Gavin Newsom: "Citizenville: How To Take The Town Square Digital And Reinvent Government"
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2013-02-14/gavin-newsom-citizenville-how-take-town-square-digital-and-reinvent-government
(Photo courtesy Gavin Newsom)
California’s Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom has been on the cutting edge of technology and social issues. The former mayor of San Francisco on making government better in the digital age.
Guests
Gavin Newsom
California Lieutenant Governor and former San Francisco Mayor.
Read An Excerpt
Excerpted from "CITIZENVILLE: How to Take the Town Square Digital and Reinvent Government" by Gavin Newsom with Lisa Dickey. Reprinted by arrangement of Penguin Press, a member of Penguin Group (USA), Inc. Copyright (c) 2013 by Gavin Newsom.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Diane, I'm sure that Mr. Newsom will discuss many wonderful technologies that have the potential to increase democratic discussion and participation, but can you ask about some of the more "old-fashioned" methods?
First, why aren't civics and critical thinking classes a core part of the twelve years of primary and secondary education curriculum? This would instill not only the necessary knowledge that each citizen needs to possess but also the "habit" of participatory democracy. Meetings with various local, state, and federal representatives would be an integral part of this curriculum (and I bet it would help to keep our representatives on their toes).
Second, one of the core missions of our thousands of public libraries should be to be a focal point of community participatory democracy, for citizens of all ages. Meetings and discussions should be frequent and routine.
I'm sure that digital democracy has its merits, but I can't help but notice that things tend to get uncivil more easily during digital discussions than when talking to people face to face. I'm loathe to participate in discussions on complex issues over a series of thousands of tweets. :-)
What could this man possibly offer in the way constructive ideas. California is a state that has been destroyed by unchecked liberalism and Gavin Newsom has been a key player in it. The only thing that's in California's future is total bankruptcy. I'm just waiting for the big federal government bailout of all these liberal states that refuse to say no to anything.
"California has one-third of the nation’s welfare recipients but only 12 percent of the nation’s population."
"California has one of the nation's highest levels of income inequality gaps between families in upper income brackets and those in middle and lower quintiles. When it came to the gap between those at the top and those in the middle, California had the second widest gap, lower only than New Mexico's"
"California has a poverty rate of 23.5 percent, the highest of any state in the country, according to figures released this week by the United States Census Bureau."
"Highest state debt in the country, California again trumped other states with a $617 billion debt. California's debt is more than twice the size of New York's state debt, and New York has the second largest total debt burden in the nation."
"California also produced the most number of dropouts, almost 93,000, for a rate of 4.6%, well above the national average. During the 2009-10 academic year, more than 514,000 students dropped out of high school nationwide, a rate of 3.4%."
"California is a high-tax state. State Sales Tax: Highest in the Nation.
Gasoline Tax: Second Highest in the Nation. Personal Income Tax: Highest in the Nation"
California ranks at or near the top of every "worst list" out there.
California is a liberals dream come true, this is Obama's America.
Corporate business is the most anti-democratic institution I can conceive of, and it dominates the Internet. Technology alone solves nothing, and usually serves to enhance the power of our wealthy oppressors. Anti-informative media ownership is so asymmetrically powerful that it dictates the topics all the way over on NPR shows like Diane Rehm. To day is "One Billion Rising" (Eve Ensler's dancing campaign to stop violence against women) and it is the prelude to the biggest demonstration against the soot pipe (Keystone XL) in Washington, D. C. And not one word from DRShow on these topics (and other popular freedom actions), not one word on the Roundup tomorrow either, because Diane is the victim of corporate intimidation, and her lips are sealed.
*If things are worsening under austerity in California just remember it is our bellweather state. Whatever its disasters and injustices, they will come to your hometown tomorrow.
Pancake Rankin wrote: "If things are worsening under austerity in California just remember it is our bellweather state"
There is no real "austerity" in California, it's the tax increases to pay for the unsustainable that will do them in and yes it is a bellwether in that regard. This is exactly what's happening in Europe, faux austerity and real tax increases. Odd how the left never sees a limit on spending, the money does run out eventually.
I look to the "soot pipe" as a kind of bellwether on Obama, if he refuses it, it only confirms my worst suspicions that he indeed does want to stymie economic growth. We have about a zillion pipelines, this one will make no difference ecologically. Those tar sands one way or another will be exploited, a pipeline is the safest way to do it. The politics on this will be interesting. I'm confident Diane will bring it up again soon.
There are approximately 55,000 miles of crude oil trunk lines in the U.S.
http://www.pipeline101.com/overview/energy-pl.html
Gavin Newsome, the prettiest Democrat I've ever seen (photo above), should probably inform himself that money is a social convention (and not a good in itself) so that he can advocate for human needs and socially cohesive communities and not just be a bill collector for the rich and their big banks. (See "Up Front" KPFA archive for Wednesday February 13th.) Anthropologist David Graeber emphasized in that interview that the magicians of debt are deceiving humanity with their money worship and tricks. He has surmised that modern dependent humans (includes libertarians with guns) are more susceptible to deception than primitive communities sitting before a shaman. The sustainable village knows the shaman is a fraud, and the shaman admits it. Of course, the traditional magician has no police or thugs or media or schools to do any convincing, and his people grow their own food and create their own employments. Their debts are social and forgivable. This post is a warning not to take Pretty Boy seriously. Demand what you need! Don't let dandy thugs stand in your way. Working people owe their fraudsters nothing except punishment. Put money in its place (a social convention requiring consent). $10.55 is 21K a year (as if they gave you 40 hours), and that is chickenfeed. So Gavin is a small-minded businessman. We deserve better.
Many of us were skeptical about the public statement from the LAPD that they were going to investigate Dorner's allegations of police brutality, racism and corruption. Should the LAPD really be the organization to investigate itself? I can write what their conclusions are going to be even before they start. "No merit, no evidence." What about his allegations that the commanding officers of the notorious Ramparts Division have been promoted within the LAPD?
This guy is so full of it!
Fiscal Year 2014 State Budget
Gov. Jerry Brown proposed a state budget for FY2014 on Jan. 10, 2013.[9] A 248-page Budget Summary provided by the governor's office can be found here.
The proposed budget increases spending by approximatley 4% over FY2013, bringing general-fund spending to $97.7 billion.[10]
Highlight of the budget include:
Schools will receive $56.2 billion in state funds, an increase over $2.7 billion over the prior year;[9]
an additional $350 million will go to implementing President Obama’s healthcare law with Medi-Cal, the state’s public insurance program;[9]
$2.7 billion increase in funding for community colleges;[11]
increases state funding for the University of California and California State University systems by $250 million, a 5% increase.[11]
The governor claims that, if the budget is enacted as he proposes, the state will see an $851-million surplus projected at the end of FY2014.[9] He also said that he believes the state can reduce its "wall of debt" from $27.8 billion at the end of this current fiscal year to $4.3 billion by the end of 2016-17.[11]
In laying out his timeline for repaying some $23.5 billion in borrowed funds, Gov. Brown did not factor in tens of billions more owed $62 billion for retirement health care benefits promised to state workers. The coming tab for retired workers tops $181 billion over the next three decades: $62.1 billion for retiree health, $64.5 billion for teacher pensions, $38.5 billion for employee pensions, $12.8 billion for University of California employee pensions and $3.3 billion for judges’ pensions.
Read more: http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/California_state_budget#ixzz2KtQwAHPD
When a public official has to keep his meetings with labor leaders secret he might realize he might be living in a totalitarian fascist state. When community forums require chichanery to keep participants feeling safe from bullies, discourse has deteriorated to a make believe level. Does dyslexia mean he's like Obama who can't tell the Pacifist Left from the Violent Right, and tends to sic his dogs on those who follow Christ, Gandhi and Martin Luther King. Newsome needs an off camera wine bottle he can swig with gusto to keep pace with Marko Rubio. (Can Gavin resurrect the electric car? He is proudly ignorant of the facts. The Jetsons is a real life nightmare. "Jane... help me stop this crazy thing!")
Those Paul's are the most honest guy's out there, that's why they lose big nationally. What am I missing?
Though as a “Native New Yorker” I’m tempted to join in with Dan D.’s little anti-California tirade, there’s an important statistic he forgot to mention.
Like most “liberal” States (so “liberal” it elected Reagan and “Ahnold” as its Republican Governors, gave us Prop. 13, Prop. 8, and led the attack on affirmative action), California pays more in Federal taxes than it receives back in Federal spending. In short, it is a “Donor” State, unlike such “conservative” bastions as Alabama, which is a “Beneficiary” State (regularly receiving more Federal dollars than it pays in Federal taxes).
So, which State is the one really “living on the dole”?
But please don’t take my word for this. Go to the source: The Tax Foundation (http://taxfoundation.org)
Dan D. on February 14, 2013 @ 12:16 pm wrote: “Those Paul's are the most honest guy's out there, that's why they lose big nationally. What am I missing?”
Assuming you are talking about Ron and Rand Paul, allow me to offer a few possibilities:
1) Perhaps they are not as honest as you perceive.
2) Perhaps their ideological rigidity displeases most Americans.
3) Perhaps their mindless version of Libertarianism, borrowing heavily from Ayn Rand's philosophy (which is merely warmed over Social Darwinism), isn't as attractive to most Americans as it clearly is to you.
4) Perhaps honesty is an overrated virtue, and what's more important is what you are honest about. Hitler was completely honest about what he was up to. So was the Unabomber, Charles Manson, and any number of other historical "monsters". While, of course, the Paul's don't belong in that category, perhaps what they're "honest" about are policies most Americans disagree with.
There are, of course, numerous other possible explanations.
Dear Pancake Robin:
Just so you don't feel neglected. May I point out that your Comments are just as extreme as Dan. D.'s, only in reverse, of course. He sees nothing bad in unrestrained Laissez-Faire Capitalism, and mourns its "absence". You see nothing good in it, and condemn its "dominance".
I prefer to view things "in the middle", employing facts and reason. America has never been a pure Laissez-Faire nation. There have been times when the "free market" had more power. (Such as during the era of the "Robber Barons", and even then most of them were cozy with politicians, and often received government "favors".) And there have been times when it had less power. But America's economic system has always consisted of Regulated Capitalism, and that has by and large served us well.
After all, in the first presidential debate, even Romney expressly stated that government regulations were essential for the market to function properly.
Let's have a practical debate over how much regulation there should be, of what kind, and to what extent, instead of yours and Dan's "black and white", "either/or", arguments. You are both guilty of presenting a false dichotomy.
P.S. - The same facts and principles also applies to the size and role of the government in our economy in other areas, including the issue of social programs (whose existence is not the same thing as "Socialism!").
Dan, it's fine that you want to constantly bash "liberals," I'm sure it's a source of endless amusement for you, but the way you go about it, with superficial talking points, is not going to change anyone's mind.
For example, you mention the statistic that California, with 12 percent of the US population, has one-third of the nation's welfare recipients. Therefore, "California is a liberal's dream come true." But it's not as quite as simple as that.
You could compare "liberal" California to a "conservative" state such as Texas. Okay. For every 100 families below the poverty line in Texas, only 6 receive assistance. In California, 66 of those below the poverty line are helped. Is Texas therefore better than California because it says "no" to far more families under the poverty line? Perhaps you would say YES!
But take a closer look at Texas. In 2010, Texas tied with Mississippi for having the highest percentage of workers earning the minimum wage. The percentage of minimum wage workers in Texas is about twice the national average. Great for businesses in Texas! California has one of the lowest percentages of workers earning minimum wage. Terrible for businesses in California! Indeed, you may believe that there should be no minimum wage at all, and that businesses should be allowed to pay workers one dollar an hour, not enough to pay for shelter but at least enough to prevent starvation. And as for the crazy socialist notion of medical care being a right of every US citizen, fuggedaboutit! If people - including children - can't afford expensive US medical care, let 'em die!
To be continued . . .
To Dan, continued:
Texas has no income tax and it has ranked low among US states in public funding for education and social programs. You may applaud that. And yet, even with all those conservative and libertarian values at play in Texas, that state was still facing a $27 billion deficit compared to "liberal" California's deficit of $25 billion. Did those wily liberals somehow infiltrate the conservative political machine in Texas?
This is not even the tip of the iceberg. My point is that these are complex issues that can't be discussed by posting biased talking points in a forum like this. You have an anti-liberal agenda, and that is fine, but you're not going to convince anyone of anything with your superficial talking points. You are merely throwing meat at people who look at things as superficially as you do. And likewise for "liberals" who think in similarly shallow terms and do nothing but bash conservatives. Both liberals and conservatives who engage in shallow discussions are just wasting time. They are not trying to understand or solve anything. They just like to argue. And an argument can last forever if all one does is take a side and stick to shallow talking points.
You write a lot of comments in this forum, so I thought I'd give you my two cents this one time. I'd say that your posts rank at or near the top of every "worst list" out there, too. :-)
Etaoin, I am intrigued by you. Clever name, by the way. I wish I had thought of using it.
If you'd care to give the short, short version of your general political philosophy, I'd be interested. If I were to put a one-word label on my general philosophy, it would be "humanist." Given two words, I'd add "pragmatist." Given three words, "realist." Given four words, "hedonist." Given five words, "humorist." :-)
I consider Ron and Rand Paul to be the Dynamic Duo of politics, in the same ridiculous way that Batman and Robin were the Dynamic Duo of TV back in the 60s. :-)
Are you new to the forum? Are you a fan of Diane's program?
Etaoin, as a "Native Californian," I must point out that the Great State of New York enjoys the highest per capita spending on welfare, $256, compared to California's $179.
But since you said nice things about us, please let me know when you plan to visit my very beautiful state so I can buy you dinner with my food stamps. :-)
Etaoin Shrdlu wrote: "California pays more in Federal taxes than it receives back in Federal spending. In short, it is a “Donor” State, unlike such “conservative” bastions as Alabama, which is a “Beneficiary” State (regularly receiving more Federal dollars than it pays in Federal taxes)."
California has a lot of very rich people and they like to live in the beautiful climate. Put Alabama on the Pacific coast and it would be no different. This argument really doesn't prove anything one way or the other, in fact it is completely irrelevant to my point and to the larger issue of which states contribute more in federal taxes, it's a red herring. This only reflects population density, geographical location and nothing more.
Any vestiges of conservatism that have existed in California's past are long gone. Prop 13 did indeed cap property taxes, but this was more than made up for in tax increases elsewhere. Arnold was a buffoon, not a conservative.
Samcot wrote: "but the way you go about it, with superficial talking points, is not going to change anyone's mind"
They are not superficial and I understand closed minds can't be changed. I offer provable statistics, actual budgets with accompanying links. What do you offer, insults and half baked information. Who's superficial?
The stats about income disparity and all the rest don't lie dude, get real. Money goes a lot further in Texas than it does in CA., the cost of living in California is 42 percent higher than it is in Texas.
I would respond more to your post but I found it to be loaded with superficialities. Apparently I'm getting under your thin skin.
By the way everything you commented on was in response to me, what does that say about you if I'm so "superficial"
Etaoin Shrdlu wrote: "Perhaps their mindless version of Libertarianism, borrowing heavily from Ayn Rand's philosophy (which is merely warmed over Social Darwinism), isn't as attractive to most Americans as it clearly is to you."
Stop it, I'm getting misty eyed.
You don't like Gavin Newsom because he's a Democrat. Worse, he's a Democrat from Democratic California. So you jump all over him and California. When I point out the "provable fact" that Texas, a Republican state, had a bigger budget deficit than California, even though they spend far less money than California on social programs and education, and even though workers in Texas are cheaper (for businesses) than workers in California, and even though - as you acknowledge - the cost of living (and the cost of doing business) is lower in Texas, all you have to say in response is "I found your post to be loaded with superficialities." Leftie California has had more success in dealing with its budget deficit than Rightie Texas. You ignore inconvenient facts.
Texas has the largest number of people working at minimum wage and all you can say is money goes further in Texas than in California? Even in "low cost" Texas, many families earning a bit more than minimum wage are barely getting by. Texas has three times as many minimum wage jobs as California. Every other state should strive to increase the number of minimum wage jobs. Let's all race to the bottom.
I'm not saying that California is a model of good governance. Far from it. But I'm not stuck on one side like you are. Our current political structures and our culture are not set up to create the conditions for good governance. Far too many of our citizens are apathetic with weak critical thinking skills, and the vast majority of us do not have the "habit" of exercising our civic responsibilities. Most Americans vote based on blind (and unthinking) party loyalties, single-issue politics, sound bites, and a candidate's photogenic and/or oratorical attributes.
Anyway, don't get a big head just because I responded to one of your superficial posts. Just like Diane shouldn't get a big head just because you live in her discussion board. :-)
You see, Dan, this is why I say you are superficial (and I'm being kind). You're saying that the reason conservative Alabama is a sponge state is because its climate isn't good enough? And the reason that liberal California is not a sponge state is because it has a better climate?
Do you think Alabama is lacking in sunshine, Dan? Maybe it's time you get out of that dark hole you're in and get some sunshine yourself.
Samcot wrote: "You don't like Gavin Newsom because he's a Democrat. Worse, he's a Democrat from Democratic California. So you jump all over him and California. When I point out the "provable fact" that Texas"
The topic chosen by D.R. has zero to do with Texas. Diane brought in California politics to the discussion. Texas was mentioned because of Rick Perry's outreach to California businesses. You brought it up as a strawman argument because you cannot face the problems in your own state. I'm not going to waste much time on someone that is obviously in denial and thrashing out emotionally with strawman arguments. You resort to personal attacks on me because you cannot defend your positions honestly. Sounds to me that you like to be lied too by your state leaders, enjoy!
I have not explored the issue of Ca. vs TX. all that much but I have been hearing and reading the benefits of Texas over California for quite some time. I can say what I have read today about it is that you really don't want to go there. To put it in a nutshell, Texas is not at the brink because it is a low tax state and it's citizens are not maxed out tax wise. California on the other hand is taxed to the hilt already with no where else to turn. Liberal agendas are the reason why.
As far as weather, I have lived in Florida, spent a few months in Texas and lived in Southern CA. for a couple years. You cannot compare the humid hell holes that summers are across the southern states to CA. weather. I live in WI. now and would not trade my awful winters for southern state summers.
The Texas vs. California Example
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/06/13/the_texas_example_1...