ELK GROVE, CA — Sacramento agrees on one thing: Dan Lungren’s spiked pension is hurting Californians. Yesterday Republican Governor Schwarzenegger took aim at spiked pensions like the one enjoyed by Lungren:

“Is it pensions or is it parks? Is it pensions or higher education? Is it pensions or childcare?”

How would Dan Lungren respond to these questions?

CBS-13 recently exposed how Lungren is double-dipping into taxpayer funds, collecting a taxpayer funded congressional salary while accepting a spiked, taxpayer funded pension from the state of California. In his final month as attorney general, Lungren accepted a 25.9% salary increase, which spiked his pension payouts by over $11,000.

“Before we devote one penny of taxpayer money for schools or kids, Californians will have to pay over $55,000 this year alone for Dan Lungren’s spiked pension,” said Lucinda Guinn, Bera for Congress campaign manager. “We call on Dan Lungren to answer Governor Schwarzenegger’s questions – what’s more important, his lavish, spiked pension, or education and healthcare for California’s citizens?”

Then there’s this; “Among the 492,000 retired government workers receiving checks from the state’s Public Employees’ Retirement System, the average monthly benefit is $2,188, and 78 percent receive $3,000 a month or less.”

That’s an average, and I am not so naive to think that there are not some people who are gaming the system, but that isn’t the system’s fault and is no reason to punish those who are receiving modest and legitimate public pensions.

Boxer holds views that are definitely partisan, and to some people they are extreme. Fiorina holds views that are definitely partisan, and to some they are extreme. So what? Isn’t that to be expected, and is it a bad thing? The whole point of a political campaign is to point out the differences between you and your opponent in order to show why voters should cast their votes for you.

But, wouldn’t it be great if we could let the labels go and just see people for who they are? Yes, it would be, but it ain’t gonna happen. We like our labels to much. Labels give us a sense that we know and understand the people we are deriding and instills in us a sense of power over them. Labels give us an excuse to spew hatred and to depersonalize others. “Those (insert label here) people are such idiots.” Labels make it easy to denigrate our opponents, political and otherwise, without having to address anything factual.

I have no solution except the one already offered – stop labeling people – which I have already established ain’t gonna happen. Sometimes you just needs a good vent.

ELK GROVE, CA – On Saturday August 21, 2010, the California Republican Party is hosting their fall convention, which will feature a workshop on “The ‘Pension Tsunami Facing California.” The agenda for the workshop states that it will address the issue of lavish pension packages:

“How excessive are the pension packages given to government employees – and how you can best communicate with the public by using concrete examples of lavish pension packages” (California Republican Party web page, “Convention Info: Workshop Series,” http://www.cagop.org)

If California Republicans are really looking for “concrete examples of lavish pension packages,” they could look to one of their own: Rep. Dan Lungren. In 2009, Lungren received $55,697 in pension income from the California Legislators Retirement Pension (LRS) for only eight years of service as attorney general. (Financial Disclosure Statement, “Schedule I: Earned Income,” United States Clerk of the House, Dan Lungren)

Lungren’s LRS pension has far exceeded the pension income earned by the average state employee in California. According to calculations by the Orange County Register, under the pension plan offered to typical state employees, an 11-year employee would be eligible, at most, for $40,738 annually. (Orange County Register, 8/13/10)

Moreover, Lungren enjoyed a significant spike in his pension payments due to a 25.9% salary increase he received during his final month in office, which increased the maximum amount he could collect on his LRS pension by $11,546.40. If LRS pension payouts are calculated using 40% of an individual’s maximum salary, then Lungren’s LRS pension would have only been $44,553.60 based on the $111,384 salary he received in 1998. However, after Lungren received his 25.9% pay raise, the maximum pension benefits available to him increased from $44,553.60 to $56,100, based solely on the salary he received from December 7, 1998 until January 4, 1999. (California Citizens Compensation Committee, “Salaries of Elected Officials,” www.dpa.ca.gov, Orange County Register, 8/13/10)

A few years after Lungren took advantage of this form of “pension spiking,” it was outlawed. In 2007, the Senate and the Assembly passed SB 221 unanimously, which changed the pension benefit structure to close the payout loophole enjoyed by Lungren. Pensions are now based on the highest average salary during a 12-month period. Lungren continues to draw a pension based on a salary he made for only a month. (SB 221, 2007; Sacramento Bee, 7/18/2007)

Additionally, Lungren’s $55,697 LRS pension package is not the only government benefits package he will be eligible for when he retires. He will also be eligible to receive an estimated federal pension of $64,662 for the 15 years he’s served in Congress, courtesy of the American taxpayer. Although Lungren has yet to begin collecting a federal pension, an estimate was calculated based on his congressional salary over the last three years and the Civil Service Retirement System pension formula provided by the Congressional Research Service. This year Lungren accepted a $174,000 taxypayer-funded salary in addition to his lavish LRS pension. (U.S. Senate web page, “RL30631: Congressional Research Service Report for Congress: Retirement Benefits for Members of Congress,” www.senate.gov; TheCapitol.net web page, “FAQ: Pay and perquisites of Members of Congress,” www.thecapitol.net)

“In some cases, if you go after the rich, you are destroying the chance for the big payoff at the end,” Rep. Dan Lungren told an audience in Jackson over the weekend. Even though it was part of a larger context, this sentiment is part of what drives Lungren and his ilk. While they express their concern for the poor and middle class, they do nothing to assist those who are not members of “the rich” class. Recently, Lungren turned his back on the unemployed by voting against a bill to extend benefits that would help them put food on the table, pay rent, and just get by. This is in keeping with his looking out for “the rich” so that he can enjoy “the big payoff” they supply to keep him in office. “The big payoff” that comes at the expense of working families.

“In some cases, if you go after the rich, you are destroying the chance for the big payoff at the end,” said Lungren.

Just what kind of “big payoff” is he hoping for? He will tell you it is the trickle down that he claims will occur if we just give more tax breaks, open up more loopholes, and extend the largess from the Bush era that have benefited the rich and hurt the poor. Make no mistake, trickle down is a failed economic policy that has never worked except in the wealth addled minds of the rich. In reality, the rich hoard while the poor continue to languish in poverty under the oppressive weight of failed economic theory like trickle down hoping for some crumbs to fall from the table. To be honest, trickle down would be more aptly named pissed on.

Fortunately, we don’t have to put up with Congo Dan much longer. It is in our power, as voters in the third congressional district, to elect to congress someone who will stand up for us, for working families. Someone who will say no to corporations and yes to real people. Someone who won’t be looking for the next “big payoff” from “the rich.”

Ami Bera listens to voter concerns at a 2009 forum in Rancho Cordova, CA.
© ARBayne Photography

Ami Bera is such a person. He has a plan for job creation and economic recovery that doesn’t rely on disingenuous rhetoric. Ami Bera’s jobs and economy plan focuses on the working families and small businesses that drive the economy and provide jobs. It is a plan which focuses on “public education and workforce training, so that young people and a transitioning workforce have the knowledge and skills necessary to build for a successful life.” Ami Bera’s economic plan streamlines government and works toward balancing the budget while cleaning up Wall Street and putting an end to “corporate welfare”.

The choice is simple, you can continue with someone who is looking for his next “big payoff.” Or you can support and vote for someone who will look after the interest of his constituents, the working families of the 3rd Congressional District. When you mark you ballot this fall remember who is on your side and vote for Ami Bera for Congress.

While the children went inside to deliver the paintings, more than 1,000 members of the California School Employees Association (CSEA) and other supporters of public education rallied outside after a march from the Sacramento Convention Center where CSEA is holding their annual convention. On the final leg, marchers were escorted by school children pulling wagons loaded with broken and outdated school equipment, including broken music stands, outdated textbooks and flat soccer balls.

All of these children standing here with us today deserve the best chance we can give them to achieve their hopes and dreams for the future,” said CSEA President Allan Clark. “It’s time for our elected leaders to step up and commit to saving education.”

Parent Lonnie Buck from Plumas Lake said he is worried that his 10-year old won’t get the “gold standard” education that drew the father to California from Mississippi.

“I understand better than anyone the irony of California and Mississippi resting at the bottom of the school rankings,” Buck said. “I’ve watched our schools trying to keep up with less and less all the time.”

Student Mariana Rojas said budget cuts are having a disheartening effect on students.

“The budget cuts have undermined the determination and the inspiration and the spirit that we all need so much,” Rojas said. “Some of my classmates have become hopeless — hopeless in a land that was built on dreams and hopes. My goal has become the goal of so many others — we should all be fighting for our education.”

California continues to rank nearly last in the nation in per-pupil spending. Thousands of local schools have cut art and music programs, school transportation, tutoring programs, school libraries and countless other programs and services. Speakers called on state legislators to keep the promise they made to students in last year’s budget agreement and reject the $4 billion cut to public education proposed by Gov. Schwarzenegger in his May budget revision.

This lamp was made by Peter Bareman, my wife’s grandfather, many years ago. Not sure when, but it was sometime before she was born. I refinished three of them and this one sits on the desk in my office at home.

This little guy is living in a small bathtub planter on our front porch. During the day it stays in the cool, moist leaves in the planter. At night, it climbs up our front windows and feast on the small bugs attracted to the porch light. What a life.

Democrats in the legislature are standing firm demanding a budget that includes new revenue as well as strategic cuts. Senate President Pro-tem Darrell Steinberg said in a statement, “If the governor continues to insist on granting billions in corporate tax cuts financed by drastic cuts to public education and programs for working mothers and their children, I am prepared to grant his wish by waiting for the next governor.”

C’mon Governor, stop the childishness, grow up and work with Democrats to solve California’s budget crisis.

WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman John Garamendi (D-Walnut Creek, CA), a member of the House Armed Services Committee, today voted against the $32 billion supplemental for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The supplemental passed by a 308-114 vote. He issued the following statement:

“Today the House of Representatives voted to lead our great nation down the wrong path in Afghanistan and Iraq. For at least another year, we will continue to spill brave American blood and spend tens of billions of dollars in the longest war in American history. I do not think a large scale military presence in Afghanistan or Iraq is in the best interests of our economy or national security. I want our troops home.

“I recognize that the threat from Al Qaeda is very real. With our allies, we must focus like a laser on eradicating Al Qaeda’s presence wherever it may be. I think a speedy withdrawal of most soldiers from Afghanistan furthers this goal.

“$32 billion is a lot of money. It’s enough to pay for the health care of 12 million children for a year. It’s enough to keep 500,000 police officers patrolling our streets for a year. It’s enough to employ 500,000 teachers for a year. It’s enough to provide 20 million households with renewable energy for a year.

“I am deeply disappointed by the deficit hawks who say that we can’t afford jobless benefits, we can’t afford to keep teachers in our classrooms, we can’t afford the infrastructure investments needed to continue our climb out of a recession, yet we can afford more war.

“We’ve been in Afghanistan for nine years, and it’s come at a tremendous cost. We’ve tragically lost more than 1,100 American lives and spent close to $300 billion. We’ve also been in Iraq for seven years, where we’ve lost more than 4,400 American lives and spent more than $700 billion. I do not want to see one more American lose their life in an internal Afghani civil war.

“I’m a Returned Peace Corps Volunteer, and I know that a foreign policy built in mutual respect and assistance can transform hearts and minds. I believe disengagement from war really means a return to the policies that put America’s best face forward in the international community. Diplomacy and development should be our goal in the Middle East, not the continued dragging out of wars without an exit plan.

“Regardless of where we may stand on war policy, we must always honor the troops. Our brave men and women in uniform and their families must always be honored, respected, and treated as heroes. It is an honor and privilege to serve Travis Air Force Base and the thousands of military personnel, veterans, and their families that call California’s 10th Congressional District their home. They deserve everything we can provide to make sure that they can thrive in uniform and in civilian life.”