Boaltie at the RNC
As someone posted late last year, Ricky Gill (Boalt 2012) is running for Congress for Califronia's 9th Congressional District (which I think covers most of San Joaquin County, some of eastern Contra Costa County, and some of southern Sacramento County). A couple days ago, he gave a speech at the RNC. He is just outside my Congressional District, but I'm sure there are a few Boalties out there that are registered in his district. Here is a link to his speech.
It is pretty brief (just under two minutes), and doesn't say anything terribly earth-shattering. It is nice, for me at least, to see young people running for office - he just made the constitutional cut-off for Congress at 25 years old. My time at Boalt didn't overlap with his at all, but I'm sure some of you trolls out there know him and have your own thoughts.
It is pretty brief (just under two minutes), and doesn't say anything terribly earth-shattering. It is nice, for me at least, to see young people running for office - he just made the constitutional cut-off for Congress at 25 years old. My time at Boalt didn't overlap with his at all, but I'm sure some of you trolls out there know him and have your own thoughts.
posted by Slam Master A at 1:33 PM
20 Comments:
It would be nice to have a young person running for office who understands what we go through, someone who has student loans and such.
However, I don't see how a trust fund baby who reports 1.3-5.6 million in assets and whose only loan is the 152,222 which he loaned his campaign is a good thing. I don't think we'll see more young people in congress, unless you count more trust fund babies getting congress seats as graduation gifts.
5:09 - student debt is a problem I am fortunate not to have to deal with, but the thoughts of my classmates and fellow alumni here have made me think about it a fair amount lately.
Given that the UC system has eight large campuses (sorry Merced and Hastings/UCSF medical) in various districts in the State, I am somewhat surprised that there has not been a coordinated effort to elect congressional representatives in those districts with the issues of students in mind - namely, tuition and student loan obligations.
Now, there are obviously some problems, such as a lot of students are registered in the city they grow up in rather than the city they attend college, but I would think with enough push, there could be a system-wide movement, similar to the tuition hike protests from a couple years ago, that might get the result you are looking for.
There may be other logistical issues I am overlooking (one that I'm sure would play largely is the need for students of different political persuasions to overcome party lines), but I am fairly surprised it hasn't happened in at least one community.
Ricky Gill - Hasn't spent any time working after college (aside from internships). Went Princeton-> Boalt -> Possibly Congress. Running on a boilerplate "small business" conservatism that isn't reflected by his own life experience (inherited a shit ton of money/assets from his parents who invited him into the family business. He paints his parents as hard scrabble immigrants - they're doctors who run a chain of clinics/offices. The farm he touts is mostly wine grapes.
Jerry McNerny - PhD in differential geometry. He spent almost his entire pre-Congressional career developing wind energy technology and implementing it - through a company he started and as a consultant to other companies. (Wind energy is the next big thing in the San Joquin valley). He voted for health coverage for all, the jobs and energy stimulus package and has opposed drilling in the Arctic. He's also voted to stop DEA agents from raiding legal CA pot dispensaries.
It's laughable that Gill thinks he's anywhere as near qualified to lead as McNerny, a guy who got into politics only 8 years ago, at the end of a long and fruitful career aimed at helping Californians and the US replace its fossil fuel energy needs with clean ones. To run so early in life, with so little experience, it's hard not to draw the conclusion that Gill isn't doing it simply to have power and try to move on to bigger positions. How can you hope to govern or relate to the people you govern when you're a multi-millionaire 25 year old who's never held a real job?
Out come the trolls. I don't give a shit about Ricky Gill, Jerry McNerny, or even "the San Joquin [sic] valley." But I have noticed that every time Ricky Gill is mentioned on this blog, someone crows about how he inherited money. Don't get me wrong, I envy him too. But let's be real, no 25-year-old who is not independently wealthy has time to run for Congress. You're not going to get some 25-year-old with $200k in law school debt to run--it's way too risky.
How's that trolling?
His background will inform how he votes and "governs."
And, of course, you mistake envy for wanting to expose him for who he is - a trust fund baby who wants to cut taxes for the rich and make life harder for the middle class. He also has no life experience, unless you call inheriting wealth, going to Princeton and then directly to Boalt life experience. You're trolling by accusing us of trolling.
Fear leads to anger; anger leads to hate; hate leads to suffering.
One of the least inspiring speeches of the RNC - and that's saying something.
A few points.
First, a bit of a bummer that there is so much hate here for someone that, through no fault of his own, was born into money and chooses to use it in politics rather than just making more money. At least Romney chose to make his money. Someone with money running for Congress is neither unusual or on its own a negative. In fact it is exactly what our republican form of government should be: allowing those with the time (and often independent wealth) to research the issues and have thought-out views on a variety of subjects be the ones to lead...instead of those doc review monkeys in big law but form opinions from the Daily Show.
Second, I have not researched his positions and generally take no stand (yet) on whether I agree. And lack of experience is a definite negative for a leader. But youth was a positive for you libs despite Obama being called "too young" to be President, so why not here?
Finally, Gill is one of the uncommon Boalties who is willing to express political believes other than the liberal party line (or left of it). I'm glad he is taking that stand, and also glad that he chose Boalt despite the antagonism he likely saw there. The place is better for it because of the debate it creates.
*that form opinions from ....
Gill wasn't at school enough for anyone to be antagonistic towards him. He didn't even come to graduation.
I had a class with him during 2L. I thought he was a nice enough guy and thoughtful. But while I like the idea of a Boaltie running for office (basically from a "hey, this is neat" perspective), our issues don't line up and mid 20s is way too young to me to send someone to Congress. I do hope he stays at it and refines his platform/gets more experience somewhere. Then we'll talk.
While I don't agree with his politics, I think we've given old white guys enough rope and they have hanged us all. So might as well give the younger set a try (and I'm over 40 and saying this, remembering just how clueless I was in my mid-20s)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_youngest_members_of_the_United_States_Congress
Hey McWho: *who form opinions...
Hey 7:57, maybe he meant "that"? Maybe he only has a problem with the people forming opinions from the Daily Show? Not every doc review monkey is objectionable!
I'm going to go off topic here. There seems to be a lot of Berkeley Law professors and faculty who are married to each other. Does anyone know of a list of them that exists online somewhere? Maybe N&B could create one (with proper asterisk, of course). I keep finding myself surprised about how the connections here work. (Ex: Pam S*amuelson, of copyright law fame, is married to Bob Gl*shko, of the Berkeley iSchool and creator of XML).
very good post
Armen,
We're coming up on a solid month during the school year without a new post. Perhaps it's time to re-invigorate this site or bury it?
How would one "bury" a website? Even if there isn't much new content, keeping it online still serves a purpose.
The long story short of it is this - it's hard to get current students involved in a site that has such an aggressive group of conservative alums who are willing to shit talk anonymously.
Current students have generally enjoyed what fellow students have posted only to be surprised and saddened by the general response and tone on this blog. This has created a situation where few people want to post because the reaction is generally just so shitty. This probably isn't going to change. But, N&B still serves as a good clearing house for OCI and Bar questions and so should and shall remain.
Instead of broad-brushing and complaining about the contributors, why don't you ask for an invitation to become one or solicit others whom you think would be a good addition? Feel free to email Armen or myself.
Post a Comment
<< Home