The Public Policy Institute of California released an exhaustive poll revealing citizens' preferences on a slew of issues. Overall, at the state level, Californians greatly distrust their leadership, possess a strong desire for change, and are cautious concerning the type of reform they're willing to endorse.  At the federal level, Californians are much more positive in their outlook.  Here's a statistical breakdown of the various categories: 

As a result of a $500 million federal loan, Solyndra could hire up to 4,000 workers for its solar panel plant in Fremont.  Governor Schwarzenegger is hailing the subsidy as a triumph for job creation, green energy, and Obama's stimulus package.  However, the solar market faces multiple challenges.  Start up costs for solar energy companies are extremely high, and loans are difficult to obtain due to a tight credit market.  Demand for solar energy may also be insufficient to produce a thriving boom due to relatively low oil prices, at least in the near-term.

In flush times, luxury and abstract pleasures are welcomed, and with good reason: why sweat the small stuff when you're riding high? During hard economic times and amid debt problems, there is no logical reason to continue spending as though it's sustainable. With California still in the red to the tune of more than $20 billion, the question arises: how appropriate is it to direct resources toward "green" jobs?

This isn't just a function of wasteful California spending; it is inextricably tied to federal spending programs as well.

Fox and Hounds journalist, Joe Matthews, made a number of thought-provoking statements regarding the California GOP's decision to prevent independent, non-partisan voters from participating in its state primary.  For example, while he recognizes the GOP's perogative in restricting certain voters, he asks a very pointed question:  why should we have to pay for your primary, then?  

The federal trial court in Washington handed down the attached opinion yesterday in the ongoing litigation over their open primary.  There were three main challenges that remained to be resolved after the Supreme Court's decision:

1) an as-applied challenge, based on potential voter confusion (the Supreme Court expressly only ruled that the open primary was not facially invalid);

2) a claim by minor parties that their access to the ballot was unconstitutionally infringed; and

3) claims that the open primary violated the parties' trademarks.

As the California drought goes into its third year, government authorities at last appear to be serious about addressing the situation. Rather than either ignoring the situation completely or paying lip service, it appears that some new water legislation may be in the cards for Californians.

California is known for incredible jumps in innovation and new technology. Every big city in California is known for some major innovation, association or business. Los Angeles: Hollwood. San Diego: technology and armed forces. San Francisco: finance and technology. The list goes on, of course. 

In an interview with CNBC, Gray Davis gives his assessment of California's budget mess and some positive words for California's non-partisan primary initiative.

Mired in a steep budget deficit, some California officials claim that legalizing marijuana could generate a significant revenue stream.  According to the State Board of Equalization, marijuana sales would raise $990 million from a $50 per ounce fee and $392 million in sales taxes.  A trio of Northern California criminal attorneys has already submitted a pot legalization measure to the state attorney general's office for consideration.  If accepted, the measure would require 443,000 signatures to place The Tax, Regulate, and Control Cannabis Act on the November 2010 ballo

From FreeandEqual.org: A Back Room Budget Deal earlier this year means the so-called "Top-Two" Primary will be voted on by California citizens.

The vote would institute a Washington state style "Top-Two" system, in which the top two vote getters in the primary are the only names to appear on the November ballot -even if that means only one political party is represented.

Free & Equal board member Richard Winger writes in Ballot Access News: