Your paper has had lots of articles the past few weeks
on public pensions, bargaining rights and other public
employee issues. However, I have not seen any articles
on a current election that should help shape all of
That election is the election of statewide and local
officer for SEIU 1000. I am guessing that the reason there are no articles
about the nomination part of the election which ended
recently is due to the fact that like many third world
countries, SEIU 1000 has extremely limited the number of members that it
lets run for any of these offices.
Last year, the governing council for SEIU 1000 voted to only allow members who have been stewards
for the last two years to run for statewide office.
This limited the number of possible candidates to probably
to a 1,000 or so of the almost 100,000 people that SEIU represents. They did this to ensure
that members that do not think like the current leadership
would not get a chance to change things. Public employees
and their unions are under attack on many fronts; this just adds ammunition to those opposed to the
I was a steward for 5 years from 1995-2000 and a chapter President from 1995-1998. However, I do not meet the new requirements to run
for any SEIU 1000 leadership positions.
Many other members that do not agree with how the union
is run cannot voice their opposition. This is just
one more reason that many of the state employees SEIU
represents don’t even like them. SEIU needs a greater diversity of
opinions in their leadership, not less.
This is as bad as it gets. The California Department
of Fish and Game thinks that we, the taxpayers, and
interested citizens, can't see through their smokescreens
or tell fool's gold from the real deal.
The Department is again campaigning to expand the number
of California bears that can be killed during the hunting
season by approximately 20% despite the overwhelming objection to this by state
residents. (See my prior call to action piece that describes this
cruel and unsportsmanlike activity http://bit.ly/icDFsi ) While trying to allow more bears to be killed, this
same department is simultaneously bragging about their
efforts to rehabilitate a few bear cubs orphaned by
- yes - hunters! Once the babies are of the appropriate age
to be hunted they will be released to the wild to be
such a target.
They are essentially fattening those baby bears for
slaughter. Did they think that we would not notice?
Did they think that we would be so blinded by the image
of cuddly, carousing cubs to not see the manipulating,
sinister hand behind their self-congratulatory press releases? We are not so easily
distracted by shiny objects.
I concur with my colleagues' piece in the San Francisco
Chronicle http://bit.ly/exhOBs with one exception. I don't think we should
praise them for these acts but rather bury them with
demands not to expand the hunting numbers. I also believe
every single resident of California should also contact
Jerry Brown, our new governor http://gov.ca.gov/m_contact.php and ask for a top to bottom review of the
entire Department of Fish and Game and its impotent
President, Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals, Los Angeles