Wednesday, October 30, 2013

After Washington Republicans Kill Immigration Reform, How Will DeMaio, Jorgensen, and Simon React?


House Republicans are following up their disastrous government shutdown by killing the prospects for immigration reform for 2013. According to a report from Politico, Republican leaders are planning to prevent a vote by the full House on immigration reform, despite years of discussions and bipartisan passage of a bill in the U.S. Senate.

As House Republicans let another national problem fester, congressional candidate and DREAM Act opponent Carl DeMaio will have more time to explain why his Washington allies are stopping reform, while Kirk Jorgensen and Dr. Fred Simon refuse to disown the dysfunction that is hurting regular Americans.

“Carl DeMaio’s closest allies in Washington are standing in the way of reasonable solutions to real problems with our immigration system, but that’s no surprise given DeMaio’s opposition to the DREAM Act and support for Arizona’s antagonistic immigration laws,” said Matt Inzeo of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “While Carl DeMaio and his Washington friends share a reckless approach to immigration, Kirk Jorgensen and Dr. Fred Simon refuse to speak up for reasonable solutions, and it makes all three of them wrong for San Diego.”


“House GOP Plans No Immigration Vote in 2013.” “House Republican leadership has no plans to vote on any immigration reform legislation before the end the year. The House has just 19 days in session before the end of 2013, and there are a number of reasons why immigration reform is stalled this year. Following the fiscal battles last month, the internal political dynamics are tenuous within the House Republican Conference. A growing chorus of GOP lawmakers and aides are intensely skeptical that any of the party’s preferred piecemeal immigration bills can garner the support 217 Republicans — they would need that if Democrats didn’t lend their votes. Republican leadership doesn’t see anyone coalescing around a single plan, according to sources across GOP leadership.” [Politico, 10/25/13]

DeMaio Opposed the DREAM Act Calling it a “Poorly Thought Out Program.” In 2012, at an Institute of Americas Debate, when asked whether he supported the DREAM Act, Carl DeMaio refused to say he supported it and called it an unfunded program, saying “Unfortunately, legislators passed the DREAM Act without providing the funding revenues, the funding source to support that program. And so my concern is that you’re robbing Peter to pay Paul. I think it’s a very poorly thought out program even though the intentions are well placed.” [Institute of the Americas Debate, uploaded 8/14/12]

DeMaio Supported Arizona’s Controversial Immigration Enforcement Law. In 2010, Carl DeMaio, as San Diego City Councilman, cast the lone dissenting vote on a resolution calling for the repeal of Arizona’s controversial SB 1070 immigration enforcement law. [Del Mar Times, 5/03/10]

San Diego Mayor Candidates Bob Filner and Carl DiMaio Debate at Institute of the Americas

Monday, October 28, 2013

Carl DeMaio’s Benefactors Face $1 Million Fine for Illegal Campaign Activity

While the Koch brothers use one of their partisan groups to attack Scott Peters, other elements in their network now face a $1 million fine from the California Fair Political Practices Commission and must pay $15 million to California’s general fund. The Commission identified two groups as “part of the ‘Koch Brothers Network’ of dark money nonprofit corporations.”

For years, DeMaio worked as a senior staff member of organizations where David Koch serves on the board of trustees. After his loss to disgraced ex-mayor Bob Filner, DeMaio went back to work for Koch’s Reason Foundation.

“With a Koch brothers ally attacking on Carl DeMaio’s behalf, it’s becoming increasingly clear that San Diego voters might have to live with the Koch’s infamous secret money attacks for the next year,” said Matt Inzeo of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “If the Koch brothers are willing to skirt California law to advance their Tea Party agenda, and they're already weighing in for their staffer Carl DeMaio, San Diego voters are in for a lot of politics-as-usual."

“Koch Brothers Network” Face $1 Million Fine for Illegal Campaign Activity
“California's political watchdog agency on Thursday announced the largest fine in its history for campaign-reporting violations and ordered two political action committees involved in the 2012 elections to pay the state's general fund $15 million. The California Fair Political Practices Commission called the two groups that will pay the $1 million fine "part of the `Koch Brothers Network' of dark money political nonprofit corporations.’ The reference is to billionaire brothers Charles and David H. Koch, who have given millions of dollars to conservative causes across the country.” [San Diego Union-Tribune, 10/24/13]

Koch Brothers’ Americans for Prosperity Released TV Ad Targeting Scott Peters. 
“The conservative advocacy group Americans for Prosperity is wading into the 52nd Congressional District race more than a year before Election Day, funding a television ad calling for residents to call Rep. Scott Peters and demand the Affordable Care Act be replaced. […] David and Charles Koch of Koch Industries are the primary funders of Americans for Prosperity, which is spending at least $200,000 to air the 30-second spot on network affiliate and cable channels over the next three weeks.” [San Diego Union-Tribune, 10/22/13]
2013: DeMaio is a Paid Consultant for Koch-Backed Foundation. 

In May 2013, Carl DeMaio announced that he was consulting for the right wing Reason Foundation, as chair of the California Reform Council. According to DeMaio’s personal financial disclosure, DeMaio received $37,500 from the Reason Foundation for his consulting work. David H. Koch serves on the Board of the Trustees of the Reason Foundation. [Carl DeMaio for Congress, 1/10/13; Federal Personal Financial Disclosure, 9/16/13;, accessed 10/23/13]
·         1999-2003: DeMaio was Employed by Koch-Backed Foundation. 

From 1999-2003, Carl DeMaio worked for the Reason Foundation as a Director of Government Redesign. [, web archive, 10/26/04; Voice of San Diego, 10/12/12]

When is campaigning, mudslinging?

There has always been debate; this special election cycle is no different, in the media and now amongst social media about dirty campaigning.  We are again abuzz and aghast with the campaign mail hitting homes, websites popping up, Facebook posts and parody twitter accounts from candidates, independent expenditures and political activists challenging certain things as crossing the line as attacks, going negative, slinging mud and dirty politics.  How dare you sir!

Going back to early United States history you see the mudslinging from some of our most distinguished and cherished elected officials.  It was never pretty.  My point is whether attacks are really mudslinging is in the eyes of the beholder.  For the attacker, they will claim they are only exposing the side of the candidate voters should be aware.  Just reaching back to our last mayoral election we hear from insiders and outsiders, “Why didn’t anyone tell us about former Mayor Bob Filner?”  Umm, that would be a charge of mudslinging, right?  What rises to the level of presenting the facts about a candidate or mudslinging?  The only answer I can see is depends from where you stand; making it or receiving it. 

Another interesting angle is when one slings mud claiming it is the guise of casting the light on another’s mudslinging.  A negative on a negative, classic!  I had to hand it to the independent expenditure supporting former Assemblymember Nathan Fletcher, they did the negative on the negative and went one step further, showed a photo of him and his family with mud splatters on them.  The mailer suggested the attacks they were defending were on the whole Fletcher family. No one has ever made any attacks on his family, but just the candidate.

In the end, the candidate needs to stand on their record, the good and the bad.  Those snarky comments by supporters of a candidate crying foul need to be judged on not how they respond to when their candidate is attacked, but how they respond when their candidate or the independent expenditure in support of their candidate attacks the others as well.  Mud will fly this election cycle, if you aren’t being hit, then you are throwing it. Splat!