TOP DOWN APPROACH
Last week Gavin Newsom gave a speech about California as part of his exploration of his chances for running for Governor. In the course of the event he spoke about the Bottom Up approach in dealing with major issues in the economy such as bringing back vegetable gardens in your back yard and even in the City Hall grounds to cut down on the transportation pollution to bring food to your table. However in reflection, we do not approach problems from the Bottom Up but in fact from the Top Down. It is leadership that (to risk redundancy) LEADS. The spreading out of a solution to a problem that involves the mass power of individual small efforts comes from leadership not from the bottom up.
We in California are faced with the breakdown in leadership and more critically the leadership structure of the state government that is no longer able to function as viewed from just about any neighborhood. What we need is to start to change things from The Top Down.
The legislature is divided into two parts with 40 officials in the Senate and 80 in the Assembly.This should be eliminated and reduced to a single chamber with 1 representative for each congressional district. That would cut the number of people involved by over 50%. While I am a firm believer that Government is the most expensive form of entertainment on the planet, clearly having more of these comedians does not increase the appeal of their jokes – or was that legislation? After all, if the state is to be basically dealt with in a series of party oriented divides we might as well have less people involved. Additionally by using the same districts we can begin to get uniformity in government and save on all the duplicate gerrymandering that goes on.
Remove the position of the Lt. Governor whose only real function is to serve when the Governor is absent, and replace him with the Leader of the new Representative Assembly that is elected by that body.
Then taking it from the top, we go down the entire chain of appointed officers and remove 50-60% of them. If there are 7 commissioners appointed to a panel, then we do only 3. This cuts down greatly on the available political patronage to the political party in power thus reducing their internal power politics and allow for that shocking concept of doing the people’s business to creep back into government service.
It all starts at the Top and then it can work its way down.
Edi Birsan
Hoping for Easy Does It government in my lifetime.
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
ARTICLE POSTER, EDI BIRSAN, REPLIES
First a little reality check to group Hitler and Stalin as ’socialist/communist leaders’ is to be ignorant of the difference between the economic structure of fascism and socialism and communism.
However when you just want to banter about with the names of dictators facts need not get in the way of a good political screed.
Second, the issue of approaching a problem from the top or the bottom has a totally different concept to some. Somehow a few people have skewed this to mean to there are commies under every comment.
That we have too many people in government and that they should be reduced is somehow seen as a communist take over. How funny to hear it from the Republicans who have been yelling smaller government for years.
What I have said is that I want to reduce the size of government starting from the top by removing over half the positions. Then starting from the top reduce the number of political appointees by an equal number if not more.
I can understand where this is a direct threat to the political parties both GOP and Democratic whose patronage to the party faithful is displayed in the assignment of those positions. I agree that it is threat to the political machines, and they deserve it.
I’m sure that Castro, Mao, Hitler, Stalin and other socialist/communist leaders would approve of the “Top-Down” approach in regards to the government structure too. After all, don’t they know what’s best for the masses?
I find it amusing that Newsom spoke about the Bottom Up approach in dealing with major issues in the economy such as bringing back vegetable gardens in your back yard and even in the City Hall grounds to cut down on the transportation pollution to bring food to your table.
I wasn’t aware that “vegetable gardens” were the answer to our economic woes. Maybe, this is Newsom’s plan to create jobs for the illegal aliens that reside in his sanctuary city? I mean, who would pick the fruit and vegetables at City Hall?
I appreciate Edi’s view that major changes need to take place but more and fairer representation is the answer, not less.
Californians, including Contra Costa residents are underrepresented in Congress and in the State Legislature.
Even the way we elect our representation insures that, in many cases, no majority winner is elected, only plurality “winners” who often are opposed by the majority of who voted for someone else.
Fiddling with bi-cameral or unicameral bodies does not address at all this basic foundational problem.
1. A very simple AND Constitutional approach would be for the Legislature to first enable all counties and municipalities, irregardless of charter status, to change their exsiting voting systems from simple plurality to at least Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) (e.g. CCSF District elections). This legislation has been on the docket over several sessions and needs to be put over the top.
So I ask Senator DeSaulnier and Assemblymembers Torlakson and Buchanan to work hard for passage of such a basic reform that at least makes it possible—whether or not a county or municipality chooses—to reform its undemocratic method of electing representation.
2. Then, voters in Alameda or Contra Costa will have to tear our elections away from special interests (including legislators and party hacks from both sides) who are very good at funding spoilers and gaming runoffs, and others invested in keeping an unfair, undemocratic, and ineffective voting system in place.
3. Then, after steps 1 and 2 are in place—when Californians are ready, organized and better educated on the issues of preference voting— a citizens convention OUGHT to simultaneously pass an INCREASE to the number of Assembly and Senate seats and DECREASE the number of districts in both houses; so that multi-member districts are created, elected by Single Transferable Voting (STV) (e.g. Cambridge MA elections).
Forget fundraising, term limits, redistricting by itself with out voting reform, voting machines that work worse than Vista, THESE changes WILL create districts that actually reflect their diversity in its representation instead of one party or another conniving and gerrymandering just to eke out a simple majority that gives power beyond actual voter support. Take it to the bank.
In this manner voters’ preferences are practically insured to produce a) majority winners, and b) your vote will elect someone that represents your interest.
Sure, this would be the mother of all redistricting conventions, but with hard work, will produce fuller representation, fairer voting methods, and more responsive and less polarized governing bodies in comparison to what California suffers from now where the extremes of two parties rule the majority and nothing gets done and rank and file are ignored.
The whole concept of “top-down” government just sickens me. They are supposed to be our representatives not “leaders”. This isn’t a corporation, we don’t exist at the “pleasure” of the state, this isn’t what America is about. This person has got it all wrong.
I do believe however there is quite a few people out there who believe this, simply because they are not educated in liberty and what made America great. The people is where its at. We need more grassroots organizing and come together on common principals. Too much time is spent “waiting for orders” from the top.
I agree with the basic notion of bottom-up vs. top-down organization. But I don’t agree with Edi Birsan’s prescriptions how to accomplish this. Further, I have a very hard time taking seriously anyone who suggests Gavin Newsom should be a source of inspiration for anything, except possibly for his recommended hair care products.
Birsan proposes to amend the California Constitution to create a unicameral legislature with fewer than half the current combined membership of the Senate and Assembly. How much face time, or even basic responsiveness to constituent concerns, do Contra Costans get now from our US Representatives George Miller, Ellen Tauscher and Jerry McNerney? My rep, George Miller, receives very low marks in this regard from me.
This is no recipe for improvement.