League News

Photo credits: Norma Schroder. The annual meeting was attended by about 40 members. Key votes were to approve the slate of directors for 2014-2015, raise dues to $75 for an individual and $110 for a household of two members, and to approve the 2014-15 budget

According to our luncheon speaker, Mary Hughes, only 20% of legislative leadership positions are held by women. Participation seems to be stuck at the level. Shouldn’t it be more like 50%? Mary believes such a body politic would be more collaborative, more productive, more civil and less polarized than the one we have now. See our article on her talk.

LWV-LAMV President Cathy Lazarus spoke on the themes from the National League Convention in Dallas that most resonated with her.  Stagnant and declining membership needs to be turned around by new member recruitment methods that can attract the under 45 and non-white population.  The more important political issues for voter engagement include money in politics, voter suppression and climate change.  Read our article on Cathy’s  full remarks here.

.

There was a surprise agenda item. Ellen Wheeler, representing the LWV California Board,  awarded Extraordinary Service recognition for outstanding work to the Higher Ed Study subcommittee. Lucas Ramirez, Abby Longcor, Pat Showalter (and Ellen Wheeler) all worked for 6 months to craft the scope for that new State Study. Without their perseverance there would be no new study.

Want to read about the startling genesis of the Higher Ed Study? It was conceived and incubated right here in our own LWV-LAMV League by  Lucas Ramirez and Max Beckman-Harned.

 

 

Pat Showalter introduced our speaker Mary Hughes.  Thanks to Pat Showalter and Carol Kuiper for recruiting Mary Hughes to be our lunch speaker.

Time to Eat

 

 

Here is one of the luncheon tables at Michaels at Shoreline restaurant in Mountain View. Left to right, Shirley Reseck, Pat Showalter, Paul Gilbert, Natalie Elefant, Abby Longcor, Martha McClatchie.

 

 

 

 

 

Another table of  guests at the annual business meeting luncheon. From left to right, Barbara Kyser, Marilyn Terman, Terry Terman, Judy Crates, Susan Graham, Linda Craig.

Time to Socialize

 

Donna Yobs, co-chair of the LWV-LAMV Housing committee chats with Mike Kasperzak about Donna’s favorite political issue – affordable housing. Katie Zoglin, LWV-LMV Director for Government listens on the left. Kasperzak suggested that the committee engage the Mountain View council in informal meetings, rather than just with formal “yellow card” statements/letters of League position addressed to the council.

 

Left to right, Donna Yobs, co-chair of the he LWV-LAMV Housing Committee listens as Margaret Capriles questions Mike Kaspernak. Steve Sherman, a LWV-LAMV Observer, volunteer listens.

Photo credits: Norma Schroder

 

 

Founder and close the gap, CA Board Member Mary V. Hughes* was guest speaker at the LWV-LAMVA’s Annual Meeting, held June 20, 2014, at Michael’s at Shoreline. The Mary Hughes talk was a stirring analysis of Women Leaders in  U.S. Politics and Corporate America.

Hughes Recognizes the League’s Contribution

Hughes thanked the League for its dedication to non-partisanship and encouraging the informed and active participation of citizens in government. She expressed concern that the disregard in which elected officials are held is a danger to the country. Hughes said that citizens count on the League to make the case that government matters and serving in government is a high calling. Where we live, people tend to be active and informed, but this is not the case around the country. Hughes urged the League to keep up its efforts, that all the ways the League can add to good governance and support for those who serve is to the good.

Women’s Participation Statistics – sadly a drop

Unfortunately, increasing the numbers of women serving in the California Legislature has lost ground. The numbers have dropped from a high of 31 to the current number of 26.

Hughes said that the bad news is that in any sector—law, medicine, academics, government—women hold only 18-23% of the leadership positions, the high of 23% being in academia. Women constitute only 18% in businesses among Fortune 500 companies.

“Through the decades of the Woman’s Movement, this percentage has not changed,” Hughes said. “This under-representation by women in these policy and leadership positions matters to all women and society.

Why Leadership Gender Makes a big difference in Outcomes

Research and good arguments reveal why it is important for more women to aim for leadership positions and be successful in achieving these positions in all walks of life.

Gender matters. Women in leadership roles add value to all enterprises where they serve.

Men and women differ, and this difference has value in solving problems, achieving goals, a better bottom line, avoiding fraud and corruption.

Examples In Business:

• Credit Suisse studies revealed the importance of gender balanced, decision making in investment. Gender balanced teams produced better returns. Gender balanced teams scored better in risk avoidance and consumer understanding.

• Carnegie Mellon studies found gender balanced teams were better at problem understanding and defining problems and had higher Emotional IQs.

Gender balanced boards have higher returns.

Examples In Politics:

• In the CA Legislature, 26% are women; in the US Congress, 18% are women. When women have a voice, their voices make a difference.

In 1992 the largest cohort of women were elected to Congress: Pat Schroeder, CO; Olympia Snow, ME and the presence of women in Congress changed the agenda.

• In the area of Women’s Health: Clinical trials now done in more diverse ways with better conclusions.

•Congresswoman Gabby Gifford: When she served on the Armed Services Committee, she pushed to learn the effects on soldiers and families when soldiers return from war and what support they need. Gifford helped change the agenda to the physical and mental health needs of returning soldiers and families; the effects on children. Because a woman served and asked these questions, returning soldiers were viewed through a different lens. Kristen Gillibrand’s presence on this committee has facilitated the focus on sexual assault, harassment in the military.”

How Women in Politics Differ

According to Hughes, women tend to be more open and transparent and are motivated more by a desire for public service versus a political career to amass power for power’s sake.

Women serving in the State Legislature encourage other groups who are underrepresented such as people of color, immigrants, the gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual community to approach women as portals and gateways to inclusiveness.

Women say ethics matter. Nancy Pelosi, the first woman Speaker of the House, formalized ethics standards for Congress.

When women are present, they tend to create more open avenues toward collaborative solutions vs picking one solution.

“Women tend to collaborate and co-sponsor more legislation than men and generate more tax dollars for their district,” Hughes said. “If you are represented by a woman in Congress, she delivers $47 million more in government assistance and other benefits to your district than her male counterpart.”

Hughes said that women fought hard that birth control and benefits for children were included in the Affordable Care Act (ACA). When Congresswoman Eshoo learned that reconstructive breast surgery had not been a covered procedure, but was viewed as a cosmetic or optional procedure, her efforts resulted in reconstructive breast surgery as a covered procedure.

Women in politics are more civil

Women’s Tutorial in the Senate: The 4 Republican and 16 Democratic women senators meet for dinner once a month. They collaborate and have made a commitment not to speak ill of each other. They are committed to maintaining civil respect in public. This coalition is largely responsible for passage of the current budget and the farm bill.

“The collaboration and work of these women are making a positive difference with just 20% of the body,” Hughes said. “Think what value added if women were serving in Congress and State houses in equal numbers. Get a glimpse of how good and great the country could be, at home and aboard, if legislatures could be opened up and inclusive.”

Hughes again thanked the League and asked us to think about the value added by women and how that can work in implementing the LWV agenda. She urged us to think about how we can better take credit and be more forceful in leadership, be more present and set a standard others want to live up to.

Getting Out the Women’s Vote

Hughes said that women have everything at stake in these elections. (Large numbers of women are heads of households and single moms supporting children.) Hughes said that it is critically important that women take time to vote, to mail in their vote by mail ballot or take time off from work to vote or vote from the library.

“More women need to understand what is at stake in electing more women to office and lifting the 20% cap,” Hughes said. “Government sets the example. If women chaired the Judiciary Committee, we would not have all male committees, and this will lift the standards in the private sector also.

The rationale for electing women is so that there are enough women in leadership positions now so our daughters get to be in those leadership chairs. The 20% cap sits heavily on all heads. The best way to move history faster is electing more women in government.”

In conclusion, Hughes said, “Do what you are doing faster, bigger, louder.”

Q&A:

Q: How do we change the negative perception of women who are more assertive?

A: Over 15 years of study, the perception of assertive women is changing from assertiveness/toughness being off-putting to now when a woman who speaks out knowledgeably with compassion is perceived as strong rather than tough.

It is important to have wit and call things the way you see it, but contain flashes of anger, impatience. If people know your story, they will be more open to your views.
Q: What do you think about Sheryl Sandberg’s book, Lean In?

A: I have respect for anyone who wants to help women find their way to leadership. I recommend Anne Marie Slaughter’s article titled “Why Women Still Can’t Have it All” which appeared in the July/August 2012 issue of The Atlantic. : More women leaders make a more compassionate society.

Unfortunately, US society is not structured to value family the way we pretend to value family. What work requires and the way we think of success make it difficult to accommodate family and get to the top.

Q: What about studies that show women prefer male bosses? Women do not always support other competent women.

A: A recent study showed 15% of women felt a woman is not ready to be President, but that perception is changing.

A Governors’ study showed older women delayed making up their mind whom to vote for until the last minute. Boomer women, aged 46-68, are mostly ok with women leaders. But a younger cohort split and were as much for Obama as Hillary Clinton and have a different view about women leaders. They do not feel the same need to support women as older women. There is a constant need for reeducation. We cannot assume the next generation of women will have awareness unless we help them develop it.

Again, keep on doing what you are doing, but bigger, louder, better.

Facts about Mary Hughes

* Hughes is a co-founder and President of Hughes & Company, a strategic communications and political consulting firm in Palo Alto, California. Mary founded and served as Director of the 2012 Project, a national, non-partisan campaign of the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University to increase the number of women in Congress and state legislatures by taking advantage of newly drawn and newly created districts resulting from redistricting and reapportionment.

close the gap CA is a campaign to increase the number of progressive women in the California legislature by recruiting talented, progressive women to run for open, winnable seats in 2014 and 2016. Changes to California’s term limit law in 2012 means another opportunity like this will not occur again until [the next decade’s redistricting].

 

Make the most of your right to vote. Learn about the candidates for County Superior Court at  our May 5 Forum in Mountain View. In the voting booth, it is not good enough to just punch the button for the candidate whose name we vaguely recognize or who shook our hand at the 4^th of July Celebration. Instead we must make decisions based upon the candidates qualifications, record of community and/or public service, and their stated and written responses to questions and issues that we in the community find important.

A well-planned and executed candidate forum can help the community make the most of their right to vote. To this end, the League of Women Voters of the Los Altos-Mountain View Area and the League of Women Voters of Palo Alto will co-sponsor two forums for Santa Clara County Superior Court judges candidates, Office #21 and #24 on Monday, May 5, 2014 starting at 6:45 pm in the Council Chambers of the City of Mountain View, 500 Castro Street.  As is customary with League of Women Voters forums, questions from the audience will be the major part of the evening.

MARK YOUR CALENDAR

6:45 p.m.
Candidates for Office #21
Julianne Sylva and Dennis A. Lempert

8:00 p.m.
Candidates Office #24
Dianne Ritchie, Annrae Angel and Mathew S. Harris

LOCATION: Council Chambers of the City of Mountain View, 500 Castro Street

For more information contact Natalie Elefant, natalie.elefant@gmail.com

 

 

 

Our local league conducted an annual “legislative interview” with Assemblyman Richard Gordon, 24th District, on March 13, 2014.

QUESTION 1: Money in Politics

Introduction:

Californians are increasingly dismayed by the flow of money into campaigns at all levels of politics. They are even more alarmed about the fact that for many large donations there is no way to identify the original contributors. Innocuous committee names no longer fool them.

In particular, the League strongly supports SB 27 (Correa) to prevent nonprofits from contributing large sums in California elections without disclosure. We are cosponsors of SB 2 (Lieu), which will improve slate mailer disclosure, require “Stand by Your Ad” in state elections, and strengthen enforcement.

Question:

Bills to require disclosure of the sources of all contributions in California campaigns and to make campaign disclosure more transparent and user-friendly in general will come before the Assembly

and Senate early in 2014. Will you help see that effective measures are passed in the Assembly/Senate to help voters know who’s funding campaigns?

 

Assemblyman Gordon absolutely supports SB 27.   His bill, AB 800, passed the Assembly on March 10^th.  AB 800 helps strengthen the Fair Political Practices Commission in investigating and auditing organizations making large campaign donations.  These two bills would have helped us avoid the “dark money” from an NPO in Arizona during the 2012 election.  Gordon co-authored and was the floor jockey for SB 27.   These bills will provide greater transparency to the electoral process.  Gordon expects there are enough votes to pass SB 27 in the Senate on March 17^th.  The Governor would like to sign both SB 27 and AB 800 at the same time.  [GM1]

 

QUESTION 2: Education

The LCFF (Local Control Funding Formula) is rolling out over the next few years. Implementation strategies are being drafted and there will inevitably be some adjustments. What do you see as the ongoing role of the legislature? Are there programs you feel should remain categorical? Are there areas you deem as off limits for spending supplemental and concentration funds?

 

Assemblyman Gordon is a strong supporter of the local control funding formula.   It assures local school boards the ability to set priorities for their own funding.  It sets the path for additional funding, specifically targeting the achievement gap.  Gordon believes that for too long we have underfunded education.  Gordon would like to be able to provide education with more funding.  The LCFF also eliminates the previously complex funding of most categorical areas, except for a few “sacred cows.”  What more should the Legislature do?  Not much.  Leave it to the districts and school boards for now.

 

When asked about Transitional Kindergarten, Gordon feels it should be funded moving forward.  However, he does have some concerns with the current proposals.  Overall the current state education budget does not provide enough funds for K-12 education, in addition to expanding the TK program.  The move to universal TK has several challenges, such as insufficient facilities in many districts and an insufficient number of properly credentialed teachers.  Also there are many home-based child care programs that provide families with needed income but these caregivers may not be properly credentialed for TK and this will produce an economic hardship.  Then there is the question of how districts would contract out TK programs and services.   Gordon doesn’t foresee any legislation on the expansion of TK to be enacted this year.

 

QUESTION #3. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)

Do you think specific projects should be exempted from parts or all of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process, or have special rules set for them? If so, how would you determine which projects should receive such treatment?

 

Gordon believes that land use projects should be subject to CEQA reviews.  The issue with the current CEQA is that it opens the door too easily for groups to file law suits to block or delay a development project, claiming an environmental issue that may or may not be valid while attempting to leverage a non-environmental consession.

QUESTION # 4 – Other issues

What other major issues do you think the legislature must deal with in 2014? What are your personal priorities?

 Gordon feels water is the major issue for 2014.  California’s primary storage is the snow pack in the Sierra Nevadas.  We have inadequate water storage across the state and no way to capture both run-off and rain fall.  Gordon is part of a group working on a multi-billion dollar water bond for the November 2014 ballot.  A key way this bond is different from the Governor’s is that it would leave out the construction of tunnels under the delta.  Further ways to alleviate California’s water shortage are to promote reuse and recycling of water.  Some groups are looking into desalination.  Overall with the current drought, this fall’s election is a good time to take water issues to the voters. 

He is also very interested in and concerned about sea level rise.  He is holding a forum on this subject in July at Moffatt Field in Mountain View.  He is carrying legislation (AB 2516) that will create a centralized data base  of information on how California is preparing for, and adapting to, sea level rise. He is also in favor of  incentivizing regional planning efforts around this issue. 

Another legislative priority is community/school-based gardens.  At this time school kids are not allowed to eat the produce they grow in their school gardens as the produce has not been inspected.  Other groups such as farmers’ markets have found ways to self inspect and certify produce; AB 1990 would allow these same techniques to be used for community and school based gardens as well. 

The Affordable Care Act – the current cap for out of pocket medical expenses is fixed at about $6,000 a year.  For persons with chronic illnesses such as cancer or HIV that have high medication costs, this cap can be reached in the first month.  Through AB 1917, Gordon suggests an extended payoff plan whereby payments could be spread out over the entire year.

 

Gordon is chair of the Rules Committee.