother with candidates except State Superintendent because that's an obscure one.

State Superintendent of Public Instruction:
                   Tom Torlakson

Propositions:
1    No
2    No
45  Yes
46  No
47  Yes
48  Yes

Measures:
S    No
O   Yes
P    Yes

And here are more details on my thinking:

Tom Torlakson
Read what this guy says about his opponent.  I agree.

Propositions:

1    No. Water Bond.  7.5 billion for more dams is not going to fix our water problems in a sensible way. We need to get serious about ground water regulation which we DO NOT have AT ALL right now in CA and we need to ask ourselves if growing massive crops of a tropical plant, cotton, is the central valley desert is the wisest use of our water resources.

2    No.  "Rainy Day Fund" I have done a lot of reading on this one and I am convinced it is Sacramento giving itself weasel room to get out of full school funding in part by raiding local districts cash reserves.  If this passes all local school districts will be required to spend their cash reserves, which currently average 16 weeks of expenses, down to just 2-3 weeks of expenses.  That is scary. SF Gate on the subject.

45  Yes. Insurance Commission Approves Health Insurance. My Mom was suspicious of this one so she made me really look into it.  This comes from Consumer Watchdog not some fly by night astro turf crew with a fishy agenda.  It may get the Insurance Commissioner up in Covered California's business but that is not necessarily a bad thing. Just because I think Obamacare (ACA) is a lot better than NOT-Obamacare does not mean we all look the other way.

46  No.  Drug tests for Doctors/ Increase in Medical Malpractice Cap.  Drug Testing for Doctors...really? That part was supposed to sweeten the bitter pill of increasing malpractice liability limits for pain and suffering.  I would actually have considered upping the limit which was set to the fixed dollar amount of $250K in the '70s back when that would buy you a big fancy house on the Riviera instead of half of a dump next to the freeway in Goleta ...but the drug testing idea is so dumb I choked on that poison pill.

47  Yes. Changes some non-violent felonies to misdemeanors. Yes Yes Yes. OMG can we please stop sending everyone in California to prison for everything. Who doesn't want this? Prison guards, for-profit prison operators, fear mongering politicians, racists.  Who wants this? Sane people.

48  Yes. Indian Casinos. They happen. The State and the Feds negotiated this one. Other tribes and their casino operators/investors with nearby casinos put this on the ballot to stop the competition.

Measures:

S    No.  City College Bond.  I love SBCC. I really do. And I am willing to cough up property taxes to support the school. But $288 million in bonds covering a 10-year wish list is too much money all at once.  Especially since SBCC did not spend it's last bond on exactly what they said they would.  I think this community will agree to support campus upgrades. But the board need to get the message that they have to communicate better with us about out of state/country students, housing, facilities for Adult Ed and exactly what projects it is planning and why.  SBCC doesn't need to sneak stuff by us. We are eager to be on their side.

O   Yes.  Bed Tax.  Get's Hotel Bed Tax in unincorporated parts of county closer to amount in our cities. Helps fund services that make people want to come here.

P    Yes.  Prevent new oil operations that involve Fracking/ Acidification/ Steam injection.  I see this as an oil development vs. water resource protection issue. New, intensive oil extraction technologies are proliferating around the country and the environmental risks are not fully understood or are being minimized. The only protection our local ground water has from risky oil extraction is a 3 to 2 vote on the board of supervisors. If the always closely divided third district goes to a pro-oil candidate in the future, that's it. We can wait forever for the State or Feds to regulate while we risk more and more high intensity projects getting into the pipeline, or the people of the county can say that we prioritize water over oil and hold any future board to that standard. The is a lot of talk about how this will cause a raft of lawsuits.  Possible. The oil interests often sue when they hear NO and it will happen without Measure P as well.  The only alternative to lawsuits is to let powerful unscrupulous people get their own way regardless of the cost to the community. We need to prioritize our tourism, agriculture and the integrity of our water over oil extraction. That is prudent self governance.

Time Machine: What I Said About Iraq in 2003

Dear Editor,

George Bush is preparing to launch our country into unprovoked war of aggression against a sovereign nation. We are sending troops thousands of miles from our shores to invade and indefinitely occupy a country that has neither attacked nor threatened to attack us, a country that is, in fact, incapable of posing any meaningful military threat to us even if it wished to.  International support for this action is at best weak and, insofar as it exists, is due only to the enormous military and economic hegemony of our country in the world community. Our roster of “allies” has been assembled through a combination of coercion and bribery, and not from a genuine international concern that Iraq posses any immediate threat. The plain truth is that the Bush administration intends to invade Iraq for no other reason than to secure control of it’s oil reserves.

This fact should shock us.  This war is murder and robbery in its purest form. It will cost thousands of civilian lives but let us go beyond that.  When our soldiers arrive on the streets of Baghdad they will be facing the armed citizenry of Iraq.  These people will be fighting, not to protect Saddam Hussein or his supposed weapons of mass destruction, rather they will be fighting to defend their homes and families and the independence of their nation against foreign invaders. Any of us would do the same.  It is conceivable that we will be asking our sons and daughters to murder people literally on their own doorsteps. There is no stretch of the imagination that can frame this as self-defense.

When the fighting actually starts the call will go out to “support our troops” as if the wickedness of starting the war can be atoned for by the winning of it.  Well, I am supporting our troops and all the brave people of Iraq as well, by saying no to war right now.  I do not want to see our soldiers turned into dead bodies and I don’t want to see them turned into murderers and war criminals either.

Where Does the 2nd Amendment End and Terrorism Start?

 Here's the story: Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy has been grazing his cattle on public land for decades. For the last 20 years he has refused to pay grazing fees to we-the-people who collectively own this land. He said his ancestors had been running cattle on the land since the 1870's and it is theirs by right. He also objected to grazing restrictions the BLM was trying to enforce to protect the endangered Desert Tortoise. He had his day in court and the judge told the BLM they could confiscate his cattle until he paid up. The BLM rounded up around 400 of 900 cows. Hundreds of well armed protesters, who disagree with the concept of public land or at least federal public land, showed up to exercise their first and second amendment rights simultaneously and demanded a stop the round-up. Some of them also blocked a nearby highway. Fearing a violent escalation (remember Waco?) the BLM backed off and released the 400 cows, allowing Bundy to continue to graze his cattle for free for now.

This unfolding story raises a lot of interconnected issues.

The first is the question I raised at the top: Where does the 2nd amendment end and terrorism start?
Should the BLM, representing we-the-people, have given in because protesters were armed and seemed dangerous? Should we ask government range managers to face large groups of angry armed people to do their job?

Then again having seen the excessive force so often employed to stop avowed peaceful protestors one could be excused for concluding, based on this story, that it might be better to show up armed next time.

Then again, imagine the balls and ovaries a group of unarmed, say pro-tortise, protesters would need to show up to express their first amendment rights in this situation.

The feds claimed a lot of land occupied by Native Peoples. Is this different than claiming land occupied by Bundy's ancestors?

There is a lot of loose talk about second amendment remedies to tyranny. One the one hand, just because something is legal doesn't make it right. (You know like slavery and Goldman Sachs). And just because something is hard to stop doesn't make it legal (like NSA spying and Goldman Sachs) But as always, one person's tyranny is another person's constitutionally implemented law.

All this ties in with the current "Santa Barbara Reads" title "Big Burn" which discusses the origins of the Forest Service under Teddy Roosevelt and the birth of the whole concept of public lands in this country.

I'd really like to know what y'all think. And I recommend "Big Burn". They have many copies at the library.

My Comments on Channel Islands National Park General Plan

These are the comments I sent into the NPS on their General plan for the Channel Islands National Park. The NPS "preferred alternative" calls for, among other things, expansion of the kayak rental at Scorpion into a permanent concession with employee housing and extensive development at Becher's Bay on Santa Rosa including a hotel, restaurant and jeep tours. Comments must be received  by Jan 9. If you follow the link there are instructions on how to comment. 

We have been traveling by boat to the Channel Islands for 35 years and are deeply familiar with its unique wild beauty.  We strongly oppose any concessions or new development within the Channel Island National Park other than limited rustic camping.  The impacts of development such as hotels, restaurants and on-island equipment rentals as envisioned in the NPS preferred alternate 3, would be profound and would include wildlife disruption, sewage, trash, noise, pollution, lights and increased danger of wildfires. The addition of employees of private businesses, who are not trained or invested in the resource conservation mission of the Park will create other problems. How will they be housed and fed? What additional services will they ultimately demand? What kind of oversight will park service staff have to provide to protect the resources? How will enough water and electricity be supplied at to serve them?

We oppose any attempt to increase interest in the CINP by creating more “things to do” and attracting visitors who are looking for an experience that is different than what the CINP already offers.  Currently visitors expect to pack their own food and water and be prepared to deal with their own safety and first aid. There is no “entertainment” available other than the magnificent and transformative experience of just being present in this last wild corner of coastal Southern California. It is not difficult to make a trip to the park today with the many charters available. If visitors are not attracted to the park because it is not comfortable or convenient enough, not “fun” enough, or they don’t feel like planning ahead for their own needs, then they do not belong there. They are less likely to be the kind of people who will protect the CINP resources and more likely to be the kind who will create dangers and nuisances for other visitors and park staff. Visitor traffic should be limited to people who can deal with the harsh conditions and are prepared to take care of themselves.

An important component of the Channel Islands experience, as with any rugged wilderness trip, is self-sufficiency. This is especially true for children and teens. Parents and teachers can tell kids, “You only have what you brought, you can only experience what is all around you, you must leave no trace when you go.” People can give themselves over to the experience of wildness. Even minimal concessions will threaten this experience. You tell a kid, “If you want to go to Johnson’s Lee you have to hike.” And they will say… “but look there’s a jeep rental right over there.”  Once a permanent concession is established at Scorpion it will inevitably include a store selling sunscreen and candy and ultimately “I love CI” t-shirts. Kids will be pestering parents to buys things which is exactly what people go out there to get away from. Hotels, food service, jeep tours or stores cannot be offered to satisfy some visitors without fundamentally changing the nature of the CINP experience in a way that cheapens it for all.

The Channel Islands are an easy day trip away from hundreds of hotels and restaurants in Santa Barbara and Ventura and the wilderness experience of the park should not be compromised by locating these types of facilities on the islands. If new visitor services, educational exhibits or equipment rentals are desired, they should be located on the mainland just as the current park visitor center is.

The park service has done the public a disservice including such limited alternatives in this report.  It feels like the decision has already been made on “what is best for CINP” and the public is being steered toward accepting it.  Alt 2 and Alt 3 both contain the same amount of development. Increases in visitor services show up as beneficial impacts in the assessment even though they will degrade the experience existing visitors are currently seeking and enjoying. There is no mechanism in this report to assess the impact of altering the current self-sufficiency model of the CINP experience…yet once you can go out to the CI and buy stuff with money the experience is fundamentally changed. The public is not offered an alternative which addresses some of the problems solved by Alt 2 and 3 but without the rental concession at Scorpion with permanent housing and without the extensive development at Bechers.  (I think it is a false choice, but even if I had to pick I would rather see the buildings at Bechers deteriorate than turned into a hotel and restaurant if that were the only way to save them.) Changes to the mainland area of the park (visitor’s center etc.) are largely uncontroversial but they are still only packaged up with Alt 2 and 3. The CINP must support it’s own visitor values: “opportunities to experience peace, pristine soundscape, natural dark, and explore an environment with few other people present” but neither Alt2 or Alt3 do this.

I think a fairly broad based consensus can be found among current visitors to the CINP as  follows:

 

• ·       Habitat restoration and protection of biological and archeological resources
• ·       Limited visitors at rustic camping facilities
• ·       Improvements to mainland facilities
• ·       No hotels, restaurants, stores or jeeps
• ·       Support for scientific research

We basically want the islands left as they are except to restore damage done by past human activities. Visitor traffic to CINP is already increasing. There is no need for CINP to “to provide a diverse range of visitor experience opportunities” as the plan puts it.  The CINP will be at legally mandated carrying capacity with the visitor experiences that are currently on offer. If funding is an issue, the report should state that right up front such as: “The CINP wants a hotel at Becher’s because we need the money.”  If this is the case, then a real conversation needs to happen about alternative funding options. Once this Pandora’s box gets open up, those of us who love these islands rightly fear they will be changed forever for the worse.

Ann's Holiday Shopping Guide - Buy Local

My number one gift suggestion is always Love and Gratitude. But if you are looking for something to wrap up and put under the tree here are some ideas that will strengthen our local economy and support our friends and neighbors.

Something sweet and inspiring from Molly Hahn's Buddha Doodles:

A new CD from marvelous Brazilian transplant to Santa Barbara Teka:

A gorgeous handmade ceramic drum from Full Circle Drums:

:

A massage gift certificate or guided meditation CD from master massage therapist Ann Brode:

Beautiful, melodious garden art from Picotte Windchimes:

A DVD or CD from storyteller extraordinaire Michael Katz:

Toad the Wet Sprocket has an awesome new CD out:

Smooth Jazz with Craig Sharmat:

An upcycled shopping tote made right here in Santa Barbara by local artist Susan Owens.  The coffee bean bag would have been discarded but now it is lined, has comfortable handles and can hold A LOT of groceries!  Available at Raoul Textiles 136 State Street across from the train station.

Looking for something for a gardener or pet lover? Head over to Island Seed and Feed.

Give a gift of healthy food from the The Isla Vista Food Coop 

Make a sampler from their large selection of Fair Trade Chocolate or their whole shelf of different hot sauces.  How about a basket of locally grown apples or mandarins or winter squash? It's also a great place for supplies for your healthy, delicious holiday feasts. Beer and wine too!

Make a gift in someone's name to our many worthy local non-profits. Here are some of my favorites:

The Environmental Defense Center, doing everything legally possible to protect our local environment.

The Wilderness Youth Project and Sprout Up, connecting kids and nature.

The Marge Luke Theater providing an affordable venue for performing arts.

Domestic Violence Solutions, providing shelter and counseling for families dealing with domestic abuse.