I have a request to our friends in the netroots: remind anyone you know who lives in the 10th Congressional District, a Northern California district that includes portions of Contra Costa, Solano, Alameda, and Sacramento counties, to vote on Tuesday, November 3rd.
John Garamendi received the endorsement of the Contra Costa Times today. It's basically the same stuff that they said back on the September 1 election. He's experienced, he knows his stuff, he'll have an impact. All stuff I can agree with.
However, there is at least one thing to quibble about, specifically the part about Harmer in this quote:
Garamendi supports the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and a change in the law to allow same-sex couples to legally marry. Harmer has not taken strong positions on either.(CCT 10/28/09)
Now, if one were to peruse over to the SF Chronicle's database of donors to Prop 8, you'd find one David Harmer of San Ramon having given $2200 to Yes on Prop 8. I'm not sure how much stronger of a position somebody could make. He literally put his money where his opinion is. He steadfastly opposes equal marriage rights for same-sex couples.
I decided to try my hand at redistricting California's Congressional districts for 2010-2012, using Dave's Redistricting App. After playing around with it a bit, here's what the map I came up with looks like overall:
Here's the 2008 Obama/McCain vote in California, on the precinct level:
I've had many incredible experiences during my 34 years in public service, but never have I been blessed to receive the support of two presidents in just over a week - until now. On Thursday, at a Bay Area event, I received President Barack Obama's support for the November 3rd 10th Congressional District special election. This followed our great endorsement rally with President Bill Clinton last week.
At President Obama's San Francisco event last night, the President introduced Garamendi, saying: "Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi, who is running for the California 10 [in the] upcoming election - everybody has got to go out there and work for John."
The President went on to say "The reason you're here tonight, the reason I'm here tonight is because we know that our work isn't done. We still have enormous challenges in this country. There are far too many people out there who are really going through a tough time - out of work, seeing their hours trimmed, their wages cut. Americans who are subject to the whims of health insurance companies or who can't afford quality health insurance in the first place. Too many Americans who are seeing the American Dream slip further and further and further out of reach. ... Now is the time to secure our future."
Last Tuesday, I had one of those days we treasure for life. I had the honor of receiving a public endorsement from President Bill Clinton at a rally with hundreds of enthusiastic Bay Area supporters at the Basque Cultural Center in South San Francisco.
The crowd was enthusiastic attentive, and the issues discussed far ranging - from solving the healthcare crisis to stabilizing our economy to slowing the ravages of climate change to creating high quality, middle-class jobs.
It's impossible to upstage the former President, and I won't try. Below are excerpts of his wonderful speech. CBS 5 has partial video.
FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON:
"I was thinking today as I was driving down here of so many things of the extent to which my life has been intertwined for the last 18 years with the Garamendi family.
"You heard John say that he and Patti served with great distinction. He was the Deputy Secretary of the Interior where he worked on everything from climate change to resolving water disputes in California, and he did a superb job of everything. And Patti at the Peace Corps, where we began what has now been an unbroken strain of bringing back the Peace Corps. Bringing more people back into it, going into more countries. ...
"This world has been pretty good to us. But on the other hand, California has the 4th highest unemployment rate in the country; Compton was ground zero of the earthquake of home mortgage foreclosures even before the failure of Lehman Brothers and the financial collapse. On September 15th, 2008, the day that Lehman Brothers collapsed, before that happened, already two-thirds of the American people were actually worse off than the day I left office. Little known fact. The median income after inflation was $2000 lower on September 15, 2008, than the day I left the presidency. And health costs after inflation had doubled. College costs after inflation have gone up 75 percent. ... We can't go on for eight more years where nobody gets a raise." ...
(They certainly are circling. I'm quite confident that John Garamendi, if elected before the health care vote, will stand up for Americans, not the insurance companies. - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
I was asked to come on to talk about my past experience with the health insurance sharks who are long on making a profit and short on consumer protection. I said what needs to be said about health care reform: it is irresponsible to force people to pay for insurance if we cannot control the cost of their premiums. As I explained to the Los Angeles Times in a story printed today, this is akin to forcing millions of Americans into an insurance market with sharks circling. They have sharp teeth, and they smell blood. It brings a new perspective on who the "consumers" are in health insurance.
Without effective protections - most importantly a robust public option allowing competition - we will continue to allow administrative and advertising overhead to skyrocket. Otherwise, the insurance companies will be able to charge a captive audience whatever they want for insurance.
Some in Washington are seriously considering penalizing Americans for being unable to afford care in a marketplace that doesn't control costs. If voters in the 10th Congressional District choose me to be their representative in Congress, let me be clear. I will not vote for any bill that includes the individual mandate unless I am confident that bill offers generous subsidies for Americans struggling to make ends meet and unless that bill includes the public option to provide real competition in the health care marketplace. I regulated the insurance companies for eight years as California's State insurance Commissioner, and I know those companies well enough to know that we can trust them to put profits before people. They aren't friends to consumers.
What a night! As you may have seen, last night I was the highest vote-getter in the 10th Congressional District special primary election and will now face Republican David Harmer in the November 3rd general election.
I want to thank our incredible team of hard working volunteers. They spent countless hours knocking on doors, making phone calls, and making their presence known at community events throughout the district. Our success would not have been possible without them, and they have my deepest gratitude. Because of their efforts, we won all four counties in the district.
I also want to take a moment to acknowledge my competitors in this election:
To David Harmer: Congratulations on your victory among Republicans. I look forward to two months of dialogue focused on the issues and solutions that matter to the people of the 10th Congressional District. I intend to make it clear that a radical right wing agenda that seeks to stop health care reform, starve the education of our children, fails to finance the transportation and infrastructure systems we need, and advocates more tax breaks for the most wealthy is not in the interests of the people of the 10th Congressional District, California, or America.
To Senator Mark DeSaulnier: Your health care town halls helped establish an important dialogue in the campaign about the need for comprehensive health care reform. You are an institution in Contra Costa County, and you have many admirers. You deserve special acknowledgement for your work seeking a constitutional convention. The two-thirds majority requirement has worsened California's problems and I look forward to working with you to bring a working democracy and majority rule back to California.
• Survey USA has been maligned by some for its robo-polling techniques, but they consistently overperformed other pollsters throughout the 2008 primaries, and they basically nailed the polling in CA-10. The final numbers track almost precisely with the final vote tally. Well done.
• These special elections largely come down to name ID, and there's not a whole lot you can do about that. The challengers certainly tried - Joan Buchanan spent $850,000 of her own money and got a whopping 12% of the vote. But Garamendi really cruised to victory in this one.
• Katie Merrill, last seen yelling at the netroots for daring to consider a primary of Ellen Tauscher, became Mark DeSaulnier's campaign manager, where she devised the craptacular strategy of focusing on Garamendi's residency requirement, which approximately nobody cares about, instead of building a campaign infrastructure outside of Contra Costa County. Despite having a minority of residents, in Solano, Alameda and Sacramento counties, Garamendi picked up over 6,000 votes on DeSaulnier, who finished well back in all those regions. There was no way he could have ever won that back in CoCo, where he lost as well by 2,300 votes. Maybe introducing yourself to people outside your base would have worked better than the "neener-neener, here's this technical non-violation" nonsense that is a proven loser.
6. I thought Anthony Woods might break into double-digits. Instead, he ended up with 8.5 percent of the vote. He is a strong candidate who was probably too liberal for the moderate 10th District but he kept the elected officials on their toes. I suspect we will see Woods on a ballot again one of these days.
This "moderate district" thing really has to get flushed down a toilet somewhere. John Garamendi was endorsed by the California Nurses Association, the most progressive organization maybe in America. He's a single-payer advocate. He's strongly liberal and far to the left of Ellen Tauscher. And he won. Woods' difficulty was simply a product of name ID and a quick-strike primary. He didn't have labor ground troops and that was that.
• Just to reiterate, there will now be a general election between Garamendi and David Harmer on November 3. Garamendi will be strongly favored.
It was 5:30 AM. I was at the Concord BART station. With me were two friends sporting
"Garamendi for Congress" shirts. Also with me was the Lieutenant Governor of California, John Garamendi. How did I get here?!?
I've always been active in politics, even though I'm only a freshman high school student. For me, this campaign started in June. My friend, Jeremy Wolff, invited me to volunteer with the Garamendi for Congress campaign, where he was working. I was already more-than-familiar with the congressional race and John Garamendi. Unable to refuse anything related to politics, I accepted without hesitating, and on the same day, met John for the first time at the Campaign Headquarters.
Since then, I've been volunteering regularly, phone banking every other day, and canvassing on weekends. I've spent a good deal of my summer with this campaign. Not only am I a campaign enthusiast, I am also a blogger, and am the editor-in-chief of The Alternative DC, a national bipartisan youth political blog. It was under this position that I agreed to interview John for the blog at the crack of dawn.
While we've been focusing on the CA-10 congressional race, it's not the only special election on Tuesday. It seems like it's only been a few weeks since Sen. Curren Price moved from the Assembly, but tomorrow we just might get a replacement for him. The seat, based in Inglewood, is solidly Democratic, and it may look like we'll be able to avoid the pro-forma second special election caused by a lack of a 50%+1 majority. Gardena Councilman Steve Bradford has pretty much wrapped up all angle. He's got the money, the endorsements, and the Independent Expenditures (IEs).
Gardena Councilman Steve Bradford is in a commanding position heading into Tuesday's election in the 51st Assembly District. Bradford has a near monopoly on major endorsements and a six-to-one fundraising advantage over his nearest opponent.
*** *** ***
Bradford has raised $294,000, and has benefited from another $58,000 in independent expenditures, mostly from a committee of doctors that is primarily concerned with maintaining a damages cap on medical malpractice suits. (Torrance Daily Breeze 8/31/09)
Now, I can't say I know much about Bradford, other than what I've read in the past few months. He narrowly lost to Curren Price in the primary for the seat a few years ago, and is nothing if not dogged. Normally losing candidates don't get a second chance, but he's taken more than a few losses and is still sticking around. You have to give the man credit for perserverance.
That being said, the fact that he has been the beneficiary of nearly $60,000 in independent expenditures by a "tort deform" group is troubling. California already has one of the strictest tort reform laws in the nation. And while many will say, fine, that's no big deal, consider how it actually causes our system to function.
The cap on non-economic damages is generally $250,000 in California for medical malpractice. That means everything but the actual costs, ie medical expenses, resulting from the injury caused by the doctor. That sounds like a fair bit of money. But when it comes down to it, pursuing these cases in court is expensive. And many quality lawyers won't even take medical malpractice cases because it just too hard to make a decent living that way.
But consider the really perverse incentive of these caps: it is cheaper for a doctor to kill the patient than to have them in some sort of chronic condition. If a doctor kills a patient, say by giving him the wrong prescription, the family can only recover $250,000 in pain and suffering. Meanwhile, had the patient only been maimed and require life-long care, costing millions of dollars, the doctor, and his insurance company are on the hook for a big expense. In other words, if you mess up, make sure you finish the job.
Now, I'm not saying that doctors are out there killing their patients to avoid a big malpractice judgment, but you have to admit, that is one messed up incentive. The cap is far too low for medical malpractice law to actually allow serve its purpose, and so, on many occasions, doctors who make deadly mistakes simply avoid all liability. It is a tragedy of our legal and political system that this is allowed to occur.
I'm not saying that Steve Bradford will simply be a wholly-owned subsidiary of the American Medical Association, but the IEs cost the people of California. I'm sure he's a good person like (most of) our other Legislators who just try to do what is right for the state. However, we can't keep continuing to elect people by their fundraising abilities alone. It puts the diffuse interest of the majority of Californians at the whim of the special interest dollars. It is in fact, the best election system that special interest dollars can buy. We need clean money, and we need it now.
As John Garamendi touts in a diary here, the most recent SurveyUSA poll shows the Lt. Governor with a comfortable lead in the CA-10 primary set for Tuesday. I am surprised that another candidate hasn't talked it up as well, however, because the only candidate showing movement from the previous SurveyUSA poll is Anthony Woods.
In fact, this new poll, from 8/26-8/27, has Garamendi at 25%, Sen. Mark DeSaulnier at 16%, Asm. Joan Buchanan at 12% and Anthony Woods at 9%, with 5% undecided. The last poll, from 8/10-8/11 was Garamendi 26%, DeSaulnier 15%, Buchanan 12% and Woods 5%. I don't think there are enough undecided voters to push Woods much further, but he's running the only race drawing undecided voters, if the polls can be believed.
Among those who have already voted, the numbers are similar: Garamendi 27%, DeSaulnier 18%, Buchanan 13% and Woods 10%.
Certainly, Garamendi looks very strong for victory, and there aren't likely to be enough voters Tuesday to favor a late riser, but Anthony Woods is running the only race moving from no built-in support to a credible challenge. As for the relative flatness of the two state legislators, I'd say the choice by Sen. DeSaulnier to decide on a monomaniac focus on Garamendi's residency issue, which simply has not moved voters in numerous other instances, instead of giving voters a reason to support him, would offer some answer. Buchanan has run a self-funded campaign focused mainly on finding female support, but not necessarily a larger message. In an environment with three safe or fairly lackluster campaigns, the expected form is holding. Only Woods appears to be taking in new support, but his uphill battle was perhaps too high to climb.
Among Democrats, my lead is even starker: 37 percent favor me, 23 percent favor DeSaulnier, 18 percent favor Buchanan, 13 percent favor Woods, and only 2 percent are undecided. Most importantly, our great team of volunteers is effectively converting the support identified in the Survey USA and other polls into actual votes cast. Among those who have already voted, our considerable lead holds: 27 percent voted for me, 18 percent for DeSaulnier, 13 percent for Buchanan, and 10 percent for Woods.
Our lead holds among all demographic groups, including Obama voters, men, women, all age groups, all races, all levels of educational achievement, and all income levels. Our support is broad based and diverse. As the only candidate who has represented all corners of the 10th Congressional District, the voters know where I stand. As CBS 5 explained, "DeSaulnier and Buchanan have failed to make inroads since CBS 5's last poll 16 days ago."
Clearly, with Election Day fast approaching this Tuesday, we like where we stand.
The poll explains the what, but it fails to explain the why. I'm proud of the campaign we've run. We're convinced the polls are a reflection of voter support for a positive issues-based campaign that has emphasized solid Democratic principles and experience that can deliver results.
Just a rundown of events in the CA-10 race with a week until primary day:
• Late last week, fundraising reports were due, showing that over $2 million dollars has been raised by the various candidates seeking Ellen Tauscher's old seat in Congress. By any metric - total cash raised, cash raised in the last cycle, cash raised since June 30, cash on hand, and cash on hand less debts - John Garamendi has the lead, though much of his money comes from big donors. Anthony Woods, and to a lesser extent Mark DeSaulnier, have found a smaller-donor base, though Woods' is mostly out of district. Joan Buchanan has basically not raised money at all; she has given herself as much as $750,000 in loans and is generally self-funded (and what donations she has not given herself have come from such health industry interests as Wellpoint, one of the largest insurers in America). I would say the top four candidates probably have enough money to get out the message within their budgets, however.
• The Contra Costa Times, the main newspaper in the main population center of the district, endorsed John Garamendi for the position. However, their criticism of Mark DeSaulnier, that he "acced(es) to the wishes of organized labor, particularly public employee unions," gives you an indication of their orientation and whether or not you find them a trusted source.
• DeSaulnier continues to hammer on the largely irrelevant point that Garamendi doesn't live inside the district. Here's a mailer to that effect. And practically every missive from campaign staff re-emphasizes this point. I would like their research department to find one instance of when a residency issue like this had any impact on a Congressional race. I just really think DeSaulnier has missed his target here. He's better off showing his progressive bona fides on issues like health care, transportation and the environment, IMO. This is such a critical time, and residency issues do not appear to be at the top of the minds of people who want to see this country make good on the change agenda from 2008, particularly Democratic partisans who would vote in a special election primary.
• Anthony Woods held another live chat at AmericaBlog this week. His position in local endorsements always comes at the end and reads something like "we were very impressed with him and think he has a bright future."
With superior name recognition, Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi is the front-runner in the September election to replace Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher. But a Garamendi victory could spell disaster for a cause he has made a centerpiece of his campaign platform, and has supported throughout his whole career - the environment. As Lieutenant Governor, Garamendi sits on the California State Lands Commission - a three-person body that wields enormous power on environmental issues. Recently, Garamendi led the charge on the Commission to successfully kill Governor Schwarzenegger's move to allow offshore oil drilling on the Pacific Coast - by a 2-1 vote. If Garamendi gets elected to Congress, he will have to resign from the State Lands Commission - and Arnold will get to pick his successor. Garamendi has the Sierra Club endorsement in this race, due to his campaign platform. But will the environmental community be happy after he wins the seat, and his replacement potentially votes to allow offshore oil drilling?
The San Francisco Chronicle, which is not completely the local paper in CA-10 (I would imagine the Contra Costa Times has more readers) but which is a large regional paper with reach into the suburbs, endorsed John Garamendi for Congress today.
Lt. Gov. John Garamendi stands out in this crowd because his vast portfolio of experience is so well aligned with the issues of the times and the big concerns of the district.
Garamendi said he withdrew from the governor's race when this seat became open because "these are the issues I've spent my life on." Others might suggest his decision was conveniently pragmatic - his bid for the Democratic nomination was going nowhere - but there is no doubt about his qualifications for Congress, especially in this district. He was an aggressive and effective insurance commissioner (think health care, consumer issues such as foreclosure), deputy secretary of the U.S. Department of Interior (delta, climate change) and a state legislator from 1974 to 1991.
The 64-year-old Garamendi has the confidence and depth of knowledge that would allow him to hit the ground running in Congress - and his history suggests he would be unabashed in doing so.
The op-ed had good words for practically everyone running, particularly Anthony Woods, but went with Garamendi. In a weird example of symmetry, Bruce Brugmann and the SF Bay Guardian wrote almost exactly the same editorial today.
Meanwhile, Joan Buchanan debuted a spot for the last two weeks of the campaign, which looks pretty much like a generic bio spot, although with her being the only prominent woman in the field, an ad just repeating "Joan Buchanan, Joan Buchanan" for 30 seconds would be somewhat effective (and basically that's what this spot does). The three electeds are all up on cable TV now. Will Anthony Woods use some of his money for TV?
I'm baffled by Mark DeSaulnier's decision to run a goofy Jib-Jab attack ad on John Garamendi based on the one thing we pretty much know voters could give a crap about - district residency.
First of all, Jib-Jab ads are to 2009 what using Matrix-style graphics were to 2005 - dated, uncreative and boring. Second, look merely to the north and the election of Tom McClintock, who lived 400 miles away from the district, or to the east of him and at one of the SUBJECTS of the ad, Dan Lungren, who has represented Long Beach as well as the Sacramento area, for evidence that Voters. Just. Don't. Care. They want a candidate who will fight for them and who will make bold stands on big issues. Garamendi has done that and so has DeSaulnier on occasion, and I understand that the campaign must be looking for something to use as an attack in the absence of policy. But this ain't it.
Also, if this is about running where the party needs someone the least, couldn't that also apply to DeSaulnier, attempting to leave the state legislature at a time when the Yacht Party uses the 2/3 rule to hijack state government, and any vacancy in the Assembly or Senate just emboldens them and raises the bar? Why even bother with an attack like this if it can be plausibly turned on its head so easily? Maybe because DeSaulnier reads the polls and figured that he had to go on the attack.
Primary fights are so rarely about issues, but we have tried at Calitics to dig down and see what each candidate in CA-10 believes. You can read those interviews at the CA-10 tag, or educate yourself further by watching this candidate forum.
...by contrast, the ad Garamendi released today is simple and straightforward and issue-based, with him talking to the camera about health care, although I could do without using the same footage of him on the horse twice.
Thousands of people are lined up in front of a sports arena waiting to receive the health care they desperately need from a nonprofit that specializes in treating patients from the developing world. Some of their grateful patients stand outside hours past sunset waiting to be treated. Basic dental work for working mothers, glasses for young children, infections left to linger, procedures delayed because the cost of treatment is too great.
No, I'm not recalling an incident from the years I volunteered for the Peace Corps in rural Ethiopia treating small pox. I'm talking about the Remote Area Medical Volunteer Corp's weeklong clinic in Inglewood, a community near Los Angeles. For the first time in their 25 year history, they are offering their worthy service in a major metropolitan U.S. city. Where did we go wrong?
On Sunday, my campaign released a new poll of 400 likely 10th Congressional District special primary election voters that found our campaign holds a double digit lead over other Democratic challengers. When initially asked, 31 percent of likely voters chose me, while Senator Mark DeSaulnier, Assemblymember Joan Buchanan, and Anthony Woods received 21, 17, and 9 percent of the vote respectively. When voters were given a rundown of the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate, our lead grew to 36 percent, compared to 22, 20, and 9 percent respectively. The poll was conducted by respected California pollster Ben Tulchin. If you are interested in more information, please see our press release and Ben Tulchin's memo. We are understandably excited by the results.
But enough about polls. In three weeks (or now for those who vote-by-mail), the people of the 10th Congressional District will face a choice. The challenges we face in Washington and in our region are as complex as they are diverse. The debates over health care, economic development, and education will shape the course of our society for decades to come, and I think I am the best candidate to fight for our side on each of these issues in Washington.
