When it comes to fighting for constitutional rights, equality and fairness, Democrats have been at the forefront of the battle. We relish in this hard fought victory and celebrate that as Californians we have reached another milestone in securing equal rights for all.”
Friday, August 6, 2010
Statement of California Democratic Party Chairman John Burton on Court Ruling Overturning Prop 8 Marriage Ban
“Ninth Circuit Judge Vaughn Walker upheld the constitution and thus made the right decision in overturning Proposition 8, the ban on same-sex marriage. For Californians fighting for equality and the thousands of same-sex couples who have been striving for the basic right to marry their partner, this was also the morally correct decision. Prop 8 was nothing more than a divisive and mean-spirited way to elevate one class of people above another.
When it comes to fighting for constitutional rights, equality and fairness, Democrats have been at the forefront of the battle. We relish in this hard fought victory and celebrate that as Californians we have reached another milestone in securing equal rights for all.”
# # #
When it comes to fighting for constitutional rights, equality and fairness, Democrats have been at the forefront of the battle. We relish in this hard fought victory and celebrate that as Californians we have reached another milestone in securing equal rights for all.”
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Senator Feinstein Statement on Proposition 8 Case
This was released yesterday.
WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) today issued the following statement in response to Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional:
"This is an enormous victory for the equal rights of gays and lesbians. Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling today confirmed what many of us had felt was clear all along: that it is unconstitutional to take away the rights of gays and lesbians to enter into the institution of marriage.
Most likely this verdict will be appealed and will go to the Supreme Court. The journey is not over, but today is a day to celebrate this historic victory for equal marriage rights. This is very good news."
# # #
WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) today issued the following statement in response to Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional:
"This is an enormous victory for the equal rights of gays and lesbians. Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling today confirmed what many of us had felt was clear all along: that it is unconstitutional to take away the rights of gays and lesbians to enter into the institution of marriage.
Most likely this verdict will be appealed and will go to the Supreme Court. The journey is not over, but today is a day to celebrate this historic victory for equal marriage rights. This is very good news."
Statement of California Democratic Party on Court Ruling Overturning Same-Sex Marriage Ban
Today’s ruling is a victory for equality and an affirmation for all Californians who believe that our state must never be party to keeping committed, loving couples apart. This is but the latest victory in a long march toward full equality that has yet to be realized for the majority of LGBT couples and families in the United States. California Democrats will continue to fight on the side of basic fairness and equality under law until the right to marry is extended to all couples.
Jess Durfee
Southern California Chair, LGBT Caucus
California Democratic Party
Jess Durfee
Southern California Chair, LGBT Caucus
California Democratic Party
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Does Meg’s Money Matter?
Meg Whitman has spent nearly $100 million so far to become the next Governor.
Jerry Brown has spent $663,000 with $23 million in the bank.
Any other candidate would be down by at least 10pts if they had to endure the attacks that Meg has launched against Jerry. Yet the polling numbers aren’t moving much.
I don’t believe that Brown can win by standing still, but he’s doing great so far.
Jerry Brown has spent $663,000 with $23 million in the bank.
Any other candidate would be down by at least 10pts if they had to endure the attacks that Meg has launched against Jerry. Yet the polling numbers aren’t moving much.
I don’t believe that Brown can win by standing still, but he’s doing great so far.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Wayne gets $17K from the SDCDP
From Today’s UT:
After complaining about a loophole that allowed the local Republican Party to give $20,000 to a City Council candidate, the San Diego County Democratic Party did the same thing just before the window of opportunity closed.
The party gave $17,000 to District 6 council candidate Howard Wayne on June 16 ahead of the city formally adopting a $1,000 limit on political party contributions.
Good job, Dems! About time the SDCDP does something real to help their candidates besides supplying volunteers. The SDGOP didn’t do the same for Zapf after the election. If the local Dems continue acting like this, they may become a real force in this city. Stay tuned.
After complaining about a loophole that allowed the local Republican Party to give $20,000 to a City Council candidate, the San Diego County Democratic Party did the same thing just before the window of opportunity closed.
The party gave $17,000 to District 6 council candidate Howard Wayne on June 16 ahead of the city formally adopting a $1,000 limit on political party contributions.
Good job, Dems! About time the SDCDP does something real to help their candidates besides supplying volunteers. The SDGOP didn’t do the same for Zapf after the election. If the local Dems continue acting like this, they may become a real force in this city. Stay tuned.
Monday, August 2, 2010
Frye wins
The battle isn’t over but the Voice of San Diego has summed up what happened last week:
Their 2005 campaign, for all its hoopla and circumstance, eventually became a rather unromantic affair. It was a battle of financial plans, after all.
Frye chose a more radical approach of the two. She wanted to stop paying what the city attorney had said were illegal pension boosts and ask voters to give her authority to go around the City Council and unilaterally negotiate with unions and put the city in bankruptcy. Her goal: Have the clout and authority to put a comprehensive reform package of labor cuts and a temporary sales tax on the 2006 ballot.
Sanders on the other hand disavowed taxes as a solution and seized on Frye's tax plan accordingly. He wanted to streamline, outsource, renegotiate with unions and wait for a judge to decide the legality of employee pension boosts.
The strategies underscored a subtle but key difference between the two politicians: Frye saw a systemic problem that needed a shock to the system. Sanders saw a single problem that could be addressed through incremental change.
But, in the end, it was the mayor that got the ball rolling on a comprehensive reform package a month ago, though he didn't publicly admit it until after he had given up hope.
Sanders would rather be popular than effective. It’s nice to see Frye finally wield her power in a grand way.
Their 2005 campaign, for all its hoopla and circumstance, eventually became a rather unromantic affair. It was a battle of financial plans, after all.
Frye chose a more radical approach of the two. She wanted to stop paying what the city attorney had said were illegal pension boosts and ask voters to give her authority to go around the City Council and unilaterally negotiate with unions and put the city in bankruptcy. Her goal: Have the clout and authority to put a comprehensive reform package of labor cuts and a temporary sales tax on the 2006 ballot.
Sanders on the other hand disavowed taxes as a solution and seized on Frye's tax plan accordingly. He wanted to streamline, outsource, renegotiate with unions and wait for a judge to decide the legality of employee pension boosts.
The strategies underscored a subtle but key difference between the two politicians: Frye saw a systemic problem that needed a shock to the system. Sanders saw a single problem that could be addressed through incremental change.
But, in the end, it was the mayor that got the ball rolling on a comprehensive reform package a month ago, though he didn't publicly admit it until after he had given up hope.
Sanders would rather be popular than effective. It’s nice to see Frye finally wield her power in a grand way.
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Vargas Victory Speech
From Capitol Alert:
"The time has come to take a stand -- to blaze a bold new trail and once again make California the state of possibilities.
"I know we can do this if we work together.
"As one of 10 children, born and raised on a small farm, I leaned from my parents at a young age that anything is possible and that no dream is too big if you work hard to achieve it...
"As your senator, I will passionately promote policies that reflect a vision for the future in which we measure our progress not merely in the quantity of our goods but in the quality of our lives - the purity of the air we breathe and the water we drink; the safety of our streets and the excellence of our schools and healthcare system.
"Thank you once again for joining me in this cause. Let's win in November and turn California around."
"The time has come to take a stand -- to blaze a bold new trail and once again make California the state of possibilities.
"I know we can do this if we work together.
"As one of 10 children, born and raised on a small farm, I leaned from my parents at a young age that anything is possible and that no dream is too big if you work hard to achieve it...
"As your senator, I will passionately promote policies that reflect a vision for the future in which we measure our progress not merely in the quantity of our goods but in the quality of our lives - the purity of the air we breathe and the water we drink; the safety of our streets and the excellence of our schools and healthcare system.
"Thank you once again for joining me in this cause. Let's win in November and turn California around."
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Councilmember Donna Frye and Former Candidate Steve Hadley Announce Endorsement of Howard Wayne
July 1, 2010
(San Diego, CA). District 6 Councilmember Donna Frye and her Chief of Staff, Steve Hadley, a former District 6 candidate, announced today that they are endorsing Howard Wayne to replace Frye on the council.
“We have a very clear choice in this race,” said Frye. “Howard is a long-time member of this community, a Deputy Attorney General and a legislator who has already proven his commitment to us. Lorie Zapf, in contrast, has shown herself to be intolerant and to lack the kind of financial management skills it takes to run a large City.”
Steve Hadley also expressed confidence in Howard Wayne and concern about the direction Zapf might take the City. “This is a critical time for San Diego,” he said. “We can’t afford any big mistakes in who we elect.”
Howard Wayne is running on a platform of improving City services through economic improvement, better fiscal management and pension reform.
Howard Wayne has served the public throughout his professional career as a San Diego area California State Assembly Member and as a California Deputy Attorney General. A San Diegan since early childhood, Howard attended Marvin Elementary School, Lewis Junior High School, Hoover High School, San Diego State University, and University of San Diego. He has lived in San Diego Council District 6 neighborhoods for 38 years.
(San Diego, CA). District 6 Councilmember Donna Frye and her Chief of Staff, Steve Hadley, a former District 6 candidate, announced today that they are endorsing Howard Wayne to replace Frye on the council.
“We have a very clear choice in this race,” said Frye. “Howard is a long-time member of this community, a Deputy Attorney General and a legislator who has already proven his commitment to us. Lorie Zapf, in contrast, has shown herself to be intolerant and to lack the kind of financial management skills it takes to run a large City.”
Steve Hadley also expressed confidence in Howard Wayne and concern about the direction Zapf might take the City. “This is a critical time for San Diego,” he said. “We can’t afford any big mistakes in who we elect.”
Howard Wayne is running on a platform of improving City services through economic improvement, better fiscal management and pension reform.
Howard Wayne has served the public throughout his professional career as a San Diego area California State Assembly Member and as a California Deputy Attorney General. A San Diegan since early childhood, Howard attended Marvin Elementary School, Lewis Junior High School, Hoover High School, San Diego State University, and University of San Diego. He has lived in San Diego Council District 6 neighborhoods for 38 years.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
The Problem with Better Courts Now
This year, a group called “Better Courts Now" put up four candidates to challenge sitting judges on the California Superior Court in San Diego. The challengers claim to be running to impose what they consider “Christian values” on the courts. An AP story reported one of the challengers claimed that “God has called upon us to do this only with the judiciary.”The incumbent judges all won handily against these challenges.
I recently debated a supporter of Better Courts Now on a local morning news show.The approach of Better Courts Now, to impose a specific religious perspective on judicial elections, seems inappropriate to many observers. It’s unsettling to people of faith, myself included.
But why? In most elections for public office, we usually tolerate interest groups jockeying for influence. It’s a part of our pluralistic democracy. It’s just politics.
I accept that anything with an election is inherently political. But I do not believe that just because something’s inherently political, then every political act within it is fair game.
There are some campaign tactics that are inappropriate, even if they’re entirely legal under the system. For example, we object strongly to race-baiting, or spreading salacious and false rumors about candidates. Campaigns may be allowed to do so, but they still shouldn’t do so.
Similarly, it’s inappropriate for judicial candidates to assert that they’ll impose specific views on the administration of justice (religious or otherwise). The office is intended to be impartial and fair-minded.
The problem with Better Courts Now is that they are trying to bring in a specific narrow set of values to an office that is supposed to be neutral. Sure, judges are human beings, and they carry the same biases and weaknesses as all of us. But a judge has an obligation to strive for impartiality. Neutrality may ultimately be a fiction, but it’s a useful fiction.
Better Courts Now chucks the idea of impartiality out the window. The whole basis of their campaign, to impose a set of values on a body of neutral arbiters, is antithetical to the function of a judge. Voters are appropriately left to wonder who are these candidates running for judge, who so fundamentally misunderstand the very nature of the offices they seek.
The supporters of Better Courts Now also make the incongruous claim that judges who apply their particular set of religious and social values, are better able to render impartial legal decisions. This idea is inconsistent, if not incoherent.
A judicial activist is a judge that allows their own set of values to supersede other more legitimate legal policies. In the same breath, Better Courts Now claims they will prevent the imposition of personal values in the administration of justice, by imposing personal values in the administration of justice.
Voters don’t like this kind of double dealing, and they appropriately rejected it.
Monday, May 31, 2010
One week left: Predictions
Things always change the last week before the election. Today, this is where I see things:
San Diego City Council District 2 & 4 - Yawn
Faulconer and Young win. Finucane becomes the front-runner four years from now in D2.
San Diego City Council District 6 - Popcorn!
The egos of Kvaric and Sudberry have chained them to the flawed candidacy of Zapf. Thanks to the "gift" of $20K from the SD Republican Party, the Lincoln Club's oversized hit pieces and this being a Republican leaning primary, in spite of the candidate, Zapf gets dragged across the finish line into the runoff.
Wayne makes the runoff totake out face Zapf. With Labor focused in Chula Vista and the local Dem party tilting at the windmill that is the 4th Supervisorial seat, Wayne gets in the old-fashioned way; he worked at it. His relentless campaign should grab enough of the electorate to make it.
Hadley has the Donna-heads on his side but that's it. They will deny Wayne the outright win but will make it easier for him to unify the party in the fall. Hadley's natural volunteer base has fled for Whitburn and, as of this writing, his campaign has not shown much of a pulse since their SDSU interns graduated.
Tran has loaned herself $20K but it remains to be seen how she will apply this to campaign (more signs?). This is her best chance to make the runoff: five candidates and a wounded Republican frontrunner reduce the number of votes needed. It could happen.
Huckabone may receive more than single digits. He has been quiet during the Zapf brouhaha which implies that he is being the good soldier for a future shot at office. Keep your eye on this guy. With some direction and money, he could be dangerous.
San Diego City Council District 8 - Kettlecorn!
D8 is the the kind of place where the total votes garnered by the 3rd or 4th place finisher in D6 could win outright due to the low turnout numbers. Polls have been done showing Inzunza with a solid lead but his runoff opponent remains unknown. One poll has BD Howard as number two and in another it's Alvarez. UFCW launched a hit on BD but it may result in elevating Nick to an outright victory. With Felipe and Ben Hueso sharing resources and people, it appears unlikely that any prediction for the second spot can be credible.
What I will say is that he who has the better ground game will win.
State Assembly District 79 - Tequila poppers!
Conventional wisdom (the same wisdom that gave Peters the nod over Aguirre, Morrow a chance a against Sanders, etc) gives this to Hueso but he's never had to run against a class warrior like Quinones and an experienced veteran like Doyle. The Hueso camp has cobbled together an operation in the last month to compete with the other two which have been in operation for months.
It appears that he didn't realize he had to run a real campaign until May rolled around. Word on the street is that Hueso is planning a hit involving comments from some of Quinones's fellow boardmembers. Hueso also doesn't acknowledge Doyle probably because Doyle is set to take a chunk out of the votes that would be going to Hueso.
Either way, this race is turning into a streetfight between Ben and Pearl. I would have given this to Hueso but his inability to take the race seriously until the last minute may cost him. It will be close.
Prop G Chula Vista - Jaggersahots!
Talk about streetfights and close results. This will be decided by last minute voters and whichever side can yank people out who care about this in June. Chula Vistans have been flooded in the mail and on TV (watched MSNBC or the History Channel recently?). Labor needs to win this. Too close to call.
State Senate 40 - Vodka!
After sending and receiving Molotov cocktails, fire-bombs, and other incendiaries at eachother for months, the Salas and Vargas campaigns will reap the fruits of their labors. Will the insurance industry buy their seat for Vargas? Will Salas be able to raise her head to fight another day? Elements of this race had Spy-vs-Spy qualities.
Winner wins by 2-3 percentages.
Congressional District 50 - Peanuts
Emblem and Busby have been locking horns for over a year now. Emblem is running with Labor in an area where Labor is not popular. Busby gets it on name ID.
Extra! Republican Primary Congressional District 53 - Pretzls
This has been a fun one to watch! Fink gets it because she has good signs and is nowhere near as batty as her opponents.
San Diego City Council District 2 & 4 - Yawn
Faulconer and Young win. Finucane becomes the front-runner four years from now in D2.
San Diego City Council District 6 - Popcorn!
The egos of Kvaric and Sudberry have chained them to the flawed candidacy of Zapf. Thanks to the "gift" of $20K from the SD Republican Party, the Lincoln Club's oversized hit pieces and this being a Republican leaning primary, in spite of the candidate, Zapf gets dragged across the finish line into the runoff.
Wayne makes the runoff to
Hadley has the Donna-heads on his side but that's it. They will deny Wayne the outright win but will make it easier for him to unify the party in the fall. Hadley's natural volunteer base has fled for Whitburn and, as of this writing, his campaign has not shown much of a pulse since their SDSU interns graduated.
Tran has loaned herself $20K but it remains to be seen how she will apply this to campaign (more signs?). This is her best chance to make the runoff: five candidates and a wounded Republican frontrunner reduce the number of votes needed. It could happen.
Huckabone may receive more than single digits. He has been quiet during the Zapf brouhaha which implies that he is being the good soldier for a future shot at office. Keep your eye on this guy. With some direction and money, he could be dangerous.
San Diego City Council District 8 - Kettlecorn!
D8 is the the kind of place where the total votes garnered by the 3rd or 4th place finisher in D6 could win outright due to the low turnout numbers. Polls have been done showing Inzunza with a solid lead but his runoff opponent remains unknown. One poll has BD Howard as number two and in another it's Alvarez. UFCW launched a hit on BD but it may result in elevating Nick to an outright victory. With Felipe and Ben Hueso sharing resources and people, it appears unlikely that any prediction for the second spot can be credible.
What I will say is that he who has the better ground game will win.
State Assembly District 79 - Tequila poppers!
Conventional wisdom (the same wisdom that gave Peters the nod over Aguirre, Morrow a chance a against Sanders, etc) gives this to Hueso but he's never had to run against a class warrior like Quinones and an experienced veteran like Doyle. The Hueso camp has cobbled together an operation in the last month to compete with the other two which have been in operation for months.
It appears that he didn't realize he had to run a real campaign until May rolled around. Word on the street is that Hueso is planning a hit involving comments from some of Quinones's fellow boardmembers. Hueso also doesn't acknowledge Doyle probably because Doyle is set to take a chunk out of the votes that would be going to Hueso.
Either way, this race is turning into a streetfight between Ben and Pearl. I would have given this to Hueso but his inability to take the race seriously until the last minute may cost him. It will be close.
Prop G Chula Vista - Jaggersahots!
Talk about streetfights and close results. This will be decided by last minute voters and whichever side can yank people out who care about this in June. Chula Vistans have been flooded in the mail and on TV (watched MSNBC or the History Channel recently?). Labor needs to win this. Too close to call.
State Senate 40 - Vodka!
After sending and receiving Molotov cocktails, fire-bombs, and other incendiaries at eachother for months, the Salas and Vargas campaigns will reap the fruits of their labors. Will the insurance industry buy their seat for Vargas? Will Salas be able to raise her head to fight another day? Elements of this race had Spy-vs-Spy qualities.
Winner wins by 2-3 percentages.
Congressional District 50 - Peanuts
Emblem and Busby have been locking horns for over a year now. Emblem is running with Labor in an area where Labor is not popular. Busby gets it on name ID.
Extra! Republican Primary Congressional District 53 - Pretzls
This has been a fun one to watch! Fink gets it because she has good signs and is nowhere near as batty as her opponents.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Blog of San Diego picks up Zapf's "strategic fraud"
Blogger Pat Flannery tears apart Zapf's case.
Would Lorie Zapf bring "strategic fraud" to City Council?
And just where is the UT on this?
Would Lorie Zapf bring "strategic fraud" to City Council?
And just where is the UT on this?
Monday, May 24, 2010
D6: Tran hits Zapf over Home Default
As the SDUT ignores the story about Lorie Zapf's inability to maintain financial discipline at home, Channel 10 News has picked up on it with quote from Kim Tran, one of her opponents and fellow Republican:
Regardless, Tran is questioning her opponent's judgment, especially since Zapf is campaigning on promises to bring fiscal responsibility, balance the budget and bring common sense back to City Hall.
"You spend the money you don't have," said Tran.
Check out the story here.
Regardless, Tran is questioning her opponent's judgment, especially since Zapf is campaigning on promises to bring fiscal responsibility, balance the budget and bring common sense back to City Hall.
"You spend the money you don't have," said Tran.
Check out the story here.
Zapf news blackout at the UT?
From the Voice of San Diego this weekend:
Unpaid Debt of the Week: If you're running for City Council on a platform of fiscal responsibility, it can't help your case to default on your mortgage. But will CityBeat's revelation about the tangled mortgage situation of Lorie Zapf, a leading candidate for City Council, actually damage her campaign? CityBeat's readership is small, so it may depend on whether bigger local media like the U-T jump on the story and keep it alive. Or her rivals could spread the news themselves.
I think the UT will ignore the story or run it when it can be buried with the rest of the campaign reporting. They did endorse her and it would be a poor reflection on the UT if they didn't research her background. After all, it is a matter of public record.
Unpaid Debt of the Week: If you're running for City Council on a platform of fiscal responsibility, it can't help your case to default on your mortgage. But will CityBeat's revelation about the tangled mortgage situation of Lorie Zapf, a leading candidate for City Council, actually damage her campaign? CityBeat's readership is small, so it may depend on whether bigger local media like the U-T jump on the story and keep it alive. Or her rivals could spread the news themselves.
I think the UT will ignore the story or run it when it can be buried with the rest of the campaign reporting. They did endorse her and it would be a poor reflection on the UT if they didn't research her background. After all, it is a matter of public record.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Zapf can't make ends meet
I don't like going personal in campaigns unless an element of the person's identification is used as a pillar of their campaign. Then it is fair game.
Lorie Zapf is running as a successful business-woman who is all about fiscal discipline.
From yesterday's CityBeat:
Publicly, Lorie Zapf is campaigning for San Diego City Council on a platform of fiscal responsibility. Privately, however, the Zapf family has defaulted on a loan that could result in the foreclosure of their home.
As of March 30, 2010, Lorie and Eric Zapf were six months behind in payments on a $230,000 line of credit, according to a Notice of Default (NOD) that Wells Fargo filed with the San Diego County Recorder’s Office. It’s the second loan the Zapfs have taken out using the house as collateral.
And there's more. Read the article.
Running for office is never easy but you should make sure you have a home to go back to before setting out on such a life-altering journey. Especially with a family.
DeMaio, Sudberry, and Krvaric really know how to pick their candidates.
Lorie Zapf is running as a successful business-woman who is all about fiscal discipline.
From yesterday's CityBeat:
Publicly, Lorie Zapf is campaigning for San Diego City Council on a platform of fiscal responsibility. Privately, however, the Zapf family has defaulted on a loan that could result in the foreclosure of their home.
As of March 30, 2010, Lorie and Eric Zapf were six months behind in payments on a $230,000 line of credit, according to a Notice of Default (NOD) that Wells Fargo filed with the San Diego County Recorder’s Office. It’s the second loan the Zapfs have taken out using the house as collateral.
And there's more. Read the article.
Running for office is never easy but you should make sure you have a home to go back to before setting out on such a life-altering journey. Especially with a family.
DeMaio, Sudberry, and Krvaric really know how to pick their candidates.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
District 6 for Sale!
District 6 for Sale!
Republicans trying to buy, hijack, or steal elections is nothing new.
This from today’s UT:
A federal appeals court has lifted a ban placed on political party donations in the city of San Diego ahead of the June 8 election, which could open the door to unlimited party contributions to City Council candidates in the next few weeks.
The ruling is the latest in a lawsuit filed by the county Republican Party and others to change the city’s campaign finance laws, which they say are restrictive and infringe on free-speech rights.
Now the Republicans can do what their own candidates can’t seem to do for themselves: raise money. The more insidious side is now coordination between the parties and campaigns can go forth without regard to spending limits. Who benefits?
Made explicit in the Voice of San Diego:
It is clear who benefits the most from the decision.
Businesswoman Lorie Zapf, the endorsed Republican candidate vying to replace termed-out District 6 City Councilwoman Donna Frye, will receive a $20,000 contribution from the Republican Party prior to the election, Republican Party Chairman Tony Krvaric said.
"That's the first thing on the docket," Krvaric said.
Zapf is locked in a five-way primary fight and has $27,000 less in cash on hand than the Democratic Party's endorsed candidate, former state Assemblyman Howard Wayne. Also in the race are Frye's chief of staff Steve Hadley, businessman Ryan Huckabone and paralegal Kim Tran. If no candidate wins more than 50 percent of the June vote, then the top two finishers will compete again in November.
Political observers widely see the District 6 race as the only one this election cycle that could change the 6-2 advantage Democrats currently hold on the City Council. District 6 includes the city's Mission Valley, Clairemont, Kearny Mesa, Serra Mesa and Linda Vista neighborhoods.
So now a woman who thinks homosexuality is a sin and that supporters of hers, like Demaio, shouldn’t be in public office will be able to have her ground and mail campaign paid for by the Republican Party because she can’t do it herself.
All I can say is that you get what you pay for. It’s obvious that Zapf crumples before Huckabone in person and has been depending on others to do her campaigning for her. Tran signs are everywhere and Zapf is fading. Enter the egos of Krvaric and Sudsburry who don’t like the idea of having their handpicked choice cut to ribbons because she is so inept at running for office. They need something to show people that they back up their boasts. If that means filing lawsuits to benefit the regional director for Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse in order to buy the seat for her, so be it.
I hope Wayne kicks their collective asses. They so deserve it.
Republicans trying to buy, hijack, or steal elections is nothing new.
This from today’s UT:
A federal appeals court has lifted a ban placed on political party donations in the city of San Diego ahead of the June 8 election, which could open the door to unlimited party contributions to City Council candidates in the next few weeks.
The ruling is the latest in a lawsuit filed by the county Republican Party and others to change the city’s campaign finance laws, which they say are restrictive and infringe on free-speech rights.
Now the Republicans can do what their own candidates can’t seem to do for themselves: raise money. The more insidious side is now coordination between the parties and campaigns can go forth without regard to spending limits. Who benefits?
Made explicit in the Voice of San Diego:
It is clear who benefits the most from the decision.
Businesswoman Lorie Zapf, the endorsed Republican candidate vying to replace termed-out District 6 City Councilwoman Donna Frye, will receive a $20,000 contribution from the Republican Party prior to the election, Republican Party Chairman Tony Krvaric said.
"That's the first thing on the docket," Krvaric said.
Zapf is locked in a five-way primary fight and has $27,000 less in cash on hand than the Democratic Party's endorsed candidate, former state Assemblyman Howard Wayne. Also in the race are Frye's chief of staff Steve Hadley, businessman Ryan Huckabone and paralegal Kim Tran. If no candidate wins more than 50 percent of the June vote, then the top two finishers will compete again in November.
Political observers widely see the District 6 race as the only one this election cycle that could change the 6-2 advantage Democrats currently hold on the City Council. District 6 includes the city's Mission Valley, Clairemont, Kearny Mesa, Serra Mesa and Linda Vista neighborhoods.
So now a woman who thinks homosexuality is a sin and that supporters of hers, like Demaio, shouldn’t be in public office will be able to have her ground and mail campaign paid for by the Republican Party because she can’t do it herself.
All I can say is that you get what you pay for. It’s obvious that Zapf crumples before Huckabone in person and has been depending on others to do her campaigning for her. Tran signs are everywhere and Zapf is fading. Enter the egos of Krvaric and Sudsburry who don’t like the idea of having their handpicked choice cut to ribbons because she is so inept at running for office. They need something to show people that they back up their boasts. If that means filing lawsuits to benefit the regional director for Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse in order to buy the seat for her, so be it.
I hope Wayne kicks their collective asses. They so deserve it.
Saturday, May 15, 2010
STEINBERG RESPONSE TO GOVERNOR'S MAY REVISION
STEINBERG RESPONSE TO GOVERNOR'S MAY REVISION
(SACRAMENTO) – Senate President pro Tempore Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) made the following comments today in response to the Governor’s May Revise:
I could speak for a long time about the past and where to point the finger.
I could talk about sledgehammers, and automobiles and torn up credit cards.
I could talk about blowing up boxes.
I could talk about one of many silly metaphors.
But I will leave it at this: I am disappointed that the Governor has chosen to surrender.
That he sees California as unfixable and that he proposes a budget that kills the economy and harms so many.
It is a non-starter.
If God forbid this budget became a reality, California would be the only state in the union to not have a safety net for children.
Leadership is not about blaming others. It’s about finding solutions to tough problems to preserve the state and its people.
In their comments throughout the day the Governor’s representatives have described the cuts he proposes as quote “terrible.”
I believe him …but his actions say it would be more terrible to delay $2.1 billion in corporate tax breaks than to save children, the elderly, and the most vulnerable.
His actions say it is more terrible to impose a tax on oil profits than complete elimination of county mental health services and child care.
He appears to have decided that the solutions are too difficult to achieve so he will accept these “terrible” cuts.
We refuse to wave the white flag.
California’s elected leaders- including myself- and the governor and the others need to stand up.
Given the choice between enacting $6 billion in cuts to services for the elderly, children and the disabled, or delaying corporate tax breaks, I’m for delaying corporate tax breaks.
Given the choice between cutting education by nearly $3 billion or seeking revenues from oil companies extracting oil in California, I’m for getting revenues from oil companies profiting handsomely in this state.
But I want to go beyond I think what you expect here which is sort of the give and take.…
And [provide a] the recitation of our genuinely held beliefs and philosophy.
I want to state my perspective on the overall situation very clearly.
In my view—having now my tenth year in the legislature, second year as leader, having served on numerous budget conference committees—we have come to the end of trying to prop up this failed structure.
There is no more triage.
The status quo is unsustainable.
Our government is not structured to quickly and effectively respond to an economic crisis of this magnitude.
We are so balkanized that the people don’t know who collects the taxes and who provides the services.
Yes we need revenue, and we will fight for revenue, but not to prop up this outdated structure.
We must use this crisis now, not next year, not another report, not another study.
We need to bring government closer to the people.
The inside term is “realignment.”
What it means to the people of California is that we must take many of these state programs that otherwise may be decimated, and give them to the locals and the school districts. Give them restored revenue and the ability to raise revenue themselves.
This is not theory. This is not academic. This is not a luxury.
Those who say – “too difficult, too complicated”, I challenge you to do this:
Bring forward an alternative that balances the budget, preserves essential public investments, and does not rely on gimmicks.
Finally, I do want to respond to one thing that the Governor highlighted in his comments about the tax structure.
I think we all agree that California’s tax structure needs updating. But to say that we are living through this budget crisis solely or primarily because of the tax structure is just plain wrong.
The Legislative Analyst said clearly that if we had adopted the Parsky Commission’s recommendations . . . revenue would actually drop $10 billion.
[The] Governor has this theory about GDP that he keeps talking about, but this is what we know about California:
Personal consumption in California has fallen by the largest percentage since 1980.
Home prices have plunged dramatically since 2007 from an average of $484,000 a home to $250,000.
The share of corporate income tax paid in California has fallen by nearly half since 1981.
So this idea that if our tax structure had only kept up with some phantom robust growth in our economy over the last couple of years . . .
This country, the world, and this state are living through the most precipitous drop in revenue, and it would be precipitous no matter what tax system we had.
The real answer here is we must restructure and realign this outdated structure that we have here in California and we need to provide the revenue to the entity that is.
(SACRAMENTO) – Senate President pro Tempore Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) made the following comments today in response to the Governor’s May Revise:
I could speak for a long time about the past and where to point the finger.
I could talk about sledgehammers, and automobiles and torn up credit cards.
I could talk about blowing up boxes.
I could talk about one of many silly metaphors.
But I will leave it at this: I am disappointed that the Governor has chosen to surrender.
That he sees California as unfixable and that he proposes a budget that kills the economy and harms so many.
It is a non-starter.
If God forbid this budget became a reality, California would be the only state in the union to not have a safety net for children.
Leadership is not about blaming others. It’s about finding solutions to tough problems to preserve the state and its people.
In their comments throughout the day the Governor’s representatives have described the cuts he proposes as quote “terrible.”
I believe him …but his actions say it would be more terrible to delay $2.1 billion in corporate tax breaks than to save children, the elderly, and the most vulnerable.
His actions say it is more terrible to impose a tax on oil profits than complete elimination of county mental health services and child care.
He appears to have decided that the solutions are too difficult to achieve so he will accept these “terrible” cuts.
We refuse to wave the white flag.
California’s elected leaders- including myself- and the governor and the others need to stand up.
Given the choice between enacting $6 billion in cuts to services for the elderly, children and the disabled, or delaying corporate tax breaks, I’m for delaying corporate tax breaks.
Given the choice between cutting education by nearly $3 billion or seeking revenues from oil companies extracting oil in California, I’m for getting revenues from oil companies profiting handsomely in this state.
But I want to go beyond I think what you expect here which is sort of the give and take.…
And [provide a] the recitation of our genuinely held beliefs and philosophy.
I want to state my perspective on the overall situation very clearly.
In my view—having now my tenth year in the legislature, second year as leader, having served on numerous budget conference committees—we have come to the end of trying to prop up this failed structure.
There is no more triage.
The status quo is unsustainable.
Our government is not structured to quickly and effectively respond to an economic crisis of this magnitude.
We are so balkanized that the people don’t know who collects the taxes and who provides the services.
Yes we need revenue, and we will fight for revenue, but not to prop up this outdated structure.
We must use this crisis now, not next year, not another report, not another study.
We need to bring government closer to the people.
The inside term is “realignment.”
What it means to the people of California is that we must take many of these state programs that otherwise may be decimated, and give them to the locals and the school districts. Give them restored revenue and the ability to raise revenue themselves.
This is not theory. This is not academic. This is not a luxury.
Those who say – “too difficult, too complicated”, I challenge you to do this:
Bring forward an alternative that balances the budget, preserves essential public investments, and does not rely on gimmicks.
Finally, I do want to respond to one thing that the Governor highlighted in his comments about the tax structure.
I think we all agree that California’s tax structure needs updating. But to say that we are living through this budget crisis solely or primarily because of the tax structure is just plain wrong.
The Legislative Analyst said clearly that if we had adopted the Parsky Commission’s recommendations . . . revenue would actually drop $10 billion.
[The] Governor has this theory about GDP that he keeps talking about, but this is what we know about California:
Personal consumption in California has fallen by the largest percentage since 1980.
Home prices have plunged dramatically since 2007 from an average of $484,000 a home to $250,000.
The share of corporate income tax paid in California has fallen by nearly half since 1981.
So this idea that if our tax structure had only kept up with some phantom robust growth in our economy over the last couple of years . . .
This country, the world, and this state are living through the most precipitous drop in revenue, and it would be precipitous no matter what tax system we had.
The real answer here is we must restructure and realign this outdated structure that we have here in California and we need to provide the revenue to the entity that is.
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Stop Wall Street Favors
From the CDP:
Tell Congress to stop doing favors for Wall Street, and pass the Stop Tax-Haven Abuse Act now! The Stop Tax-Haven Abuse Act would crack down on the use of offshore tax-havens, the abuse of tax shelters by the super wealthy, and make it more difficult to avoid taxes by funneling money through foreign corporations.
Here's the video.
Tell Congress to stop doing favors for Wall Street, and pass the Stop Tax-Haven Abuse Act now! The Stop Tax-Haven Abuse Act would crack down on the use of offshore tax-havens, the abuse of tax shelters by the super wealthy, and make it more difficult to avoid taxes by funneling money through foreign corporations.
Here's the video.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Thursday, May 6, 2010
SD 40: Thuggary doesn’t play
The race between Salas and Vargas has been soiled for the last month ever since Salas began launching hit pieces against Vargas for being a tool of the insurance industry.
The Vargas camp responded with physical intimidation. From CityBeat:
Vargas dispatched several campaign staffers to crash Salas’ press conference—emphasis on “crash.” A skirmish between the two staffs resulted in one Salas worker falling, banging his head and taking a trip to urgent care, which the Salas campaign characterized as hospitalization in a press release sent immediately after the event.
Where I come from, boys get physical as a schoolyard response to an out of control situation. Press conferences aren’t out of control but making them such becomes the story. In other write-ups of this incident, the scuffle has been the lead to the make point that Salas was trying to make.
And more:
The Vargas campaign retaliated by e-mailing CityBeat several documents, including flyers accusing Salas of being “hypocritical and deceitful” because, over the course of her political career, she has accepted $75,000 from CJAC members.
We’d like to point out that a) that’s still roughly a 10th of what CJAC has spent on Vargas just this cycle, b) accusing your opponent of being just as corporate as you are is not a winning argument and c) replacing the first S in Salas’ name with a dollar sign is just weak.
Salas wins this one. The Vargas campaign’s attempt to thwart a story only made it larger.
The Vargas camp responded with physical intimidation. From CityBeat:
Vargas dispatched several campaign staffers to crash Salas’ press conference—emphasis on “crash.” A skirmish between the two staffs resulted in one Salas worker falling, banging his head and taking a trip to urgent care, which the Salas campaign characterized as hospitalization in a press release sent immediately after the event.
Where I come from, boys get physical as a schoolyard response to an out of control situation. Press conferences aren’t out of control but making them such becomes the story. In other write-ups of this incident, the scuffle has been the lead to the make point that Salas was trying to make.
And more:
The Vargas campaign retaliated by e-mailing CityBeat several documents, including flyers accusing Salas of being “hypocritical and deceitful” because, over the course of her political career, she has accepted $75,000 from CJAC members.
We’d like to point out that a) that’s still roughly a 10th of what CJAC has spent on Vargas just this cycle, b) accusing your opponent of being just as corporate as you are is not a winning argument and c) replacing the first S in Salas’ name with a dollar sign is just weak.
Salas wins this one. The Vargas campaign’s attempt to thwart a story only made it larger.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)