Whitman's play for the Hispanic vote
James Hohmann James Hohmann – Wed Aug 4, 5:37 am ET
SOUTH GATE, Calif. — Pete Wilson, a former Republican governor reviled by many Latinos here, promised in a May advertisement that Meg Whitman would be as “tough as nails” on illegal immigration.
On Wednesday, less than two months after she won the GOP primary, her campaign for governor will debut a warm-and-fuzzy Spanish-language ad pledging something different — a plan to create jobs for Latinos.
Whitman is not the only Republican candidate making a serious play for Hispanic votes this year, but she stands out as the nation’s most prominent test case of whether Republicans can project a welcoming message as the party’s dwindling base clamors for Arizona-style crackdowns on illegal immigration.
Her struggle to make inroads with this pivotal constituency, which accounts for one-fifth of California’s electorate, captures in miniature the dilemma facing national Republicans. A hard line on immigration might pay short-term dividends in 2010, yet it might also be a risky gamble against the long-term odds of demography.
No state party understands the downside of that risk quite like the Golden State GOP, which has suffered for 16 years now because Wilson tied his 1994 reelection fortunes to the politically expedient Proposition 187, which would have denied public services to illegal immigrants had a federal judge not ruled it unconstitutional.
Whitman, who is eager to not repeat the mistakes of the past, wants to neutralize the hot-button issue of immigration in the general election by downplaying its relative importance and blurring the contrasts with her opponent’s position.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20100804/pl_politico/40606
Governor candidates oppose sanctuary cities
Democrat Jerry Brown and Republican Meg Whitman both say they oppose sanctuary policies established by San Francisco and about a dozen other cities to limit their role in federal immigration enforcement. But the candidates' plans to carry out their views if elected governor are both divergent and perplexing.
Brown's campaign says he thinks sanctuary cities violate federal and state law, but would take no action against them. Instead, he intends to lobby for a long-stalled overhaul of federal immigration laws that would make local refuge policies unnecessary.
Whitman says she would do "anything we can do to eliminate sanctuary cities." But the action she proposes to take, withholding state funding from the cities, appears to be beyond a governor's authority.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/08/03/MN5H1ENBPK.DTL#ixzz0vep78469
California Pols Got Free Extreme Cagefighting and Sesame Street Tickets from BP
— By Josh Harkinson
| Wed Aug. 4, 2010 1:00 AM PDT
Despite being on the hook for unprecedented cleanup and legal costs in the Gulf of Mexico, BP has spent thousands of dollars in recent months on free concert and sports tickets for California lawmakers. As I reported last month, getting the tickets is as easy as calling the BP ticket request line, an unpublished phone number that appears to exist for the sole purpose of granting freebies to lawmakers, regulators, and their staffs. Since the Deepwater Horizon exploded in April, BP has given government officials 32 tickets valued $2500, according to a BP lobbying report filed yesterday. All of the performances took place at Arco Arena, the Sacramento stadium named after BP's West Coast subsidiary.
While BP gave away less than half the tickets it did in the same period before the Gulf disaster, its image problems didn't prevent staffers for some of California's most powerful politicians from partying on its dime. Junay Gardner Logan, chief of staff for state Senator Bob Huff (R-metro LA), the chairman of the Senate Republican Caucus, accepted two tickets to see the Eagles' "Long Road to Eden" concert. She declined to comment. And staffers for Assembly Speaker John Perez (D-Los Angeles) took in the Eagles and Cirque du Soleil. A spokeswoman for Perez said one of the staffers is no longer with him. "Speaker Perez has not accepted any gifts from BP," she added. "The fact that the Speaker has proposed a new tax on oil companies to close our deficit should underscore the fact that BP's ticket practices have no influence on public policy in the Speaker's office."
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/08/bp-concert-ticket-line?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Motherjones%2Fmojoblog+%28MotherJones.com+%7C+MoJoBlog%29
League of California Cities files suit for modification to Prop. 22 summary
The Times-Standard
Posted: 08/04/2010 01:15:28 AM PDT
The League of California Cities filed a lawsuit Monday against the summary of Proposition 22 created by the Legislative Analyst's Office (CA), arguing that the text does not accurately represent the proposition's impact on local finances.
The proposed legalization aims to ban state grabs on local government funding and is cosponsored by the League of California Cities. Since the public review period for ballot information, which includes the fiscal impact prepared by the LAO, ends Aug. 9, the lawsuit will be litigated quickly.
According to a press release from the league, the summary does not efficiently illustrate the impact on local government finances. Of the 58 words, 51 words detail the impacts to the state, while seven words contain a reference to local government revenues. The phrase “local government” is completely excluded, an omission the league said “leaves the impression that Prop. 22 has no fiscal impact on local government.”
”The Legislative Analyst has a legal obligation to inform voters of the local government impact of a ballot measure,” said Chris McKenzie, executive director of the League of California Cities and petitioner in the lawsuit. “Prop. 22 is the most significant measure in recent memory that would stabilize and protect city, county and other local government revenues. To completely exclude or ignore the impact of Prop. 22 on local government in the fiscal summary is a disservice to voters and a failure of the LAO's obligation under the law.”
http://www.times-standard.com/rss/ci_15674334?source=rss
Pot plan worries small growers
By the Associated Press
Posted: 07/19/2010 01:01:10 AM PDT
OAKLAND (AP) -- After weathering the fear of federal prosecution and competition from drug cartels, California's medical marijuana growers see a new threat to their tenuous existence: the "Wal-Marting" of weed.
The Oakland City Council on Tuesday will look at licensing four production plants where pot would be grown, packaged and processed into items ranging from baked goods to body oil. Winning applicants would have to pay $211,000 in annual permit fees, carry $2 million worth of liability insurance and be prepared to devote up to 8 percent of gross sales to taxes.
The move, and fledgling efforts in other California cities to sanction cannabis cultivation for the first time, has some marijuana advocates worried that regulations intended to bring order to the outlaw industry and new revenues to cash-strapped local governments could drive small "mom and pop" growers out of business. They complain that industrial-scale gardens would harm the environment, reduce quality and leave consumers with fewer strains from which to choose.
"Nobody wants to see the McDonald's-ization of cannabis," Dan Scully, one of the 400 "patient-growers" who supply Oakland's largest retail medical marijuana dispensary, Harborside Health Center, grumbled after a City Council committee gave the blueprint preliminary approval last week. "I would compare it to how a small business feels about shutting down its business and going to work at Wal-Mart. Who would be attracted to that?"
The proposal's supporters, including entrepreneurs more disposed to neckties than tie-dye, counter that unregulated growers working in covert warehouses or houses are tax scofflaws more likely to wreak environmental havoc, be motivated purely by profit and produce inferior products. http://www.thereporter.com/ci_15549235?source=rss
THE DEATH OF TRUTH :eMEG AND THE POLITICS OF LYING
Perhaps it’s just a case of wishful nostalgia, but it seems to us that before the rise of Fox News, Rovian manipulation and the abnegation by certain people of fact-based reality, there was some sort of agreed-upon truth that was adjudicated daily by the mainstream media.
A candidate couldn’t say one thing one day – like, for example, that they were opposed to a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants — and another thing another day – like they basically agree with an opponent who favors a path to citizenship. They’d be afraid of being called a liar in the papers, and that would actually matter.
But in the California governor’s race it now appears that we are witnessing the Death of Truth. From a cosmic perspective, this has come about because:
– The attention span of the average citizen, never very long, has been hyper-accelerated by the rise of new media, including the Internets, where something is old before it barely new — and certainly not fully digested — and everyone is off on the next new thing. Beyond that, the rise of ideologically-sated outlets like FOX and MSNBC ensures that partisans will never again have to watch something with which they disagree.
– The lugubrious mainstream media is often strangled by self-imposed, on-the-one-hand-on-the-the-hand, false-equivalency “balance,” in part intimidated by loud, if unfounded accusations of “bias” most frequently lobbed by the right-wing. Thus the MSM at times seems unable and/or unwilling to cut through the miasma and call a lie a lie or a liar a liar. (Even Jerry Brown won’t call a spade a spade, referring instead to Meg Whitman’s “intentional, terminological inexactitude.”)
– It’s now clear that a candidate with unlimited resources can and will blow off complaints, critiques and factual analyses of those who dare to speak up and will instead declare that the truth is whatever he or she says it is — in their paid advertising and the assertions of their mercenary prevaricators.
http://www.calbuzz.com/2010/07/the-death-of-truth-emeg-and-the-politics-of-lying/
FPPC to take up 'express advocacy' issue today
Marisa Lagos, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau 07-19) 04:00 PDT Sacramento - --
California currently requires groups that run campaign ads that expressly tell voters how to vote for certain issues or candidates to disclose where they got their money and how it was spent.
But if an ad simply informs the public about an issue - even if that issue has some connection to an upcoming election - the state's disclosure laws about who is bankrolling the effort are murkier.
That's because over the past decade, state laws and regulations have been curbed to comply with court decisions that limited who can be forced to disclose their donors.
Now, some state officials believe that a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision may have changed things. Today, staff members from the state's campaign watchdog agency, the Fair Political Practices Commission, will hold a meeting to explore whether to revisit its rules on an issue known as "express advocacy."
The million-dollar question: If a political ad doesn't specifically advocate for or against a candidate or campaign - for example, say "vote for" or "vote against" - should it be considered express advocacy, and therefore should the donors be disclosed? And if those so-called "magic words" are not part of an ad, is it legal to force that disclosure?
"We're not trying to prevent independent voices from being heard in California - this is all about disclosure," said FPPC Chairman Dan Schnur. "In express advocacy, there is transparency about where the money is coming from. What we're interested in is giving voters the opportunity to find out who's funding something so they can make an informed decision on the election. ... But we come into this with a genuinely open mind."
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/07/19/BA7I1EFH0E.DTL&feed=rss.news#ixzz0u9Y5RERA
Prop 19 Battle Continues At CDP E-Board
by: Robert Cruickshank
Sun Jul 18, 2010 at 07:00:00 AM PDT
Yesterday the California Democratic Party Resolutions Committee took up the question of November ballot initiative endorsements. After some debate, the committee narrowly rejected Tom Ammiano's proposal to endorse Prop 19, and then unanimously approved the original plan to remain neutral on that initiative.
The speakers in support of Prop 19 - Ammiano and Alice Huffman of the California NAACP - made powerful arguments in support of the measure. Ammiano cited the more than 20,000 signatures we at the Courage Campaign (where I work as Public Policy Director) gathered in support of the initiative, the stack of which you can see at right, alongside the strong case for Prop 19 on the merits - to provide prison reform, help fix the budget, and to admit that our policy of prohibition has failed.
Huffman's case was even more powerful. Rejecting claims that Democrats should be skittish of Prop 19 out of concern for their candidates on the November ballot, she called on delegates to "show courage" and endorse Prop 19 for the sake of ending the devastating war on drugs that has hit young African Americans and Latinos so hard, and seek a more sensible and rational regulatory policy of cannabis.
However, the more skittish view prevailed on the committee. In spite of the evidence showing that California Democratic voters support Prop 19 and their own party chair's view that Prop 19 will boost turnout for Democrats, these folks worried that Democrats running in purplish or red areas would be hurt if the party endorsed Prop 19, even though some candidates in those kinds of districts already have gone on record in support of Prop 19.
I'm sympathetic to that view, but I think it also misreads the 2010 election. This is a turnout election, not a persuasion election. Democrats win by driving our people to the polls, plain and simple. Prop 19 will bring Democratic-friendly voters to the polls. If the CDP were to be on record in support of Prop 19, those voters might also be willing to cast their vote for Democratic candidates. If the party is neutral, then that might not occur at the levels we'd like.
Today the entire E-Board will take up the endorsement. It will require 60% to endorse. My feeling is the vote will be close. There's no chance the CDP will oppose Prop 19, so the question is whether the party will endorse it or remain neutral. We'll know by noon.
http://calitics.com/diary/12156/prop-19-battle-continues-at-cdp-eboard
Another View: Get serious, Prop. 24 poses threat to workers
By Greg Hines
Special to The Bee
Published: Sunday, Jul. 18, 2010 - 12:00 am | Page 3E
So you might think in the face of an ongoing recession – 2 million Californians out of work; businesses continuing to struggle – that state tax reforms aimed at those very problems might deserve a good look.
But that's not the way it read in Dan Morain's column on Proposition 24 ("Tax break faces union effort to end it"; Viewpoints, July 8).
If you read his column, you wouldn't have any idea that Proposition 24 threatened reforms that had anything to do with jobs, or the economy, or even that there were hard times in California outside of the Capitol dome.
At issue are three reforms to state tax law, passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor – reforms to end policies that taxed new job creation and that pushed businesses out of California.
Our coalition of California employers, small businesses, biotech and high-tech organizations thinks those reforms are good ideas – and surely ideas worth a serious look.
Proposition 24, which would reverse those reforms, is a bad idea, but we expect The Bee would give that position a serious look, too.
Instead, we got this glib response from a Proposition 24 supporter. No problem, he says or "scoffs": "They'll move to another state? Please. There is no evidence that this (initiative) is going to drive business away."
So a backer of Proposition 24 assures us that Proposition 24 is safe as milk.
Let's try evidence instead. For example, The Bee could have consulted a new study (by a USC professor of economics) which finds Proposition 24's impact would cost 144,000 jobs.
Or talked to the 23 other states that have some of these reforms in place.
Or talked to the state's legislative analyst. He said this about using tax policy to serve public policy (though not specifically about Proposition 24): "I want to stress that tax expenditures are not loopholes. … These are done intentionally – they're appropriate to do."
Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/07/18/2895894/get-serious-prop-24-poses-threat.html#ixzz0u3ZwhZ7T
The humor of Brown, Whitman campaigns
Posted at 12:00 AM on Sunday, Jul. 18, 2010
By Jim Boren
Most of us regularly complain about our candidates for governor in California, but is there any state that offers more entertainment at election time?
Consider the 2003 recall election that featured Arnold Schwarzenegger and a supporting cast of a hundred, including pornographer Larry Flynt, porn star Mary Carey and a woman who sold thong underwear on her Web site.
Oh, sure. Minnesota had Jesse Ventura for a short time, but the celebrity status of the rest of the nation is in very short supply. Even Illinois' Rod Blagojevich would be a second-tier hoodlum in California.
With Schwarzenegger about to make his gubernatorial exit, we're now complaining about Republican Meg Whitman and Democrat Jerry Brown. But these candidates are very amusing in their own way as they try to position themselves for the November election.
We should appreciate their flexibility, as they reinvent themselves -- Whitman changing from a few months ago and Brown from a few decades ago. The gubernatorial match-up in California could be called the "Battle of the Flip-floppers."
Whitman, the right-wing conservative in the Republican primary, is now the centrist Californian in the general election, claiming that her current views represent most voters in the blue state.
So what happened to the candidate who was tough on illegal immigration when she was pitching herself as the "true conservative" in the primary? Just joking, says the GOP nominee with a wonderful sense of humor.
Conservative Republicans who voted for Whitman in the primary must be doubled over laughing at her comedy routine on illegal immigration. But what are they going to do? Vote for Brown? Now that would be funny.
Read more: http://www.fresnobee.com/2010/07/16/2009092/the-humor-of-brown-whitman-campaigns.html#ixzz0u3aiCiO1
Silicon Valley company appeals ruling on electronic signatures
By Shaun Bishop
Daily News Staff Writer
Posted: 07/17/2010 03:00:00 AM PDT
A Silicon Valley startup that aims to give California voters the option of signing initiative petitions electronically is appealing a decision by a San Mateo County judge who ruled that a digital signature submitted by one of the company's co-founders is not valid under the state elections code.
Verafirma had previously pledged to appeal the April ruling by Superior Court Judge George Miram, who said company co-founder Michael Ni "did not substantially comply with the requirements" of the elections code when he turned in the signature he captured using his iPhone and software developed by Verafirma.
Miram's ruling went in favor of the county and Chief Elections Officer Warren Slocum, who said he rejected Ni's signature because he could not determine whether it complied with state law.
Ni filed an appeal of the decision with the California Court of Appeal on June 7, but neither side has filed briefs outlining their arguments yet.
"We've always felt this would be the beginning, not the end of our legal effort," said Jude Barry, a San Jose political strategist and Verafirma co-founder. "Sometimes government bureaucracies are resistant to change, even when the change is good for the public and will ultimately save taxpayers money."
Barry called it "a case where new technology meets or exceeds the requirements of old law," and said he is confident the company will prevail on appeal.
County officials say they believe the appeals court will uphold the ruling.
http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_15537343?source=rss
Conservatives Shine in Showdowns in S.D, N.C & WA
by John Gizzi
07/17/2010
South Dakota’s At-Large U.S. House District
Noem vs. Herseth-Sandlin
“Baptism by fire” is the way to describe what happened to Kristi Arnold when she was 20. While Kristi was working on the family farm in Castlewood, S. D., her father Ron Arnold was killed while unloading a grain bend with 50,000 bushels. Along with experiencing the tragic loss of a parent she loved, Kristi had to quit college to help her mother, brothers and sister run the farm.
This all gave Kristi a full-blown education. The Arnolds expanded their farm and started a hunting lodge and restaurant, which Kristi managed.
These early “adult responsibilities” proved very helpful to Kristi after she married and, as Kristi Noem, managed an insurance business and a ranch with her husband. And they proved invaluable when she was elected to the state house of representatives in 2006 and became assistant Republican leader in ’08. As South Dakota faced a massive deficit, it was state Rep. Noem who helped lead the charge for cutting spending by trimming programs. In addition, the two-term lawmaker helped craft a measure that made property taxes more equitable and rolled back regulation that was discouraging wind-power developers from coming to South Dakota.
“And I’m still working on that bachelor’s degree!” said Noem, now a mother of three. But finishing her classroom education will have to be put off, since the 42-year-old Noem defeated two opponents in the Republican primary for South Dakota’s lone U.S. House seat and now faces Democratic Rep. Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=38111
THE POLITICAL ANIMAL
By Steve Benen
July 18, 2010
A LIKELY SCENARIO IN 2011.... It's hard to say with confidence which party will hold the congressional majority next year, but Paul Krugman noted yesterday that "fake scandals" will be all the rage in the 112th Congress if there's a Republican majority.
[W]e'll be having hearings over accusations of corruption on the part of Michelle Obama's hairdresser, janitors at the Treasury, and Larry Summers's doctor's dog. If you don't believe me, you weren't paying attention during the Clinton years; remember, we had months of hearings over claims that something was fishy in the White House travel office (nothing was).
This may sound hyperbolic. It's not. In the Clinton era, House Republicans held two weeks of hearings investigating the Clintons' Christmas card list, and the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform fired a bullet into a "head-like object" -- reportedly a melon -- in his backyard to test his conspiracy theories about Vince Foster. All told, over the last six years of Bill Clinton's presidency, that same committee unilaterally issued 1,052 subpoenas -- that's not a typo -- to investigate baseless allegations of misconduct. That translates to an average of a politically-inspired subpoena every other day for six consecutive years, including weekends, holidays, and congressional recesses.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/
Boxer, in North Park, says she's business-friendly
BY MICHELLE DAY, CONTRIBUTING WRITER
TUESDAY, JULY 6, 2010 AT 10:28 P.M.
NELVIN C. CEPEDA UNION-TRIBUNE
Sen. Barbara Boxer held a meeting for small business owners in North Park on Tuesday, July 6.
Sen. Barbara Boxer laid out her plan to help small businesses and stimulate the economy Tuesday while taking another jab at her opponent, former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina.
With a handful of San Diego business owners standing behind her, Boxer, who is seeking a fourth term in the Senate, said giving small businesses more benefits — including improved access to loans and health care, and tax breaks — is the key to stimulating a still struggling economy.
“Those are the folks who hire at times like these,” said the California Democrat, adding that small businesses contribute to 60 percent of new jobs. “When one of these good people hires a new employee, it has a ripple effect.”
Other parts of her plan include making California a hub of clean energy technology, providing reliable, energy-efficient transportation and stopping tax breaks to companies that send jobs overseas.
As she has in the past, Boxer said Fiorina laid off American Hewlett-Packard employees while enriching herself, before taking a $21 million severance check when she was fired.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jul/06/boxer-north-park-says-shes-business-friendly/
Brown, Whitman in dead heat in gov. race
Posted at 06:40 AM on Wednesday, Jul. 07, 2010
By David Siders /The Sacramento Bee - dsiders@sacbee.com
Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman's recent ads attacking Jerry Brown appear to have resonated with likely voters, as the Democratic nominee's popularity is sliding, according to a new Field Poll.
The poll shows Brown leading Whitman 44 percent to 43 percent, a statistically insignificant difference.
Whitman trailed Brown by 21 percentage points in an October Field Poll, before closing on him in January and overtaking him in March. But Whitman's three-point advantage that month was erased in the final stages of a bruising GOP primary.
But 40 percent of voters now rate Brown negatively, nearly equal to the 42 percent with positive views. Brown's favorability rating plummeted from last year, when twice as many voters viewed him positively as did negatively.
"For Whitman, the success here is that the campaign seems to be working, in the sense that now as many voters view Brown negatively as do positively," poll director Mark DiCamillo said. http://www.fresnobee.com/2010/07/07/1997414/brown-and-whitman-locked-in-dead.html
Democrats digging harder than ever for dirt on Republicans
By Philip Rucker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
The Democratic Party is moving faster and more aggressively than in previous election years to dig up unflattering details about Republican challengers. In House races from New Jersey to Ohio to California, Democratic operatives are seizing on evidence of GOP candidates' unpaid income taxes, property tax breaks and ties to financial firms that received taxpayer bailout money.
• 2010 Congressional map
• Steele seen as an albatross for the GOP
• The many mishaps of Michael Steele
View All Items in This Story
In recent weeks, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has circulated information to local reporters about Republican candidates in close races. Among the claims:
-- That Jim Renacci of Ohio once owed nearly $1.4 million in unpaid state taxes.
-- That David Harmer of California received $160,000 in bonus and severance pay from a firm that got a federal bailout.
-- That Jon Runyan of New Jersey got a legal break in property taxes for his 25-acre homestead by qualifying for a farmland assessment thanks to his four donkeys.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/06/AR2010070605271.html?nav=rss_email/components
Schwarzenegger seeks to take water bond off ballot
By DON THOMPSON
Associated Press Writer
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Tuesday urged lawmakers to pull an $11.1 billion water bond off the November ballot after spending much of the last year fighting to get it there.
The Republican governor had said improving the state's water storage and delivery system was one of his top priorities. He now says the timing is poor and wants to delay the measure until 2012.
Schwarzenegger said the prospects for approval would be hurt by putting the measure on the ballot now, while the state faces a $19 billion budget deficit and record unemployment.
Instead, he said the focus in the Capitol should be on fixing the deficit, reforming government pensions and creating long-term budget reforms.
"It's critical that the water bond pass, as it will improve California's economic growth, environmental sustainability and water supply for future generations," the governor said in a statement. "For that reason, I will work with the Legislature to postpone the bond to 2012 and avoid jeopardizing its passage."
The Legislature would need to agree for the measure to come off the ballot.
Schwarzenegger's call for delaying the bond measure had support from both lead negotiators in last year's water legislation.
"While I believe we must immediately invest in our water future, timing is everything and I'm willing to wait to bolster voter understanding of this critical measure," Republican state Sen. Dave Cogdill of Modesto said in a statement.
A spokeswoman for Democratic Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg of Sacramento said he supports the delay because the state's current financial problems might jeopardize the measure.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CA_CALIFORNIA_WATER_BOND_CAOL-?SITE=CAANR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
What's up with Central Committee elections? [By James Lacy - Political Law - Flash Report]
6:40 am - Flashreport
As implementation of Proposition 14 looms - which will emasculate political party primary elections - the organization and activities of local Republican Central Committees will become all the more important in helping to define differences between ... http://www.flashreport.org/blog.php?postID=2010061810201295
Meg Whitman's opposition to Arizona immigration law could attract Hispanics in November
5:35 am - CA Independent Voter Network
With a whopping victory of sixty-four percent over Steve Poizner's twenty-seven percent, Meg Whitman is prepared to fight her Democratic opponent Jerry Brown in November for the big cheese. As one of her strategies, Whitman is ready to round up the… http://www.caivn.org/article/2010/06/18/meg-whitmans-opposition-arizona-immigration-law-could-attract-hispanics-november
Jerry Brown hopeful about Proposition 14
While the state Republican and Democratic parties have opposed the voter-approved open primary measure Proposition 14, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown expressed support Tuesday for the idea, saying it could help break partisan gridlock paralyzing Sacramento.
When asked by The Bee in March about the initiative, Brown refused to take a position.
Brown was in Mountain View on Tuesday to announce an eight-point plan for investing in renewable energy technology, which he says will create more than half a million green jobs. He opened his remarks to the Silicon Valley Leadership Group by lamenting polarizing partisan politics. He then segued into Proposition 14, which would advance the primary's top two vote-getters to the general election, regardless of their party affiliations.
"With the recent enactment of this open primary, that may hold some promise so that people can converge in a more moderate perspective," Brown said. "People can run and appeal to voters from the other party. ... You'd get two members from the same party where you would actually get more choice than you might otherwise get if you have parties as gatekeepers as they are now.
"This has the possibility of opening that up, and therefore it gives me some optimism."
Brown warned, however: "Most of the history of reform is one of unintended consequences
Read more: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2010/06/jerry-brown-hopeful-about-prop.html#ixzz0qy6ae2qB
CALIFORNIA PRIMARY JUNE 8, 2010, REMEMBER TO VOTE!!
Statement of Mark Meckler and Dawn Wildman re: Threats and Abuse by Naritelli Campaign June 7, 2010
We have prepared this statement to address the absurd, abusive and outrageous allegations being spread by gubernatorial candidate Larry Naritelli and a few of his overzealous supporters.
Apparently, people are being widely told that we (Dawn Wildman and Mark Meckler) made this all up, and that there was never any threat to us at all from a Naritelli campaign worker. Just so folks are clear, we received the following threat from one of Mr. Naritelli's campaign workers, Alexandra Foster.
______________________________
___________
K.A. Foster ✆
to Mark
show details May 19
Mark:
I will deal with you after the primaries, but what I will tell you if I find out there has been any meddling with a candidates info it won't be pretty. I've asked 5 times for Dawn to tell me who was responsible for gathering Larrys information. So what's there to hide?? If nothing IS wrong then why are you and Dawn acting like your trying cover some thing up like Barack Obaman? When backed into a corner people come out swinging. If nothing was done maliciously then what are you trying to cover up? Don't you dare point the finger at me like I've done some thing wrong either as I'll just come out swinging! Another thing I won't sit by and watch anyone from the tea party pull crap with Larry Naritelli. Maybe if you knew the whole story you'd know what I was pissed off about. But I can write many press releases of my own if need be if I find out the truth behind what went on with Larry. I'll take you and miss Wildman down.
Alex
___(bold added)______________________________________
We repeatedly requested by email, phone and text message that Larry "privately" distance himself from this behavior. Larry hid from our calls, and ignored our emails and texts. He ignored the email above where we copied him and asked him to weigh in. Mark finally reached Larry because he called from a different number that Larry didn't recognize. At that time, Larry agreed that he absolutely didn't support Ms. Foster's behavior, and would issue a "private" email in which he would distance himself. He also stated that he had absolutely no problem with either of us, or the Tea Party Patriots. We asked him to please air it out if he did, and he said, "no...I don't have any problems with you or Dawn, and I consider myself a Tea Party Patriot."
Now people may differ as to whether Ms. Foster's behavior is "threatening." And perhaps many would have simply ignored it. However, unfortunately, we (and many other tea partiers across the nation) are now subjected to regular and disturbing threats. Some of us are now receiving calls from local law enforcement when we are to appear, asking us about our security arrangements. And each of us has had conversations with local law enforcement and personnel with FBI contacts and experience, and all of them have told us to take this and every threat seriously. And unfortunately, Ms. Foster had become more and more irrational over time. We have also been advised by law enforcement professionals that people who issue these sorts of threats are disempowered when the person who they think they are championing steps away, and are empowered when the object of their affection refuses to distance themselves. That is all we asked Mr. Naritelli to do, in private; just say that he doesn't support threats of any kind. Though he agreed, the next day Mr. Naritelli issued a letter stating that our statements were outrageous, and that he stood with Ms. Foster and supported her threats 100%. At that time, as we had previously advised him we would, we simply sent an email out letting all on our private, internal California Coordinator list know about the situation, so that they could take any security precautions they felt necessary.
Despite the stream of continuing abuse and lies from Mr. Naritelli and his devotees, we have not commented publicly any further on Larry Naritelli or Ms. Foster. We said only what was necessary, and only in a single, limited distribution. Yet, utilizing an unauthorized copy of Tea Party Patriots California Coordinators list never meant for any political candidate, Mr. Naritelli and his few remaining supporters are now sending many lie filled emails and making many calls doing his best to keep this situation alive. Their actions are unproductive and unprofessional. We suggest that he go back to focusing on his campaign. There is much work to be done here in California, and he's not accomplishing anything productive by attacking Tea Party Patriots, and the many good folks who disagree with his actions and the actions of a few overly aggressive, threatening campaign workers.
Sincerely,
Mark Meckler / Dawn Wildman
California Co-Coordinators
Tea Party Patriots
Two of our orgnizers have been leading the charge in figuring out the landscape of the elections, Linda Paine and Greg Decker. They have done an exceptional job looking at the candidates and providing us with information so we can make informed decisions. They now have website where you can find out all of the info on the elections in California and they are holding Webinars for those interested in becoming more involved. http://www.teapartypatriots-scv.com/TeaPartyPrimaryPower.html
They are adding info every day so stay tuned... we will post the polls when they are done as well.
Sen. Bob Bennett Ousted at Utah GOP Convention
Saturday, 08 May 2010 06:37 PM
SALT LAKE CITY – Republican Sen. Bob Bennett was thrown out of office Saturday by delegates at the Utah GOP convention in a stunning defeat for a once-popular three-term incumbent who fell victim to a growing conservative movement nationwide.
Bennett's failure to make it into Utah's GOP primary — let alone win his party's nomination — makes him the first congressional incumbent to be ousted this year and demonstrates the difficult challenges candidates are facing from the right in 2010.
"The political atmosphere obviously has been toxic and it's very clear that some of the votes that I have cast have added to the toxic environment," an emotional Bennett told reporters, choking back tears.
"Looking back on them, with one or two very minor exceptions, I wouldn't have cast any of them any differently even if I had known at the time they were going to cost me my career."
Bennett survived a first round of voting Saturday among roughly 3,500 delegates but was eliminated when he finished a distant third in the second round. He garnered just under 27 percent of the vote while businessman Tim Bridgewater had 37 percent and attorney Mike Lee got 36 percent.
A third round of voting was being held later Saturday to pick a winner between Bridgewater and Lee; if neither gets 60 percent of the delegates' support in the final round, a June 22 primary will determine the victor.
http://newsmax.com/InsideCover/bob-bennett-Utah-Senate/2010/05/08/id/358302?s=al&promo_code=9DCF-1
Gender adnd geography separate foes in Democratic race for lieutenant governor
By Susan Ferriss
sferriss@sacbee.com
Published: Monday, May. 10, 2010 - 12:00 am | Page 1A Last Modified: Monday, May. 10, 2010 - 7:42 am
They're both big-city California politicians and self-described progressive Democrats, with endorsements from friends who call them champions of labor, the environment and civil rights.
But Los Angeles City Councilwoman Janice Hahn and San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom aren't just peas in an ideological pod, albeit with different personalities.
They're She and He and South and North. And those gender and geographical differences have become an undercurrent in their contest for the Democratic Party's nomination for lieutenant governor in the June 8 primary.
Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/05/10/2738787/gender-geography-separate-foes.html#ixzz0nk2h4m35
Who voted? We found out... They're asking for your votes next month. Have they been regular voters themselves?
In this case, yes, for the most part.
We requested records for candidates in the 2nd District County Supervisor and the 30th and 32nd state Assembly District races. The information we received goes back to the November 1992 election and includes only voting records for Kern County.
The only surprise in our stack of papers is that Zack Scrivner, the city councilman running for county supervisor, was a registered Libertarian before he re-registered as a Republican in November 2001. He didn't vote in Kern while a Libertarian; his first vote here was cast in the November 2002 general election. Since then, he's been a regular voter. He was born in January 1974 so would have been eligible to vote since early '92, though our records don't show when he first registered.
A few others have switched parties as well:
• Stephanie Campbell, a Republican in the 30th AD race, was a Democrat until March 2006 and has been a regular voter since 1998.
• Mary Beth Garrison, who is running for Kern County supervisor, switched from the American Independent Party to the Republican Party in September 2001. She started voting regularly in November 2000.
• Stan Beckham, another contender for supervisor, switched from American Independent to Republican in July 2007. He has voted regularly since at least November 1992.
The county supervisors race is nonpartisan, of course, but many voters nevertheless want to know how candidates are registered.
The remaining supervisor candidates have voted regularly since November 1992, when our records start:
• Bernita Jenkins, a Democrat;
• Steve Perez, a Republican; and
• James Welling, a Republican.
In the 32nd Assembly District — which will effectively be decided June 8, since the Dem contender pulled out — Republican Ken Mettler has voted regularly since November '92 and Republican Shannon Grove has voted regularly since November 1994.
In the 30th AD, Democrat Fran Florez has voted regularly since November '92 and Democrat Pete Parra has done so since March 1996.
We're still waiting on info from Kings County regarding David Valadao, a Republican candidate in the 30th, and will post it when we get it.
We'll look into city council and other significant races before November's general election.
- Gretchen Wenner, staff writer
http://people.bakersfield.com/home/Blog/politicsanyone/57446