Your opinion, my opinion, lets just call the whole thing off!

They say not to pick fights with people who buy their ink by the barrel.

In this day and age, the better advice is DO NOT ENGAGE when it comes to cranky people who have Internet access.

When will I learn?

A gentleman who used to live in Kern County but long ago moved away to the coast, Frank Pecarich, doesn't like my recent scrutiny of State Sen. Dean Florez and his attempts to use his position as Majority Leader to increase his own name recognition for his upcoming run for Lt. Governor.

For example, when swine flu became news, Florez quickly called a hearing on the state's preparedness even though the Gov. had already sent out information detailing the state's plan.
I felt that was overkill and suggested it was yet another hearing that was more about Florez than any flu, swine or otherwise.

Then I wrote a column telling people to stop rushing to the ER with a case of the sniffles because they were clogging up the system when our health professionals were already overloaded with legitimate swabs to test.

Anyhoo, Pecarich lobbed this into my email this afternoon:

Pecarich to me:
Monday, May 11, 2009 1:16 PM
Swine Flu Strain Is Severe as 1957 Pandemic Virus

May 11 (Bloomberg) -- The swine flu strain spreading around the world rivals the severity of the 1957 “Asian flu” pandemic, which was about four to eight times more deadly than a typical seasonal flu epidemic, scientists said. (Link to Bloomberg story.)

Swine flu: CHILL. You're not dying... (Link to my column) (Me: I think that's supposed to be me under the dunce cap.)
Me to Pecarich:
Monday, May 11, 2009 1:36 PM
Dear Mr. Pecarich,

Thanks for reading and thanks for your feedback, such as it is.

IF you were to actually READ my column, you would see that I suggested people not panic but be aware of the situation.

Panicking and overrunning our ERs doesn’t help.

Neither does calling foolish hearings that only cause people to be away from their posts for no real reason, other than to boost a certain politician’s name recognition.

My observation on that issue with regard to Mr. Florez, I suspect, is really where your angst lies rather than with the column you reference below.

Even so, please feel free to go back and read my column. Unless, of course, you’re too busy searching the Internet for clip art to use in your little name calling sprees.

Thanks again for reading.

Lois Henry


Pecarich to me:
Monday, May 11, 2009 3:32 PM

Lois:

You always have an excuse for your journalistic misdeeds which have, irrespective of your tortured rationale, severely hurt the credibility of your employer. Even you should sense that the print media is virtually DOA and that is mostly because drivel and misinformation such as yours (Me: OK, wait, you lost me. My tortured rationale of what? That swine flu isn't that bad yet? Or that Pecarich is mad at me about my Florez comments? And I'm single-handidly responsible for the demise of newspapers? Wow! Don't tell my bosses.) has continued to reduce readership of many, many publications.

Your opinion of the value of my opinion is also worthless as I have seen how you erroneously judge others. Incidentally, you need to read the comments of my very highly regarded wife (ME: pasted below with my comments) as to how your beliefs and commentary has misled the few readers you have left. I'm sure someone you copied your message to could provide you those comments. You might also note the comments of Steve Outing in the below URLs...

http://steveouting.com/2008/11/11/why-newspapers-are-likely-to-die-as-we-know-them/

http://steveouting.com/2008/11/14/what-a-change-sensitive-company-looks-like/

Frank Pecarich

Me to Pecarich:
Monday, May 11, 2009 4:18 PM

Frank,

Re: “Your opinion re: my opinion”

Right back at ya, buddy.

Lois Henry


Pecarich to me:
Monday, May 11, 2009 4:27 PM
(Me: I think his response pretty much says it all)



To my bosses, Mike Jenner and Ginger Moorhouse as well as Editorial Page Editor Robert Price:
Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 20:47:22 EDT
Subject: Lois Henry and Senator Florez

Mike and Robert -- I've met each of you during my years as an active member of the Bakersfield League of Women Voters and in Dianne Hardisty's absence, I'm writing you about my concern with some of the criticism your columnist seems to be directing at Senator Florez. First, let me say that I hope this flurry of negativity and suspicion is not a cheap attempt to replace the Florez v. Parra controversies that your newspaper loved to exploit for their entertainment value. That truly would be beneath your newspaper. (Me: Hey, we weren't the ones feuding!)

To put my concerns in context, it may help to know that I spent my career on public policy issues, both in and out of government. The efforts of which I'm most proud were as Staff Director of the House of Representatives Ways and Means Oversight SubCommittee. (Me: Ahh, so a former government employee who helped conduct hearings for a living is defending having such hearings. No conflict there.) As a staff, we prepared the Members for hearings on government programs and agency administration to determine how well programs and executives were working, or more often, not working as intended. We also discovered during the course of our investigations, huge gaps that had been ignored or overlooked by the administrators and managers of the federal agencies under our jurisdiction. Our work formed the basis of much corrective action, some legislative and some by executive action.

Unfortunately, in Congress, legislative oversight enjoyed a brief tenure in the spotlight. When Members realized it was hard work with little payoff in terms of press or political chips, they turned to other endeavors. As a result, although every House Committee is technically responsible for doing oversight of the agencies and programs under their jurisdiction, few engage in any meaningful efforts. The notable exception is Congressman Henry Waxman from CA. I'm sure you are aware of the benefits to taxpayers of the many investigations and oversight hearings he has held.

At the state level, I know of no legislator who does meaningful oversight other than Senator Florez. He is to be commended, not twitted, for engaging in these efforts which have brought and will bring significant reform and improved efficiency to state government and its programs. The first effort of which I am aware was his review years ago of the "no bid" state contract that had been given to Oracle (Me: You know, another outcome of those hearings was a more cumbersome process for state agencies to obtain new software, like the Employment Development Department, which Florez just slammed in yet even more hearings for not being able to respond faster to the flood of unemployeed workers) for what seemed to be an excessive amount of money; further performance on that contract was slow and not meeting the state's requirements. The state auditor finally issued a report on the contract saying it could cost the state $41 million more than other contracts, rather than saving the millions Oracle had claimed. Senator Florez was criticized that time by some because it made Governor Davis (a member of his own party) look bad. More recently he has taken on the critically important issue of food safety which has antagonized a politically important industry (including local farmers) and sponsored legislation to improve air quality in the Valley as well as protect farm workers health.

We could only hope that we had more such watchdogs in Sacramento who were not afraid to rattle some cages. There are too few state legislators who seem to care about and act on the broader public interest in the issues they are addressing. Why your columnists would want to direct barbs and unwarranted criticism at one who is acting in the public interest, and spending an enormous amount of time and energy doing so, is frankly beyond me. (Me: Florez is also spending public money and conducting public business. And for that privilege, he has willingly put himself under the microscope. Sometimes that's not the most comfortable place to be.)

Pam Pecarich