MISCELLANEOUS: Report/analysis, investment approach, wealthiest African Americans vs. white investors: "The big difference between how wealthy African-American and white investors treat their money" ....

* Washington Post:  "The big difference between how wealthy African-American and white investors treat their money" - From the WP:

The nation’s wealthiest African Americans take a far more conservative approach toward investing than whites of similar means, according to a new report.

The study, done by Credit Suisse in conjunction with the Institute on Assets and Social Policy at Brandeis University, found that the wealthiest 5 percent of African Americans—those with a net worth of $357,000 or better–-pour a greater share of their holdings into relatively low-risk, low-reward investment vehicles, such as certificates of deposit, saving bonds, and insurance policies, rather than stocks, bonds and mutual funds. In addition, those well-off African Americans tend to have more of their wealth in real estate and less in businesses than similarly situated whites.

Pamela Thomas-Graham, Credit Suisse’s chief marketing and talent officer and head of the bank’s New Markets effort, said the investment strategy of African Americans makes sense, given their relatively poor experiences with banks through the years and their historically fragile financial standing.

One study cited in the report noted that fewer than one in four African Americans who were in the top quartile of black wealth holders in 1984, remained there in 2004. The report also cited a study that found that black business owners received bank loans with less frequency, of smaller size and at higher interest rates than white-owned companies. “If you are in the top five percent and you are African American you probably are smart to have a more cautious approach,” Thomas-Graham said in an interview. “Historically, there is more [downward] mobility, and fragility.”

Still, that means African Americans are leaving a lot of money on the table by eschewing the financial vehicles that tend to grow most rapidly. Overall whites have nearly $8 of wealth for every $1 held by African Americans, according to the Institute on Assets and Social Policy. The Institute’s breakdown of the factors driving that difference is below........................


POLITICS/BUSINESS (National): U.S. Food and Drug Administration, new rules, calorie-posting requirements: "Calorie counts: Coming to a restaurant, movie theater, vending machine near you" .... 

* Washington Post:  "Calorie counts: Coming to a restaurant, movie theater, vending machine near you" - From the WP:

It’s about to get a lot tougher to hide from calories. Chain restaurants, vending machines, grocery stores, coffee shops and pizza joints will soon have to display detailed calorie information on their menus under long-awaited rules to be issued Tuesday by the Food and Drug Administration. The calorie-posting requirements extend to an array of foods that Americans consume in their daily lives: popcorn at the movie theater, muffins at a bakery, a deli sandwich, a milkshake at an ice cream shop, a drive-through cheeseburger, a hot dog at Costco or Target.


Chain restaurants and other establishments will have one year to comply with the regulations. Owners of vending machines will have two years to post calorie information for each item inside the machines on nearby placards, posters or digital displays.

Activists who for years have pushed for more transparent and consistent menu labeling, saying it would provide an important tool in combating the nation’s obesity epidemic, praised the FDA’s action.


The enthusiasm wasn’t universal.


The rules date to a little-publicized provision in the Obama administration’s broad 2010 health-care law. It required food establishments to post calorie information on menus and drive-through signs, but exactly which retailers would be subject to the law has been the focus of intense debate, relentless lobbying and years of delay.

The FDA first issued its menu-labeling proposals in 2011. Since then, the agency has received hundreds of comments about what food should be subject to the rules — with consumer advocates, pizza places and theater chains among those trying to sway the administration. “It was much more complicated than we originally thought it would be,” Hamburg told reporters Monday.

Ultimately, the regulations issued Tuesday include a swath of places where Americans buy food, although the FDA also carved out exemptions............................


MORNING MEMOS: San Francisco Bay, pollution, "Environmental group to sue San Jose for sewage spills and trash pollution"; Orange County, "OC Supervisors Renew Call for State Campaign Finance Oversight"; San Diego, transportation, Court of Appeal ruling, "Appeals court rejects SANDAG plan" .... 

***Various items this morning from across the spectrum of politics and/or public policy....

* Voice of OC:  "OC Supervisors Renew Call for State Campaign Finance Oversight"

* U-T San Diego:  "Appeals court rejects SANDAG plan"

* San Jose Mercury News:  "Environmental group to sue San Jose for sewage spills and trash pollution"


POLITICS (State, National, Local): November 2014 elections, evem "worse" turnout than expected: Report/analysis, "Election turnout in state was far worse than previous low"; also, commentary (David Sirota), "Big elections with little journalism" .... 

* San Francisco Chronicle:  "Election turnout in state was far worse than previous low" - From the Chronicle:

The pundits who predicted a lousy turnout for California’s Nov. 4 election got it wrong. It was way worse than that. With almost every vote counted across the state, it appears about 42 percent of the state’s 17.8 million registered voters cast ballots. That shatters the previous low of 50.5 percent set in 2002, when Gov. Gray Davis won re-election over Republican businessman Bill Simon.

“The turnout was less than we predicted and worse than almost anyone expected,” said Mark DiCamillo, whose Field Poll survey had anticipated a 46.1 percent turnout.

Dan Newman, a Democratic consultant who worked on the winning re-election efforts of Gov. Jerry Brown, Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Kamala Harris, said it wasn’t easy getting pollsters to even consider a 41 or 42 percent turnout model. “We used a turnout range of 40 percent to 50 percent, and it was hard to convince pollsters it would go that low,” he said. “They found it hard to believe it would go much below 50 percent.”

Turnout wasn’t just a California problem. . . . . . . .

The numbers aren’t a total surprise, since midterm elections typically draw fewer voters than a presidential race. Two years ago, when President Obama was on the top of the ballot, 72 percent of California voters cast ballots. But when the numbers sink into the abyss, there’s more than history at work...............................

***ALSO, Related:

* San Francisco Chronicle (Op-Ed - David Sirota):  "Big elections with little journalism"


SACRAMENTO: Assembly District 39, final tally, Raul Bocanegra concedes to Patty Lopez: "Neophyte Patty Lopez takes Raul Bocanegra's California Assembly seat"; also, "Raul Bocanegra concedes to Patty Lopez in Assembly District 39 race"; "Ballot order scrutinized in 39th Assembly District race" ....

***39th Assembly District, final tally, Patty Lopez leading by 467 votes, Raul Bocanegra concession....

* Los Angeles Times:  "Neophyte Patty Lopez takes Raul Bocanegra's California Assembly seat"

* Daily News:  "Raul Bocanegra concedes to Patty Lopez in Assembly District 39 race"

* Sacramento Bee:  "Ballot order scrutinized in 39th Assembly District race"