David Lesher

Exporting California

Communications — Fri, 23 Mar 2007 08:00:00 -0400

A New America Event
03/22/2007 - 9:00am

California, the most diverse and entrepreneurial state in America, is poised for a big step onto the national stage this year. Its presidential primary is moving to the front end of the 2008 campaign season. Its native daughter, Nancy Pelosi, is serving her historic first year as Speaker of the House. And the nation is taking notice as a series of major bipartisan policy agreements take place in Sacramento.

Within this… more

David Lesher Discusses Kids' Accounts on Sacramento's KXTV

Communications — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 21:15:00 -0500

California lawmakers are considering giving $500 to every single baby born in the state. The bipartisan bill aims to give babies a financial head start with a savings account. "Anything we can do to encourage savings and investment and to provide a young adult -- especially young adults from lower income families, families of modest means -- to be able to have a small nest egg to go to college to learn a career, down payment on the house, would be a good thing," said Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento. At age 18, each child would repay the original $500 gift, but they can keep any interest and additional deposits tax free. "We're at a point where our middle class needs to grow," said David Lesher from the New America Foundation, a group that invests in non-traditional policy ideas. "We have an income gap with too many rich, too many poor and we don't have enough in the middle class..."

For the complete story, please visit the KXTV, Sacramento website.

David Lesher on San Francisco's KGO-TV Explaining Kids' Savings Accounts Bill

Communications — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 03:47:00 -0500

Mar. 1 - KGO - A new plan to give newborns a head start is getting mixed reviews. The idea is to give every baby born in California $500 dollars. It would be a nest egg they would have money out of taxpayers pockets today -- that would be a nest egg when those babies become young adults... After families add money, at 18 the child would have to pay the state back $500 and use what's left tax free for college, a house, or a retirement account. The idea came from the New America Foundation, a non partisan think tank which found one Democrat and one Republican to introduce the bill.David Lesher, New America Foundation: "I don't know how we can not afford to give people access to home ownership and college -- that they might not otherwise have..."New mom Lisa Jenkins would rather see the state put to use the $500 now, rather than having little Sophie wait until she's 18 to see any benefits.

Lisa Jenkins, New mother: "There's going to be a need for more classrooms, more teachers, or overcrowding of what we already have."

But the New America Foundation says… more

San Francisco Chronicle Reports on Kids Savings Account Bill

Communications — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 20:28:00 -0500

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Every child born in California would get a $500 savings account to start building a nest egg for college or a down payment for a home, under a state Senate bill introduced Wednesday.California would be the first state with such a program, said David Lesher, a program director for the nonprofit New America Foundation, based in Washington. A national savings program has languished in Congress since 2005; a similar program has increased savings in Britain since 2002.Under the bill, every child born in California after Jan. 1, 2008, would receive the money, regardless of their parents' income or immigration status. Recipients would have to repay the state's initial $500 investment once the turn 18.

The money may be used for three purposes: college or continuing education, a down payment on a home, or a retirement account.

For the complete article, please visit the San Francisco Chronicle website.To read the proposal, please click here.

David Lesher on California Independents in San Francisco Chronicle

Communications — Mon, 26 Feb 2007 16:38:00 -0500

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger was playing to a growing crowd of voters, in California and across the nation, when he used his inaugural address last month to urge people to "move past partisanship'' to a new home in the political center...It's a sentiment that appeals to the burgeoning number of voters who don't want to be identified with the Republican or Democratic parties and to the many people unwilling to be tied to their party's candidates or policies... Nearly a fifth of California voters are registered as "decline to state" ...[which] includes voters who are ultraconservative and others on the extreme left, but polls done by the policy institute show that most of them fall in the broad political center... Decline-to-state voters are younger, with 27 percent under the age of 34, compared with 16 percent for the Democrats and 14 percent for Republicans. More than half of those voters are college graduates, a higher percentage than in either of the major parties. And considering that they have an average income well over the state average, California's independent voters "are like a young professional group compared to the other parties,'' said David Lesher,… more

Crime or Punishment

Cecille Isidro — Sun, 18 Feb 2007 19:28:00 -0500

Sacramento lawmakers are in a trap. U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton will decide in little more than three months whether to set a population cap on the state’s vastly overcrowded prison system, potentially forcing the early release of thousands of convicted criminals. To keep the court at bay, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has asked the Legislature to approve billions in new prison construction money, and to consider revising sentencing and parole laws to put fewer criminals behind bars.

The trap is this: California voters want criminals locked up, as they demonstrated again last year when they overwhelmingly passed an initiative that toughened sentences for sex offenders. So they’re generally against loosening the sentencing laws. But at the same time, they also oppose spending any more of the state’s tax money to build more prisons, according to polls.

So what are legislators to do? The enormity of the prison system’s ills makes inaction no longer viable. Prison facilities are packed to twice their intended capacity, California has the country’s highest recidivism rate, and the $8-billion corrections budget is already the third-largest spending category. Failure to take action will probably mean a takeover of the prison system by the courts.

Crime has long been the most dangerous third rail in California politics. The 1993 abduction and murder of 12-year-old Polly Klaas by a repeat felon triggered a wave of public fear and anger. The following year, the "three strikes" law, mandating a 25-years-to-life sentence for a third felony conviction, overwhelming passed.

Lately, there have been some small indications that attitudes might be changing, and that voters might be willing to rethink their views. Crime statewide is down -- so perhaps the sentencing reform won’t seem quite so scary -- and support for more prison spending is growing, though it remains a distinctly minority view.

A survey last month by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California found that just 34% of the public support more prison funding, with nearly two-thirds opposing it. And even if the state received unexpected revenue, 57% of likely voters would still oppose spending the money on prison construction. But the survey also indicated a shift in attitudes. Respondents were asked whether state funding on prisons should be increased, remain the same or be cut. Roughly one-third of likely voters fell into each category. That’s a significant change from, say, January 2005, when the survey found that just 13% of voters supported an increase in prison spending and nearly half favored a cut in the prison budget.

Less encouraging for politicians is the fact that the survey data indicate that the key swing-voter groups in California are most opposed to new prison spending. Independent voters, a rising category, are more likely to oppose the idea than either Democrats or Republicans.

And while opposition to more money for prisons crossed nearly every demographic category, the most negative findings were from middle- and upper-income households and from those in the San Francisco Bay Area. By contrast, the issue was nearly divided in Los Angeles, as it was among Latinos and lower-income households.

Lawmakers appear frozen by a cynical political calculation. They could step onto the third rail by approving a plan that would boost prison spending and reconsider criminal sentences for nonviolent criminals. Or they could allow the crisis to escalate by doing nothing, and then try to blame a federal judge for it.

"Some . . . have suggested to me, ‘Just let the governor do it,’ " state Sen. Gloria Romero (D-Los Angeles) said at a recent news conference. "Sit back and wait. Others have said, ‘Just let the courts do it.’ I reject both of those approaches."

In December, Romero joined Schwarzenegger to announce an $11-billion plan to expand the bed capacity of the corrections system by building more prisons and to create a commission that would consider new sentencing laws.

****

But the time and political capital the governor wants to spend on universal healthcare, new public works projects and political reform, among other initiatives, may leave little to invest in fixing the corrections system. And the same goes for the Legislature, which last year rejected Schwarzenegger’s $9-billion proposal to build more prisons.

The solution to the political crisis will take a public education campaign to remind voters that overhauling the state’s criminal justice system by building more prisons and redoing sentencing and parole laws is a tough-on-crime position. The new money is not being spent to coddle criminals. Also, to reject an overhaul is to put public safety at greater risk.

The growing public support for more funding of prisons suggests that voters are increasingly aware of the financial cost of the tough-on-crime policies they support.

National polls also indicate that voters recognize that a lack of rehabilitation programs will make crime worse. More than 60% of respondents in a Zogby poll last year said it was "very important" that inmates released from prison have access to job training, mental health services, mentoring and family assistance.

The last year in Sacramento was widely described as one of the most productive in years because Schwarzenegger and the Legislature set aside political differences to achieve bipartisan compromises on several major issues. So far this year, the political mood in the Capitol seems to be more conducive to compromise than stalemate.

The prison crisis is a crucial test for government. If it’s not addressed and dangerous criminals are released, politicians will deserve the outrage from a public that was just starting to think things had gotten better.

New America Survey Shows Overwhelming Support for California Citizens Assembly

Communications — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 04:32:00 -0500

Contact: Steven Hill (415-6655044) or David Lesher (916-448-3721)

The poll analysis, survey questions and results are available for download in PDF format.

SACRAMENTO, CA – As Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger calls for more competition in elections, a survey commissioned by the New America Foundation finds that nearly three-quarters of California voters would like to see the governor and the Legislature create a citizen’s panel to explore ideas for making the state’s election process more fair and competitive. If lawmakers did not convene the panel, two-thirds said they would vote for an initiative to create one.

The findings identified overwhelming demand for better elections, as the governor and other leaders have sought to achieve through an independent redistricting proposal. Nearly 70% of respondents said they are unsatisfied with the quality of candidates on the ballot and they "often feel [they] are voting for the lesser of two evils." More than three out of four voters also said the system favors Democrat and Republican candidates and is unfair to independents or minor party candidates. And nearly 60% said the system needs improvement and that government would perform better if a wider variety of candidates were elected.

But the poll also suggests that voters don’t trust politicians to set the rules for their own elections and they are much more confident in citizen-based solutions. About 70% of the poll respondents said they would be more likely to support the recommendations of an average citizens panel as opposed to government or political leaders. Just 10% were more likely to support government recommendations. Voters also were more likely to support a recommendation from an average citizens panel than one composed of independent experts.

"The biggest problem for political reform may not be the message, but the messenger. People don't trust politicians to design their own election system," said Steven Hill, director of the Political Reform Program at New America Foundation, which sponsored the survey. "The poll findings suggest a highly popular method for improving California’s electoral system and creating a government with a wider variety of lawmakers and more public confidence," Hill said.

The support for citizen recommendations was also reflected in the reaction to a citizen-based reform model that was used recently in British Columbia (Canada). Nearly 73% of respondents said California should repeat the British Columbia model, where 160 voters were randomly selected to participate in a year-long evaluation of their democracy. At the conclusion, the recommendations of the panel – known as a Citizens Assembly – were placed on the ballot for all voters to decide.

Under the Citizens Assembly model, average California voters could recommend improvements to the state’s election process, possibly including an independent redistricting commission, open primaries, campaign finance reform or alternative election methods. The survey found a majority of voters across the state already support two alternative election methods – Instant Runoff Voting or Proportional Voting.

Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) has been used in San Francisco to elect local offices since 2004. Under the plan, voters are allowed to rank their first, second and third choices for each office. The second and third choice rankings are used to elect majority winners in a single election if no candidate receives more than 50% (a majority) of the first choice rankings. The idea is designed to encourage a wider variety of viable candidates, discourage negative campaigning and save taxpayer money by eliminating traditional runoff elections. On Nov. 7, Oakland voters overwhelming passed Instant Runoff Voting with 69% of the vote, and Davis voters passed it with 55%.

Nearly 52% of the poll respondents liked the idea of ranking their choices for elected office. Support for the idea increased to 59% if voters thought it would discourage negative campaigns and to 70% if it would save taxpayer money.

A similar majority in the poll supported Proportional Voting, which also uses ranked choices as well as multiple seat districts to help elect a wider variety of candidates and give voters more viable choices on election day.

The survey was commissioned by New America Foundation and conducted by the Survey and Policy Research Institute in San Jose. It interviewed a random sample of 600 registered California voters who had cast ballots in at least one of the last four elections or who were newly registered to vote. These voters are referred to as active voters. The Surveys were conducted Nov. 27-30 in English and Spanish by EMH Opinions of Sacramento. The statistical margin of error for the survey, at the 95% confidence level, is plus or minus 4 percentage points.

The poll analysis, survey questions and results are available for download in PDF format.

About the New America Foundation:

The New America Foundation, based in Sacramento and Washington, is a nonprofit, nonpartisan policy institute that aims to bring new voices and ideas into the policy debate. With support from the James Irvine Foundation, the Political Reform Program aims to identify and develop the best opportunities for political and electoral reform, educate opinion leaders and the public about electoral alternatives, and encourage the formation of a broad-based coalition for reform.

More information about the poll and about Instant Runoff Voting, Proportional Voting and Citizens Assembly can be found at www.newamerica.net/politicalreform.

California Event: Health Care Reform

Communications — Wed, 06 Dec 2006 02:00:00 -0500

A New America Event
12/05/2006 - 8:00am

Governor Schwarzenegger has said that the top goal he will announce next year is to expand health insurance coverage to all Californians. This half-day conference was designed to provide him and others with fresh answers to the hard questions of how coverage expansion can be financed and how responsibility could be shared among families, employers, and government.

Presenters ranged from state officials, private employers, health policy advocates, as well as experts from academia, think tanks, and international consulting firms. California's… more

ABC Affiliate Interviews David Lesher on California Health Coverage

Communications — Wed, 06 Dec 2006 00:15:00 -0500

ABC's KGO-TV featured David Lesher, director of New America's California Program, in a recent piece on Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA).

Excerpts from the transcript appear below. For the complete article, and to watch the news clip, please visit the ABC News website.

KGO - State lawmakers got an earful today from Governor Schwarzenegger as he unveiled his plans for the new term. While new legislators are still learning their way around the capitol, the governor made it clear he thinks there should be more new members.

Governor Schwarzenegger unveiled today the first major proposal of his 2007 agenda - it's to have an independent citizen group redraw political district lines. He's unhappy that in the last three state elections, only four out of 459 congressional and legislative seats changed parties.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger: "That is evidence of a system that has become unresponsive and is stuck in a status quo. We must bring competition back to the political process."

The governor's anxiously-awaited plan to provide health coverage to California's more than 6,000,000 uninsured is still in the works though.

Just today, a think tank group called the New America Foundation held a forum on the importance of tackling the problem as soon as… more

David Lesher Discusses Redistricting in San Jose Mercury News

Communications — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 19:39:00 -0500

SACRAMENTO - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is signaling that he will push strongly for redistricting reform next year to change California's gerrymandered election process, relying on the same bipartisan course he steered successfully this year.

Voters rejected the governor's redistricting ballot initiative in last year's special election. Legislative leaders were unable to work out a deal in time for this November's vote, but there appears to be renewed interest from both parties to fix a flawed system...

Doolittle rejected any approach that would involve retired judges, such as Schwarzenegger's failed initiative from a year ago, Proposition 77. Under that plan, a panel of three retired judges would draw new districts.

Other proposed schemes involve commissions of voters chosen at random by the secretary of state's office or panels comprised of partisans and independents.

All those ideas are up for discussion in the next legislative session, said David Lesher, head of the New America Foundation's California program, which has lobbied for reforms. But he said even with the most nonpartisan deal, it's likely that only 10 to 15 percent of California's legislative and congressional seats would be competitive.

"California's so balkanized, with concentrations of Democrats in urban areas and concentrations of Republicans in rural areas, there will… more