Californians: Impeach Arnold

Published

Oops! I Appointed A Special Interest

News Archive - Web Logs - Press Releases

Schwarzenegger pledged to stand up to special interests in Sacramento. He must have missed a few key bullet points on the resumes of some of his chief appointments. If big business holds the keys to the governor's office, all legislation will be filtered through the lens of corporate interests. Here are some Schwarzenegger appointees the public should be concerned about - we'll be keeping an eye on them at ArnoldWatch.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Garrett Ashley, Deputy Chief of Staff

Ashley was previously executive director of Tech Net - Orange County. TechNet is a network of high-powered corporate executives (think Microsoft, J.P. Morgan, NASDAQ and AOL Time Warner) that lobbies in Sacramento and Washington D.C. for high tech interests. In recent years, TechNet's lobbying has focused on limiting consumer rights, including: fighting against court settlement reforms to let the public know about harmful products; pushing to restrict injured consumers' right to bring class action lawsuits against crooked corporations; and resisting post-Enron corporate accountability proposals to require companies to report the cost of executive stock options to shareholders.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cassandra Pye, Deputy Chief of Staff, External Affairs

The External Affairs post serves as a liason to the public, "a job that is the unofficial in-house slot responsible for tending to the governor's political connections in the community, especially among ethnic groups," according to SacBee columnist Dan Weintraub.

For the past 12 years, Cassandra Pye has worked at the Chamber of Commerce, where she was most recently vice president of corporate affairs. In that capacity, Pye was responsible for the Chamber's political activities and running its Political Action Committees (PACs), which means that she spent time soliciting money from big businesses for the Chamber and its campaigns. In other words, the special political connections that Cassandra Pye brings to the administration are with big businesses. Pye's knowledge of the donors in the big business community will doubtless help Arnold raise money from the Chamber community.

Before her time at the Chamber, Pye worked with a variety of big business trade associations, including the California Retailers Association, the Food Marketing Institute, and the California Grocers Association.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A.G. Kawamura, Food and Agriculture Secretary

Kawamura donated $21,200 to Arnold. He is a past chairman of the Western Growers Association, which has been a vocal opponent of legislation protecting farmworkers and the environment enacted over the past several years.

The Food and Agriculture Department is responsible for environmental, public safety and other regulations governing agricultural interests. Kawamura's appointment is incongruous - it places a man who ran an anti-regulation organization in charge of development and implementation of regulatory safeguards. Farmworkers, and the environment in farming communities, are bound to suffer when agribusiness interests take the forefront at the department.

Among the legislation opposed by the Western Growers was last year's SB 700, which required farmers to obtain pollution permits for certain diesel powered field machinery. Previously, agricultural interests were exempt from the emission rules that require permits for other industries and Central Valley air quality was greatly compromised as a result.

Agricultural interests gave Arnold's campaign committees more than half a million dollars.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

James Branham, undersecretary at California Environmental Protection Agency

Branham was previously director of external relations for the Pacific Lumber Company. His appointment to a critical environmental post state raises eyebrows, as his company has a reputation for being environmentally unfriendly.

The Pacific Lumber company has been repeatedly cited for environmental violations, including poor forest practices and water quality problems. The company's logging license was suspended several times in the late 1990s for forest violations, including: illegal logging, the cover-up of illegal practices, and operations which disregarded procedures meant to preserve environmentally sensitive areas.

His position in the upper echelons of CalEPA will cause greater tension between the lumber interests he represented and the values of the vast majority of Californians - a clean, protected and healthy environment.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Richard Costigan, Legislative Secretary

Costigan joins the governor from his prior position as Vice President of Governmental Relations and Chief Lobbyist for the California Chamber of Commerce, putting the governor-elect's top legislative post in the hands of big business's biggest lobbyist.

Costigan's appointment could give big corporations unprecedented access to policy decisions in the Governor's office. The Chamber of Commerce is at the forefront of efforts to curb criticism and reform of corporations in California. The Chamber's opposition to major consumer protections over the last decade has included: HMO patients' rights, insurance reforms, expanding healthcare coverage to the uninsured, corporate accountability measures, and protection of consumer privacy.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Patricia Clarey, Chief-of-Staff

Clarey was most recently a Vice President for the HMO Health Net, Inc. The appointment puts the key to the governor's office in the hands of a big business exec, and bodes poorly for increased public interest access to the governor.

The state's HMOs have a long history of opposing patient protections in Sacramento, including, most recently, legislation which would have extended California's auto insurance regulatory rules to now-skyrocketing health insurance premiums.

HMO interests may quickly find expression in Schwarzenegger's healthcare policies. A key test will be whether Schwarzenegger stands up to insurers (and against Clarey's former boss) to control rapidly skyrocketing healthcare costs by regulating insurance premiums, capping hospital and physician rates, and bulk purchasing benefits and prescription drugs.

Ms. Clarey was also a lobbyist for Chevron.

http://www.arnoldwatch.org/special_interests/oops.html

Up Vote Up Vote ×

I don't think Californians are ready yet.

Many nurses who voted for him will not vote for him again.

He talks just like a batterer

An embarrasment to the office of Governor.

I agree with the police officer who said, "Police, firefighters, and nurses are heros.

Arnold is an action figure!

Up Vote Up Vote ×

He has the nearly impossible task of trying to encourage businesses to bring employees and factories to the high tax state, so tax revenues can increase the old fashion way.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1214-30.htm

Published on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 by CommonDreams.org

Governor Tough Guy, At It Again

by Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman

You may have heard the story.

You probably haven't felt the outrage.

You should.

Last week, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger garnered another round of media attention by denigrating a group protesting outside of a conference at which he was speaking.

"Pay no attention to those voices," the muscleman governor told the audience at the conference. "Those are special interests. They're just angry because I kick their butts everyday." ...

Up Vote Up Vote ×

http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041214/NEWS/41214003/1044/OPINION02

Letters to the Editor

Locked out

EDITOR: I wish Gov. Arnold Schwarzennegger was with me on my recent night shift. I wish the governor was there when the two registry nurses didn't show up and my co-worker was gracious enough to come in for her sixth night in a row. I wish the governor was there as the alarms were going off, and we rushed from patient to patient making sure each was safe and secure and alive.

I wish the governor was there to see and protect the true "special interests." I wish the governor was there the day we stood united on the Capitol steps calling for him, locked out of our office -- the one we put him in. I wish the governor would remember it is a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

I wish the governor would remember that the butt you kick may one day belong to someone who cleans yours.

CINDY DALY, RN

Up Vote Up Vote ×

http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041214/NEWS/41214003/1044/OPINION02

Letters to the Editor

Locked out

EDITOR: I wish Gov. Arnold Schwarzennegger was with me on my recent night shift. I wish the governor was there when the two registry nurses didn't show up and my co-worker was gracious enough to come in for her sixth night in a row. I wish the governor was there as the alarms were going off, and we rushed from patient to patient making sure each was safe and secure and alive.

I wish the governor was there to see and protect the true "special interests." I wish the governor was there the day we stood united on the Capitol steps calling for him, locked out of our office -- the one we put him in. I wish the governor would remember it is a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

I wish the governor would remember that the butt you kick may one day belong to someone who cleans yours.

CINDY DALY, RN

Up Vote Up Vote ×
http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041214/NEWS/41214003/1044/OPINION02

Letters to the Editor

Locked out

EDITOR: I wish Gov. Arnold Schwarzennegger was with me on my recent night shift. I wish the governor was there when the two registry nurses didn't show up and my co-worker was gracious enough to come in for her sixth night in a row. I wish the governor was there as the alarms were going off, and we rushed from patient to patient making sure each was safe and secure and alive.

I wish the governor was there to see and protect the true "special interests." I wish the governor was there the day we stood united on the Capitol steps calling for him, locked out of our office -- the one we put him in. I wish the governor would remember it is a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

I wish the governor would remember that the butt you kick may one day belong to someone who cleans yours.

CINDY DALY, RN

Spacenurse - how is letting the ratio go from 6:1 to 5:1 going to help with understaffing? Isn't that the problem hospitals are facing? That there aren't enough nurses? There isn't going to be a magical overnight appearance of nurses - enough so that Cindy Daly doesn't have to call in a collegue for the 6th night in a row.

I don't understand how changing the law equals more nurses to staff already short-staffed units.

We had the exact same thing happen here a few weeks ago .. our traveler didn't show up for pm's 3 nights in a row and we had to stop admitting patients due to only having one nurse. No one else could come in. If the ratio changes to 1:5 . . .where am I going to find that nurse to replace the traveler?

steph

Up Vote Up Vote ×
http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041214/NEWS/41214003/1044/OPINION02

Letters to the Editor

Locked out

EDITOR: I wish Gov. Arnold Schwarzennegger was with me on my recent night shift. I wish the governor was there when the two registry nurses didn't show up and my co-worker was gracious enough to come in for her sixth night in a row. I wish the governor was there as the alarms were going off, and we rushed from patient to patient making sure each was safe and secure and alive.

I wish the governor was there to see and protect the true "special interests." I wish the governor was there the day we stood united on the Capitol steps calling for him, locked out of our office -- the one we put him in. I wish the governor would remember it is a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

I wish the governor would remember that the butt you kick may one day belong to someone who cleans yours.

CINDY DALY, RN

Spacenurse - how is letting the ratio go from 6:1 to 5:1 going to help with understaffing? Isn't that the problem hospitals are facing? That there aren't enough nurses? There isn't going to be a magical overnight appearance of nurses - enough so that Cindy Daly doesn't have to call in a collegue for the 6th night in a row.

I don't understand how changing the law equals more nurses to staff already short-staffed units.

We had the exact same thing happen here a few weeks ago .. our traveler didn't show up for pm's 3 nights in a row and we had to stop admitting patients due to only having one nurse. No one else could come in. If the ratio changes to 1:5 . . .where am I going to find that nurse to replace the traveler?

steph

Up Vote Up Vote ×

If the ratio is lowered, wouldn't that mean that the hospital could not take more admissions, if the ratio wasn't met? I'm speculating here, and would like to know what other hospitals are doing when they're out of compliance now. If the hospital is violating State law by being out of compliance, shouldn't they defer admissions? Doesn't mean the patients needing admission would be served, but might mean the nurses weren't exhausting themselves working with ratios beyond their capabilities.

Our hospital is "self-reporting," meaning that they inform the State daily about whether the current ratios are met. Most of the time we're out of compliance...but because we're "self-reporting" we get away with it. I think the State doesn't investigate unless there's a "sentinel event."

And any of us could file a complaint with the State, that would bring some presence to bear in our hospitals. But the complaints should be accompanied by data about events in which patients or staff were injured/harmed in some way.

Your point about there not being enough nurses is valid. Didn't mean to take away from that. We rarely meet the ratios on our unit, and lowering the ratios wouldn't change that....unless nurses who aren't working now, would be attracted to return to nursing if they were assured their workload would lessen.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

If the ratio is lowered, wouldn't that mean that the hospital could not take more admissions, if the ratio wasn't met? I'm speculating here, and would like to know what other hospitals are doing when they're out of compliance now. If the hospital is violating State law by being out of compliance, shouldn't they defer admissions? Doesn't mean the patients needing admission would be served, but might mean the nurses weren't exhausting themselves working with ratios beyond their capabilities.

Our hospital is "self-reporting," meaning that they inform the State daily about whether the current ratios are met. Most of the time we're out of compliance...but because we're "self-reporting" we get away with it. I think the State doesn't investigate unless there's a "sentinel event."

And any of us could file a complaint with the State, that would bring some presence to bear in our hospitals. But the complaints should be accompanied by data about events in which patients or staff were injured/harmed in some way.

Your point about there not being enough nurses is valid. Didn't mean to take away from that. We rarely meet the ratios on our unit, and lowering the ratios wouldn't change that....unless nurses who aren't working now, would be attracted to return to nursing if they were assured their workload would lessen.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Originally posted by stevielynn

How is letting the ratio go from 6:1 to 5:1 going to help with understaffing? Isn't that the problem hospitals are facing? That there aren't enough nurses? There isn't going to be a magical overnight appearance of nurses - enough so that Cindy Daly doesn't have to call in a collegue for the 6th night in a row.

I don't understand how changing the law equals more nurses to staff already short-staffed units.

We had the exact same thing happen here a few weeks ago .. our traveler didn't show up for pm's 3 nights in a row and we had to stop admitting patients due to only having one nurse. No one else could come in. If the ratio changes to 1:5 . . .where am I going to find that nurse to replace the traveler?

Originally posted by windynights

If the ratio is lowered, wouldn't that mean that the hospital could not take more admissions, if the ratio wasn't met? I'm speculating here, and would like to know what other hospitals are doing when they're out of compliance now. If the hospital is violating State law by being out of compliance, shouldn't they defer admissions? Doesn't mean the patients needing admission would be served, but might mean the nurses weren't exhausting themselves working with ratios beyond their capabilities.

Our hospital is "self-reporting," meaning that they inform the State daily about whether the current ratios are met. Most of the time we're out of compliance...but because we're "self-reporting" we get away with it. I think the State doesn't investigate unless there's a "sentinel event."

And any of us could file a complaint with the State, that would bring some presence to bear in our hospitals. But the complaints should be accompanied by data about events in which patients or staff were injured/harmed in some way.

Your point about there not being enough nurses is valid. Didn't mean to take away from that. We rarely meet the ratios on our unit, and lowering the ratios wouldn't change that....unless nurses who aren't working now, would be attracted to return to nursing if they were assured their workload would lessen.

Mind you I am not an expert on this but I will do my best.

First regarding there "not being enough nurses".

Are there enough nurses during the JCAHO survey?

I have more on the shortage. Example: back in 1999 the Hospital Association was asked in 2002 when the initial ratios were announced how many nurses it would take for them to comply. Their answer was 5,000 in addition to those working at that time.

Guess what? There are more than 44,000 registered nurses with active licenses now than in 1998.

It will take a while for me to find links to other statistics on the "shortage".

OK - Perhaps at your rural hospital the problems are different.

Here is a link to a list of all rural hospitals in California:

http://www.dhs.ca.gov/lnc/pubnotice/ntpr/oshpd.pdf

This is the DHS link to frequently asked questions:

http://www.dhs.ca.gov/lnc/pubnotice/NTPR/R-37-01_FAQ2182004.pdf

On page 19 is an answer regarding waivers for rural hospitals. Basically on a case by case basis the ratios may be relaxed under certain circumstances for rural hospitals provided the DHS determines the health and safety of the public including patients is preserved.

Perhaps the average acuity is lower at your facility than the rest of the state so 6 patients per nurse generally allows for safe effective, therapeutic care. Most medical surgical units now care for patients whose severity of illness would have placed them in ICU 10 or 15 years ago. If hospitals would staff according to the needs of individual patients (acuity) it would be fine. But they have not done so consistantly in the 8 years since it was required. Most facilities have been saying, "We are changing our system. Give it a try." for 8 years now.

No matter what you should not be stuck with only one nurse three nights in a row. When you stopped admitting patients due to only having one nurse where did people go?

Are you the only hospital in the county?

If not the DHS would have been consulted to divert patients to other hospitals and trouble shoot in other ways

Page 7 (of the FAQs) answers a question about "swing beds" in rural hospitals.

On page 4 is a definition of 'healthcare emergency"

I forgot to include the line in the article that Cindy Daly is in Santa Rosa, a city with many hospitals, registries, and nurses.Area hospitals also cancel nurses for low census or send them home early after a discharge or two.

A hospital should plan better than to have an emergency because two nurses called in sick. Patients suffer.

Page 2 of the FAQs explains there is no need to self report unless the welfare, safety, and/or health of patients, visitors, and/or staff is threatened.

The State (DHS) must investigate all complaints. Patients and family members make the majority of complaints.

There is no requirement to stop admitting patients because the ratios are not being met. The DHS may order the number of beds reduced or a unit closed if the violation of the ratios is so severe that it poses an immediate and substantial hazard to the health or safety of the patients.

The term "sentinel event" is a JCAHO term, not the DHS. The JCAHO does not require self reporting. If they become aware of a sentinel event through the media or report by the facility or a patients family they will investigate. The facility must do a "Root Cause Analysis" on all sentinel events. This should look at systemic causes and actions to prevent such events in the future.

When we nurses began the long struggle for ratios hospitals were laying off RNs and replacing us with unlicensed assistive personnel (UAPs). There were many newspaper articles about that.

I am on call tonight from 7 P to 5 A. I expect to be called in if someone doesn't show up at 11:00 for M/S, at 3:00 am for ER, if there are more than usual number of admits, or an emergency 1:1 heart case. The committee at my hospital worked with management to pay a nurse to be on call rather than call him or her off. I volunteer for this so others don't have to. (plus I can read or come to ALLNURSES.COM)

I plan to find the shortage info if they don't call me. In the meantime I am posting an article below that explains a lot.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Originally posted by stevielynn

How is letting the ratio go from 6:1 to 5:1 going to help with understaffing? Isn't that the problem hospitals are facing? That there aren't enough nurses? There isn't going to be a magical overnight appearance of nurses - enough so that Cindy Daly doesn't have to call in a collegue for the 6th night in a row.

I don't understand how changing the law equals more nurses to staff already short-staffed units.

We had the exact same thing happen here a few weeks ago .. our traveler didn't show up for pm's 3 nights in a row and we had to stop admitting patients due to only having one nurse. No one else could come in. If the ratio changes to 1:5 . . .where am I going to find that nurse to replace the traveler?

Originally posted by windynights

If the ratio is lowered, wouldn't that mean that the hospital could not take more admissions, if the ratio wasn't met? I'm speculating here, and would like to know what other hospitals are doing when they're out of compliance now. If the hospital is violating State law by being out of compliance, shouldn't they defer admissions? Doesn't mean the patients needing admission would be served, but might mean the nurses weren't exhausting themselves working with ratios beyond their capabilities.

Our hospital is "self-reporting," meaning that they inform the State daily about whether the current ratios are met. Most of the time we're out of compliance...but because we're "self-reporting" we get away with it. I think the State doesn't investigate unless there's a "sentinel event."

And any of us could file a complaint with the State, that would bring some presence to bear in our hospitals. But the complaints should be accompanied by data about events in which patients or staff were injured/harmed in some way.

Your point about there not being enough nurses is valid. Didn't mean to take away from that. We rarely meet the ratios on our unit, and lowering the ratios wouldn't change that....unless nurses who aren't working now, would be attracted to return to nursing if they were assured their workload would lessen.

Mind you I am not an expert on this but I will do my best.

First regarding there "not being enough nurses".

Are there enough nurses during the JCAHO survey?

I have more on the shortage. Example: back in 1999 the Hospital Association was asked in 2002 when the initial ratios were announced how many nurses it would take for them to comply. Their answer was 5,000 in addition to those working at that time.

Guess what? There are more than 44,000 registered nurses with active licenses now than in 1998.

It will take a while for me to find links to other statistics on the "shortage".

OK - Perhaps at your rural hospital the problems are different.

Here is a link to a list of all rural hospitals in California:

http://www.dhs.ca.gov/lnc/pubnotice/ntpr/oshpd.pdf

This is the DHS link to frequently asked questions:

http://www.dhs.ca.gov/lnc/pubnotice/NTPR/R-37-01_FAQ2182004.pdf

On page 19 is an answer regarding waivers for rural hospitals. Basically on a case by case basis the ratios may be relaxed under certain circumstances for rural hospitals provided the DHS determines the health and safety of the public including patients is preserved.

Perhaps the average acuity is lower at your facility than the rest of the state so 6 patients per nurse generally allows for safe effective, therapeutic care. Most medical surgical units now care for patients whose severity of illness would have placed them in ICU 10 or 15 years ago. If hospitals would staff according to the needs of individual patients (acuity) it would be fine. But they have not done so consistantly in the 8 years since it was required. Most facilities have been saying, "We are changing our system. Give it a try." for 8 years now.

No matter what you should not be stuck with only one nurse three nights in a row. When you stopped admitting patients due to only having one nurse where did people go?

Are you the only hospital in the county?

If not the DHS would have been consulted to divert patients to other hospitals and trouble shoot in other ways

Page 7 (of the FAQs) answers a question about "swing beds" in rural hospitals.

On page 4 is a definition of 'healthcare emergency"

I forgot to include the line in the article that Cindy Daly is in Santa Rosa, a city with many hospitals, registries, and nurses.Area hospitals also cancel nurses for low census or send them home early after a discharge or two.

A hospital should plan better than to have an emergency because two nurses called in sick. Patients suffer.

Page 2 of the FAQs explains there is no need to self report unless the welfare, safety, and/or health of patients, visitors, and/or staff is threatened.

The State (DHS) must investigate all complaints. Patients and family members make the majority of complaints.

There is no requirement to stop admitting patients because the ratios are not being met. The DHS may order the number of beds reduced or a unit closed if the violation of the ratios is so severe that it poses an immediate and substantial hazard to the health or safety of the patients.

The term "sentinel event" is a JCAHO term, not the DHS. The JCAHO does not require self reporting. If they become aware of a sentinel event through the media or report by the facility or a patients family they will investigate. The facility must do a "Root Cause Analysis" on all sentinel events. This should look at systemic causes and actions to prevent such events in the future.

When we nurses began the long struggle for ratios hospitals were laying off RNs and replacing us with unlicensed assistive personnel (UAPs). There were many newspaper articles about that.

I am on call tonight from 7 P to 5 A. I expect to be called in if someone doesn't show up at 11:00 for M/S, at 3:00 am for ER, if there are more than usual number of admits, or an emergency 1:1 heart case. The committee at my hospital worked with management to pay a nurse to be on call rather than call him or her off. I volunteer for this so others don't have to. (plus I can read or come to ALLNURSES.COM)

I plan to find the shortage info if they don't call me. In the meantime I am posting an article below that explains a lot.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion