Save Our School Rally - Sat. May 3rd

SOS
SAVE OUR SCHOOLS
CAMPAIGN
Southern California
Rally
Pioneer High School
Stadium
Whittier,CA
(605 Fwy at Slauson Blvd. off ramp)
Saturday, May 3, 2008
1:00 P.M.


Join Parents, students, and community leaders in protesting California state education budget cuts.

My karate student and parents will be in attendance.

Light Rail Plan Hijacking by San Gabriel Valley Cities - Wrong!

The Whittier Daily News ran an article today on certain San Gabriel Valley cities attempting to hijack the long planned east-side county light rail route.

It's a selfish act to derail established plans to run the proposed light rail from downtown Los Angeles thru East LA, Montebello, and Pico Rivera to Whittier and unincorporated Whittier.

People in the current plan do not have adequate access to rapid public transportation like the people in San Gabriel Valley.

The San Gabriel Valley cities have the El Monte/South El Monte Transit Center hub that many transportation agencies use and provide access for residents in local cities to Los Angeles and to the Inland Empire. The transportation access at El Monte provides long range and short range bus service. More importantly, the San Gabriel Valley hub in El Monte currently provides rapid freeway flier access to Downtown Los Angeles and to the inland empire along the 10 freeway.

Detouring the current plan to serve the underserved communities of Whittier, Unincorporated Whittier, and Pico Rivera and Montebello further limits rapid transit and further diminishes access for people in these communities.

It’s selfish for cities in San Gabriel Valley to get another Transit Center.

The current plan must stay and the cities in San Gabriel Valley need to share rapid transit access to other areas of east county of Los Angeles.

Great to be American

It's great to be reminded how privileged we are to be Americans in America. Beautiful country, freedoms, diversity, and the unbound pursuit of happiness.

de Tocquevilled
T. Jefferson
John Muir
R.W. Emerson
R. Frost
H.W. Longfellow
W. Whitman

South Whittier Satelite College Center - Short Change

There is a ridiculous argument being advocated by Russell Castañeda Calleros, the governmental affairs director, at Rio Hondo College regarding the South Whittier Satellite Center. He say's, "the people in South Whittier need more green space than college classrooms."

The voters voted on a $234 million dollar bond which $3 million was committed and budgeted for a college satellite center in South Whittier. Some administrators, including Russell Castañeda Calleros, are planning to short change the project thereby breaking the promise made to the community to invest the full $3 million in the satilite center.

What it comes down to is whether to build three or four classrooms. Of course this would mean serving fewer people at the site and instead adding a small patch of grass and a tree. Russell Castañeda Calleros makes the argument that the people of South Whittier and surrounding area need more "green space" than classroom space for courses and programs.

Now, I consider myself an environmentalist and have a good policy track record. But this is about Rio Hondo Community College serving people in an area with high unemployment, the furthest south community from campus, a working class community, limited in transportation, and with no high school.

I'm stand steadfast that the people of South Whittier deserve more classroom space to take college courses that will help them attain better paying jobs, help young adults get in college, and improve the community overall rather than a small patch of grass with a tree. There are several good parks in the area.

Russell Castañeda Calleros and others are attempting to short change the people of South Whittier and I wont let them do it without a fight.

Leave Redistricting to Elected Representatives

"The California Voters First Initiative would take the redistricting process out of the hands of state legislators and put it under the control of an independent committee."

I would much rather have our elected representatives in the state legislature draw districts then leave it to an "independent" committee that is not representative of California.

The proponents of this Initiative know well that taking the process out of the hands of our elected representatives usurps residents of California and our democratic form of government.

I'm disapointed that my retired political science professor and Whittier city councilman Owen Newcomer would back such initiative. By supporting this initiative he is taking the process out of the hands of the people and giving it to an elite group of people not representative of our diverse population of California.

Our representative form of democracy should not be substituted for a committee of political appointments who were not directly elected by the people of California. If a community does like its representative they can vote them out. In the case of a committee of elites, we can not vote them out and there is no mechanism to do so should the people disagree with their decision.

Stick to our elected legislature who we can hold accountable at the local level and not a group of unaccountable elitist.

The State of Ward Republics in America

Thomas Jefferson believed that democracy in America is best represented at the local level (ward republics) where citizens govern themselves and live inter-dependently (in collaboration with each other).

I too have subscribed to this idea since my teens age years reading Jefferson, Rousseau's "The Social Contract" and other political philosophy.

This Presidential Primary cycle gives me great hope and concern. The possibility of either an African-American or woman brings me closer to the idea of equal opportunity in America.

However, I'm also growing concern for how our democracy or the idea of democracy may be or not shifting at the local level. As Jefferson argued, the small local ward republic is reflective of the federal/national state of democracy. If this is true, my concern is that I observe not a shift in ideas, but just the same "old" Machiavellian practice of the group fight and hoarding of resources.

Perhaps I'm viewing this too idealistically. To anticipate and get caught in the fervor of an ideological revolution may be placing too many expectations on "change". I understand realism in politics, but is this really "change"?

I see no "change" at the local levels. What I observe is the realist opportunism that can be a plague if not checked. My observation is the Democratic Presidential Campaigns at the local levels are not representative of the movement and ideas they purport. The Presidential Caucuses where strangely awkward.

Is there such thing as "unity" when people ideologicly akin are tearing each other apart? What I believe as ideology transcending race and culture may not be that at all. In my local ward-republic and what I observed in the Iowa Caucuses was not “unity” or “change”. What was it?

I do observe some believers in the “movement”. They deserve every encouragement and should be brought into the process so that they might actually be the ones down the road instituting “change”. I will do my best to help them get on the ship.

However, there were also acute opportunist using the “movement” to solely help themselves or engaging in cultural elitism. “I’m bring in my own group in and the rest of you will have to sit back and be governed by us” attitude.

Ok, I believe that “change” may bring change in the wealth structure in America and create greater access to opportunity for those who have not been included. Am I wrong? Could it just be one elitist group versus another elitist group?

I feel something is not right in our wards republics.