The city of Vallejo has taken the extraordinary step of filing for federal bankruptcy protection. While the financial distress of this San Francisco suburb (population 117,000) is especially acute, its fiscal problems are fundamentally the same as those facing many California cities and counties--and, indeed, the state itself.

To the familiar litany of causes--falling sales tax revenue, the home mortgage crisis leading to collapsing home prices and lower real estate taxes--there needs to be added one more: Too much government secrecy.

Vallejo is broke, and other cities and counties may be close behind, because their personnel costs--salary and benefits for current employees and retirees--are higher than they can afford. While decisions at the state level are partly to blame, ultimate responsibility for the mismatch of revenue and expenses rests with local elected officials who, meeting in secret, have managed to avoid public discussion of the true cost and fiscal impact of the pay deals that they have approved.

If no one is watching, it's easy for public officials to give generous pay and benefit increases without having a clue how to pay for them. That's not so easy to do in a public session, where voters demand to know how much taxes will have to be raised, and how much other expenses cut, in order to make good on the promised increases in compensation. Such resistance is called political accountability, and it obviously depends on public access to the meetings in which elected representatives make their decisions.

Although in theory legislative bodies in California must operate in the "sunshine," the Brown Act, the state's open-meetings law, carves out a huge exception for negotiations with public employee unions. The combined effect of this exception, and separate provisions of the labor code, is to close the door, pull down the shades and turn off the lights on virtually all decisions relating to employee compensation and other terms of union contracts ("collective bargaining agreements").

Negotiating positions are determined in secret, negotiations themselves are conducted in secret, and negotiated contracts are ratified in secret. By the time the public gets to see the compensation provisions of a new union contract, it is already a done deal--indeed, any effort to change the terms likely would be a breach of the contract.

California’s cuts to education funding are harming our efforts to provide excellent education to our public school students.

California spends millions of dollars to train our state’s teachers, and as result has some of the most experienced and talented educators in the country. The Governor’s proposed $4.8 billion in budget cuts and the resulting tens of thousands of teacher pink slips only tell part of the story about how much education in our state stands to lose --if we allow other states to come in and lure away our talented teachers, we might as well just ship those training funds directly out of the state.

California’s elected officials must do their jobs. They need to figure out how to raise revenue to keep our teachers in our classrooms.

Twenty thousand California teachers have received notices that they are being laid-off and will have no teaching position next year. These teacher layoffs are already harming our schools. Thousand of teachers are demoralized, dispirited and distressed about how they will pay their bills next year and whether they can continue teaching. They now must look for other employment. Many of them will be forced to leave teaching for more stable jobs.

Texas is sending recruiting delegations to California next week, and has placed billboards and newspaper ads across the state. School districts in Nevada are airing radio ads in Los Angeles to recruit teachers while recruiters from Kansas contacted the California Federation of Teachers to inquire about talented teachers. News outlets in Hawaii, Nevada and Texas have reported on their intensive recruitment effort of California’s teachers. Still others will leave California for other states, where their dedication and skills appear to be more appreciated than they are in California. This is a tremendous loss for the students and taxpayers of California.

Most of the laid-off teachers are young, passionate and just beginning their careers. Students will lose dedicated, trained teachers who wanted only a modest paycheck to continue the profession they chose in the state they love.

By Marty D. Omoto
Director/Organizer
California Disability Community Action Network

A little known initiative on the June 3 California primary election ballot would prohibit new rent control measures and eventually abolish existing rent controls in the State that advocates say will have a major impact on accessible and affordable housing for tens of thousands of low income people with disabilities, seniors, low income workers who provide supports and services, including those in communities of color. The ballot measure, Proposition 98 is titled "Eminent Domain: Limits on Government Authority" and would amend the State Constitution.

No statewide polls have been conducted measuring the support of two propositions on the June ballot - but extremely low voter turn-out could favor passage of Proposition 98.

If it passes, the measure would impact all areas in California currently under rent controls and prohibit any area from enacting any new rent controls, including rent controls in mobile home parks. The issue would impact persons under the federal housing programs, such as "Section 8" because in those areas where rent controls are in place, rents could increase and the control on that unit would end when tenants change, if Proposition 98 passes.

The independent and non-partisan Legislative Analyst says that about 1 million California households - which includes low income seniors, people with disabilities, low income workers who provide supports and services and others - live in housing or mobile home parks under some form of rent control, which Proposition 98 would abolish.

Some Opponents of Proposition 98 Backing Proposition 99

Some of the groups opposing Proposition 98 on the June 3rd ballot, have sponsored and support passage of Proposition 99 instead, which deals with the issue of local government taking owner occupied homes and transferring it to a private party or business. It makes no mention of rent control. If both ballot initiatives passed, a provision in Proposition 99 would prohibit Proposition 98 from taking effect if Proposition 99 received more votes.

Accessible and Affordable Housing Seen As Critical To Disability and Senior Rights

The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) has released a preliminary analysis of a possible aqueduct to divert water from the Sacramento River to farms and cities in the San Joaquin Valley and Southern California. It is the first time in decades that state water officials have taken a serious look at sending Sacramento River water around, instead of through, the San Francisco Bay-Delta.

Instead of including new ideas, DWR's analysis reflects the same flawed approach that led California voters to roundly reject the Peripheral Canal more than 25 years ago (in 1982).

DWR's analysis shows that a Peripheral Canal could result in massive new freshwater diversions at a time when salmon and other fish species are crashing, when the salmon fishery has been closed for the first time ever, and the ailing Delta can barely support its vital role as a source of clean drinking water for millions of Californians. The Delta needs more fresh water, not less.

The DWR analysis is biased in favor of increasing Delta water diversions, most of which go to agriculture, not California's cities. The analysis envisions exporting as much as 1.5 million acre-feet more water than has ever been pumped from the Delta historically. The analysis disguises the magnitude of the increase by assuming an imaginary "reference case" that substantially increases exports over existing levels, despite the harm to the Delta that has resulted from such high levels of pumping.

The massive new diversions included within this analysis would be a disaster for the San Francisco Bay-Delta, delta communities and farms, and California's salmon fishermen. It would worsen water quality and worsen conditions for salmon on the Sacramento River, which is the backbone of the state's salmon fishery. It is astonishing that DWR chose to ignore the collapse of California's salmon fishery, as well as court-ordered protections for the delta smelt, in its analysis.

California water officials are simply moving in the wrong direction. The solution is to pump less, not more, water from the San Francisco Bay-Delta system.

The new analysis is on DWR's web site.

The Natural Resources Defense Council is a national, nonprofit organization of scientists, lawyers and environmental specialists dedicated to protecting public health and the environment. Founded in 1970, NRDC has 1.2 million members and online activists nationwide, served from offices in New York, Washington, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Beijing.

By Frank D. Russo

In a move that puts Barack Obama ahead in most, if not virtually all super delegate counts and reduces his magic number to clinch the nomination, Crystal Strait, the Political Action Director for the California Democratic Party, endorsed Obama for President.

Strait, 28 years of age, the immediate past President of the California Young Democrats, and a member of the Democratic National Committee representing Young Democrats of America, is a powerful boost for Obama. She had been cited as an undecided delegate in an article as late as one appearing in this morning’s Oakland Tribune in which she praised the efforts of Chelsea Clinton to secure delegate commitments to her mother, Hillary Clinton. She becomes the 276th superdelegate to endorse Obama in a rare Sunday announcement from the campaign. Sshe has been active both within California and nationally.

Her reasoning mostly had to do with Obama’s strength with younger voters—one of the best demographics for Democrats and his ability to draw this vote out, not only cementing the party’s position this November, but realigning it for the future. As political action director for the state party, her job is to mobilize voters and volunteer efforts.

She said: "While representing the Young Democrats of America at the DNC, my number one priority is to ensure that young people are fully represented at the polls and in the Party. Barack Obama has shown a real commitment to young voters in his campaign and in response young people have overwhelmingly voted and caucused for Obama in these primary contests. We know that if a young person votes three times in a row for a Party, they become a Party voter for life. We know that because of high youth turnout in 2004 and 2006, 2008 is the third and critical election for young voters. And that's why I know I want to pledge my delegate vote to Barack Obama."

Strait had been cultivated heavily by the Clinton campaign. She had a meeting with Chelsea Clinton and has had private conversations with Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton.

My son and I have given cards and a hug and kiss to my wife on this day in her honor and that of mothers all across California and the nation. Shortly we will visit her other in a convalescent hospital for more of the same.

Most of us do not think of today in the historical context of the first mother’s day and the origins of this day. You can read the original proclamation of mother’s day in a few select places today, among them the Frederick News Post online. They say:

“Julia Ward Howe, who wrote the "Battle Hymn of the Republic," was transformed by the carnage she witnessed during the Civil War and reports from Europe of Franco-Prussian destruction. So, she crafted a "Mother's Day Proclamation" in 1870, declaring that women should no longer accept their government's reasons for war and the consignment of "our sons to unlearn all that we have been able to teach them of charity, mercy and patience."”

Thank your mother. Celebrate today. Then let’s think of doing something for California’s mothers right here in sunny California: Passage of the landmark Healthy Families, Healthy Workplaces bill, AB 2716 by Fiona Ma, which would allow all California workers to earn paid sick days.

This bill has passed out of the Assembly Judiciary http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_2701-2750/ab_2716_vote_20080415_000001_asm_comm.html and Assembly Labor Committee http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_2701-2750/ab_2716_vote_20080409_000002_asm_comm.html on party line votes with Democrats supporting it and Republicans opposing it. It is pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee with a number of other worthy bills. It’s time to put our money where our mouths are on this bill which will truly help California’s working mothers.

This weekend, working mothers shared stories about the difficulties they face when they or their children get sick, and urged lawmakers to take action. They reminded us that without paid sick days, they are just a few of the millions of working mothers in Los Angeles and across the state who must either forfeit wages, or go to work sick or send sick children to school or day care. “I have worked at the same fast food restaurant for more than 15 years, with no paid sick days and only a week of paid vacation,” said ACORN member Manuela Mendez. “Even though my husband and I both work, we have been struggling to pay our mortgage and all of our bills each month. I cannot afford to take time off work when I get sick, so I have to work sick for several days each year."

Ma’s bill would make California the first state to require employers to provide all workers with paid sick days. She reminded us this weekend that “Families, especially single mothers, have a hard time making ends meet as is. Working moms should not have to worry about losing a day’s pay or, in some instances, their jobs when they or their child become ill.”

Republican analyst and redistricting expert, Tony Quinn (he was a lead player in the 1980’s redistricting process) has written a thoughtful column on the eve of new efforts at redistricting “reform”.

Part of Quinn’s op ed piece in today’s Bee is bogus. “Fairly drawn districts will not,” Quinn writes, “markedly change the partisan makeup we have.” Previously, I have delineated the seats I believe would be lost to the Democrats under any Commission Plan. Quinn asserts that’s “nonsense,” but doesn’t bother to provide evidence to support his point. In that sense, he’s still Republican.

The remainder of his analysis is more thoughtful. “Reform will not bring about the nirvana of thoughtful moderates from marginal districts supporters hope for,” Quinn notes. The reason is that voters have moved geographically to join with others of a similar demography or ideology.

He goes on: “The white working class that was open to voting Republican has been replaced by a Latino working class that is not. Church attendance rises in Republican areas, drawing together people of similar religious views, while secular values have drawn people of more diverse lifestyles to Democratic areas”.

Quinn is correct. This is a fact totally ignored by journalists who are taken in by phony analysis that suggests that redistricting is responsible for the death of Ken Maddy and that redistricting reform would magically resurrect him and “moderate” Republicanism.

But if “reform” won’t produce more legislative moderation, why is it necessary?

Quinn says it will result in “more logical districts” with a “less brutal hacking up of the political map”. What he really means is that it will result in more REPUBLICAN districts and perhaps the loss of majority control by the Democrats.

When Democrats win a majority of Legislative seats, they win the benefits of representing that majority. They elect a Speaker or a President Pro Tempore with that majority. That leader, in turn, allocates all – I repeat, ALL – the Chairmanships of ALL committees in the Legislature to the Democrats. The Leader then picks ALL of the Committee’s majority members on ALL the Committees. In such a manner the Majority Party controls ALL public policy (save the state’s budget), reflecting the opinion of the majority of voters that elected them.

Last week-just as I was in the middle of writing my column about the calls for Illinois Senator Barack Obama to go for a knockout blow in the Democratic presidential primaries-the latest round of national clamor over the Rev. Jeremiah Wright issue was breaking. This was prompted first by Rev. Wright's appearances on Bill Moyers and his speeches at the National Press Club and the NAACP Freedom Fund Dinner, and then by Senator Barack Obama's follow-up press conference in which he broke, once and for all, with his former pastor.

And so, once more, half the nation seemed to want to talk about the issue of race, with the subject burning hot and heavy on blogs, in newspaper columns and on every national news and talk show. It was hard to ignore, but I did. I watched, briefly, the nationally-televised press conference where Mr. Obama declared that he was "outraged by the comments that were made and saddened by the spectacle [created by Mr. Wright in his comments]." Then I turned back to the subject I was working on.

I have been deeply involved in the issue of race and America for all of my adult life, for many years as a full-time worker in the African-American Freedom Movement, also as a columnist for various newspapers in the Deep South and the West. I have spoken on the issue of race during those times when seemingly everyone in the country was talking about it, and I have spoken on the issue of race during periods when a majority of the nation wished it would simply go away. Race has often been the subject of previous columns. Almost always, I welcome a discussion on the subject.

But not this time.

In recent years, there has a developed a pattern to our race discussions. They tend to come when we hear someone say something on the issue that some large portion of the population finds outrageous-the comedian-producer Bill Cosby, Los Angeles Dodger baseball executive Al Campanis, oddsmaker Jimmy "The Greek" Snyder. Former United States Senator George Allen calling an East Indian volunteer of his Senatorial opponent a "macaca, or monkey, taken from the Belgian colonialist slur for Congolese. Or Rush Limbaugh saying he mistook Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villagarosa, a Latino, for a shoeshine boy. Or Mr. Wright.

I am not trying to equate the comments of these men, one with the other. I am only pointing out the fact that these days, we tend to talk as a nation about somebody talking about race, therefore, but not about the actual underlying issue itself.

Do you need examples? They are legion.

Late in April, while the Obama-Wright controversy was beginning to hit full stride, the Alameda County Public Health Department quietly released the executive summary of a study on health and social inequity in Alameda County.

In its opening lines, the health department's executive summary flatly, unemotionally, points out the grim realities of race and class inequities in our local community: "Certain groups of people in Alameda County are getting sick and dying prematurely from 'unnatural causes,'" the summary begins. "In Alameda County, access to proven health protective resources like clean air, healthy food, and recreational space, as well as opportunities for high quality education, living wage employment, and decent housing, is highly dependent on the neighborhood in which one lives."

Recipients of awards from the Consumer Federation of California for 2008 from left to right, Senate President pro Tem Elect Darrell Steinberg, California Progress Report publisher Frank D. Russo, former Assemblymember and State Senate candidate Hannah-Beth Jackson, CFC founder and former President of the California Federation of Labor Albin Gruhn with attendant, Assemblymember Mark Leno, and Assembly Judiciary Chair Dave Jones. Not pictured, Senator Alan Lowenthal. Photo by Russell Collins Stiger

By Frank D. Russo

I was deeply honored to receive the Consumer Federation of California’s 2008 Consumer Journalist Award on behalf of the California Progress Report in a ceremony in the basement of the state Capitol cafeteria. Others honored by the CFC, a consumer organization founded in 1960, included a number of my heroes, and the audience of over 100 included many distinguished guests and representatives of organizations I cherish. I joked that over half of the crowd had written articles for the California Progress Report—which in fact was accurate.

What makes this award particularly memorable to me is that the CFC last bestowed this award on former Chronicle consumer reporter David Lazarus, who now writes for the Los Angeles Times. I consider Lazarus a giant in the field of business and consumer reporting.

Started in 2006, the California Progress Report has featured over 40 stories under the topical heading of consumer rights and hundreds of articles on food safety, privacy, health care, the environment, toxic exposure, law, responsible lending, and other areas that touch upon consumer issues. All of these can be accessed by topic or in the archives of the site which has over 3,500 articles.

• Advocates fear major impact on disability rights for hundreds of thousands of people with disabilities, mental health needs, seniors & workers

By Marty D. Omoto
Director/Organizer
California Disability Community Action Network

Bad budget news will get worse on Wednesday, May 14, when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will release budget revisions and changes (referred to as the "May Revise") with policymakers and advocates fearing that that new massive permanent spending cuts to a wide range of critical programs are now all but certain to be proposed.

With a budget shortfall exploding from $8 billion to over $16 billion and possibly as high as $20 billion by the end of the 2008-2009 State Budget year, the Governor and Legislature are faced with diminishing number of choices to close the widening gap.

The crisis differs from previous years because now legislators and the Governor are now looking for permanent ways to reduce spending rather than temporary cuts or reductions to programs. The 10% Medi-Cal rate reduction and regional center reductions called "cost containment" were all made permanent by the Legislature and Governor in February (though the Medi-Cal cut is now being contested in court with two lawsuits filed recently).

Advocates Fear Devastating Cuts Impacting Thousands

Advocates and policymakers fear that nearly every program critical for people with disabilities, mental health needs, seniors, people with MS, Alzheimer's and other disorders, people with traumatic brain and other injuries, foster and adoption assistance families, CalWORKS families that will impact Medi-Cal, adult protective services, aging programs, mental health programs, services for the blind, services for persons who are deaf, special education, accessible employment, accessible and affordable transportation and housing services, and community based organizations and workers who provide critical services and supports, all which will be hit by possibly new major spending reductions on top of cuts already proposed or implemented this year. Word from some Administration officials and advocates say that the cuts will likely be "major".

Advocates fear that more cuts will have dramatic impact on rights of people with disabilities, seniors and mental health needs and the State's implementation of the Olmstead Decision, the 1999 US Supreme Court decision that required the states to take measures to avoid the unnecessary institutionalization of people with disabilities, mental health needs and seniors.

Certain programs, such as Medi-Cal - already hit with an over $1 billion reduction in reimbursements to community-based providers with a 10% permanent rate reduction scheduled to go into effect July 1, 2008, are vulnerable for more cuts. SSP/SSP, regional center funded services including possible rate reductions to other programs, In-Home Supportive Services, a wide range of aging programs, all face current and likely new major cuts.

No official word has come from the Schwarzenegger Administration on any cuts - though officials over the weeks have warned of major cuts.

Governor and Legislature Faced With Diminishing Choices

By Zachary Norris, Esq.
Books Not Bars

Notable elected officials, unions, and civil rights and faith-based organizations have joined forces in opposition to a proposed California ballot initiative that would bankrupt California by pumping billions of dollars into prisons and failed "anti-gang" laws and "tough on crime" policies of the past. The Coalition to Defeat George Runner's Initiative held a press conference May 7, 2008, announcing the formation of the new coalition, which includes the California Federation of Teachers, California Church IMPACT, the California NAACP, and the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights. The press conference coincided with other coordinated events taking place throughout the state (Sacramento, Los Angeles, Fresno) in a coordinated Coalition Day of Action.

The “Criminal Penalties and Laws State Spending Statute”, a potential November ballot initiative introduced by State Senator George Runner, would bust the state budget by directing billions of dollars to fund prisons, probation, and police in the midst of a budget crisis that has caused drastic cuts to education and health care. This potential statewide ballot proposal, also known as the "Runner Initiative" or "Safe Neighborhoods Act," is a far reaching-measure that stiffens criminal penalties and introduces laws reminiscent of failed polices of the past that did not increase public safety, but instead substantially increased California's prison population and wasted California tax dollars.

"The Runner Initiative's name on the November ballot is as misleading as what it proposes to do for our community. The so-called 'Safe Neighborhoods Act' will not lead to safer streets, less crime or a reduction in drug dealing in our community," said United States Congresswoman Barbara Lee. "The Runner Initiative doesn't address the core problems or create real solutions. In light of the current California budget crisis, we cannot afford to irresponsibly spend even more California tax-dollars on a failed policy of only funding prisons and criminalizing youth."

The multi-billion dollar initiative would shift state resources away from education, crime and violence prevention and toward increased incarceration of youth and young adults from low-income communities of color who already have limited opportunities for education, employment and rehabilitation. The initiative would cost Californians one billion dollars in the first year, and half a billion per year thereafter; plus additional unfunded mandates that local and county governments will be forced to pay.

For the first time ever, recreational salmon fishing will be closed on the Sacramento River and its tributaries this year with the exception of a short season for late fall run chinook. The Sacramento River salmon season has opened on July 16 every year, but will remain closed this season until November 1 when a limited stretch of river will be opened to the take of salmon.

The California Fish and Game Commission voted unanimously today to adopt a zero bag limit in all 14 Central Valley rivers and streams except for a one-salmon bag limit in the Sacramento River from Red Bluff Diversion Dam to Knights Landing from November 1 to December 31. The Feather, American, Yuba and other popular salmon rivers will be closed to the take of spring run chinook salmon also.

“The Department proposed and recommended this option, a hybrid of the originally proposed Options 2 and 3, because of concerns about impacts to spring chinook salmon,” said Steve Martarano, Department of Fish and Game (DFG) spokesman. “This option will provide maximum protection to Sacramento River fall chinook in the Central Valley while providing very limited access to late-fall chinook.”

Anglers will be able to fish for rainbow trout, steelhead, shad, sturgeon, striped bass, catfish, black bass and other species on the Sacramento River and its tributaries, according to Neil Manji, branch chief of the inland fisheries division of the DFG. The closure of salmon fishing on Central Valley rivers will cause an estimated loss of over $20 million to the state's economy.

This river closure follows the closure of all recreational and commercial fishing on the ocean in California and most of Oregon in April by the federal regulatory body, the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC), and the state. The anticipated economic loss to California of the closure of the recreational ocean fishery will be around $167 million, while the economic loss of the commercial fishery will be approximately $63 million, according to DFG data.

The Klamath and Trinity rivers will be open to salmon fishing this year with the quota for recreational anglers over 20,000 fish. "If there is any silver lining to the dark cloud of the salmon closure, it will be the fishery on the Klamath and Trinity," said Manji. The specific bag limits and other regulations for the Klamath system will be approved at the Fish and Game Commission on May 22-23.

You may listen in English or Spanish or read the transcript below.

Hello, this is Assemblymember Mark DeSaulnier, Chair of the Assembly Transportation Committee.

Learning to ride a bicycle is something most of us went through at some point in our lives.

Frustration and scraped knees from falling didn't stop us from getting it right then, and growing up is no excuse for leaving our bikes in the garage today.

In fact, now more than ever, bicycles are a good way for adults to get exercise and relieve some of the burden on our environment.

Did you know a ten-minute bike ride can burn over 100 calories?

And on that same ten-minute ride, we can all save money on gas, contribute to improving air quality, reduce traffic congestion and fight global warming.

Maybe most importantly, it’s a great way to get reconnected with our friends, families and communities.

With these goals in mind, Assembly Democrats invite you to the Capitol Bike Festival at the state capitol in Sacramento.

On May 15, from 11am to 2pm, bicycle to the capitol to hear great music, win prizes and receive a free bike safety check.

Please visit w-w-w-mayisbikemonth (that’s all one word)-dot-com www.mayisbikemonth.com/events.asp for more information and check the events link.

This festival coincides with hundreds of national bike to work day events and bike month celebrations around California

And while we are recognizing the value of cycling in California this May, the legislature in Sacramento will also be working on bills addressing today’s environmental problems

Just one example is AB 2971. This bill would increase safe bicycle and pedestrian paths throughout our cities and counties, helping Californians navigate their communities without cars and safely.

When the May Revise is released, there is sure to be some bad budget news for everyone. But, even in tough budget times, the Legislature and Governor must set priorities and a top priority must be children’s health. Our leaders should work to ensure that this year’s budget decisions do not result in more children losing health coverage because it not only hurts kids, but will also make our state’s bottom line even worse.

While all the details of the May Revise are not yet known, current budget proposals put the health of more than 500,000 California children at risk and would increase the ranks of uninsured children by 60%. Two flawed policy proposals are responsible for these troublesome numbers.

First, current budget proposals would require families to fill out burdensome paperwork four times a year to retain their eligibility for Medi-Cal, rather than annually as is the case today. This unnecessary requirement would create a paperwork morass that is far cry from the annual reporting requirements of private health plans. These are eligible kids – the only reason for the Quarterly Status Reporting (QSRs) is to disenroll children from their health insurance. In fact, it is estimated that these stringent requirements would result in 471,500 eligible children being dropped from their health insurance simply because parents wouldn’t be able to keep up with the paperwork.

We could learn a lesson on unnecessary reporting from the State of Washington, who chose to address their 2002 budget crisis by instituting 6 month reporting requirements for children receiving Medicaid. In just two years, several million dollars were spent on the new administrative requirements. This was due in part because the state had to hire 160 new full-time employees to process the additional paperwork caused by the more stringent requirements. Those costs were for reporting twice a year in a much smaller state than California. Our cost to do quarterly reporting will surely be higher here. Washington ended up rescinding their bi-annual reporting requirements in 2005.