But that was not the scenario on Saturday. Vice President Al Gore happened to be in town, interviewing with The Chronicle. Police barriers erected, Secret Service in full effect, Cadillac limousines complete with the "Vice President of the United States of America" seals, and snipers posted on the roofs of neighboring buildings, the scene was elaborate, yet surprisingly calm. A small crowd gathered outside The Chronicle building hoping to catch a glimpse of the presidential hopeful.

Jen and I were part of the gathering and each shook Mr. Gore's hand. He was a pleasant fellow. Calm, not rushed in the slightest. I wish I had had more to say. Even "Welcome to San Francisco" would've been nice.

Oh well. Maybe next time.

-Gabe *************************** ADVERTISEMENT *************************** YOUR AD HERE! Want to send a message to 1,700+ individuals each week? Place your ad here! This newsletter is not spam, so everyone who receives it has asked for it. For rates and other information on advertising, drop a message to ads@capenq.com. *********************************************************************

There is justification for this view. During the boom years of the 1980s, major spending measures were approved. When the worst economic downturn since 1936 hit the state in the spring of 1990, such spending proposals were rejected. When the economy picked up again, they had a better chance of passage, such as with the billion-dollar water bond, Proposition 204, in 1996.

The election on March 7 offers a classic opportunity to test this theory. The $4 billion water-parks package, Propositions 12 and 13, that is going before voters represents the most significant environmental spending scheme to confront California voters since 1960, when the electorate approved the State Water Project.

There is little dispute that the projects contained in both propositions are meritorious, and few people oppose protections for watersheds, improved drinking water systems and conservation programs, an expanded state park system, aggressive land preservation and acquisition, and other programs.

The question is whether tight-fisted Californians will take the plunge and favor the measures when they enter their voting booths. Fiscal conservatives, perhaps the only significant opponents to either measure, note that the package would cost about $7 billion to pay back over the 25-year life of the bonds.

When the State Water Project was approved, California enjoyed an era of expanding revenues and self-confidence. In dollars adjusted for inflation, the $1.75 billion approved 40 years ago would total at least $9 billion today, perhaps more. Imagine a $9 billion bond measure today -- would such a huge proposal win approval?

A lot has happened in California during the past four decades. Crippling inflation led by spiraling property values was followed by recession and near depression. The demographics of the state changed dramatically, military bases were shut down statewide, freeway spending came to an abrupt halt, the population mushroomed, environmental quality deteriorated, the prison and jail populations skyrocketed, and an assortment of disasters -- both man-made and natural -- rocked the state.

The cumulative effect of these negatives leaves the voters of 2000 more cautious than the voters of 1960. Their leaders are more cautious, too: There is no Pat Brown in the governor's office, no Jesse Unruh in the Legislature. Gov. Gray Davis has announced his support for Propositions 12 and 13, but unlike Brown, the present governor -- despite his talk of "implementing his vision" -- has not used his office as a bully pulpit to persuade and cajole voters and politicians to get behind the programs.

Indeed, the fact that Propositions 12 and 13 are on the ballot at all is clear testimony to the timid quality of our state public officials. Rather than take the lead to approve such programs on their own -- programs which most acknowledge are long-overdue -- they pass the buck to the voters.

In the end, the real leaders on these issues may be the voters, and the nonpartisan array of environmental and business interests who want the state's infrastructure repaired.

More power to them.

Workers compensation, as you discuss in your article (Feb. 14), is a complex system. And while the public's interest may diverge away from discussions of workers' comp, it is important that the public realize the great benefits that result from workers' programs within the workers' comp system including vocational rehabilitation.

In California, over 1,600 employees sustain injuries on the job each day. Some are able to return to work without assistance, but many more require medical treatment and physical rehabilitation. That is why the state created workers' compensation. Those who cannot return to their usual employment require job counseling, training or placement to return to work. Vocational rehabilitation professionals along with private post-secondary schools and public education provide these much needed services.

Return to work is the key component of every vocational rehabilitation program. In fact, vocational rehabilitation professionals in California are helping between 51 to 73 percent of injured employees return to work, according to data collected from various sources, including the California Workers' Compensation Institute and the President's Council of California.

Returning injured employees to the work force is beneficial to both employers and workers in California. A lot of debate will be forthcoming on the workers' compensation issue this year, and legislative efforts must focus on providing the opportunity for injured workers to return to suitable and gainful employment. Any thought of abandoning vocational rehabilitation would be devastating to injured workers and their families, leaving them without help to return to work.

Sincerely,

Linda Bello-Ruiz
President
California Association of Rehabilitation and Reemployment Professionals

Tri-County Counseling
Santa Rosa, Calif.

This handy directory lists alphabetically all agency and department-level organizations, most division and branch level offices. Names and titles of state offices and officials, with addresses, phone and fax numbers. Where a vacancy exists the position is listed without a name. Convenient 4" x 9" fits in your briefcase or on your desk. With the election of a Democratic Governor, major shifts are occurring in personnel and state agency structure. Order now at: http://www.capenq.com/order or fax (916) 442-1260.

*** NOW TAKING ORDERS FOR 2000 PUBLICATIONS! ***

*** 2000 Pocket Directory of the California Legislature ***

You need the 2000 Pocket Directory now! To be published March of 2000. Stay up-to-date on Legislative contact information. Order the newest edition of "the little red book" today! Place your secure online order through our Web site: http://www.capenq.com/order, or fax (916) 442-1260.

*** 2000 U.S. Congress Directory ***

Order the 2000 U.S. Congress Directory now! To be published March of 2000. Stay up-to-date on Congressional contact information for the entire U.S. Order the newest edition today! Place your secure online order through our Web site: http://www.capenq.com/order or fax (916) 442-1260.

*** UPDATED INFORMATION NOW AVAILABLE ONLINE ***

*** Committee Rosters ***

You asked for it, you got it! The updated listings for both Assembly and Senate committees are now available through our Web site. Point your browser to http://www.capenq.com/gov/info.html for links to the rosters.

*** Current Legislative Rosters ***

Looking for the current rosters of the Assembly or Senate? Head on over to http://www.capenq.com/gov/info.html for links to the current lists -- updated with district, member name, party, room and phone number.