FCL NEWSLETTER
November-December, 2002

2002 VOTING RECORD
Stories from the 2001/2002 Legislative Session
Looking Back Looking Back, Looking Ahead . . .Year-End Report from the Outreach and Development Coordinator
In FCL Newsletter History
A Support FCL by Sponsoring a Prisoner Newsletter Subscription
Subscribe -- Receive FCL's Newsletter by regular mail

2002 Voting Record

As each year comes to a close, FCL reviews the floor votes of legislators on bills we followed during the year. Though the voting record is a useful tool in analyzing legislative trends, records of floor votes do not tell the entire story of a legislator?s performance. For example, they do not reveal what a lawmaker did during important committee hearings where bills are shaped and amended before going to the floor. Nor do they take into consideration the large volume of bills, both favorable and unfavorable, that fail in committee.

Below are summaries and voting records on a cross-section of bills of interest to FCL during the 2002 calendar year. With an eye toward the upcoming legislative session, we think this snapshot should assist our readers when they consider how to best approach state legislators on similar issues.

AB 60 (Gil Cedillo, D., Los Angeles) allows immigrants who do not have a social security number and who are in the process of obtaining lawful immigration status to obtain a driver?s license or identification card. FCL SUPPORTS. Vetoed. Floor votes: Assembly, 9/14/01; Senate, 9/14/01. Note: The Legislature passed AB 60 in September, 2001, and the bill should have been delivered to the governor for signature or veto. The author pulled the bill from enrollment in January 2002 and, following the drafting of two compromise measures, the bill was sent to the Governor in August, 2002. (See Stories from the 2001-2002 Legislative Session in this issue.)

AB 1422 (Helen Thomson, D., Davis) establishes a 13-member mental health advocacy commission to serve until 2008. FCL SUPPORTS. Vetoed. Floor votes: Assembly, 8/29/02; Senate, 8/28/02.

AB 2292 (John Dutra, D., Fremont) prevents local governments from rezoning projects or imposing conditions on developers that are inconsistent with established zoning densities and allows developers to recover court costs for illegally imposed restrictions. FCL SUPPORTS. Enacted, Chapter 706. Floor votes: Assembly, 8/23/02; Senate, 8/21/02.

AB 2739 (Wilma Chan, D., Oakland) requires Medi-Cal managed care plans to provide culturally and linguistically appropriate services. FCL SUPPORTS. Vetoed. Floor votes: Assembly, 8/30/02; Senate, 8/29/02.

SB 372 (Joseph Dunn, D., Garden Grove) creates a short-term capital loan program to permit preservation of affordable housing developments and allow time for a permanent preservation strategy to be implemented. FCL SUPPORTS. Enacted, Chapter 721. Floor votes: Senate, 8/19/02; Assembly, 8/15/02.

SB 1227 (John Burton, D., San Francisco) enacts the Housing Bond Act of 2002, which authorizes the issuance of $2.1 billion in general obligation bonds for state housing programs. FCL SUPPORTS. Enacted, Chapter 26, appears as Proposition 46 on the November 2002 ballot. Floor votes: Senate, 4/8/02; Assembly, 4/4/02.

SB 1362 (Betty Karnette, D., Long Beach) establishes a pilot program to permit the children of women serving life terms in prison to have overnight visits with their mothers, subject to the same visiting restrictions applicable to the children of mothers who have a set parole date. FCL SUPPORTS. Vetoed. Floor votes: Senate, 8/30/02; Assembly, 8/24/02.

SB 1403 (Sheila Kuehl, D., Santa Monica) requires a 60-day no-fault eviction notice if a tenant has resided on the property for more than a year, except in exempted circumstances. FCL SUPPORTS. Enacted, Chapter 301. Floor votes: Senate, 8/14/02; Assembly, 8/8/02.

SB 1667(John Vasconcellos, D., Silicon Valley) directs schools to include all aspects of violence prevention in school safety and violence prevention plans. FCL SUPPORTS. Enacted, Chapter 506. Floor votes: Senate, 8/14/02; Assembly, 8/19/02.

SB 1807 (Wesley Chesbro, D., Arcata) lowers the burden of proof to delay the return of a weapon seized during a domestic violence arrest. FCL SUPPORTS. Enacted, Chapter 833. Floor votes: Senate, 8/26/02; Assembly, 8/21/02. ? Jim Lindburg

[insert voting record chart]

Stories from the 2001-2002 Legislative Session

FCL entered the 2001-2002 session with some optimism. Voters had just endorsed Proposition 36, calling for treatment instead of incarceration for illicit drug users, and in spite of the national election turmoil, California seemed ready to address social issues with more realism. We could not foresee that the energy crisis, drought, terrorism, and fiscal reversals would dominate the legislative scene. These events cast long shadows over Friends? concerns.

The State Budget

The governor delivered his proposed budget in January 2001 on the heels of dramatically falling crime rates with rising state revenues that set the stage for improved health and nutrition programs for poor people, more support for affordable housing, after-school programs for more young people, and lower rates of prison spending. Uncontrolled growth in prison populations and economic hard times had diverted funds from these and other important sectors of public stewardship.

Soon, however, public attention was grabbed by rolling electric power blackouts that sparked fears of a summer with scarce air conditioning. Billions of public dollars were spent to stabilize power markets, while important social programs struggled for toeholds in the state budget. By October, plummeting state revenues were obvious, partly due to the bursting dot-com bubble and market reactions to major corporate accounting frauds. By January 2002, the political focus had shifted to the approaching governor?s race, and the state budget was in shambles.

Some $2 billion in mid-year spending cuts all but reversed the scant progress of the preceding year?s increase in funding for social programs. As the session progressed, the budget shortfall grew to more than $20 billion, and by the summer of 2002, state agencies were instructed to plan for a 20 percent cut in their budgets. A proposed state bond issue to address needs for low-cost housing development was developed to rescue ongoing affordable housing programs. State funding for local juvenile probation programs such as day-reporting centers was preserved, but promised increases in state support for after-school youth programs were exchanged for modified federal funding arrangements.

The decline in prison populations raised the possibility of stopping the previously authorized construction of another high security prison at Delano. Anti-prison activists were surprisingly successful in holding up the actual commitment of some $300 million in construction money until environmental requirements could be addressed. The budget subcommittees considered the advantages of delaying construction of Delano II, and FCL presented testimony that the prisoner population could be safely housed in less costly units. Expert opinion on prisoner classification showed that any new construction ought to be focused on minimum-security institutions. But in the final budget negotiations, there was no delay in construction, and a contract was approved awarding huge salary increases that will pay prison guards (GED or high-school education required) over $70,000 per year.

It was 60 days after the July 1 budget due date before the needed two-thirds vote could be delivered on the 2002-2003 spending plan. Many contract service agencies, including the Friends Outside programs for prisoners, were without funds to meet payroll from July through September, when the budget was finally signed.

Against this background of fiscal disappointments, the Legislature had a decidedly mixed record of policy activity.

Peacemaking

FCL continued to parry the efforts of the Selective Service System that has, since 1999, pushed legislation to automatically register young men for the standby draft when they apply for a driver?s license. Mike Briggs (R., Fresno) introduced AB 1572, based on his unsuccessful effort of the previous year (AB 2574). The bill directed the State Department of Motor Vehicles to forward applications for registration to the Selective Service System. The Committee Against Militarism and the Draft, Veterans for Peace, and several local peace centers were encouraged to contact legislators, and there was a spirited debate in the Assembly Transportation Committee, where the bill was stripped of its coercive provisions. Thereafter, it failed passage in the Assembly Finance Committee.

The dramatic terror attacks in September 2001 changed the legislative atmosphere, and the Selective Service issue moved to the Senate, where Jackie Speier (D., San Mateo) introduced the forced registration bill as SB 1276. The author stated she was motivated primarily by concern for constituents who have been denied government employment and other benefits because of their failure to register. Senator Machado, citing his military service in Vietnam, objected that California was being asked to act while federal prosecutors were declining to prosecute non-registrants. After extended discussion, the bill, as amended to be an optional convenience for the applicant, passed out of its policy committees but failed in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

In the wake of the World Trade Center tragedy and anthrax scare, the Legislature held numerous hearings to consider California?s vulnerabilities. The Little Hoover Commission undertook a review of state and local emer-gency preparedness. Some 80 measures with ?anti-terror? labels competed for the attention of legislators and the media, including the obligatory idea of imposing the death penalty on terrorists (see below). About $50 million in unbudgeted costs were incurred by the Highway Patrol, National Guard, and other emergency agencies.

Ray Haynes (R., Riverside) introduced SJR 32 to congratulate the Bush Administration for its strategies in fighting terrorism, and SJR 33, urging Congress to approve anti-missile defense projects. FCL pointed out the flaws in both resolutions, and the hearing on SJR 33 in the Senate Rules Committee was canceled. FCL testified against SJR 32, pointing out that terrorism is best defeated by reducing the numbers of people willing to engage in political violence. The measure was amended, and passed to the Assembly, where it died without a hearing. FCL also sought to have Bruce McPherson (R., Santa Cruz) include training criteria in SB 1350 to help law enforce-ment learn the lessons of prevention. But legislative minds were focused on the measure?s federal funding and declined to consider the larger values of education.

Abolition of the Death Penalty

Dion Aroner (D., Berkeley) introduced AB 1512 to prevent the execution of mentally retarded individuals convicted of murder. Prior efforts to enact such legislation in California had encountered resistance, surprisingly, from some members of the disability community who are concerned that special treatment in court could reinforce the stigma of mental retardation. Supporters of the bill emphasized the unfairness of a judicial proceeding where an inappropriate smile or gesture by a retarded defendant could result in a death sentence. The bill was successful in its initial policy committee, although district attorneys were opposed on grounds that people who are ?mildly mentally retarded? do understand the difference between right and wrong.

The prison guards? union perceived the bill as an attack on the death penalty in general, and opposed it for that reason. They were unimpressed with the fact that other states with pro-death penalty governors had approved similar measures. On the day the bill was to be heard in the fiscal committee, supporters were told that it was quietly being taken off file. There would be no hearing. Apparently the Assembly leadership did not want Democratic members in swing districts to engage in a debate and face a floor vote on a measure that a well-funded group might claim was ?soft on crime.?

A year later, in People v. Adkins, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty cannot be applied to people who are mentally retarded, and an Aroner bill that was in the Senate, AB 557, was amended to contain provisions similar to AB 1512. When the bill was heard in the Senate Public Safety Committee, prosecutors again objected, this time on grounds that lawyers could make fraudulent claims of mental retardation on behalf of clients in murder cases. They asked that prosecutors have the right to submit any claim of retardation to a jury, rather than to a judge, and they sought the lowest possible standard to define mental retardation. The governor, facing reelection in November, wanted a consensus bill or none at all, so the measure died in the Assembly.

A few bills to expand the death penalty were introduced. SB 490,by Bob Margett (R., Arcadia) sought to apply the death penalty in cases where a murder was in violation of a court?s restraining order. Because the Senate Public Safety Committee was unlikely to approve it, the author delayed scheduling the measure for a hearing until the final deadline in January, 2002. Nick and Amanda Wilcox (who attend Grass Valley Friends Meeting) were willing to publicly attest to their continued opposition to the death penalty, even though their daughter had recently been murdered. After a discussion between Nick and Senator Margett?s staff, the author decided to drop the bill.

Phil Wyman (R., Tehachapi) introduced two death penalty expansion measures during the spring of 2002. AB 2103 proposed to apply the death penalty to terrorist acts resulting in death, and AB 2710 sought to apply the death penalty to murder cases where the victim was under age 14. When AB 2103 was heard in the Assembly Public Safety Committee, Nick Wilcox related the story of the terror that had been wreaked on the town of Nevada City by a deranged individual. Yet Nick and his family opposed the death penalty in that or any other case. When AB 2710 was heard, both Nick and Amanda testified, pointing out that a parent?s heartache has little to do with the age of the murdered child. Both bills failed passage.

Fair Treatment of Immigrants

After several years of effort, progress seemed likely on two crucial issues affecting undocumented workers and their families: higher education and the license to drive. The education measure succeeded, the driver?s license bill did not.

AB 540, by Marco Firebaugh (D., East Los Angeles) facilitates higher education for poor, undocumented youths. Significant numbers of immigrant high school students were discovering that even though they might earn excellent grades, community colleges and state universities would expect them to pay non-resident fees. The bill permits students who complete their final three years of high school in California, and who are pursuing documented status, to pay resident fees. The bill was finally sent to the governor on September 14, 2001 and was signed into law.

The path was much more difficult for AB 60 by Gil Cedillo, D., Los Angeles, relaxing the requirement that each applicant submit a Social Security number to the Department of Motor Vehicles as a prerequisite to obtaining a drivers? license or identification card. It passed the Legislature on the same day as AB 540, just three days after conspirators in the terror attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon used drivers licenses to get through the security check points and board the aircraft. Law enforcement representatives urged a veto.

In an unprecedented move, although the Legislature had sent AB 60 to ?enrollment? and the bill should have been delivered to the governor for signature or veto, it remained in limbo throughout the fall. When the session resumed in January, the author recalled the bill from enrollment for further action by the Assembly. Law enforcement representatives who were of two minds about the value of reducing the number of phony licenses in circulation advised the Governor that the bill could make it too easy for undocumented people to qualify for licenses. Everyone was aware that the term ?illegal alien? could be a potent political weapon if it turned up in voters? mailboxes just before election day.

Negotiations between representatives of the immigrant community and law enforcement dragged on through the spring and early summer. Police wanted undocumented people to show they were not wanted for any offense and had no prior convictions. They also wanted the licenses issued to them by DMV to have a distinctive mark or color. The governor wanted applicants to show that they or the head of their family had been regularly employed. Such requirements do not apply to paroled murderers or arsonists, but immigrant bashing is never far below the surface in the political dialogue in California.

As the end of the session approached, the author again sent AB 60 to the governor for action, and negotiations heated up on two companion bills, AB 1206 (Cedillo) and SB 802 (Polanco), that had been amended to impose additional requirements that undocumented people would need to meet in order to get a license. At a crowded hearing in the closing days of the session, the immigrant community divided over whether to accept the onerous conditions sought by law enforcement or to push for more reasonable requirements. The terms finally agreed upon by legislators in the Hispanic Caucus and written into SB 802 were a compromise that ultimately failed to satisfy the governor, who vetoed it.

The unlicensed and uninsured driver problem is expected to be the subject of legislation in 2003, and FCL will need to prepare the way for better understanding of the human issues involved. Unfortunately, policymakers? performances exhibited common problems of the 2001-02 Session: domination by law enforcement interests, mistrust of bureaucracy, infrequent communication between the legislative and executive branches, and fear of voters? reactions to complex issues.

More and more, California is experiencing the downside of term limits, as seasoned legislators who are both knowledgeable of state government and confident of their constituencies are forced out. This session signals the departure of Dion Aroner, Jim Costa, Jack O?Connell, Steve Peace, and Richard Polanco, all of whom had more than a decade of service. Next session will be the last stand for John Burton, James Brulte, Ross Johnson, Byron Sher, and John Vasconcellos. As the legislative scene becomes more volatile, FCL sees its work becoming more critical than ever. ? Steve Birdlebough

Looking Back, Looking Ahead . . . Year-End Report from the Outreach and Development Coordinator

FCL was featured in Friends Bulletin, the monthly journal of Friends in the Western United States. We are using reprints of this issue in our outreach, and look forward to developing other material of this kind to convey the significance of the work we do, increase the visibility of FCL at the Capitol and across the state, and interest others in joining us.

Despite poor economic times, our special events and fundraising appeals drew an encouraging response. These included strong turnouts at the annual dinners in Sacramento and Whittier, a very successful and joyful 90th birthday party for Ernest ?Bick? Bicknell, and the Strawberry Social at Friends House. We also were gratified by those who sent contributions in response to our mail appeals, including Meetings and individuals who provided additional support. The Palo Alto Fall Bazaar and Davis Yard Sale were big successes, both breaking previous records.

The FCL staff?s outreach efforts took us throughout the state for presentations and other activities. These included forums at Pacific Yearly Meeting, Quarterly Meetings, workshops in Palo Alto and Pasadena, and visits to Monthly Meetings that included La Jolla, Orange County, Orange Grove, Redwood Forest, Fresno and Visalia. We are planning to visit Meetings in Arcata, Grass Valley, Monterey, Ukiah/Lake County and elsewhere early in 2003.

To facilitate better outreach, we are developing a Speakers Bureau and looking to support more participatory activities like citizen-lobbyist training workshops at the local level. We are seeking ways to involve more younger people in our work and encourage their development as future leaders of FCL and other organizations.

The Development &Outreach Committee welcomes new members and suggestions. Please contact Development &Outreach Coordinator Ira Saletan (fcldevt@cwo.com), or Committee Clerk Chris Mohr (robinchris@aol.com).

In FCL Newsletter History, 29 years ago

(January, 1973)

The Story of the 1972 Legislature

It was hardly a glorious year for the legislature. An election year seldom is. The legislators were skittish about the effect of issues and votes on re-election chances, were without a strong program from their own leadership, and squabbled not only along party divisions but also house against house.

It was sad to see men, elected to represent the people of their districts and expected to show some sense of responsibility toward the state as a whole, let important bills languish while they bickered over procedural differences between the two houses. The stature of the legislature was diminished, and the business of the state suffered while Assembly-Senate squabbles went on.

In the corner office on the first floor of the Capitol sat a Governor who knew what he wanted ? mostly, what he didn?t want ? and who could be very stubborn. The result was that the legislature fumbled and bumbled on one of the two critical issues before it, school finance, and achieved nothing at all on the other, reapportionment. The long-term effect, probably the saddest result of the 1972 session, was the erosion of legislative independence vis-a-vis the executive branch.

The school finance bill that was enacted added to the already unequal tax burden on low income citizens, failed to deal with the California Supreme Court mandate (the Serrano v. Priest decision) for equalization of financial resources behind each public school child, and created the spectre of new state fiscal deficits within a few years. The failure to act on reapportionment leaves the next move up to the Supreme Court, which in 1971 ordered the legislature to reapportion itself and gave it a year in which to do so. . . .

?Good Guys?

The FCL played a major role in bringing together lobbyists from groups with concerns overlapping those of the FCL in support of, or opposition to, specific measures. Out of this work have grown weekly meetings of the ?good guy lobbyists? ? a term which perhaps reflects unconsciously the influence of movies in which the Governor used to star.

The FCL again took leadership in the California Housing Coalition, which again sponsored legislation for stronger tenant rights and for an expanded supply of housing for low-income persons. The CHC is preparing a summary of housing action in the 1972 legislature. The summary can be obtained from Sharon English, Secretary, California Housing Coalition . . . .

In 1973 the FCL will work in the same areas of legislation on which we report in the following pages: basically fields in which the rights of individuals to grow and create, each according to his own insights and abilities, are at stake. The FCL will seek to represent those who are unable to represent themselves, e.g., prison inmates. And will work toward solutions to problems on which no one else is as yet working ? as FCL did in its first efforts for better nutrition for infants and pregnant women.

November 1952, Vol. 1, No. 2 ?See Your Congressman Before He Leaves for Washington . . . .

The Washington Newsletter which accompanies this Newsletter discusses in some detail some of the most important issues facing the new Congress and Administration. All of these issues affect international peace and human welfare . . . All of the tensions represented in these issues have been brought into focus in Korea. The war there has been going on for 28 months. Reported U.S. casualties exceed 125,000; of these over 19,000 are dead and almost 13,000 missing, and these figures do not include the casualties of the other countries fighting on our side, or those of North Korea and China, or those of the civilian populations of North and South Korea.

In recent weeks there have been many proposals for ending the Korean war. . . . We suggest that you talk to your Congressman about them, about your desire for a peaceful end to the conflict rather than an extension of the war. We suggest that you write to the new President and to our delegates at the U.N. urging them to explore tirelessly every peaceful alternative. The campaign has brought to the fore the fact that the public is deeply concerned over the Korean war, and that its deepest desire is to have our troubled foreign relations freshly approached. The new Admin-istration will undoubtedly be receptive to the suggestions of groups of citizens in whose integrity of purpose it has confidence.?

Support FCL by Sponsoring a Prisoner Newsletter Subscription

FCL responds to prisoners? requests by sending out almost 1,000 Newsletters every month! Each year we receive hundreds of letters from prisoners requesting free subscriptions and expressing their deep appreciation for all our work. Here are just a few excerpts from some of the letters we received during this past year.

?Please let all staff know that I?m very grateful for everything they do in regards to the organization?s mission. ?The only way I can repay is by following your examples and sharing the useful information you provide.?
? Prisoner from California State Prison, Los Angeles County

?Your publication has not only educated myself, but has helped hundreds of other prisoners to understand and cope with the continuing changes of state laws. Please never forget, WE appreciate your g-o-o-d w-o-r-k!!! FCL has one-hell-of-a-lot of friends within these prison walls.?
? Prisoner from California State Prison, Solano

?I look forward to having you one more year in my life. I hope to see some changes for the best all around this coming year.?
? Prisoner from California Rehabilitation Center, Norco

?I know that the work the FCL does is not easy, and that sometimes it seems as though you?re beating your heads against the wall for nothing. ? But no matter how difficult the work may be, never give up, and never surrender, for if the FCL doesn?t speak out, and inform society, who else will?? ? Prisoner from California State Prison, Solano

?I really value my contact with the world through you.?
? Prisoner from Salinas Valley State Prison, Soledad

?I just wanted to let you know your hard work is meaningful and important to me.?
? Prisoner from California Men?s Colony East, San Luis Obispo

?You really do not realize how important your paper is. It is kept, kept and kept by many, many of us. It is passed on. ? When I?m done with mine, they fight over it!?
? Prisoner from California Medical Facility, Vacaville

Subscribe to the FCL Newsletter

You can have each issue of the FCL Newsletter mailed to your home or place of business, simply by mailing a request to our office, together with a check for $35 ($12 low-income). Bundle subscriptions to a meeting, congregation, or other group may also be arranged at a cost of $75.

Friends Committee on Legislation 717 K St., Suite 500-B, Sacramento, CA 95814-3408 (916) 443-3734