Fresno, CA

The Center for Air Quality and Transit Technology of Central California (CATTCC) conducted a ten year study on the viability of a light rail system for the Fresno area. The study found CyberTran (a lightweight, electric train system) to be “most suitable for Central California’s transit needs.” CyberTran uses a large number of small vehicles, and operates on elevated guide ways. It can operate on speeds of 35mph to 150 mph.

According to the CATTCC’s study, CyberTran would “operate along the highest density corridors throughout the Fresno metropolitan area, taking advantage of existing light-rail Rights-of-Ways.” A CyberTran system would “boost Amtrak ridership” by providing access to Fresno’s Amtrak station.

The Study points out Amtrak is the only rail system which “services the entire Central Valley.” The bus system in Fresno, the largest town in the Central Valley, is limited, and the distance between Fresno and other towns rules out walking or riding bikes. “People have no functional transportation alternative other than driving automobiles.”

A Fresno area CyberTran system would provide many benefits, namely reducing “dangerous toxic air quality levels in the San Joaquin Valley.” It would also reduce the amount of auto accidents and lessen traffic congestion.

During a mid-July press conference Fresno Mayer Alan Autry said the Running Horse Project will spur development in West Fresno, an area long neglected by developers. In other words Autry is advocating Reagan style “trickle-down” economics. The present president George W. Bush also believes in and practices trickle-down economics. In an interesting bit of irony, Bush’s father, the former president George H.W. Bush, disparagingly called it “voo-doo economics.”

The problem with trickle-down economics is that it does not trickle down. Since President George W. Bush took office in January 2001 the income disparities between the richest and the poorest have increased. For the first time, everyone on the 2006 Forbes 400 list was a billionaire. The 2005 Forbes 400 list contained 374 billionaires, with a combined net worth of $1.13 trillion. No new editions were added to the 2005 list. Steve Forbes, Forbes magazine publisher, did not make the list because his net worth is only $400 million.

According to the National Poverty Center, poverty has increased over the last four years. Data from the Internal Revenue Service on 2005 income revealed that the bottom 99 percent of wage earners gained less than one percent, and the top one percent gained 14 percent. A December 2005 Congressional Research Service report found that per capita income in the San Joaquin Valley is lower than in Central Appalachia.

The U.S. Census Bureau revealed that between 2000 and 2005 the percentage of Americans living at half of the poverty level income increased by 26 percent. The poverty-level income for a family of three (two adults and one child) is $6,922. For a family of four it is $10,222, and for an individual, $5,250.

A 2004 study by UC Berkeley professor Emmanuel Saez reported that the income of the median household in 2004 only increased by 1.6 percent. During the 1998 to 2001 period it increased by 9.5 percent.

The industrialized nation with the most unequal distribution of income is the United States, according to a 2003 article in the journal Vital Signs. Only 1.8 percent of the wealth in the U.S. goes to the poorest 10 percent. After adjusting for inflation, the tenth percentile of family income is almost the same today as it was in 1979: about $13,500. Thirty million Americans live on less.

In the words of West Fresno developer Donald Sims, “All that’s going to benefit [from Running Horse] is the affluent. It’s not going to benefit the poor black guy, the poor Mexican guy, the poor Hmong guy, and when they have the little PGA tour over there, who’s gonna go to it, but the affluent?”

Donald Trump, the world-famous mogul, first expressed interest in the Running Horse Project in June. Running Horse consists of 420 acres slated to become a PGA golf course and contain 780 high-end houses. Only two holes have been completed. The previous owner ran out of money and sold it to Mike Evans in March, who filed for bankruptcy protection.

The Trump Organization has 13 requests concerning purchasing Running Horse. Three of the requests concern property around the project:

• Remove all internal houses- buy out the holdouts at “fair market value.”
• Buy out and re-zone entire area around course.
• Establish a one (1) mile perimeter around the property to be classified as a redevelopment
zone.

The trouble with Trump’s requests is that the area around Running Horse is not zoned for redevelopment. The Williamson Act of 1965 allowed private landowners to enter into contracts with local governments in order to restrict “specific parcels of land to agricultural or related open space use,” according to California’s Division of Land Resource Protection. (http://www.consrv.ca.gov/DLRP/lca/index.htm)

The area would have to be designated as a redevelopment zone in order for the city to use eminent domain to seize the land around the project from private landowners. Basically, the Williamson Act would have to be amended.

The Supreme Court set a precedent in 2005 by ruling the local government could use eminent domain to seize private property in New London, CT for economic development. The Court found that “Promoting economic development is a traditional and long accepted governmental function.” The Court rejected the plaintiff’s argument that “economic development does not quality as a public use,” and a “reasonable certainty” be required that the public would benefit from the planned redevelopment.

First elected in 2004, Rep. Jim Costa was re-elected in 2006. GovTrack.us considers Costa to be a “moderate Democrat.” The Sunlight Foundation, a group of citizen researchers, evaluated Costa’s website in February 2007 to see if he provided information on his legislative activities and personal finances and travel. He received a rating of 40 out of 100, with a 40 considered passing.

Costa voted yes on a June 2006 resolution which declared Iraq is part of the war on terror without an exit date. He voted in May against redeploying troops out of Iraq beginning in 90 days from the passage of the bill. However, in February he voted for a resolution which disapproved of the troop surge. During deliberations for the resolution, Costa said, “I believe America is less safe today than it was before the 9/11 attacks. And as violence in Iraq climbs and the costs continue to soar, we need a new direction in Iraq in a bipartisan fashion.”

Costa record on health care is consistent. He helped enact low cost health care insurance for children in November 2004. He voted yes on a January measure which required Medicare to negotiate prescription prices, and voted against a February 2006 measure which denied non-emergency treatment for patients who could not pay the Medicare co-pay.

However, Costa’s record on the environment is inconsistent. In June 2006 Costa voted yes on increasing AMTRAK funding, but voted against barring a website which promoted a nuclear waste dump in Yucca Mountain. He voted for deauthorizing critical habitats for endangered species in September 2005.

As with the environment, Costa’s record on energy is inconsistent. He voted against criminalizing oil cartels in May, but in January he voted for removing oil and gas exploration subsidies. In 2006 he voted against keeping a moratorium on off-shore drilling, but voted against scheduling permits for new oil refineries. In 2005 he voted against authorizing new oil refineries to be constructed.

DEVIN NUNES

What are the important national issues? In a January 2007 poll 59% rated the war in Iraq as an extremely important issue facing America. A February 2007 poll revealed 91% believed health care in America needs reforming. Gas prices remain high across the country, and are highest in California. Two weeks ago Live Earth concerts highlighted the importance of taking care of the environment.

The next few posts will look at the voting record of Fresno area U.S. representatives (Devin Nunes, George Radanovich, and Jim Costa) concerning the Iraq war, health care, energy, and the environment.

Elected in 2002 to California’s 21st congressional district, Rep. Devin Nunes voted for the use of military force against Iraq in October 2003. Despite opinion polls which cite public support for pulling troops out of Iraq as hovering at around 68 percent, Nunes still backs President Bush’s troop surge.

During the hearing for a Democratic House resolution which included redeploying troops from Iraq, Nunes called it “intellectually dishonest” and declared, “Iraq is the battleground…a key battleground against extremism, terrorism and the expansionist goals of our enemies.” Nunes failed to mention the lies which caused the Congress to authorize a military invasion of Iraq, namely that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction and Saddam Hussein had ties to al-Qaeda.

Nunes received campaign contributions from the health care industry totaling $97,000 in 2006, $18,000 in 2004, and $86,650 in 2002. Not surprisingly, the American Public Health Association gave Nunes a 0% rating on his public health voting record. Nunes’ voting record on public health issues include a negative vote on a January 2007 House measure which required negotiating prescription prices for Medicare’s prescription plan.

Nunes voted yes on a February 2006 measure which denied non-emergency treatment for patients who could not pay the Medicare co-pay. He also voted yes on a May 2004 measure which limited prescription drug benefits for Medicare recipients, and voted no for another measure in July 2003 which would allow the prescription drugs to be imported from Canada.

The League of Conservation, the environmental movement’s political voice, rated Nunes 5% on environmental issues. Nunes voted yes on two measures environmentalists opposed: deauthorizing critical habitats for endangered species in September 2005, and speeding up the approval of forest thinning projects in November 2003.

Nunes has consistently sided with the oil industry. He voted no on criminalizing oil organizations like OPEC in May 2007. He also voted no on removing subsides for oil and gas exploration in January 2007, and on maintaining a ban on drilling for oil offshore in June 2006. He voted yes on scheduling permits for new oil refineries in June 2006, and on allowing new oil refineries to be constructed in October 2004.