Letter to the Daily Transcript, 13 Feb. 2001:
Politics is the art of misdirection -- diverting the public's attention from what's really happening. And so is profiteering at the public's expense. Today we are told that our high electric prices are the fault of environmental extremism, failure to conserve electricity and not enough power plants in California. How strange that two years ago, before deregulation, none of these problems seemed to exist. In reality they don't exist. They are part of a public relations diversionary tactic, to make us forget about the astronomical profits of the energy producing companies and the campaign contributions they give to the state Legislature and the governor.
Here's how it works. I'll start with SDG&E since it's closest to home. SDG&E's parent company, Sempra, invested a cool $499,967 in campaign contributions last year, according to papers filed with the secretary of state. Did it pay off? Quoting from a Jan. 26 news article, "Sempra Energy Trading's net income increased nearly eightfold, rising from $19 million in 1999 to $155 million last year." Among the recipients of the Sempra largess were State Sen. Steve Peace, who acquired $10,000 for his now-defunct secretary of state campaign, and Senate Majority Leader John Burton, who received $15,000.
Enron, the Texas energy company, contributed some $171,000 to California politicians last year, including $10,000 to Gov. Davis, who was not even on the ballot. A Jan. 23 news item about Enron stated ``the wholesale business, which trades electricity and other commodities, saw earnings nearly triple to $777 million, up from $263 million the year before." The January headline reads ``Profits soar at Reliant Energy." The article goes on to say that this Houston company's income from power sales rose from $26 million in 1999 to $482 million in 2000. Reliant donated $9,000 to Senate Majority Leader Burton and $11,000 to House Speaker Hertzberg.
Dynegy Inc. is co-owner of a power plant in Carlsbad. A headline for this company read ``Dynegy's power-sale profits soar 252 percent." The company gave Burton $11,000 and Hertzberg $6,500.
Next is Duke Energy, which operates a power plant in Chula Vista. An Associated Press analysis said ``the financial pain of California's major utilities translated into a handsome gain for power generator Duke Energy, which more than doubled its revenues in the fourth quarter and topped Wall Street's earnings expectations." Duke gave the governor $10,000 last year and contributed $77,000 to California lawmakers.
The governor tells us that we must sacrifice for the common good. We must endure more pollution, we must pay higher prices, turn off those lights and turn down the heat even though the weather is cold.
I'd like to know what sacrifices the energy companies are making.
Mel Shapiro San Diego
Only those with long and acute memory will remember that this organization had its inaugural meeting more than four years ago, on January 4, 1997, when nineteen people came together at the Linda Vista Library at the urging of Françoise Farron. And Françoise was in turn responding to a call-to-arms written by Ronnie Dugger, and published in a July 1997 issue of the Nation, urging citizen activists to come together in a nationwide grassroots movement with the aim of reclaiming democracy with a small ``d'' from the special interests. That nationwide group went through a painful struggle for self-definition before emerging as the Alliance for Democracy (AfD), now perhaps best known for its championing of Granny D's cross-country walk for Campaign Finance Reform and her continuing activism on that issue, and its continuing Democracy Brigade actions in the Nation's Capitol.
While we are no longer affiliated with the national AfD, we too went through a long period of struggle. And most recently, we were saddened when our own David Diehl had to step down from his energetic role as president for reasons of health. Still we press on.
We here in San Diego are drawn together from varying walks of life, united in believing that San Diego will be a city better served by its City Council and Mayor when candidates for office do not have to line up as supplicants for bundled campaign donations from real estate and construction interests. We believe public money for public elections is the soundest investment of all. It is an investment in, by, and for the public interest. No other city in the country has full public financing of elections. We want San Diego to be the first.
If you haven't yet looked at our web page, please do! (At cleanelectionsandiego.org) There you'll see the text of a proposed initiative to amend the Municipal Election Code. It is a draft provided to us at no charge by Dr. Craig Holman, who is probably the nation's leading legal expert on crafting legislation for campaign finance reform. While there are a few details yet to be ironed out, what you see there is the essence of the plan.
So where do you fit in? We need help, we need volunteers, we need money. The state of Maine mustered 1,100 volunteers to collect 65,000 petition signatures in one day for their state-wide program of public financing of elections. It can be done, but only when people come together. Won't you lend a hand?
Last year Padres owner John Moores was being investigated by the FBI for possible bribery of the city council. But that didn't stop him from making generous campaign contributions. Among them was $100,000 to the Democratic National Committee. If you think he is a partisan Democrat, think again. On November 7, Election Day, Moores covered his bases, and gave $15,000 to the Republican National Committee. In January, Moores was cleared of all charges.
I wonder if the proposed Ethics Commission will fulfill the public's expectations.
The current proposal is to let the city council nominate the members of the Commission and the mayor appoint seven from this group. This means each council member will have their own person to render judgments about the council member's conduct. This is the first line of defense for the city council.
The second line of defense is that the council appoints the executive director. If the director is really tough on crime, how long will he or she last?
The third line of defense is the City Attorney and District Attorney who have both said that they don't prosecute politicians when they break the law, instead, they ``inform" them (SD Union-Tribune article, March 22, 2000).
The fourth line of defense is the council's power to set the Ethics Commission budget. Will the council agree to hire a special prosecutor to pursue one of their own members ? Don't count on it.
Through the Public Records Act and my lawsuit against the City Attorney, I received the following details of allegations of wrongdoing in city government. None of these charges resulted in any civil or criminal prosecution by the City Attorney or the District Attorney. The City Attorney would not reveal any names.
The following are excerpts from the City Attorney list.
A San Diego Union-Tribune story (3/22/2000) quoted Attorney Bob Ottillie about the absence of prosecutions, saying "it certainly fosters an environment where people perceive they can pretty much get away with anything".
The most recent example of local politicians enjoying immunity is Valerie Stallings. Yes, she was prosecuted, but not by the City Attorney or the District Attorney. After front page stories, the FBI and U.S. Attorney had to do the job. She pleaded guilty to misdemeanors, which is in the jurisdiction of the City Attorney. The same City Attorney who will be the legal counsel to the Ethics Commission.
Meetings are held on the 1st and 3rd Saturdays of each month from
10:00 AM to noon. The 1st Saturday we meet at the La Jolla Public
Library (7555 Draper Ave). The 3rd Saturday meeting is held at the
North Park Senior Center (2719 Howard Ave).