Social Security Is Insurance

Republicans and conservatives are fond of referring to Social Security as "handouts" and "welfare" (and just for the record, Robert Samuelson, you are an idiot) in an effort to make the program seem morally wrong. President Reagan taught us to hate welfare because a lot of African Americans get it (even though the majority of recipients are caucasian), so calling it "welfare" rubs us the same wrong way. And who approves of anyone getting "handouts"? Republicans hate dealing with anyone needy enough to need help--you know, like the elderly.

Well, Social Security is neither welfare nor handouts. It's insurance. It's insurance you buy all during the course of your working life against the possibility of not having enough money to live on after you retire. You pay the premiums; you deserve the payoff when you get old enough to collect benefits. The fact that it's a pay-as-you-go system doesn't change this characteristic of the program one bit.

Imagine if you bought car insurance from XYZ Insurance Corporation. You pay your premiums faithfully for 20 years. Then one day, you get into an accident, and your car is totaled (you're OK). You go to your XYZ representative and say "It's time to retire the car, per the policy - please write me a check." However, a funny-looking guy in the lobby looks at you and tells you you really shouldn't be asking for welfare. Besides, he continues, it's not fair. Your premiums have already been used to pay other drivers, and more drivers have been having accidents lately, so everyone's going to have to cut back on what they expect to get out of their insurance contracts. You should have been more careful, he continues. Maybe if you'd saved up some money, you could have paid for the damage to the car yourself rather than asking him for a handout.

Your agent calls the guy an idiot, and gives you the check because, you know, you have an insurance contract. Just like seniors do with Social Security.

Anyone who tries to convince you that Social Security is "welfare" or a "government handout" is either an idiot who doesn't understand the system, or is actively trying to discourage you from collecting your money. And you really should step back and ask them why they don't want you to have your money, and what they want to do with your money instead.

In the "marketplace" of political ideas, it's caveat emptor all the way. Especially if the seller is a Republican.

Your Biggest Investment

They say most peoples' biggest investment is their home. Wrong.

Most peoples' biggest investment is their government. You pay a mortgage on your government every year of your working life. And the Republicans, especially the Tea Party Publicans, are trying to burn your investment down.

What would YOU do if an arsonist tried to burn your house down?

California Redistricting - Redistricting Assistance Sites Opening Soon

The Redistricting Group at Berkeley Law is opening up six Redistricting Assistance sites around the state:

View Redistricting Assistance Sites in a larger map

According to RedistrictingCA:

The Redistricting Group at Berkeley Law (affiliated with the Statewide Database) is opening 6 sites in the following locations: San Diego, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Fresno, Sacramento and Berkeley, that will have computers with redistricting software available for use by the general public. The sites are designed to encourage public participation in the state redistricting process, and can be used to develop map submissions or testimony for the redistricting commission. This is a project funded by The James Irvine Foundation to increase access to data, software and information about the 2011 Redistricting Process.

More on this tomorrow.

Michigan Republicans Go Off The Deep End

According to Rick Snyder, wealthy businessman and freshly-minted Republican governor of Michigan, the state, which is approximately $1.4 billion in the red, requires "shared sacrifice" to solve its budget problems. So how does that shared sacrifice work?

*His $45.9 billion proposal includes spending cuts for schools and would eliminate many personal tax breaks while slashing business taxes. Among the proposals: ending exemptions from the state income tax for most pension income.*

OK, we get it - You sacrifice your tax dollars, and your school funding, and he shares the proceeds with his business buddies.

This shouldn't be a surprise - businessmen make lousy, lousy governors precisely because they think like businessmen. They think in terms of businesses, not people; their natural affinity is to other businessmen, not to the workers that make up the vast bulk of their constituency. The bottom line is profit, not people. People don't count that much to businessmen like Snyder, particularly people that can't work anymore:

“Lansing politicians say everyone must share in the sacrifices, yet the only ones making the sacrifices in this unfair budget are seniors, schools and ordinary families,” said Henry Lykes, a retired Marine and retired Wayne County public service worker. “Lansing politicians must stop exploiting Michigan’s budget as an excuse to attack ordinary Michigan families, seniors and our children. I know a retiree in Westland who is struggling to get by. If Gov. Snyder taxes her retirement, she may have to cut back on her medicines, or even food. That’s just not fair.”

And with that sole motive comes a disdain, if not an outright dislike, of working people, especially union people, which is why he's been moving to bust unions in the same way Scott Walker has in Wisconsin.

All of which sets up the really seriously radical, undemocratic, un-American moves Snyder is pushing for, along with the Republican majority in the Michigan Legislature:

Newly elected Republican governor, Rick Snyder, is set to pass one of the most sweeping, anti-democratic pieces of legislation in the country – and almost no one is talking about it.

Snyder’s law gives the state government the power not only to break up unions, but to dissolve entire local governments and place appointed “Emergency Managers” in their stead. But that’s not all – whole cities could be eliminated if Emergency Managers and the governor choose to do so. And Snyder can fire elected officials unilaterally, without any input from voters. It doesn’t get much more anti-Democratic than that.

Except it does. The governor simply has to declare a financial emergency to invoke these powers – or he can hire a private company to declare financial emergency and take over oversight of the city. That’s right, a private corporation can declare your city in a state of financial emergency and send in its Emergency Manager, fire your elected officials, and reap the benefits of the ensuing state contracts.

Think about that for a moment. These are a dictator's powers Snyder is seizing. Simply by declaring an emergency, the Governor, by fiat, can dissolve local governments, hire a corporation from out of the state to come in and tell everyone what to do and how to do it, and you're forced to pay for it. The good people of Michigan, who have been designated "sacrificers" in the new regime of "shared sacrifice," will have absolutely no say in how their town or county is run.

And how will the Emergency Managers, these Republican commissars empowered by Snyder to so dismantle local governments, perform their duties?

Because the bill establishes no process for how appointees can carry out their new powers and specifically lays out that Emergency Managers need not consult with a community’s elected representatives, some worry that corporate managers, appointed by the governor, could liquidate community assets to cover debt and leave towns no better off than they were.

What values will guide these individuals or firms as they work to balance budgets?

How will a manager decide whether to sell off an ice rink or a library?

The Treasury Dept. is in the process of training potential Emergency Managers, so the Messenger asked for some details of the training in hopes of better understanding the motivations and priorities of the folks who may soon take over our schools and towns.

It turns out the training itself was mostly outsourced to the law and accounting firms — Plante & Moran, Plunkett & Cooney, Miller Canfield, Foley & Lardner — already involved in emergency financial management of Michigan towns.

And none of this is about the budget. It's all about busting up unions, and, even more importantly, selling off state functions to corporations. Because as we mentioned above, businessmen think only of profit, and there's no profit in letting a government perform a government's functions. Republicans like Snyder want only to privatize your government so they and their buddies can make a profit off of you.

The inimitable Rachel Maddow has more:

This is Republicans showing their true colors.

Fukushima Radiation - Update

If this is true, it's pretty frightening. From FishOutofWater over at Daily Kos: Breaking - Spent Fuel Fire At Reactor 4, Hydrogen Explosion & Radiation Release:

This is live coverage of the HNK feed. I'm doing my best to make sense of the translation. Apparently there is an ongoing fire that may be a spent fuel fire. This is very concerning. Evacuation has been ordered up to 30 km (20 miles). A spent fuel fire has the potential of causing far greater radiation release to the environment than a reactor accident.

The number 4 reactor was not operating at the time of the earthquake according to NHK. However, the loss of power that occurred when the tsunami wiped out the diesel generators caused the spent fuel pools to lose water circulation. Heat from the spent fuel would have eventually boiled off the water once circulation was lost. When spent fuel is uncovered it can heat up to such high temperatures that its zirconium alloy cladding catches fire. That appears to have taken place. Moreover these conditions apparently led to hydrogen generation which caused an explosion that destroyed the roof of the reactor 4 building.

. . .

NOAA particle trajectory modeling indicates the possibility of low levels of particles from the accident vicinity reaching the Pacific northwest of the U.S. in 84 hours. Levels in the U.S. would likely be diluted to very low levels by dispersion and mixing.

Most radioactive particles will probably end up in the Pacific Ocean.

(Emphasis added.) Go to the link above for more details, and contingency wind pattern diagrams.

A New Civil Rights Movement

Two videos out of Wisconsin are definitely worth the time to watch today.

In the first, a Wisconsin farmer, Tony Schultz, explains, among other things, that the previous "support" from farmers for Scott Walker's plan to gut Badgercare (Wisconsin's implementation of Medicare) were actually from large factory farms; family farmers from Wisconsin would be hurt by Walker and his Republican cronies:

WATCH THIS VIDEO and please share it widely. Republicans have ruled red and rural America for a generation, playing off of fears, driving wedges, creating sterotypes. And Democracts, it must be said, have too often given them an open field to do so. It took Scott Walker and his minions to bring it fully to the surface here in Wisconsin. Tony passionately states the common threats we face, and the opportunity we have to rebuild the connections across the landscape for a progressive future. Ironically, Scott Walker is ignorant of rural and small town Wisconsin, and the social fabric that keeps small town life healthy -- the schools, health care, environmental stewardship, the local cops and firefighters. Tony reveals that here.

In the next video, Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) breathes the fire of the righteous in his address to the Madison Workers' Rights Rally when he lays out for all to witness how our American democracy is being sold down the river to corporations, primarily by the Republicans:

What we have here today in Wisconsin is the beginning of a new civil rights movement.

Best line of the speech? "Economic democracy is a predicate to political democracy!" Will post a transcript when one becomes available.

By the way - where are Obama and the Democratic leadership on the labor rights protests in Wisconsin? Where are they on supporting workers' rights? Silent. Mute. Absent without leave. It's as if they don't care about the millions of Wisconsoners that elected them. The uncomfortable, but most rational, conclusion to draw is that they approve of Walker's actions. And why should Obama support workers' rights, after all? He was never a worker himself, only organizer, professor, and professional politician.

It's time we demand that the Democratic Party return to its roots as a party of the people. It's time the people took its party back.

California Potentially In Path Of Fukushima Radiation

Up to six cores at the Fukushima nuclear facility in Sendai, Japan may have already experienced meltdown. Unfortunately, this looming disaster raises the possibility (and at this point, it is just that, a possibility) of wind carrying airborne radioactivity as far as California:

California is closely monitoring efforts to contain leaks from a quake-damaged Japanese nuclear plant, a spokesman said Saturday, as experts said radiation could be blown out across the Pacific.

. . .

"At present there is no danger to California. However we are monitoring the situation closely in conjunction with our federal partners," Michael Sicilia, spokesman for California Department of Public Health, told AFP.

. . .

Experts have suggested that, if there were a reactor meltdown or major leak at Fukushima, the radioactive cloud would likely be blown out east across the Pacific, towards the US West Coast.

"The wind direction for the time being seems to point the (nuclear) pollution towards the Pacific," said Andre-Claude Lacoste of the French Nuclear Safety Authority, briefing journalists in Paris on the Japanese crisis.

Time to recall that Southern California has two nuclear reactors of its own at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. Let's hope the Big One never hits here.

Japan - Six Fukushima Cores Melted Down?

Reuters tweet: FLASH: #Japan chief cabinet secretary says risk of explosion at building housing #Fukushima Daiichi No. 3 reactor

AUToday tweet: #fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. No.3 reactor now of concern. The power company has raised the warning leave to 4 on a scale of 0-7. #eqjp

United for Peace of Pierce County: Core Melting Presumed at Multiple Reactors as Six Cores Lost at Fukushima:

Efforts to cool nuclear fuel rods appeared to be failing at three reactors at two nuclear power plants in Japan's Fukushima prefecture, 150 miles north of Tokyo, in the aftermath of the devastating Mar. 11 earthquake (upgraded to 9.0 on the Richter scale, and now said to be the biggest within the boundaries of the North American and Pacific tectonic plates in 1,200 years) and tsunami, the London Guardian suggested.[1] -- "Kyodo News quoted Tepco as saying that the up to three meters of MOX fuel rods were exposed above water at the Fukushima plant," Justin McCurry said. -- "Shaun Burnie, an independent nuclear energy consultant and forner head of nuclear campaigns at Greenpeace, said the presence of a percentage of fuel core loaded with plutonium MOX fuel in the No. 3 reactor posed a grave threat to the surrounding area. 'Plutonium MOX fuel increases the risk of nuclear accident due the neutronic effects of plutonium on the reactor,' Burnie told the Guardian. 'In the event of an accident -- in particular loss of coolant -- the reactor core is more difficult to control due to both neutronics and higher risk of fuel cladding failure.'" -- China's Xinhua news agency reported that "the TEPOC reported that the No. 3 reactor at the plant lost its ability to cool the reactor core, becoming the sixth reactor that lost the function after No. 1 and No. 2 reactors at the No. 1 plant and No. 1, No. 2, and No. 4 at the No. 2 plant had suffered the same trouble." -- Bloomberg Businessweek downplayed the fears about the nuclear emergency.[3] -- But the New York Times called the "widening nuclear crisis" the "worst involving a nuclear plant since the Chernobyl disaster 25 years ago."

CNN: Quake moved Japan's coast 8 feet closer to the U.S.

NASA photo of Sendai flooded areas:

Japan quake upgraded to 9.0. Now tied for 4th most powerful quake in recorded history.

Iowa - Leave No Mentally-Defective Gun Owner Behind

Iowa Republicans are making love to their guns again:

Republicans this week revived a proposal that would allow Iowans to carry weapons in public without permission from a sheriff, without background checks and without training requirements. The legislation, House Study bill 219, is known as “Alaska carry,” which is law in Alaska, Arizona, Vermont and Wyoming.

Republican Jeff Kaufmann joked that the law was the "give-a-handgun-to-a-schizophrenic bill".

No background checks and no training requirements? Honestly, why don't they just pass a law stating we can drive 120 while downing a bottle of Jack Daniels? We'd be just as safe.

Of course, we're missing the psychology here; a law about being able to carry weapons in public, with Johnny law unable to say squat about it, is all about pissants projecting personal power to make up for a four-inch pecker.

California Citizens' Redistricting Commission - Who Are The DTS Members? Focus on Forbes

The California Citizens' Redistricting Commission has 14 members. Five of the members are Democratic, five are Republican, and four are "DTS,' or Decline To State party. One requirement for the DTS commissioners was that they had to have been consistently registered with a political party or DTS for 5 years prior to their appointment; as such, they couldn't merely state on their application (for example, for purposes of loading the commission with one party or another) that they were DTS.

So who are the DTS members of the Commission? They are Stanley Forbes of Esparto; Connie Galambos-Malloy of Oakland; Michelle R. DiGuillo (Stockton); and M. Andre Parvenu (Culver City).

I always wonder about "decline to state" voters. Do they truly hew to neither the Democratic or Republican Parties? Do they tend towards a third party? Are they really Democrats or Republicans, but some aspect of state or local politics irritated them enough to change their preferences on their voter registration? Such motivations are not necessarily a part of the public record. However, some information can be gleaned from simple web searches.

Today, we'll focus on Stanley Forbes of Esparto. Forbes is white, male, lives in Esparto in Yolo County and earns between $35,000 and $75,000; has a Bachelor's degree in history from the University of Southern California, and a Master's in history from UCLA. He holds a law degree from Vanderbilt University School of Law. He is co-owner of The Avid Reader bookstore in Sacramento; and owner-operator of Forbes Ranch.

According to the Citizens' Redistricting Commission website:

Mr. Forbes is a co-owner of Avid Reader, a small retail bookstore. There he selects merchandise, sells and markets books, provides customer service and attends to financial matters. Mr. Forbes also has spent the last 32 years operating a family ranch, managing crop selection, market research, financial planning, equipment operation, irrigation, chemical and air quality regulation compliance, pruning and raking almonds. Mr. Forbes received a Bachelor's degree from the University of Southern California, a Master's degree from UCLA, and a Law Degree from Vanderbilt University. Mr. Forbes is registered as Decline-To-State.

"I am applying to serve on the Citizens Redistricting Commission out of a deep concern that unless reformed, California may be unable to effectively address the problems it faces as well as maximize the opportunities that will enable the people of California to pursue and fulfill their potential."

Well, the last statement sounds nice, but substance-wise is little more than political pablum. Granted, the California state Legislature is largely gridlocked now (primarily because the 2/3 majority requirement for raising any fees or taxes give the 36% of Republicans in the Legislature undue influence). However, how does Forbes plan to correct the situation?

Perhaps his Supplemental Application holds some clues. To explain why he wanted to serve on the Commission, Forbes explained that:

Legislative districts should represent communities of interests. This is inherently difficult in California given its regional and demographic diversity. As Mark Baldassare put it in his book, “California in the New Millennium”, California is in many ways four states with mutually suspicious ethnic communities all of which distrust the government. I believe these differences can be overcome provided the districts are based on communities of interest criteria: geographic, ethnic, economic and many others. As it stands now however, the primary community of interest is political party registration. This effectively results in many single party legislative districts that may not represent communities of interest that reflect our common interests in solving the problems facing the state. With single party districts and typically low turnout primaries, party activists who are more ideologically, rather than consensus or compromise, driven exercise a disproportionate influence on who is nominated and therefore who is elected than the public at large in their districts. This results in a Legislature excessively polarized and gripped by legislative gridlock.

California cannot successfully address its problems and build on its opportunities without ridding the Legislature of this partisan paralysis. This paralysis can only be overcome by developing legislative districts that are based on community of interest criteria other than political parties so that compromise and consensus building can be returned to our political process.

So Forbes appears to believe that political affiliation does not represent a "community of interest"? Political party affiliation is a reflection of commonality of interests and values, both economic, social. There's a reason Republican Districts are drawn to encompass wealthier, more upscale, and/or more socially-conservative neighborhoods and areas; that's how they tend to think generally. Political party affiliation is not a cynical substitute for "communities of interest" cooked up by the Legislature; it's the result of communities of interest.

In any event, Forbes looks like a Commissioner who will not just ignore political party affiliation in redrawing district lines, but will actively break political party-based communities whenever possible.

Forbes is right with respect to one community of interest: the 2001 redistricting has been rightly accused of not just preserving incumbents' seats, but acting to suppress the burgeoning Latino vote. We expect the Commission will have, as a primary task, rectifying this situation. Forbes seems attuned to this:

California is our nation’s most diverse state, and there is every reason to believe that that diversity will only increase given immigration and the higher birthrate of our new residents. This can and should be a source of strength, energy, and vitality. But the benefits are not automatic. Left unrecognized, diversity can be a source of social and political corrosion that can result when a population feels alienated and excluded from the political process and proposals made to address California’s opportunities and problems.

Given the remainder of his Supplemental Application, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he's alluding to Latinos and not to Republicans. However, the letter of recommendation from Pam Nieberg points to the former interpretation:

Stan, in his work on the [Davis] School Board and City Council, made efforts to recognize the diversity of our citizens and to accommodate that diversity. While on the School Board, Stan strongly supported and voted for the Spanish Immersion Program in our schools and encouraged diversity in hiring. He also studied demographic data to help determine where schools would afford the greatest ethnic and economic diversity. On the Council, his concern for economic diversity encouraged him to ensure that all were represented in the political process. He also worked on policies that ensured that 25% of our housing in all developments qualified as low income housing.

So what else does Forbes believe?

[California] suffers from a taxation system that many consider overburdens business and is too volatile.

I have no idea what "volatile' means here, but complaints about the effects of taxation on business are standard, meat-and-potatoes Republican fare. Consistent with this, according to Davis Wiki, Forbes was registered as a Republican until 2006.

Forbes does, however, appear to have a reputation for patiently listening to all sides of a particular issue. According to research by the Bureau of State Audits:

Bureau staff contacted Pam Nieberg, the author of one of Applicant’s letters of recommendation . . . [S]he witnessed Applicant working in his capacity as a council member, and joined him to support local candidates in campaigns for the Davis City Council and the Yolo County Board of Supervisors. Ms. Nieberg indicated that Applicant operates as a consensus builder. When faced with an opposing viewpoint, Applicant tends not to hastily argue the matter and force his views on the other person, but instead works toward reaching agreement on a solution. Ms. Nieberg stated that Applicant considers all viewpoints when solving problems, as he tries to “get people to agree logically.” Ms. Nieberg also stated that Applicant is known for working well with others.

Nieberg's letter of recommendation states similar views, as does recommender Joseph Martinez'. (Curiously, W. Vasey's letter is not available for inspection; the page comes up blank.)

Although not much more is discernible about Forbes from a simple web search, our take on Forbes is this: He has Republican leanings and sympathies. However, his main focus is getting government to provide solutions that work, both in the sense that they are logical and that they serve the community. We would hazard a guess that his apparent inclination for practicality outweighed, and would outweigh, whatever partisan leanings he has (which might be why he switched from Republican to Decline-To-State). In that sense, Forbes looks like a reasonably non-partisan, practical-minded addition to the Commission. We'll follow his input with interest.

Wisconsin - A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Recall

Wisconsin state senator Randy Hopper (R-Fond-du Lac) has been a big supporter of Governor Scott Walker's push to deny Wisconsin public employees' collective bargaining rights. Hopper is now a recall target because of his votes. So when protesters showed up at his Madison, Wisconsin house to argue the matter...well, I'll let the blog folkblum's rambles and rants take it from there:

Recall target, Sen. Randy Hopper (R-Fond du Lac), talks a good game about family values.

But protesters outside the Hopper house this week in Fond du Lac were met by his wife who reportedly came out and told them: Hopper no longer lives there, but with his 25-year-old mistress in Madison.

No confirmation on whether the divorcing wife signed that petition to recall Hopper who represents Wisconsin Senate District 18.

Hopper has been a close ally with Gov. Scott Walker whose billionaire-funded attacks on Wisconsin families is drawing international attention and widespread condemnation.

I'm betting Hopper's wife wants him recalled, too, if perhaps for other reasons.

Massive Earthquake Hits Japan

A powerful earthquake, 8/9 on the Richter scale, hit northern Japan last night.

At least 60 people are confirmed dead.

There are tsunami warnings for California's West Coast - La Jolla is expected to see a tsunami at approximately 8:48 PST this morning (an hour and a half from now); the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has issued a Tsunami Advisory for our part of the California coastline.

More updates here (keep checking for more updates as time progresses). Our best to the people of Japan.

Apportionment - What Is It?

The Census Bureau has put out a helpful video explaining what apportionment is (hint - it's not the same as redistricting):

California Redistricting - Bay Area Could Lose A Congressional Seat

The 2010 Census Redistricting Data for California was published today. The population of California grew from approximately 33 million in 2000 to almost 38 million in 2010:

And California is stuck with 53 Congressional seats for the coming decade, meaning that population shifts, alone, will account for much of the redistricting done in California in the next few months. Experts are predicting that, because of the obvious growth of the Central Valley relative to other parts of the state, the Bay Area stands to lose at least one Congressional seat:

The dramatic population shift under way in the state, redistricting experts say, will make plain that the Bay Area should probably lose a district. The population in the ascendant Central Valley has grown roughly 15 times as fast as the population in the San Francisco Bay Area over the last decade, according to federal population estimates.

However, any redistricting in the area may be a double-edged sword:

The congressional districts that the Bay Area already shares with the Central Valley — 1, 3 and 11 — could be stretched farther into the Central Valley, some political scholars say. But the pendulum may well swing the other way. Republicans say they fear that portions of Contra County [sic, Costa] County, like Congressional District 10, a heavily Democratic area represented by John Garamendi that is known as the “seahorse” for its odd shape, may be reconstituted to include localities like Danville and San Ramon — currently in the 11th District — making it even harder for Republicans to get elected.

[Editor's note - District 11, represented by Jerry McNerney, looks more like a seahorse to me, but I'm not a professional at these things.] Congressional Districts 1, 3 and 11 are presented below for reference:

Certainly, the western end of District 3 will be lopped off and potentially added to a new District; such a reformed District 10 would still be reliably Democratic. District 11 is almost certain to be radically recast, particularly the portion encompassing only part of Stockton (similarly, District 18, which represents the central portion of Stockton, would be significantly redrawn, as well). My guess is that District 10 would be redistributed among Districts 1, 7, 9 and 11 to reduce the number of Bay area Districts, while a new Central Valley District would be formed from portions of existing Districts 11, 18 and 19.

I've been focusing on potential redistricting in Southern California, but it looks like the Sacramento-area Central Valley will be a hotbed of redrawing as well.

Why Businessmen Make Lousy Governors

Rick Scott, newly-minted Teabagger-approved Governor of Florida, is pissing off his Republican allies in the state:

“The governor doesn’t understand there is a State Constitution and that we have three branches of government,” said State Senator Mike Fasano, a Republican from New Port Richey who upset Mr. Scott with rough handling of his staff during a testy committee hearing. “They are talking about the attitude that he is still the C.E.O. of his former health care corporation, and that is not going to work in this state, in Tallahassee, in my district. The people believe in three branches of government.”

Republican lawmakers in Florida were hoping for a smoother transition. Instead, they say, they got top-down management from a political novice.

This is after Scott killed job-creating high-speed rail in Florida, slashed education to benefit his corporate buddies, and generally showed himself to be a lying sack of crap.

It shouldn't be any surprise he's acting this way, however. He was a billionaire CEO of HCA/Columbia before buying the governorship, and the way he is running the state indicates how CEOs think about the rest of us. Everyone else exists to serve them; the state's voters can be cast aside like workers in an economic downturn. CEOs are paid pretty highly to not care about the people that work for them. Meanwhile, his corporate buddies--whom he obviously sees as investors--are showered with your tax dollars. CEOs don't care about people; to them, people are tools to be used. The only people that matter are other corporate leaders, particularly other CEOs.

Elect a CEO, you elect the guy that fired you in the last recession, and the guy running your cable TV and mobile phone companies, not to mention the guys who sent Enron, WorldCom and a host of similar companies into the ground in flames. Who would ever think someone like that would be effective at running a state for the benefit of its people?