(Thanks for the info! If anybody else has similar information for other areas, please post it. And hey, don't forget about Jerry McNerney's virtual phone banking. You can do it from home, and Skype provides free long distance calling. - promoted by SFBrianCL)
Take Back Red California Volunteer Bulletin
SPECIAL 11/3 UPDATE
GOTV Special Bulletin
TIME TO GET OUT THE VOTE!
NOW IS THE TIME TO TAKE BACK CONGRESS!
Four days til the election, folks--and it's all coming down to turnout, getting voters to the polls.
The Republicans have a well-funded, well-oiled machine to Get Out The Vote. The Democrats have
YOU . . . the grassroots volunteers...You're the key!
Every single voter contact is critical right now--every knock on a door, every phone call.
UPDATE:Art Torres has released a statement about these mailers: "The oil companies are trying to win this campaign with deceptive mailers. The California Democratic Party has one official position and that is Yes on 87."
Last week I received a slate mailer with a postmark in Riverside. It had a big picture of DiFi on the cover, and I was a bit suspicious. I'm thinking to myself, hmm, this is suspicious. Riverside, DiFi...hmmm.
Well, anyway, my suscpicions were confirmed when I opened the slate mailer to read a No on 87 endorsement. I think to myself, hmmm, I don't think DiFi would endorse No on 87, so I look it up. Turns out, DiFi supports Prop 87. Now, unfortunately, I failed to scan this slate mailer in before it got swept into our recycle bin. But, before I tossed it, I did notice a few things.
DiFi did not have an asterick by her name to indicate that she paid to be on the mailer. Prop 87 did. So did Prop 86, Prop 89, etc. So it turns out that all these "No" Campaigns had paid to be on this mailer, probably because DiFi was on it. In effect, the mailer was using DiFi's image to slyly suggest that she did not support Prop 87, when in fact she does.
This my friends, is deceptive. Check out silence's diary about the No on Prop 87 campaign's use of these mailers. Some of the mailers they are appearing in: "Democratic Voters Choice", "Continuing The Republican Revolution", "Committee To Protect The Political Rights Of Minorities Candidate Pac", "Republican Voters Checklist". You see, they spent lots, and lots of money to . You can check out the No on 87 campaign spending here. Oh, by the way, notice the $750,000 to the California Republican Party. I guess they had too much money after all the Chevron cash dump. So, might as well give it to the GOP, huh? I guess the No on 87 campaign is just another fundraising arm of Team Arnold.
"Democratic Voters Choice" my butt. These slate mailers are misleading and deceptive. The deceptive practices of some, but certainly not all, of these mailers must be reined in.
I figure, I should get in on the act, too! Mine was composed this past Sunday, with help from a gang of friends -- I convene a "Pizza and Politics" party before every election, to research the ballot... Results are below the cut, as well as in my LJ.
(Lets stop this train wreck before it happens, Yes on Shelton, No on Kincaid! - promoted by CarlsbadDem)
Rod Shelton is in a runoff for Superior Court Judge against Larry Kincaid. This shouldn't be even a contest, but it will be.
Shelton was rated "well qualified" by the San Diego Bar Assoc. Kincaid wasn't given a rating because he failed to show up for his interview (probably a calculated decision - "not rated" looks better than "unqualified"). Even the conservative Union-Tribune "strongly" endorsed Shelton. All the law enforcement agency and leaders, and dozens of other judges in the area, have endorsed Shelton.
Prop 90, which was recently publicly rejected by Arnold Schwarzenegger, uses the name "Protect Our Homes". Well, so a good question would be: How many homes have been taken by eminent domain? Well, here are some answers to that question:
Bay Area governments have very rarely used powers of eminent domain to seize private homes and turn them over to developers over the last decade, according to a Chronicle survey of every local agency that does such projects.
Only two owner-occupied homes have been acquired by governments using eminent domain for redevelopment over the last 10 years, local officials reported. Officials razed one to build an apartment complex in Concord and the other to help make room for a new downtown in Pleasant Hill.
{snip}
The Chronicle's survey findings mirror the results of a recent California Redevelopment Association survey of most of the state's 386 redevelopment agencies. It found that between 2000 and the end of 2004, eminent domain was initiated in the purchase of 28 owner-occupied homes.
Of course, the No on 90 spokesman, Kevin Spillane, says that those numbers are all lies. You know, because the government always lies and stuff. The fact is that "Protect Our Homes" will do nothing of the sort. Rather it will protect developers as they want to pillage our open spaces as they have done in Oregon, where the voters now want to rid themselves of this albatross. In Portland, the city planners are desperately trying to protect the open space around the city.
Saladay has the results of a Polimetrix internet poll conducted for the Hoover Institution. Overall, Democrats are looking good downballot including Garamendi up by 6, Brown up by 21 and Bowen up by 7. At the top of the ticket, however, things are looking pretty static with Schwarzenegger up by 10.
As for the initiatives, if these numbers are to be believed (again, it's an internet poll so take with a grain of salt), the results give us some mixed news. While 85 would be defeated and 86 & 87 would be within a hair's breadth of passing, check out those horrendous Prop 89 and 90 numbers.
There are a few propositions that have been so seriously damaging to governance in California, that is exceedingly important to defeat them. We have failed on some of these, with disastrous consequences. For evidence, look no further than Prop 13. Prop 90 is a stealth assault no just against land use regulation, but against all economic regulation in the state. I'll try not to get too lawyer-like, but feel free to ask questions in the comments.
Do I exaggerate? I don't think so. Prop 90 is not strictly limited land use, but is broadly defined to require compensation for any damage to "real property". The full text can be found here. Could this be defined strictly as to include only land? yeah, it could. However, real property could be defined to include stuff, or to include businesses. If interpreted in this manner, we will never again have legislation such as minimum wage increases, etc.
But even given a tighter interpretation, there are serious flaws in Prop 90's general premise. Again, the law is unclear, but it applies to any regulations that "damage" real property. There is a grandfather clause for previous laws, and proponents argue that anything done to further purposes of past laws are exempt. However, doesn't that really beg a question of fact that will require judicial intervention? What furthers the purpose, and what goes too far?
Who are the winners of this? Well, lawyers, but beyond that, developers. Agencies do not have the resources to fight every battle. They will have to settle at some point. What has happened in Oregon with the similar Measure 37 (which they now hate), is that the state agencies end up waiving the application of the law. It is not clear that California can do that, so will we end up in court every time? Or will the vigilance of agencies just rapidly decline. Do we really want either?
But the issue for which there is no question: No further environmental legislation taht affects land could be passed. No more progressive environmental agenda. Gone, not in California. We will lose our position as a world leader in confronting environmental issues.
Two more issues of which you should be aware: First, California's land use planning is pathetically out of date. Unless all of those plans are updated in the next week, we will be stuck with these planning schemes. Forever. A suburb grows in a former agricultural area? Too bad for you if your neighbor decides to build a cow feed lot next door. The municipality will have no power to stop it. Zoning will be dead.
Finally, Prop 90 would defeat the purpose of Don Perata's infrastructure bonds that the Governor is supporting. The valuation scheme under Prop 90 would make building new roads ridiculously expensive. The new pricing scheme would require the state to include the value of the improvements upon the land in the price the government will pay. In other words, our money will go to the pockets of land speculators, not into building roads. Arnold Schwarzenegger, are you listening?
If you support infrastructure improvements, including the Perata bonds, then you must also oppose Prop 90. It will devastate our land-use planning and leave us with third world infrastructure. This is not a plan for economic growth; it is a recipe for disaster. Reject Prop 90, the Trojan Horse for Developers.
I haven't done any Weekend Odds and Ends. I tend to get a bit lazy, but they are just as important around these days. So, here we go. Teasers: Pray for Mountjoy, Schwarzenegger and his hypocrisy on crime, Pombo's ghost, Prop 89 and more.
The SF Examiner had another No on Prop 90, this time from the typically annoying Ken Garcia.
Few measures display the beauty and the scariness of California’s much-abused initiative process quite like Proposition 90, a slithering regulatory mess disguised as a sunny plan to protect property owners.
{snip}
Rather than addressing the concerns raised in the Connecticut case, the proponents of Prop. 90 instead decided to stand reason on its head and redefine property rights in such a way that it could be a multibillion-dollar headache for state taxpayers.
And that’s just one of the eminently bad aspects of the initiative, which would negatively impact cities and counties throughout the state by limiting redevelopment in blighted areas.
Under the proposed measure, property owners would be allowed to sue for almost any action government takes that does not fall within a narrow band excluding public health and safety.
So that's like, hundreds of editorials against Prop 90, and a couple of editorials from the OC Register in favor. As Garcia said: Prop 90 is a Bad idea.
While waiting for Monday's debate between Congressman Dana Rohrabacher and challenger Jim Brandt, I met a young Marine outside. His blue eyes told me he'd served in Iraq, so we talked about other things. He's on leave from out-of state and asked me who the candidates were. Then he told me about roadside bombs on the road to Fallujah. This article isn't about him.
It's a strange thing to go to a debate in Orange County, and discover the Democratic candidate has the home field advantage...
Yesterday the OCRegister blog reported (here and here) that "between 9 and 12 persons" were arrested in connection with a voter registration fraud scheme in which more than 100 Democratic and Independent voters had their registrations switched to Republican. The LATimes picked up the story this morning too, reporting the number of arrests to be 11. This scandal is in addition to the well-known Tan Nguyen voter fraud/racist vote supression scandal. The O.C. GOP really has some issues. This is what you get with single-party rule and no accountability.
Governor – PHIL ANGELIDES California is a blue state that deserves a real Democratic Governor. Mr. Angelides will enact progressive reforms in health care, provide more funding for public education, and ensure strong protections for our environment.
Lt. Governor – JOHN GARAMENDI – The Republican candidate in this race is the most right-wing state legislator in office today. Mr. Garamendi will use this office to promote Democratic values and help protect consumers and the environment. We must stop McClintock from getting elected to this position, which is only a heart-beat away from the Governor’s office. www.garamendi.org
Secretary of State – DEBRA BOWEN – Ms. Bowen will make sure our voting systems are free from corruption. She is a strong, no-nonsense person who will stand up to local election officials who, all too often, don’t seem to be terribly concerned about having the best voting equipment available. The appointed incumbent is a nice enough guy, but this job requires someone tougher. Vote Bowen. www.debrabowen.com
State Controller – JOHN CHIANG – Mr. Chiang is probably the most qualified person to run for this office in my lifetime. He is an elected member of the State Board of Equalization and a former tax law specialist with degrees in finance and law. He has worked for Democratic elected officials in the past and will be a hard-working Controller. www.chiangforcalifornia.com
State Treasurer – BILL LOCKYER – Mr. Lockyer, our current Attorney General, will win this office rather easily. That’s fine, since he would be much better than his Republican opponent.
Attorney General – JERRY BROWN – The office of Attorney General is the second most important office in the state. Whatever you may think of Jerry Brown, he will no doubt be a much stronger Attorney General than his Republican opponent when it comes to protecting consumers and the environment. We can’t afford another right-wing attorney general in our state. Vote for Jerry. www.jerrybrown.org
Insurance Commissioner – CRUZ BUSTAMANTE – This race is a disappointment with two rather mediocre candidates for an important statewide office. The Republican candidate, STEVE POIZNER, is a multi-millionaire with no relevant experience in this area. The Democratic candidate, Bustamante, has been a lackluster Lt. Governor. Nevertheless, I choose Cruz, although I there are folks I respect who will be voting for Poizner.
United States Senator – DIANNE FEINSTEIN
Member, Bd. of Equalization – Seat #1 – BETTY T. YEE Seat #4 – JUDY CHU
State Senate 2nd S.D. – PAT WIGGINS 6th S.D. – DARRELL STEINBERG (Excellent!) 8th S.D. – LELAND YEE 10th S.D. – ELLEN CORBETT 12th S.D. – WILEY NICKEL 26th S.D. – MARK RIDLEY-THOMAS
State Assembly 6th A.D. – JARED HUFFMAN (strong enviro!) 11th A.D. – MARK DESAULNIER 12th A.D. – FIONA MA 13th A.D. – MARK LENO 14th A.D. – LONI HANCOCK 16th A.D. – SANDRÉ SWANSON 18th A.D. – MARY HAYASHI 79th A.D. – MARY SALAS
Member of Congress 8th C.D. – NANCY PELOSI – Future Speaker of-the-House 9th C.D. – BARBARA LEE 11th C.D. – JERRY MCNERNEY – This is our best chance in California to pick up a seat in the House. The incumbent, Mr. Pombo, is one of the most anti-environmental and pro-Bush members of Congress in the country. Go to www.jerrymcnerney.org to see how you can help get Jerry elected. 12th C.D. – TOM LANTOS 27th C.D. – BRAD SHERMAN
STATE PROPOSITIONS:
1A – NO – Transportation Funding Constitutional Amendment. This Amendment would prohibit the state from using the sales tax revenue on motor fuels for any purpose other than transportation funding as specified in the previously approved Proposition 42. This is too restrictive. Prop 42 was a mistake; this amendment would just make it worse by reducing much-needed flexibility in tough economic times. It deserves a 'NO' vote.
1B – Yes – Highway Construction and Repair, Transit Expansion, and Air Quality Bond Act. This bond proposal will fund improvements and repairs to highways and local roads, as well as seismic upgrades of bridges. Also provides funds for public transit and air quality mitigation near ports. There are many things to not like in this bond proposal, but there are also some good things. Additionally, we need to get this type of bond out of the way, so we can focus on High Speed Rail in 2008.
1C – YES – Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Bond Act. This bond proposal will fund important shelters for battered women and their children, as well as new housing for low-income senior citizens. Also provides home ownership financial assistance for disabled residents and accessibility upgrades in apartment buildings.
1D – YES – K-12 and University Facilities Bond Act. This bond proposal will fund much-needed construction and renovation of public school facilities to relieve over-crowding, improve seismic safety, repair deteriorating school buildings, and fund vocational education facilities throughout the state. Includes higher education facilities as well.
1E – YES – Flood Disaster Prevention Bond Act. This bond proposal will fund repairs and renovations to existing flood control structures, including levees along the delta.
83 – NO – Sex Offenders Punishment, Restrictions and Monitoring. This is a costly and mostly unnecessary initiative that will let every city and town expand residency restrictions for all sex offenders, even misdemeanor violators who served their time decades ago. It would also require an expensive and unproven lifetime GPS tracking system that could take law enforcement resources away from going after truly violent predators. See www.cacj.org for more info.
84 – YES – Water Quality, Parks and Natural Resource Conservation Bonds. This bond initiative authorizes $5.4 billion in bonds for improvements in water management and drinking water quality, protection of rivers, natural lakes and coastal fisheries, improvements in flood control projects, acquisition and enhancement of local, regional and state parks, protection of coastal watersheds and wildlife habitats. More info at www.Yeson84.com.
85 – NO – Parental Notification and Mandatory Waiting Period for Abortions by Minors. This Constitutional Amendment would mandate that doctors deny an abortion to teenagers until the parent is notified and a waiting period has gone by. This measure creates onerous procedures for minors, including those in troubled families, to ob-tain a lawful abortion. More info at www.NOon85.com.
86 – YES – Increase in Cigarette Tax to Fund Health Programs and Emergency Room Expenses. This initiative adds an additional 13¢ tax per cigarette to fund hospital emergency services, nurse training programs, nonprofit clinics, children’s health care coverage, heart disease, stroke and cervical cancer programs, and tobacco control research, among other health-related programs. More info at www.Yesprop86.com.
87 – YES – Alternative Energy Funded by Oil Extraction Fee on In-state Oil Producers. This initiative creates 10-year oil severance tax to fund much-needed clean energy and alternative fuel incentives, research and development. All other oil-producing states currently have an oil severance tax except California. Endorsed by Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and the Union of Concerned Scientists. More info at www.Yeson87.com.
88 – YES – $50 Property Parcel Tax to Fund Public Education needs. This initiative creates a modest $50 per parcel state property tax earmarked for much-needed public education expenses. This is supported by Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell.
89 – YES – Public Financing of Political Campaigns and Campaign Spending Limits. Known as the California Clean Money initiative, this proposition creates a system of public financing of state political campaigns funded by a minor increase in the corporate tax rate. This will likely reduce the influence of private corporate contributors. Supported by CA Common Cause, League of Women Voters, and the Alameda County Democratic Party. More info at www.Yeson89.org.
90 – NO – Regulation of Private Property and Limits on Government’s Ability to Adopt Certain Laws. This Constitutional Amendment is an extreme proposal that would cost taxpayers and local governments millions of dollars and make it much more difficult to enact new land use, housing, and consumer and environmental protection laws. This is not merely about eminent domain—it’s about private interests versus the public interest. Please vote NO! More info at www.NoProp90.com.
A few interesting fundraisers for Arnold Schwarzenegger fundraisers:
Tonight: A fabulous fundraiser with Sean Hannity in Sacramento. Wow, that will be great. So, Arnold is a moderate, huh? Then why the right-wing talk show hosts?
Nov. 1: Sony Pictures Studios. The Price has been SLASHED from $500 to $250, featuring some well C-List celebs like Jim Belushi (John is the funny one...well he was)
I'm a proponent of California's Proposition 89, the Clean Money and Fair Elections Act. I like to keep tabs on what the other side is doing. It helps me understand what they're telling people, so I can counter it. So, I've been waiting for the Stop 89 people to come out with their TV ads. Well it appears they have. You can see one for yourself.
Busby has some great videos up on her webpage. In case you missed the latest of Keith Olbermann's stunning Special Comments (Oct 23), it was about Republicans using terrorism as a campaign tactic. He singles out Bilbray (R CA-50) (and neighboring CA-52's Duncan Hunter (R)) for some especially harsh words:
... The Republicans are paying to have the messages of Bin Laden and others broadcast into your home [as part of their scare ads].... When last week the CNN network ran video of an insurgent in Iraq evidently stalking and killing an American soldier, the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Duncan Hunter, Republican of California, branded that channel, "the publicist for an enemy propaganda film," and added that CNN used it "to sell commercials." Another California Republican Representative Brian Bilbray called the video "nothing short of a terrorist snuff film." If so Mr. Bilbray, then what in the hell is your party's new advertisement? And Mr. Hunter, CNN using the film to sell commercials? Commercials? You have adopted Bin Laden, and Zawahari, as spokesmen for the Republican National Committee. ...
I just got a press release that the junior senator from Illinois, Barack Obama, will be appearing in LA with the California Democratic Statewide ticket. Considering that Obama is now something of the rock star, this will be a great opportunity for press coverage. In addition to Phil Angelides, other statewide candidates will be there as well. John Garamendi, Debra Bowen, John Chiang and Cruz Bustamante will be in attendance.
If you are in LA, the event will be on Friday 10/27 at 3PM at USC. Full details are in the extended.
Chris Bowers is on fire these days. He's been working to Google Bomb GOP candidates and now to get our unnopposed incumbents to fork over some of their Cash on Hand. This money should be going to our competitive races. It should be going to McNerney, Brown, Rodriguez, Roth, Busby, Cox, etc. This money should be going to candidates who can change the course of the House.
And DiFi, this goes for you too. $4 million bucks on a series of puff piece ads when you are up by 25 points? get over yourself. That money could have paid for a gigantic ad buy in Tennessee for Harold Ford Jr. But instead, it gets thrown in the toilet of California media. Boxer has been working hard to elect Dems in the Senate, you...um, you're working to elect who exactly?
On the flip I have the full list of House incumbents in California that should be giving at least 30% of their Cash on Hand. Give them a call and tell them to do so. Here is the full spreadsheet.
Another week closer to the election. We are now only 15 days away from it now. Teasers: Prop 86, Props in general, Prop 90, Debra Bowen, Money, prop 85 and Latino voters, Gary Miller and Arnold Schwarzenegger is a politician...shocker!!
This is big and shows that Steve is finally getting some big-time coverage after building a campaign into a grassroots movement.
In its November issue, the national publication made endorsements for all 435 of the coming elections for the U.S. House of Representatives, and for all U.S. Senate and gubernatorial races on the fall ballot.
