A worthy tribute

By L. PIERCE CARSON

Register Staff Writer

Big bottles of cult status wine, no-stone-left-unturned trips all over the world, lavish wine parties, automobiles filled with collectible wine and old-fashioned star power combined Saturday night to push Auction Napa Valley 2008 proceeds past the $10 million mark.
The second time this decade that the valley’s trendsetting charity wine event exceeded all expectations, proceeds for the 28th annual fundraiser totaled $10.3 million, just $200,000 short of the record set in 2005.

“It’s fabulous,” enthused Kathleen Heitz Myers, who co-chaired this year’s auction with her mother, Alice, and brother, David.
Noting that “people come here from all over the world” to bid on exceptional wine lots donated by the 300-member trade organization, Napa Valley Vintners, Myers said the outcome “validates what we do in the community. I can only offer praise for all the staff and volunteers do, and thank the bidders for their support. I’m thrilled.”

Jay Leno, host of “The Tonight Show,” returned to wine country to kick off this year’s dinner auction with trademark quips and observations of current events. He tackled everything from politics to out-of-control teen stars, from obesity to the Pope.
His remarks tickled the crowd’s fancy, including the queen of TV talk shows, Oprah Winfrey, who dined in the giant white tent on the Meadowood fairway with vintner and former Hollywood mogul Rich Frank and ABC-TV chief Steve McPherson, teaming up to offer one of the auction’s coveted lots — one that included a walk-on role on “Grey’s Anatomy” and an extraordinary wine trip to New Zealand. While Winfrey confessed “Napa Valley is my new favorite place,” she did not bid on any of the live auction’s 44 super lots.

The lot that raised the most money Saturday night was one that barely registered on the radar as the glamorous offerings were put on public display at an auction preview last Friday.

“Fund A Need” underwrites medical care offered by Community Health Clinic Ole, quietly explained one of the agency’s biggest boosters, vintner John Shafer. He told bidders that Clinic Ole — which serves farm workers and area residents with little or no health insurance — had taken care of 20,000 patients last year. He said Auction Napa Valley continues to fund Clinic Ole each year and hoped that bidders could find a little extra in their wallets to do the same.

As a sweetener, Chanel Fine Jewelry provided the top bidder in this lot with a diamond necklace valued at $40,000.

Bids were taken at levels of $1,000, $5,000, $10,000, $50,000 and so on, up to the high bid of $500,000 made by Woodside’s Joy Craft, who, as auctioneer Humphrey Butler clasped the diamond pendant around her neck, told reporters: “This is what I came to do tonight.”

With vintners Mary Miner and the Steffens family offering runner-up bids of $200,000 and $300,000, respectively, the Fund A Need lot brought in a total of $1.7 million for Clinic Ole.

Raising just under $1 million was the final lot, which celebrates the life of industry icon Robert Mondavi, who passed away a little over three weeks ago just shy of his 95th birthday.

Put together by vintners Garen and Shari Staglin, an event at Copia on June 28 will feature a panel of friends and family discussing the life, wines and contributions of Robert Mondavi, preceded by a reception where a majority of Napa Valley Vintners members will be pouring their wines. Five top-flight chefs from East and West Coast restaurants will prepare a celebratory dinner paired with 17 wines.

Prior to bids being taken, a moving video tribute to Mondavi was screened and his 94-year-old brother, Peter, offered both toast and tribute to Bob and Margrit Mondavi. Taken aback by the sustained applause from all in the tent, the younger Mondavi brother recalled his sibling’s “tremendous energy” and that he wanted “only the best for the wine industry.

“It’s hard to recall all the things that he did ... and he wasn’t only just for the Napa Valley. We’ll all miss him.”

The lot brought in a total of $950,000, with 95 people agreeing to pay $10,000 each for a place at the table.

It took a bit of coaxing from auctioneer Fritz Hatton for the event’s biggest wine lot to tie a record set during the dotcom boom. Previously, a successful dotcomer paid $500,000 for a six liter bottle of Screaming Eagle, a cult wine made from Oakville fruit. Although this year’s lot offered more wine — six liter bottles of Screaming Eagle from the inaugural 1992 vintage — David Li paid the same amount — half a million dollars — for it. The owner of a cyberspace company located in Shanghai, Li maintains Screaming Eagle is “the best wine in the world.”

The live auction brought in $8,598,000 this year, with the popular Friday afternoon barrel auction contributing $1,383,000. The newest adjunct of Auction Napa Valley, the e-auction, netted $371,203 from online bidding around the world.

Auction’s top lots

While the stock market took a nosedive at the end of last week, unemployment numbers were way up and the price of gasoline topped $4 a gallon, bidders weren’t shy about raising their bidding paddles. A number of this year’s offerings saw spirited bidding and final numbers that exceeded quiet predictions.

Once again, a lot that incorporated wine and Hollywood soundstages proved a popular attraction. Rich Frank, of Frank Family Vineyards, teamed up with ABC-TV president Steve McPherson to offer a walk-on part in the hit ABC series, “Grey’s Anatomy,” in addition to dinner for four with some of the cast members at Mozza, hosted by chefs Nancy Silverton and Mario Batali. Following the Hollywood events, Frank will whisk the quartet off to New Zealand on an Air New Zealand Business Premiere flight for a week of wine tasting and lavish tastings and dinner parties. Also included in the lot is a five-year vertical of etched magnums of Frank Family’s Winston Hill cabernet sauvignon and a case of 2005 Promise, Frank and McPherson’s new joint venture of small lot cabernet sauvignon.

Auction regulars Jody and Stratton Sclavos, of Saratoga, paid $480,000 for this lot. When Frank and McPherson first teamed up to make this type offer at the 25th auction in 2005, the Sclavoses were top bidders as well, paying $300,00 for wine, dinner with Teri Hatcher and a “Desperate Housewives” walk-on.

There was also plenty of interest in the lot offered by Harlan Estate, a ten-magnum vertical of its Bordeaux blend (1995-2004) in a special presentation case, along with a celebratory dinner for eight with vintner Bill Harlan. Auction regular John Thompson teamed up with Paul Wick, both residents of the Peninsula, for the high bid of $340,000.

St. Helena’s Hi Sang Lee picked up a pair of lots that also prompted a wealth of bids. First was Blackbird Vineyards invitation for four to experience the excitement of a Chanel fashion show in Paris and to stay in the upscale Hotel Plaza Athénée. While in Paris, the foursome will get a tour of the private apartment of Coco Chanel. Two double magnums of Blackbird’s proprietary blend were also included in the lot. Lee ponied up $300,000 for the Parisian experience.

He also spent $290,000 on the lot offered by Bryant Family Vineyard. It includes an eight magnum vertical of Bryant Family Vineyard cabernet from 1993 through 2000. On top of that, Lee and five friends will join vintner Don Bryant at a private dinner at his New York City residence, paired with Bryant wines.

In addition to picking up the Chanel necklace, Joy Craft wanted another jewel, five double magnums from Colgin Cellars 2005 harvest — IX Estate Red and Syrah, Tychson Hill Vineyard Cabernet Sauvignon, Cariad Red and Herb Lamb Vineyard Cabernet Sauvignon. She spent $260,000 for these gems.

Also among this year’s top 10 bids were:

The Chair’s Lot, offered by the Heitz family. It provided for exclusive use of the Point, a former Rockefeller Great Camp in the Adirondacks of New York, for eight couples. Heitz Wine Cellars is including roundtrip jet travel between Chicago and the Adirondacks, a dinner and wine tasting with Kathleen Heitz Myers at the luxury camp as well as a number of other meals during the four-day stay. The high bidder from Champaign, Ill., (who preferred to remain anonymous as permitted by auction officials) paid $240,000 for this excursion.

A dinner party with vintner Naoko Dalla Valle celebrating the return of Maya, a respected Bordeaux blend from Dalla Valle Vineyards, brought in a top bid of $200,000 from David Reis, of Rye, N.Y. The lot included Maya 2005 in one six-liter bottle and six 750 ml bottles.

Auction officials announced Saturday night that next year’s auction will be chaired by the Trefethen family, namely Janet and John and their children, Loren and Hailey.

Clinton refuses to bow out of presidential race

By JIM KUHNHENN and BETH FOUHY

NEW YORK (AP) — Angling for a vice presidential nod, Hillary Rodham Clinton refused to bow out of the Democratic race Tuesday, hoping to maintain leverage as Barack Obama clinched the delegates needed to secure the party's nomination.

"A lot of people are asking, 'What does Hillary want?'" Clinton told supporters at a rally in New York. "I want what I have always fought for: I want the nearly 18 million people who voted for me to be respected and heard."

Clinton told the crowd she would consult in the coming days with advisers about the fate of her moribund candidacy. But her remarks came hours after she told congressional colleagues she would be open to joining Obama as his running mate.

Many of her top supporters spoke openly of Clinton's potential vice presidential prospects. Lanny Davis, a former White House special counsel under President Clinton, said he told the former first lady Tuesday that he was initiating a petition to press Obama to select her for the second spot on the ticket. He said Clinton did not encourage or discourage the step.

"If he doesn't have her, I think he can still win. With her on the ticket, he can't be beat," Davis said.

Clinton's national finance chairman, Hassan Nemazee, said he was also pushing an Obama-Clinton ticket, claiming that together they would be able to raise $200 million to $250 million for the general election.

Advisers indicated earlier Tuesday that the former first lady would publicly acknowledge in her speech that Obama had crossed the delegate threshold. But she changed her mind and refused to do so even after television networks and The Associated Press declared the Illinois senator had sealed the nomination.

Her advisers said they considered the delegate numbers to be unreliable, even as the AP estimated Obama had several more than the 2,118 needed to nominate. Earlier, Clinton acknowledged on a conference call with New York lawmakers that the delegate math was not there for her to overtake Obama, according to several participants on the call.

She said none of that publicly Tuesday but vowed the Democratic Party would unite in its effort to defeat Republican John McCain in November.

Clinton won South Dakota's primary Tuesday, while Obama won Montana's. The two contests rounded out a historic five-month primary battle that pitted the first major black candidate against the first serious woman contender.

The South Dakota victory, which was unexpected, gave Clinton an excuse to buy more time to consider options, her advisers said.

On the conference call with New York colleagues, Clinton, a New York senator, said she would be willing to become Obama's running mate if it would help Democrats win the White House.

Clinton's remarks came in response to a question from Democratic Rep. Nydia Velazquez, who said she believed the best way for Obama to win key voting blocs, including Hispanics, would be for him to choose Clinton as his running mate.

"I am open to it," Clinton replied, if it would help the party's prospects in November. Her direct quote was described by two lawmakers who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak for Clinton.

"I deserve some time to get this right," she said, even as the other lawmakers forcefully argued for her to press Obama to choose her as his running mate.

Joseph Crowley, a Queens Democrat who participated in the call, said her answer "left open the possibility that she would do anything that she can to contribute toward a Democratic victory in November. There was no hedging on that. Whatever she can do to contribute, she was willing to do."

Another person on the call, Rep. Jose Serrano of New York City, said her answer was "just what I was hoping to hear. ... Of course she was interested in being president, but she's just as interested in making sure Democrats get elected in November."

Rep. Charles Rangel, a devoted booster of Clinton who helped pave the way for her successful Senate campaign, said he spoke to her Tuesday and got much the same answer.

"She's run a great campaign and even though she'll be a great senator, she has a lot of followers that obviously Obama doesn't have, and clearly the numbers are against her and so I think they bring all parts of the Democratic Party together and then some," Rangel said.

Aides to the Illinois senator said he and Clinton had not spoken about the prospects of her joining the ticket.

Most of Clinton's campaign staff will be let go and will be paid through June 15, said the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to divulge her plans.

Universal health care, Clinton's signature issue as first lady in the 1990s, was a point of dispute between Obama and the New York senator during their nomination fight.

Clinton reiterated her commitment to that issue in her remarks Tuesday.

"It is a fight I will continue until every single American has health insurance. No exceptions and no excuses," she said.

Other names have been floated as possible running mates for Obama, including former rivals New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, and governors including Janet Napolitano of Arizona, Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas and Tim Kaine of Virginia. Also mentioned are foreign policy experts including former Georgia Sen. Sam Nunn, Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd and Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, and other senators such as Missouri's Claire McCaskill and Virginia's Jim Webb.

Obama could also look outside the party to people such as anti-war Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska or independent New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg. Or he could look to one of his prominent supporters such as former Sen. Tom Daschle of South Dakota or try to bring on a Clinton supporter, such as Indiana's Sen. Evan Bayh or retired Gen. Wesley Clark.

Beth Fouhy reported from Washington. Associated Press Writer Devlin Barrett contributed to this report.

Health, chemicals ministries sort out pharma policy issues

The controversial National Pharmaceutical Policy 2006 may finally see the light of the day with the Health Ministry and Chemicals and Fertilisers Ministry sorting out differences over some proposals in the policy. "The secretaries of Ministry of Health and Ministry of Chemical and Fertilisers, held a meeting a couple of weeks back in which concerns of Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss were discussed and ironed out," a senior government official told a news agency.

With the issues sorted out, the Chemicals and Fertilisers Ministry would be approaching the Group of Ministers (GoM), which was formed to look into the policy again, the official said while adding that it would then be up to the GoM to decide on the future course of action.

The draft pharma policy was referred to the GoM headed by Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar, after concerns were raised by the pharmaceutical industry over the issue of price control as proposed in the draft. Till now, four meetings of the GoM have taken place but it has not been able to find a solution.

In the fourth meeting held on 30th April, Health Ministry has objected to the some of the proposals made in the draft after which it was decided that secretaries from both ministries should sit and overcome hurdles for smooth passage of the policy. The Health Ministry had apparently objected to the provisions in the pharma policy pertaining to drug regulator and procurement of medicines for government hospitals and health insurance, which it felt would be duplicated.

What Are We Waiting For?

Long before the disastrous George W. Bush administration, I had been waiting for profound, systemic changes in our political system. Perversely, I saw the upside of Bush as motivating more Americans to demand political change. And that happened. But the national yearning for change was co-opted by Ron Paul on the right and Barack Obama on the left while John Edwards with the most authentic populist change message fizzled out early.

It is not enough to want, demand and support change, not when change is more of a campaign slogan than a carefully detailed set of reforms. Critically needed is a firm understanding of what specific changes can restore American democracy and remove the privileged rich plutocrats and corporatists running and ruining our nation.

A huge fraction of Americans have bought into the Obama candidacy because of his polished and effective rhetoric. But Obama does not offer the changes I have been waiting for, or the ones the public needs. A great speaker does not necessarily have the courage or intent to fight for deep political reforms.

Our nation’s Founders did not create the United States of America just with smiles and slick rhetoric; they were bold, risk-taking revolutionaries fighting tyranny. Obama has not defined our domestic tyranny and told us how he will try to abolish it. Obama is no dissident or revolutionary. The change he mostly seeks is moving from senator to president. Not what I have been waiting for.

There is no evidence in Obama’s brief political career that he is a champion for deep political reforms to transfer power from the plutocrats to the people. To the contrary, the more you learn about Obama’s history the more he appears as just another super-ambitious politician making friends, using people and cutting deals to get ahead.

To begin with, I have been waiting for a potential president that speaks out against the over-powerful two-party system that sucks up money from all countless corporate and other special interests. I have never heard a word from Obama to indicate he understands the many harmful effects of the two-party plutocracy and the need to open up our political system to a much wider spectrum of beliefs and strategies. Instead, Obama cleverly talks about bipartisanship just as many other Democrats and Republicans have, because that maintains the two-party status quo.

If Obama believed in opening up the political system he would, for example, advocate opening up televised presidential debates to third party candidates and removing the many obstacles the two parties have built to limit ballot access to third party and independent candidates. He would also openly call for replacing the Electoral College with the popular vote for president.

If Obama truly wanted to get rid of big, corrupting money from corporate and other special interests, then he should be advocating a constitutional amendment that would remove all private money from political campaigns and change the US system to totally publicly financed campaigns. Only a constitutional amendment can accomplish this. Campaign financing reforms by Congress are a distraction and next to useless.

And if Obama really supported universal health care, then he would have concluded as nearly all experts have that the nation needs a single payer insurance system that puts an end to the rape of the public by the insurance and pharmaceutical industries.

Change? Absolutely. But real systemic, root changes that reform and transform the current system by changing the power structure that both major parties have nourished over many decades. What is so clear to millions of people highly skeptical of the Obama-as-political-messiah fiction is that he has not earned the presidency through diverse political and leadership accomplishments.

Sure, none of the other candidates are any better than Obama - not Hillary Clinton, not John McCain. More worthy candidates based on experience and authenticity succumbed to many bizarre forces and media disinterest. It is too late to enlighten ardent Obamatons, but millions of voters will justify voting for Obama as the lesser evil candidate. That proves how bankrupt our political system really is. Now is the time to reject the two-party plutocracy and vote for third party and independent candidates, such as Ralph Nader. Yes we can! Voters that define themselves as independents should assert their independence by rejecting candidates from both major parties.

With a longer view of history, there really is something worse than John McCain becoming president. It is once again upholding the periodic shift of power between the two major parties that stabilizes their tyranny. Just as the Bush administration has built demand for change so too would a McBush presidency. Maybe then in 2012 a true, trustworthy and proven agent of change would have a shot at the presidency. However, electing Obama will set back things back. He will only disappoint us and drain all the pent up demand for change by delivering, at most, some cosmetic actions. Just like his recent decision to wear a flag lapel pin.

The right question is not whether this African American can win the general election, it is SHOULD he be president?

After a few years as president, millions of people would realize that Obama is not the political salvation people have been waiting for. Of course, he would then focus on getting a second term, with more seductive smiles, empty platitudes and false promises. Why not? It worked the first time.

What Are We Waiting For?

Long before the disastrous George W. Bush administration, I had been waiting for profound, systemic changes in our political system. Perversely, I saw the upside of Bush as motivating more Americans to demand political change. And that happened. But the national yearning for change was co-opted by Ron Paul on the right and Barack Obama on the left while John Edwards with the most authentic populist change message fizzled out early.

It is not enough to want, demand and support change, not when change is more of a campaign slogan than a carefully detailed set of reforms. Critically needed is a firm understanding of what specific changes can restore American democracy and remove the privileged rich plutocrats and corporatists running and ruining our nation.

A huge fraction of Americans have bought into the Obama candidacy because of his polished and effective rhetoric. But Obama does not offer the changes I have been waiting for, or the ones the public needs. A great speaker does not necessarily have the courage or intent to fight for deep political reforms.

Our nation’s Founders did not create the United States of America just with smiles and slick rhetoric; they were bold, risk-taking revolutionaries fighting tyranny. Obama has not defined our domestic tyranny and told us how he will try to abolish it. Obama is no dissident or revolutionary. The change he mostly seeks is moving from senator to president. Not what I have been waiting for.

There is no evidence in Obama’s brief political career that he is a champion for deep political reforms to transfer power from the plutocrats to the people. To the contrary, the more you learn about Obama’s history the more he appears as just another super-ambitious politician making friends, using people and cutting deals to get ahead.

To begin with, I have been waiting for a potential president that speaks out against the over-powerful two-party system that sucks up money from all countless corporate and other special interests. I have never heard a word from Obama to indicate he understands the many harmful effects of the two-party plutocracy and the need to open up our political system to a much wider spectrum of beliefs and strategies. Instead, Obama cleverly talks about bipartisanship just as many other Democrats and Republicans have, because that maintains the two-party status quo.

If Obama believed in opening up the political system he would, for example, advocate opening up televised presidential debates to third party candidates and removing the many obstacles the two parties have built to limit ballot access to third party and independent candidates. He would also openly call for replacing the Electoral College with the popular vote for president.

If Obama truly wanted to get rid of big, corrupting money from corporate and other special interests, then he should be advocating a constitutional amendment that would remove all private money from political campaigns and change the US system to totally publicly financed campaigns. Only a constitutional amendment can accomplish this. Campaign financing reforms by Congress are a distraction and next to useless.

And if Obama really supported universal health care, then he would have concluded as nearly all experts have that the nation needs a single payer insurance system that puts an end to the rape of the public by the insurance and pharmaceutical industries.

Change? Absolutely. But real systemic, root changes that reform and transform the current system by changing the power structure that both major parties have nourished over many decades. What is so clear to millions of people highly skeptical of the Obama-as-political-messiah fiction is that he has not earned the presidency through diverse political and leadership accomplishments.

Sure, none of the other candidates are any better than Obama - not Hillary Clinton, not John McCain. More worthy candidates based on experience and authenticity succumbed to many bizarre forces and media disinterest. It is too late to enlighten ardent Obamatons, but millions of voters will justify voting for Obama as the lesser evil candidate. That proves how bankrupt our political system really is. Now is the time to reject the two-party plutocracy and vote for third party and independent candidates, such as Ralph Nader. Yes we can! Voters that define themselves as independents should assert their independence by rejecting candidates from both major parties.

With a longer view of history, there really is something worse than John McCain becoming president. It is once again upholding the periodic shift of power between the two major parties that stabilizes their tyranny. Just as the Bush administration has built demand for change so too would a McBush presidency. Maybe then in 2012 a true, trustworthy and proven agent of change would have a shot at the presidency. However, electing Obama will set back things back. He will only disappoint us and drain all the pent up demand for change by delivering, at most, some cosmetic actions. Just like his recent decision to wear a flag lapel pin.

The right question is not whether this African American can win the general election, it is SHOULD he be president?

After a few years as president, millions of people would realize that Obama is not the political salvation people have been waiting for. Of course, he would then focus on getting a second term, with more seductive smiles, empty platitudes and false promises. Why not? It worked the first time.