Skip to main content


Unfortunately, I spectacularly misspelled California Senator Michael Rubio's name in this morning's  article. It was MICHAEL Rubio of Bakersfield whose key vote saved our bill--AB 1657-- and with it the funding for the Roman Reed Spinal Cord Injury Research Act. The bill itself is not out of the woods, another major committee hearing, Appropriations, plus the full Senate vote, plus the Governor's approval, if we can earn it-- but we would have died on Tuesday if not for the vision and forethought of Michael Rubio.

To my incredible embarrassment, I attributed MICHAEL Rubio's vote to Marco Rubio, which is the name of the Florida Republican who opposes the research.

I will be putting this apology both on my personal website,, as well as on the great Daily Kos website where the piece ran this morning.

Again,my profound apologies to California Senator MICHAEL RUBIO of Bakersfield.


Don C. Reed

Unfortunately, I spectacularly misspelled Michael Rubio's name in the below article. Michael Rubio is the California Senator whose key vote saved our bill-- and with it the funding for the Roman Reed Spinal Cord Injury Research Act. The bill itself is not out of the woods, another major committee hearing, Appropriations, plus the full Senate vote, plus the Governor's approval, if we can earn it-- but we would have died on Tuesday if not for the vision and forethought of Michael Rubio.

To my incredible embarassment, I attributed Michael Rubio's vote to Marco Rubio, who is an enemy of the research.

I will be putting this apology both on my personal website,, and on the Daily Kos website where the piece ran today.

Again, profound apologies to California Senator MICHAEL Rubio.


Don C. Reed
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Reed
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 1:57 PM
Subject: THE AGONY AND THE EXHAUSTION: the Price of Political Change?

THE AGONY AND THE EXHAUSTION: the Price of Political Change?

By Don C. Reed

THE AGONY AND THE ECSTASY, by Irving Wallace, describes the creative process of Michaelangelo, as he painted the Sistine Chapel. Put a small change in the last word, making it “exhaustion”, and you have a pretty good description of politics as well.

Tuesday, June 26th. Everybody in the California Capitol was running on fumes, or so it seemed,   in the halls outside Conference Room 4203.

Inside that room, nine people would decide the fate HB 1657, a way to fund the Roman Reed Spinal Cord Injury research Act, named after my paralyzed son.  If that bill (AB 1657) became law, it would impose a $1 add-on penalty to traffic tickets, raising approximately  $3 million a year for the fight against paralysis.

Our bill had just passed the Assembly already.  We now needed this committee, (Transportation and Housing), then Appropriations, then the full body of the Senate—and if the Governor signed it, the research would go forward—and my son would have a chance to walk again.

Right now, Roman was working his cell phone furiously, asking friends for one more phone call, one more e-mail to the members of the committee, especially Mark DeSaulnier, the Chairman.

I was running up and down the stairs between the floors of the Sacramento Capitol building—no time to wait for elevators—taking last minute messages to the offices of the committee members.

We needed five ”aye” votes. Five out of nine.

At last, there were no more errands to run; no way to influence the situation, but only just to sit and wait for our turn at the witness stand.

I took an aisle seat in the conference room, waiting for Roman to pull in beside me.

At three o’clock, Assemblyman Wieckowski approached the podium, adjusted the mike.

“Hi, Don!” whispered a voice behind me.  It was Angela Gilliard of the University of California, here in support!

I heard the click and hummm of a power chair.  As we three headed for the witness area, I passed Roman a copy of the speech I had written for him.

Roman placed the speech on the table in front of him, looked at it for a moment—and then shoved it away.

“I don’t need to read it—I live it,” he said. Which was effective, I supposed, except that I now had to squeeze some of his planned remarks into my already crowded three minute speaking time…But Roman is a force of nature, and knows what he is doing.

He covered the emotional aspects.  I listed the nuts-and-bolts. Angela Gilliard explained how every dollar California spent had attracted four dollars from the federal government, giving us an actual profit, quadruple the bang for the buck. Fourteen million over ten years had brought in sixty-four million from the National Institutes of Health and other sources, new money for the state…

The Chair thanked us for our testimony—but there were not enough members present for the vote.

So…we waited some more.

I sat there twitching from too much coffee, planning what to say if we lost.

The program was great—no one disagreed.  Well, except maybe the California Catholic Conference, which called part of our research “immoral”.  We had funded embryonic stem cell research (4 projects out of 129) early on.  I was proud of the research and most Catholic families (like my own) supported it.

Our original $1.5 million a year had come from the general fund: paid for by the California taxpayer. But now, thanks to the Republican no-new-taxes pledge, there was not enough money in the budget.  

Why was it so hard for California to raise taxes on the rich?  People called Democrats the “tax-and-spend” party.  I never understood why this was an insult.  Of course we should tax and of course we should spend, fighting  problems too big for families on their own--what was wrong with that?  Why do rich people object to taxes they can so easily afford? They became rich off our state and nation—why would they not want to help—were they not patriotic?

We had been forced to come up with alternative funding.  

Traffic ticket add-ons were a natural: unsafe driving may cause car crash, a major source of spinal cord injury.  

Of course, we did not enjoy slapping an extra dollar onto already expensive traffic tickets.  But what choice did we have?

Should we sit by and do nothing while the program died?

I help my son get out of bed in the morning. That is okay for now, but I am 66 years old.  What happens when my strength fails?

We just had to win. No fallback position. If we failed this year, we would come back again and again until they get tired of telling us no.

“They have a quorum”, and Jeff Barbosa, “enough members for a deciding vote.”

But was it enough to win?

One by one the votes were tallied. The “ayes” on our side: Mark DeSaulnier, Alan Lowenthal, Joe Smitian—and Wyland, Mark Wyland, a Republican-- thank you Sir!

But it only tallied to four aye votes, 4-2. The no votes came from Ted Gaines and Tom Harman, both Republicans.

Democratic members Christine Kehoe and Fran Pavley did not vote, I don’t know why.  I felt a chill up my spine.  Senator Kehoe was the Chair of the Appropriations Committee where we must go next, if we passed today.

And then at last Senator MICHAEL RUBIO of Bakersfield came in, sitting down very casually, as if he did not hold our future in his hand: the lady in charge asked his vote, and he smiled and said “aye” and we had our fifth vote…

As I walked down 12th street afterwards, trying to remember where the parking lot was, I called Gloria.  She asked if I was excited; I said no, too tired.  How did Sacramento people handle this, I wondered. I just had the one bill, and my brain felt fricasseed—how did legislators keep track of a couple hundred bills—especially when there was not enough money to go around?

My answer was ice cream (technically mocha almond fudge gelato, an Italian delight with absolutely no calories whatsoever) to eat on the way home.

I got the biggest one they had, but I should have gotten two.

Because our bill was still alive.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Traffic ticket add-ons for SCI research funding... (0+ / 0-)

    That's a brilliant idea... After all, it was reckless driving that resulted in breaking my spine at T5/6 resulting in a complete SCI injury. I still have a 'need for speed' (a 6.2 liter supercharged V8 powers my daily driver), but, suffice it to say I am much more subdued, and pick and choose my moments.

    As it pertains to the traffic tickets: only $1? Why not $10? Instead of $3 million, you generate $30 million.

    Even so... the amounts of money thrown at R&D for spinal injury (and R&D for virtually everything in general) in this country is abysmally low. I say cut the military budget 80%, and reinvest all of that in public works projects and scientific R&D spending... like that'll ever happen...

    At least we're making progress in the California Republic! :-)

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site