Congressman McNerney hits the Manteca street.

Congressman Jerry McNerney surfaced at the "street faire" in central Manteca and met with and spoke to people on the street. He didn't stray too far from the booth being run by the Democratic Party and I got to ask a few questions!

First, despite having political differences, mainly caused by the fact that he's a democrat, I have to respect that he has the courage to just meet people on the public street and discuss political issues. That's got to be tough! You never know which type of crackpot you might meet next.

I think he was well briefed for my questions, with one exception. I'll get to that.

There are some photos of the congressman at the event here. I wish I'd gotten a picture with the congressman. Maybe I was afraid to let anyone hold my camera although most of the people there seemed friendly even though they were democrats.


I was introduced to the congressman as "the guy who gives the school board hell." I guess that's a nice intro. (I'm thinking "ya heard a me?") So then the congressman launched into the party line about how we don't value education enough (meaning we don't spend enough) yada yada... I had to interject that education is so important that we have to stop wasting money on and forcing everyone to attend failing government run schools. When I mentioned I'm in favor of "school choice" the congressman chuckled at that and we agreed that was a discussion for another day.

This is a good reason to always keep with you a list of "the questions you want to ask a politician should you ever meet one." Like, if you met President Bush today, or this minute, what would you ask? Or the governor? A city councilman? Whoever.

So, working from the list, I hit him with the #1 question I've been meaning to ask a democratic congressman: "We (well, not me, but that's beside the point) voted for you (the democrats) to end a war, and all we got was an increase in the minimum wage!?"

He picked up on the minimum wage comment first. He asked if I'm an "employer" or a business owner? This is typical in California -- no one wants to give their viewpoint until they figure out what you probably want to hear. So I just said "well lets just say I'm some guy" (probably a safe bet). And I asked "Why don't I have the right to my own labor? Like, if I want to work or do a thing for five dollars an hour, why shouldn't that be my right?"

He went on to the classic defense of the "minimum wage" which I don't have to repeat here except I think it involved "helping" some mysterious "little guy" by some vague means. This is the mistake of confusing the intention of a law with what it actually does. There's not a single economist who will say the minimum wage helps anyone more than it harms.

So when he finished explaining how he's trying to help the little guy with the minimum wage, I then asked "but those policies hurt the little guy..." and he asked "how so" and looked at me like he'd never heard such blasphemy before. I launched into a short explanation that if someone doesn't have the skills to produce above some arbritrary minimum level the law says you may not hire that person. And that doesn't "help" the little guy. He suggested that any job should be able to pay a certain minimum amount. This of course is nonsense, but it was time to get back to the main point.

What about that "war" going on? He explained how "we just don't have the votes" to end the war. He did say something about how terrible the war was and how much it was costing, the American lives lost, etc. (the party line again.) I asked him, "apart from the cost in American dollars and American lives, what about the cost in human life?" He looked around, wary that anyone would see him express sympathy for non-American human life, but he did nod and say yes. I got the feeling this was the only unscripted part of our whole talk. It's pretty sad when you can't even express the view that we shouldn't be making war on peoples who've never done any harm to us and not be afraid of criticism from someone who will call you "soft on terrorists" or whatever the concern was.

Quickly going through that list, I brought up issues of "home mortgages" and foreclosures and "bailing out" huge multi-billion dollar investment banks. I told him I didn't think it was fair to take money from ordinary careful people to give it to either people who entered into a home mortgage unwisely or to bail out multi-billionaires. He said we had to prevent "the larger collapse of the economy!" I would have challenged that crazy notion but that was about enough grilling for one day.

At this point, his assistant looked a little antsy so I decided skip over immigration, "energy policy," and medicine and finish with the election. He mentioned he's a "super delegate" for the Democratic Party and when I asked who he was favoring for president, he made a zipper to the lips type motion and said he wasn't saying.


Later, the congressman spoke to City Councilman Jack Snyder, about what I'm not sure because I was reluctant to get close enough to hear for fear some political critical mass may occur at any minute.


Next former mayor and now newspaper publisher Carlon Perry raked the congressman for not doing anything to help the people, going back to Washington DC and "forgetting all about the people you represent." The congressman did say something about how it's amazing that DC is all about some kind of quest for power and said it was astounding what happens to people there. And somehow this was related to the republicans I think. Another little lesson here is that I wish I'd spent more time carefully listening.

My general impression? Congressman McNerney reminded me of historical accounts I've read of how members of congress would have barbecues and meet with and speak with people at home gatherings and such. Democracy in action! It's unfortunate he's ignorant of economics and how certain policies hurt "little people" but so far as representation in Washington goes we could do worse. I guess.

Lathrop mayor not so hot on criticism

Lathrop, CA -- Mayor Sayles threw G.R. out of the Lathrop City Council meeting last night.

(I wasn't at the meeting -- photos are from my file of "pictures of officials scowling at someone at meetings")

G.R. evidently didn't like that some guy who was trying to sell his "development" to the city was allowed to ramble on for about 20 minutes. Normally comments (from everyone) are limited to three or five minutes depending on if it's an agenda item or not.

G.R. asked to speak and then accused the council of giving favor to "the developer" and suggested that maybe it was because "developers" had contributed in a big way to Mayor Sayles' campaign. The mayor declared/ruled/decreed that wasn't the kind of thing anyone should be allowed to say and not only told her to cease but also had law enforcement remove her from the meeting! (I don't know if she yelled "Seize her!" or not)

According to press reports and public election records, firms that build home and office buildings (or "developers") had given money to the mayor's campaign (and "developers" have given money to nearly every elected official.) The part that apparently didn't sit well with Her Honor was the suggestion / opinion / criticism that these campaign contributions somehow shaded her fairness or objectivity. A mere plebe dares utter such words? Silence!!

Under California open meeting law any person is permitted to criticize public officials. Even in public. The Lathrop City Council has a "no personal attacks" rule printed on the "request to speak form," as do a lot of these councils and school boards. As for when and how the council adopted this rule and how they interpret it is a bit of a mystery. There are a few court cases interpreting this law too, and they make it pretty clear that just because something may be "not what the official likes to hear" that doesn't make it a "personal attack."

Those cases are here: Baca v. Moreno Valley Unified School Dist., 936 F. Supp. 719 (C.D. Cal. 1996); and Leventhal v. Vista Unified School Dist., 973 F. Supp. 951 (S.D. Cal. 1997).

moonrise

This is what the moon looked like when it rose tonight. It was already half obscured by the earth's shadow.

There was quite a bit of interest in the neighborhood!

And after the moon moved into the shadow completely, this is about what it looked like (this photo is with the color balanced "locked" on daylight, so the reddish color is pretty much how it looked.):

Youngsters enjoy Stockton Opera

We were pleasantly surprised by the Stockton Opera Company's performance of Madama Butterfly. It was performed at the Faye Spanos Concert Hall in Stockton. The voices were all outstanding and the orchestra, though small, did a yeoman's job. The guy on the drums was especially enthusiastic.

I noted from The Record article that "the audience for opera in San Joaquin County... has been aging and shrinking." Judging from the audience at Sunday's performance, this observation seemed confirmed.

Well, we went with two enthusiastic youngsters aged 10 and 14. A few we met there spoke with us and more than one was curious how we were able to "get" the youngsters to come out to the opera. (i.e. how were we able to drag kids to the opera or how did we "get them interested" in the opera?) The nature of the implied question reveals a fundamental misunderstanding about both classical music and young people.

In fact, the kids begged us to take them. Surprised? Read on...

The simple answer to the question is that young people love the opera and classical music! That probably sounds surprising to some. We think we live in a new age of iPods and Internets and mp3's, and that youngsters can't possibly be interested in something like the opera. But I don't believe that. There are several lines of evidence for this belief I won't go into depth about here; but briefly I've read movie review forums and often someone would remark how this or that movie wouldn't interest young people because it was "slow" or "boring" and didn't have enough explosions, etc. And invariably, a young person, someone like 15 years old or so would remark that is was one their favorite movies. Likewise with classical music and opera.

One fellow during the intermission did express concern that we (they) weren't doing a very good job at passing on the love of opera to the next generation. So, I thought I'd share with you "Joe's tips for how to pass on the love of great music:"

Joe's tips:

First, and most important, don't ever assume for one second that a child won't like classical music. This is simply not so. I can't say every kid will instantly love the opera or classics, but to assume "they won't like this" is the worst mistake you can make. You've lost your connection with the next generation before you even start if you believe that! In my experience, in almost every case young people find something appealing about classical music.

Start by introducing classical music when they are young. Have recordings playing in your home. In the modern world, if you have computer (and I presume you do if you're reading this, duh), there's a vast amount of music of all types available to you. If you're a cheapskate, you can stream classical music for free.

Of course, it helps if you have a love of classical music and "know something about it." However, if you don't, it's never too late to start. The secret is knowing that classical music varies widely, some is hard to listen to (so don't) and some is readily accessible. So start googling for what's good.

We found the kids loved the videotapes and DVD's of operas, particularly Puccini. When the kids were just "hanging out" we would pop in a DVD of Turandot or Madama Butterfly. Without any fanfare, and without any lectures on how you should watch this, you should like this, how much better this music is than that stuff they listen to today is, etc. Just let it play and see who's drawn in. It helps if you know something of the story and can relate it to the modern world when they ask -- and they will.

Which leads to the next important tip: Never denigrate your kids music or "the stuff they listen to." Instead, ask about their music. Who's that singing? What band is that? What's your favorite? Or "what's the popular thing kids at school listen to?" I asked that and to my horror, the answers were things like "My Humps" and "My Chemical Romance." However, avoid the urge to make a face or degrade that choice in any way. We've been through this "generation gap" thing before. In my view, we should be thankful if your child shares with you. So appreciate it! Every generation listens to music their parents hate. Just accept that. It's fine. There's no reason to make a "choice." Kids don't have to give up their music or make any choices, they can like both modern music and the classics.

Lemme digress a bit with another example...

I used to annoy my brother, who didn't have the slightest inclination or appreciation for classical music, by setting the buttons on his car radio (in the family van) to the classical music stations. I had to do it a few times, which of course annoyed him to no end, but fortunately, his wife liked the idea so I had an ally. After a few years of complaining to the family how they should never let me sit in the front seat because "he'll change the buttons on the radio." (I actually only changed the last button, the one to the extreme right so it would be easy to find) one day he said to everyone at the family dinner that something odd had happened. The youngest, a toddler, had asked when they were driving around to put "that music that feels (something I can't recall)?" And he was perplexed by the request and went through the buttons till he found the one, as you can probably guess, was the one I had set on the classical music station. She exclaimed "that's it." He was shocked by this. I wasn't.

Now I can't promise this to everyone, I think this is a quirk, but that child, just a few years later, started playing classical music on the piano. I mean, without ever taking lessons. And she was like 5 or 6 years old. And she played with some astounding skill. It was like some kind of thing you see in the movies about an idiot savant, except that she was otherwise normal. When dad asked "how do you know how to play like that?" She responded, "I can just 'see' (or feel) the notes in my head" or something to that effect. And as she grew, her talent advanced 'till she was some kind of world class pianist. I don't know if she'll ever be famous or anything, but I found it a fascinating event and a great source of pride for her parents. Guess what, I never had to explain or apologize for messing with the car radio buttons that's for sure.

To be fair, the other child didn't do any such thing, and I've never seen this phenomenon in any other child since then even if they were exposed to classical music. So I speculate it was some pre-disposition of talent that she had. But I wonder, would it ever have expressed itself had she not been exposed to classical music? You never know, maybe you have the next budding Mozart in your family!

But I digress...back to the opera

Jackie wondered if the girls were interested in Madama Butterfly because, well, they were girls and it's the story of a young girl, etc. Maybe. So that got me thinking, what would be some good classics for boys? I wouldn't rule out Butterfly or Turandot. (stories of Yankee imperialism and a heroic prince who fights the odds and gets the girl) But also, maybe something like Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture, maybe Prokofiev's Peter and the Wolf? And for an opera, maybe La Fanciulla del West? Heheh. Yes, that's some stereotypes. (The story of war, hunting trips, and a "western" about an outlaw set in gold rush California). I'm sure there are others, maybe some of you have some suggestions? Share them here!

Happy New Year

Is Manteca adding a new firehouse?

Are they really adding a fourth fire station? Here's a map showing the current fire station (the red blob on the right) and the proposed "new" fire station (circled in red on the left). Personally, I have my doubts, but we'll see.



One thing still raises some doubt -- why did the fire chief talk about how the new station will cover the 2,000 or so homes not currently within the 5 minute response time window, and then add that there might be "200 or so homes" (on the east side of town) that will become just outside the 5 minute area? Why would that be so? Wouldn't that only occur if the eastern station was closed? (i.e. the 200 homes in the 5 min. range now -- how will they become out of range unless a fire station is closed?) hmmmm.


Correct me if I've misinterpreted something or leave a comment.

Council wrap up

Last night's city council meeting had some issues that I thought I'd note here.

1. The "memorandum of understanding" for the police union was presented. Check out the raises involved here. There are eleven raises, ranging from 2 to 7.5 percent over the five years (about two raises each year, one in January and one in July.) Two of the raises in years 3 and 4 are unspecified, but may be up to 7.5 percent each and based on some "study" of what other cities are paying their people. How much you want to bet they pick 4 or 5 cities that pay a lot to compare us with?

Just the listed raises turn out to be about a 37 percent increase over the five years. And the two unspecified raises could increase that more, maybe a lot more. The part that I find interesting is that if you do a back of the envelope kind of calculation, if you assume the fire depart will has gotten a similar contract, you find the added costs for payroll is just about $3.9 million. The Measure M tax was estimated to "bring in" about $4 million! So, more or less, the Measure M tax wasn't for "improved public safety" it has gone to lavish pay raises.

And this isn't even considering the two unspecified raises. My guess is whatever money happens to be left in any department or in any source will be used up by the unspecified raises. But maybe I'm too cynical.