Democracy Has Left The Building

***Warning - political rant to follow.  If you are here only for blogs about our family or healthy eating, please skip this posting.***


Democracy is a form of government in which all people have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives.  (Wikipedia)

Last Friday, a governor of a very liberal state, defied the will of the people by signing a state law that overturned the people's vote on a very important issue.  These people had voted overwhelmingly in support of a ballot initiative that prohibited discrimination - in one area as much as 76% voted yes on this initiative.  The people were currently gathering signatures to put this same issue on the ballot in other cities and counties.  The people knew that if left up to the local boards and city councils, made up of politicians who owed favors to special interests, that this discrimination would continue to occur - both to the detriment of workers and the taxpaying citizens.  So the people used the power they had - a ballot initiative - and made their will law.

But the governor and his friends didn't want to abide by this ban on discrimination - after all, the discrimination gave them an unfair advantage in the market place!  And so, they drafted a bill that said these bans on discrimination were not allowed and that each local board or city council could make the decision - instead of the voters.  And in areas like charter cities, in which the State has no authority to make such a rule, they made it law that if these bans on discrimination were enacted, that charter city would no longer receive state funding.

And in his signing message, the governor wrote that it was more democratic to allow each local board or city council decide whether or not the discrimination was right for their area.  More democratic apparently than allowing the voters in those areas to decide.  Because democracy is a form of government in which only the officials have a say in the decisions that affect the lives of the people, right?  Oh wait, that's called dictatorship.

What would you say if this discrimination was against ethnic minorities?  What if it was against certain religious groups?  What if it was against certain genders or sexual orientation?  Well for sure the governor and his friends would never promote that type of discrimination because that would just be wrong.

This discrimination promoted by the governor and his friends is discrimination against the worker who decides to not belong to a union.

Because while the Democrats in our state (and the nation for that matter) pretend to be the group that speaks out for the social injustice of the world - these same people not only allow, but PROMOTE discrimination of the non-union worker.  Somehow in their world, this makes sense.

I am speaking here, of course, of Jerry Brown and the Democrat legislators in our state who passed SB922 along party lines (it received not one Republican vote), to ignore the will of the people in several cities and counties who have banned Project Labor Agreements (PLAs).  These are agreements that will not allow non-union workers to work on a project, (a project funded by their own tax dollars) unless that worker joins the union and pays dues, gets dispatched from the union to the project, and pays into the union pension and benefits programs from which they will never receive benefits or pension.  The effect of these rules is that non-union contractors do not bid PLA projects because of the drastic pay cut that results for their employees, and having to abide by non-productive union work rules such as staffing on the project.  

Which is just fine for the unions, because they don't like competition anyway.

I am disgusted at this law.  First, because it absolutely spits in the face of real democracy.  Second, because it is funded entirely by special interests (unions) who are legally able to take mandatory dues from their members and fund political campaigns whether or not the members approve.  Third, because our politicians in this state MUST comply with the union rule or else risk being thrown out in the following election when the unions support an alternative candidate, and their insane legislation illustrates these favors to the unions.  Four, because of the hypocrisy of the Democrat party which portrays itself as the great equalizer but only really for those it calls friends.

If ever there was a time to change the direction of our state, this is it.  I for one do not love America for its dictatorship - I love it for its democracy.  And that, my friends, is dead in California.

For more on this issue please check out the following links:

Gut and Amend Bills Bad for California

Governor Brown doesn't think it's okay for local boards and city councils to decide on an issue like circumcision, but they can decide themselves to discriminate against 75% of the construction workforce in CA.

Here's the story on union campaign contributions that led to the passage of SB922.

And this is fun!  From maplight.org you see the total contributions by Interest groups for 2009 and 2010.   Wow, small business doesn't have a chance in California.  But I can see why our state is going bankrupt and is full of frivolous lawsuits!

Top Interest Groups

Last two years of available data, Jan. 1, 2009 - Dec. 31, 2010.

Construction unions	$5,438,156
Attorneys & law firms	$4,147,108
Police & fire fighters unions and associations	$2,665,964
Native American tribes & governing units	$2,572,862
State & local government employee unions	$2,494,189
Property & casualty insurance	$1,815,768
Telecommunications	$1,721,519
Pharmaceutical manufacturing	$1,278,381
Teachers unions	$1,200,551
Physicians	$1,131,876

But hey, don't worry voters!  While Jerry and his friends can reverse your ballot initiative with the swipe of a pen, all you have to do to overturn their law is raise about $4 Million and go for a referendum.

No sweat!

Stacked Decks

I don't know if anyone even reads my political blog posts.  I'm sure an issue about construction isn't very exciting for many of you.  But if you give a minute to the issues I discuss, and then think about how issues you care about are similarly handled by our local governments, then I hope that I can turn you from a possibly passive voter to someone who gives a damn.

Getting fed up is how great movements begin.

It is my humble opinion that the PEOPLE currently have little to no voice in our government.  Our elected officials are beholden to those who fund their campaigns, whether Democrat, Republican, Tea Party or Independent.  Unions and the LARGE corporations (think, Wall Street, AIG, GE, Bank of America) have almost unlimited funds to throw their weight around Washington and in our local state and community governments.  Time and time again I see elected officials vote for the most insane things with no regard to taxpayers, not because they believe in it, but because they were pressured by the unions/corporations that fund their campaigns.  Reason and logic never prevail in these situations, when average people or small businesses try to explain to the politicians how these policies kill jobs and hurt our communities.  I sit in meetings wanting to scream - as a mother, a wife, a taxpayer, a business owner HOW CAN THESE DECISIONS MAKE SENSE!??!

I once heard that small businesses employ 80% of the workforce in our country.  Who is the voice for these small businesses?  Who is the voice for the voters who fall squarely in the middle between liberal Democrat and staunch Republican?  Give me a candidate who represents those voters and they will absolutely have my vote.  Unfortunately small businesses and mainstream America can't afford to fund a campaign, so we end up with politicians funded by the big companies with highly paid lobbyists - and the result is policy and regulation that grants favors to these special interests on the backs of small business and average taxpayers. 

Last night at the Regional Transit Board of Directors meeting, our company lost the opportunity to bid on $2.5 BILLION in work on the South Sacramento Light Rail project.  Due to the actions of four Directors who controlled the majority of the votes, the $2.5 billion project will completely exclude non-union contractors.  Why would they do such a thing?  Because they are elected officials in the City of Sacramento who are beholden to the labor unions that helped fund their campaign.  Without citing any justifiable reasons for the discrimination, despite lots of testimony as to how PLAs limit competition, increase costs and discriminate against the 75% of California that is the non-union construction workforce, these Directors upheld the PLA on the South Sacramento extension.  And poof - $2.5 billion is no longer available for our company to bid or our taxpaying workers to build.  (I would like to thank the six Directors on the RT Board that understood and spoke openly about the discrimination and incredible cost of a PLA and voted against it.)

If you think it's bad at the local level, it only gets worse at the State level.  Last week, at the very end of the legislative session, the unions sponsored and got approved several horrible anti-democratic gut-and-amend bills (bills that started as something completely different and were made into pro-union bills at the last minute). 

The gut-and-amend bill that makes me the most angry is Senate Bill 922 which basically tells voters and local governments that they are too stupid to make the right decisions.  SB922 stops state funding for public projects in any city/county that bans discriminatory project labor agreements.  That's right, if a local government decides to pass a ban on PLAs so that projects are open to ALL contractors, or if voters approve a ban on PLAs in their community, they will no longer receive state funds for construction projects.  This bill was in direct response to our ballot initiative in the City and County of Sacramento to ban PLAs. Knowing that the voters would ban PLAs as they have done overwhelmingly by ballot initiative in several other cities, the unions went to the legislature, who owed them for the campaign funds, and effectively took away the democratic rights of voters and local governments in our state. This bill was passed directly down party lines - Democrats voting for it, Republicans voting against it.

Tell me, why do we have local governments or ballot initiatives by the voters if the unions can overrule them in the state legislature? 

I was accused last night at the RT Board meeting of not representing the workers, since I myself am a contractor.  Like those two things are mutually exclusive! I take considerable issue with this accusation, because in fact, I represent the 200 workers that we employ in our company that should have the right to work on government projects, the 600 some apprentices that are indentured in our non-union apprenticeship program that are excluded from working on a PLA project, and I represent the 75% of the construction industry in California that chooses not to belong to a union.  I volunteered last night to represent considerably more workers than the union lobbyist that was speaking in favor of PLAs.  

In this state, more than many others, the decks are stacked against anyone who bucks the union system. While this can make a person feel completely powerless at times, there are times when we also win our fight to expose PLAs and government waste, and the politicians make the right decision. I will continue to fight for the small businesses and the people of our community because I am passionate about doing what is best for the industry, I believe in democracy, and I believe in the power of informed voters.  And I know that as more and more voters become aware of the special interests that are currently controlling our government, we will do more to replace these beholden politicians with people who truly want to make a difference in the direction of our country. 

And that is what leads to really great movements.  That is the hope and change that I am looking for.

Arenas And Politics

As you now know, I am involved in Fair And Open Competition Sacramento - a group that is sponsoring a ballot initiative to remove Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) from taxpayer funded projects in the City and County of Sacramento.  PLA's mandate that all construction workers pay union dues (even if they have chosen not to be union), be dispatched from a union hiring hall, and pay their benefit and pension money to the union (even though they don't use the benefits and don't vest in the pension).  Our group thinks PLAs are discriminatory against non-union workers and cost taxpayers billions of dollars (since reduced competition equals higher construction prices) and should not be legal.

A couple of weeks ago I was at an industry event and spoke to an unnamed Mayor of an unnamed City that will be building an unnamed sports complex.  I introduced myself to the Mayor and explained that I am with Royal Electric Company, the second largest electrical contractor in Sacramento. 

Mayor:  "That's great!"

Me:  "You know, if you have a PLA on the arena project, we won't be able to bid it because we have non-union employees.  We need to keep that project free of a PLA."

Mayor:  "It's too late, that's already a done deal."

Me:  "You realize a comprehensive study just came out that shows PLA's increase the cost of construction by 13 to 15%?"

Mayor:  "You don't have to tell me.  I get it.  But politics are too strong in this City." 

And there you have it folks.  Even though something like a PLA doesn't make any sense, on a project that may not ever even be fully funded as it is, taxpayers will be forced to pay 15% more for no other reason than the construction unions have a hold on the politicians in our community.  This is why our initiative is needed, because politicians can't make the right choices for taxpayers when their re-election dollars come from special interests. 

What does this equate to in dollars?  The arena is said to cost around $340 Million.  With a PLA on the project, that cost could rise to $391 Million - over $50 Million more. 

How many teachers, firefighters and police could $50 Million keep employed?

Unions say a PLA is needed for several reasons:  ensure local labor, ensure trained labor, ensure higher pay for the workers, ensure legal citizens, and to keep the project on budget and on time.  But public projects already mandate worker pay (our employees would actually make much less on a PLA project than we currently pay them because their benefits and pension would go to the union and not to the worker), and the other items can be mandated by contract without regard to union affiliation.  For example, our company uses e-verify (a federal program) to make sure our employees are all legal workers.  The unions do not verify their members unless a project has this as a contractual requirement.  Many contracts also require goals for hiring local workforce, without regard to union affiliation. 

And the part about on time and on budget is ridiculous.  As long as companies are prequalified for a project (meaning the Owner reviews the contractor's history of past performance) it makes no difference whether a company is union or non union. 

Seventeen of the top twenty five electrical contractors in the Sacramento area are not union.  A PLA on the arena (or any other project) would keep these companies from bidding on the project.  That leaves only two electrical contractors big enough to handle a project the size of the arena.  What do you think it would do to their pricing if they knew they were bidding against only one other company instead of ten? 

Is that really how you want your tax dollars being spent? 

For more information, please see the website for our ballot initiative at Fair And Open Competition Sacramento, and please sign our petitions if you see them at retail centers near you.  (And don't worry, the signature gatherers are not paid felons as the union-sponsored radio ads suggest!) 

I Got Booted

Five years ago I was appointed by Governor Schwarzenegger to the California Apprenticeship Council.  (That was back when we were fairly certain he was a groper, but didn't know he was an adulterer.)

It was a very big honor for me to serve on the CAC.  The Council is a commission set up to oversee the State's handling of apprenticeship issues in California.  We would hear appeals from apprentices, appeals regarding new or expanding programs, research and try to resolve issues affecting apprenticeship, and draft legislation to fix problems with current laws regarding apprenticeship. 

For many, many, MANY years the CAC has been a very political council.  The politics comes from the union vs. non union sides of the construction industry, even though the council also oversees apprenticeship in other industries.

In a nutshell, here's the political battle (and believe me when I tell you I'm not joking):

The union side truly believes that merit shop (non-union) business owners want to exploit workers in every way possible, and that merit shop programs do not really train apprentices, they are just a way for greedy business owners to pay lower wages.  (Seriously, you can ask any union journeyman about this and they will confirm this belief.)  On the other side of the aisle, merit shop programs don't give a damn about the union programs, they just want to provide a choice to employers that want apprentices but don't want to sign with a union. 

But the key here is that the unions do not want competition. 

You see there are laws in California that to perform public works projects, contractors must make sure that 16.7% of their workforce are state registered apprentices.  If no merit shop apprenticeship programs exist, then employers are forced to dispatch union apprentices and pay into the union pension and benefit plans. 

When Grey Davis was Governor, the 17 member CAC was comprised almost solely of union backed commissioners (most of which were themselves members of one union or another).  It was literally 99% impossible for a merit shop program to be approved.  When Schwarzenegger became governor, he balanced the CAC and it was truly represented half by union leaning folks, and half non-union leaning folks.  And we got a lot of business done. 

Well, most of us Schwarzenegger appointees have terms that have now expired.  And Governor Brown is following in the footsteps of Grey Davis.  Today he reappointed three of the union leaning commissioners, but replaced us non-union leaning commissioners with more union leaning commissioners.  Once again, the balance is gone. 

I am disappointed that my time on the CAC is over.  I have met wonderful people, union and non-union alike.  I have especially enjoyed getting to know "The Ladies of the CAC" - a group of strong, opinionated, wonderful ladies who served with me on the CAC. 

The Ladies of the CAC
Julia Dozier, Kate Leyden, Anne Quick and me. 
Not pictured:  Donna Bechtold & Lucy Wang

But mostly I am just depressed that in this state our politicians and appointees are owned by the unions.  And these commissions, appointees and politicians make rules that the rest of us have to follow, when unions only represent less than 20% of our population.  The more and more I get involved with politics, the more I see that it doesn't represent the people - it represents the special interests. 

And now that I have free time I'll be darned if I can't find a way to actively fight those special interests in favor of the people who live in California. 

Something You Never Thought I'd Say

Kudos to Governor Jerry Brown! 

Seriously, I just wrote that.  And I meant it.  Jerry Brown vetoed Senate Bill 168, which tried to ban per-signature pay for ballot measure petition circulators.  You can read about it here from the Mercury News. 

I did not know much about ballot initiatives before getting involved with Fair And Open Competition Sacramento.  But here's how it works.  You need to get a certain percentage of registered voters in the given area to sign a ballot initiative.  Once the signatures are all verified and meet the quantity required, the initiative goes on the ballot to take the issue to the voters. Voters still have the choice to approve or reject it.  Achieving the signatures just means it goes to a vote, not that it becomes law.  People make a living collecting signatures for these measures, regardless of whether an initiative is sponsored by corporations like Amazon or industry groups like ours, or by the unions.  The signature collectors are trained on the topic, and station themselves at grocery stores, Home Depot, or go door to door getting paid to collect the signatures.  This is what SB168 tried to ban - meaning you would have to get volunteers to do this process day in and day out - effectively making it very difficult to ever get an initiative on the ballot. 

The other way to create a new law is for our legislature to submit it, both houses approve it, and the governor signs it.  The more and more I have gotten involved with politics I have sadly learned that THIS process is NOT about the people.  This process is about special interests - whether Republican or Democrat.  People with money pay their lobbyists to spend all day at the Capitol to pressure lawmakers to submit bills that favor them.  The media likes to state that these lobbyists are all paid for by, what's the term, oh yeah "corporate jet owners and big oil".  That never ceases to crack me up. 

Actually, it's industry groups that pay lobbyists.  Contractors, unions, pharmacy groups, teachers, airline pilots, farmers, whatever.  If you have a big enough group and collect enough money, you have a lobbyist.  Many of these groups also always back political candidates during their campaign.  So guess whose lobbyists get the attention?  That's right, whichever groups helped get lawmakers elected.  It's a sad, sad process. But hey, that's democracy, right?!?

So, the only way that actual voters can get something passed into law is the ballot initiative process.  Lawmakers HATE this process because it takes the control out of their hands, and voters truly don't always understand implications that can happen from passing a ballot initiative.  But still, it's our only voice other than our ability to vote for a politician. 

I believe Senate Bill 168 is a direct attack against the current initiatives that are circulating, including ours for Fair And Open Competition Sacramento.  It was widely backed by the unions.  And even though the unions were the major funding source for Jerry Brown's campaign, he told them no by vetoing this bill.  (He also told them no by vetoing the agriculture card check bill.)  RIGHT ON JERRY!!

There are several other tactics the opponents of these ballot measures are using to scare voters away.  The Building Trades Unions association helped sponsor a radio ad that tells people they shouldn't sign initiatives because of identity theft (see here and here).  The SEIU has circulated a flyer telling people not only to not sign them but to call in the location of the ballot circulators and record their gender and what they look like.  The unions have also sent out people to the sites where our signature gatherers are stationed, where they physically try to block and intimidate people from signing our petitions. 

In a future post I will share with you what the opponents of our initiative are saying as to why they think it's a bad idea, and our responses as to why they are wrong.  But I won't fill your head with too much right now, lest I bore you. . . .

Letter To The Editor

Earlier this week I received a phone call from the Sacramento Bee, wanting to know more about our ballot initiative.  I did a full interview, telling him all about saving taxpayer money, stopping the discrimination against workers who didn't want to join a union and how successful these same measures have been in San Diego and other cities in California.  Yesterday I was very excited to see the article made the front page of the newspaper!


However I was a little disappointed at my supposed quote.  Out of all the good information I gave him, he quoted me on something I'm not even sure I said.  Man, now I know how Sarah Palin feels.  Ha!


Anyway, here is a link to the article.


And here is a follow up letter to the editor I sent today.  Hopefully it makes it into the paper so I can sound a little more intelligent about the issues!


Dear Editor:


Regarding your coverage of the measures we are bringing to voters in the City and County of Sacramento, this is not a union versus non-union issue as your article suggests.  Our firm is signatory to several union agreements yet we support these measures because they will encourage openness in the construction marketplace on publicly funded projects and thus reduce costs to taxpayers. 


The agreements our measures will prohibit require workers to pay into union pension and benefit programs even if they already have such benefits.  Since these workers will never vest in these programs, the workers lose this money.  Non-union workers (80% of the local construction workforce) want to avoid this pay cut so non-union contractors shy away from these projects - and decreased competition drives up the cost of the project to taxpayers.  This is why our company, and its union and non-union employees, support these pro-worker, pro-taxpayer measures.  

- Dina Kimble, Royal Electric Company

Fair And Open Competition

Yesterday I had the privilege to speak at a press conference for a ballot initiative we launched to ban Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) in the City and County of Sacramento.  PLAs mandate that all craftspeople working on a taxpayer funded public works construction project must be members of a union in order to perform work.  If they do not wish to join a union, they cannot work on a PLA project.

Since only 25% of the construction workforce in California chooses to belong to a union, PLAs discriminate against 75% of the craft workers - people who live and work (and pay taxes) in Sacramento.  If a worker chooses to join a union just for a given PLA project, they must pay dues to join the union, use the union benefits program (even if the worker already has a benefit program with their existing employer) and pay into the union pension program (even though they will lose some or all of this money since they will never vest in the union pension plan).  This results in a significant pay cut for these employees.

The only group that benefits from PLAs are the construction unions and union contractors.  Most merit shop contractors choose to stay away from PLAs due to the hassle it creates for their employees, and because they are only allowed to use a small number of their own employees and get the rest out of the union hall.

Because merit shop contractors do not bid PLA work, the prices on these projects increase (less bidders = less competition = higher prices).  This means taxpayers get less construction work done for a given amount of money.  In an economic time when every dollar counts, we can't afford PLAs.

Please keep your eye out to sign our petition to get this initiative on the ballot.  Workers should have the choice whether or not they want to belong to a union, and our City and County of Sacramento should not be allowed to discriminate against those who choose to not be represented by a union.  Both union and non-union contractors should be able to work on taxpayer funded projects.

For more information on the ballot initiative, please go to Fair And Open Competition Sacramento and see how you can help.  For more information on project labor agreements go to Coalition For Fair Employment in Construction.