Xposted on mydesert.com, the online edition of the Desert Sun
Rally this afternoon in Palm Springs and tomorrow afternoon in Beaumont to protest the unconstitutional removal of 'fundamental right to marry' for gays and lesbians:
The more I look at the passage of Prop 8 and the reaction to it - the outpouring of anger, the determination to not let this stand - the more I realize that we have been here before.
In 1963 the state legislature passed the Rumford Fair Housing Act, outlawing racial discrimination in the sale or rental of property. Housing segregation was one of the main targets of the Civil Rights Movement and the Rumford Act was a major victory.
But it also provoked a conservative reaction. In 1964 the California Real Estate Association put Proposition 14 on the ballot, a constitutional amendment repealing the open housing law. A former actor named Ronald Reagan launched his political career serving as the spokesman for the campaign, especially in TV ads. Despite a major mobilization against Prop 14 - leading to, among other things, the Berkeley Free Speech Movement - Prop 14 passed by a 2-1 margin in November 1964.
It was a bitter blow to the California civil rights movement. The anger it provoked was so intense it led to the Watts Riots the following summer. But the main reaction among the California civil rights movement was to organize. By 1970 activists had forced the Democratic Party in CA and in DC to embrace open housing and enshrined it in law as soon as Prop 14 was overturned by the US Supreme Court.
Many Californians are asking us "what now?" The protests we have seen are the beginnings of a new civil rights movement - the marriage equality movement - but we need a grassroots movement to make this movement grow and succeed. And to do that we need a goal. A court case doesn't sustain activist energies - something the civil rights Movement, which was organized long before Brown v. Board or Reitman v. Mulkey and achieved its main successes by mounting the most effective and important grassroots movement in our history, understood quite well.
The goal, then, ought to be a repeal of Prop 8. We can and must do the groundwork, field organizing, and outreach to block by block reverse this defeat and show Californians the importance of restoring equal rights - exactly as the civil rights movement did 40 years ago.
The birth of a new Marriage Equality Movement -- the civil rights movement of the 21st Century -- is unfolding before our eyes.
Movements are visceral and popular, often borne of outrage and anger. What we are witnessing on the streets and online is a community of people who have come together to say: "These are our lives. This is our time. This is unacceptable." Organized from the bottom-up by thousands of ordinary people in the last 48 hours, this people-powered phenomenon is exponentially growing by the minute, online and offline.
(We owe Bill Hedrick a debt of gratitude. We also need to study his race to figure out why it worked when others faltered. - David Dayen, I'm in for $25 for Bill and $25 for Charlie, who's with me? You can give to both at the Calitics ActBlue Page. - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
Dear Friends and Supporters,
We may be down, but we are by no means out. This race truly is too close to call until every last vote has been counted.
That, however, is not stopping Ken Calvert from trying to end the counting before we can close the gap. Calvert's lawyer is already challenging signatures and trying to get vote-by-mail ballots disqualified.
Today (two days after the election), Ken Calvert told the OC Register that he's sure he won re-election. We beg to differ. With 100,000+ votes still left to be counted and a vote difference of only about 4000 votes, it looks like he knows he's in trouble, and is trying to declare a victory before all the votes have been counted. We can NOT let this happen.
We have assembled a legal team to make sure the process is fair and that all valid ballots get counted. We have the best lawyer money can buy, but good lawyers are expensive.
Can you donate to the Hedrick Ballot Fund right now to help pay our legal costs and make sure every vote is counted?
The 2008 California Assembly District election results are in, and Democrats have picked up Assembly Districts 15, 78, and 80, and lost Assembly District 30.
Riding a tidal wave of new Democratic registrations in California, Assembly Democrats had high hopes of getting closer to a 2/3s majority, and poured a huge amount of money into the top races.
An analysis shows relatively little movement in the Democratic performance in most districts since 2004, but two districts in Southern California showed significant trends.
This one shouldn't take long to call, but still, here it is. 0% Reporting Barack Obama (D): John McCain (R): Cynthia McKinney(G): Ralph Nader (I): Bob Barr (L):
The last Field poll (PDF) results of every election cycle are the turnout estimates. They are usually fairly accurate. In 2006, they predicted (PDF) 8.16 million ballots cast for Arnold's reelection, and about 8.9 million actually voted. In 2004, they guessed 12.2 million and 12.59 actually voted. And in 2000, they estimated 11.5 million and 11.14 showed up.
This year they are estimating 13.65 million voters. While there is no clear bias either way based on the past numbers, but if I had to take the over/under, I'd take over this year. Turnout is a tough game to guess at this year, but Field's guesses are pretty interesting. Some notable demographic figures: Field expects a full 25% of the electorate to be between 18-34, 67% to be white, 19% to be Latino, 6% to be African-American, and 8% to be Asian/other.
Finally, on the "historic" participation rate. There will likely be history made in the sheer number of ballots cast, but that happens pretty much every presidential election due to population growth. What is more noteworthy is the expected turnout amongst our 17.3 million registered voters (78.9%), which would be the highest such figure since 1976. Also, Field estimates the overall participation rate, the percentage of eligible voters that actually vote, to be around 58.8%, the highest since 1972.
Who knows what these turnout numbers mean in terms of winning elections, but I'm always in favor of everybody voting. That's a generally a pretty good thing for progressive politics.
We California progressives have come quite a long way in this decade. Whereas America had its catastrophic political moment eight years ago, ours came on October 7, 2003. A disorganized and demoralized Democratic Party, out of touch with its base, saw its governor recalled and replaced by an Austrian actor.
Just as American progressives used the defeats of 2000 and 2004 to learn how to organize and place ourselves on the brink of an historic presidential victory, California progressives used the 2003 defeat to start doing the hard and necessary work of rebuilding a party and a movement. We saw some early rewards in 2005 when we beat Arnold's special election. And we saw some setbacks in 2006 when top-down party establishment led us into another gubernatorial defeat.
At the same time California progressives helped send Jerry McNerney to Congress and put Debra Bowen in the Secretary of State's office and helped Marcy Winograd nearly knock off Jane Harman. Immigrant rights activists took to the streets and created a new civil rights movement for a new generation. Those campaigns helped sow the seeds of the remarkable grassroots energy we have witnessed here in 2008. Up and down the state progressive activists have organized to help Democrats have a fighting chance at a 2/3 majority, helped put candidates like Charlie Brown and Debbie Cook on the brink of defeating two of Southern California's far-right freakshows.
And the outpouring of activism for the No on Prop 8 campaign is something to behold. That race is still WAY too close for comfort - if you have not yet volunteered for the campaign, be sure to do so as part of your Stay for Change action. Vote early and then get to work - we have an election to win.
As the history of California progressives in the 2000s shows, sometimes you've gotta hit rock bottom before you can make it back to the top. We're not there yet, and no matter how the results turn out today, we still have a long way to go. With Arnold Schwarzenegger still governor, with millions of Californians facing unemployment and foreclosure and the loss of health benefits, with the state budget in deficit and Republicans insist on using it to ram through Grover Norquist's radical agenda - we still have plenty of work left to do no matter what happens today.
But today's election is the end of the beginning. California progressives are no longer the party doormat, no longer a disorganized group. We are not just here to stay, but we are here to lead and we are here to resuscitate this state. The right-wing remains strong - so strong they may well pass Prop 8 - but no longer will they have the state to themselves. Today, the battle has been joined.
(We'll do an after-action report later, but for my money, Prop. 2 has been the best-run progressive campaign in the state this year. - promoted by David Dayen)
Barack Obama's campaign, as many commentators have often stated, has been brilliantly run. There's another campaign which, in a different way and by a different yardstick, has done a superb job: the Yes on Prop 2 campaign in California. This proposition, under the rubric "Prevention of Farm Cruelty to Animals Act" initially but now officially titled "Standards for Confining Farm Animals", seeks to codify minimum humane standards for farm animals. These standards are absolutely basic: "that they be allowed, for the majority of every day, to fully extend their limbs or wings, lie down, stand up and turn around," the measure reads.
Anyone who has ever taken pets on an airplane will know that airlines have strict regulations about the size of their carriers. We accept that pets should not travel - even for a few hours - if they do not have enough room to be comfortable. Yet what was perhaps not well-known before Prop 2 was that in factory farms in this country, millions of pigs, cows, veal calves, and chickens are confined to spaces which do not give them room to even stretch their limbs, and they are kept that way for their entire lives.
As we all know, you can't win an election without a good candidate. But behind every good candidate are good people working their tails off. And in a grassroots campaign, every blade of grass makes a difference.
Jeff Morris has run what can only be called an insurgency campaign in California's 2nd Congressional District, challenging 22-year incumbent and Republican party-liner Wally Herger. Jeff's campaign has been run entirely by volunteers. Only one very low-paid staff member. Not one big corporate donation. A little bit of PAC support, but from PACs that a progressive can be proud of. The fact that it's a people-powered grassroots campaign was recently described with great clarity by a local newspaper:
When Wally Herger campaigns, his catering bills run in the thousands of dollars.
When Jeff Morris campaigns, he eats at McDonald's.
So here I am at Monkey Business in Fullerton to do some phone banking for our local candidates, including for my husband Gary Pritchard, who is running for California State Senate.
The 33rd district covers a huge amount of area, including Anaheim, Anaheim Hills, Fullerton, Villa Park, Orange, Laguna Niguel, Laguna Woods, Laguna Hills, Mission Viejo, Rancho Santa Margarita, Aliso Viejo, Buena Park, Tustin, Silverado, Irvine, Santa Ana, Lake Forest, Coto de Caza and Foothill Ranch. I like to call the district map, "Rexi".
There are but three days to go, Gentle Reader, and the McCain campaign is now down to fear and Joe The Plumber.
Those who seek to spread The Fear are resorting to fantastic schemes and amazing leaps of logic in an effort to find something to make The Fear rise in voters.
But to be honest, the crazy speculation lacks...imagination.
I believe I can present crazy speculation that is at least as interesting as what they've put out-and funnier to boot-and with that and the Halloween just past in mind we present the final weekend edition of the 2008 campaign cycle's blogging.
So, ya wanna hear a few debunked made up rumors that, frankly, have a lot more creative style?
There are 72 hours left to determine whether California will take a massive step backward on human rights and allow the far right to dictate policy here - or whether we can rally voters to make a stand for equality. Polls don't vote - it's time for us to go all out on GOTV to defeat Prop 8.
This is especially important given how motivated our opponents are. They are raising money hand over fist and have thousands of fervent followers planning to get out the vote on Monday and Tuesday. We know their GOTV operation is exceptional.
Your job now is to volunteer to defeat Prop 8. Our goal is to reach 1000 netroots volunteers for No on Prop 8 GOTV. Have you signed up yet? You need to take action, NOW, to make sure that our supporters get to the polls.
As I write this Yes on 8 supporters are gathering at Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego for "The Call."See their crazy video - this is what is going to be unleashed on California over the next 72 hours. Are you going to help us fight back?
"The Call" organizers are billing this as "a confrontation between light and darkness will happen this November. To the victor goes the soul of the nation." Some of their featured speakers - a who's who of the theocratic right:
Lou Engel, founder of The Call: "The powers of darkness shall not prevail - this is a call for war. California is the Armageddon of the cultural wars of today."
James Dobson, Focus on the Family (he has donated over $550,000 to the Yes on 8 campaign): "Tolerance and its first cousin, diversity, 'are almost always buzzwords for homosexual advocacy.'"
James Garlow, Skyline Church: Garlow said of gays: "Homosexuals are not monogamous. ... They want to destroy the institution of marriage. It will destroy marriage. It will destroy the earth."
Tony Perkins, Family Research Council: Tony Perkins says humanity will not survive if Prop 8 loses: "It's more important than the presidential election.... We've picked bad presidents before, and we've survived as a nation. But we will not survive if we lose the institution of marriage."
These are the people who will be the new power brokers in California politics if Prop 8 passes. They will be emboldened to unleash the full brunt of their far right agenda on California and ALL of us are going to be its targets.
So let's make sure they don't get that chance, and that Prop 8 is defeated. Sign up to defeat Prop 8 now!
The Field Poll finally got around to polling Prop 1A and the results are about what I'd expected after six weeks of the Reason Foundation and the Howard Jarvis Association flooding the state's media with lies. We have a 47-42 lead with 11% undecided. The common rule of thumb in California politics is that a proposition under 50% before election day is in serious trouble, but I'm not convinced that conventional wisdom will hold true this year. There are a number of propositions - such as 4 and 8 - that are also very closely split, and voters are showing a better understanding of the issues, with a reduced inclination to vote no as a knee-jerk reaction.
Still, the poll shows that we have a LOT of work to do between now and Tuesday. Especially when you look at the crosstabs.
Prop 1A will be decided on election day. Those who have already voted oppose it 39-51. That is very close to the number of McCain voters opposing Prop 1A, 35-56. Here in California absentee voters have traditionally leaned Republican and conservative. Those groups oppose Prop 1A - Republicans by a margin of 35-58 and conservatives by a margin of 30-64. Voters over age 65, those most likely to cast an absentee ballot, oppose it 38-53.
However, if California gets an Obama surge on election day, the outcome may be much different (preferences are listed in order of yes, no, and undecided):
Democrats: 53-30-17
Independents: 54-40-6
Moderates: 49-40-11
Liberals: 61-25-14
Obama: 56-33-11
Age 18-34: 50-38-12
If young voters in particular hit the polls in large numbers than we can win this on election day.
In 2006 I contributed to a project originated by Chris Bowers called Use It or Lose It. It came back in lower profile again this year, but it's a good habit to get into up and down the political spectrum every election cycle. The premise is that our elected Democrats- when safe or unchallenged for re-election, should be dipping into their campaign cash reserves to bolster our chances in competitive races. It's been particularly relevant these two most recent election cycles because of the myriad pickup opportunities across the country and across the state.
Dave in particular has been hammering around these Calitics parts for a long time on the need to target a 2/3 majority in the state legislature if we're ever going to pass a reasonable budget or pass a legitimately progressive budget (Democrat does not necessarily equal progressive I realize). So how have our state Dems been doing when it comes to spreading the wealth? We all know that incumbency is a powerful force in this state, so generally sitting on a lot of cash can't be explained by anticipating a re-election fight. A quick chart of the notable and the affluent Democratic state legislators submitted without further comment. You can make your own analysis and comparisons, though there are certainly some aspirants to leadership here:
I've been posting quite a bit about Jeff Morris, who is running a tough campaign against Wally Herger in California's Second Congressional District. This post is going to be a bit different, because I want to talk about Jeff on a personal level.
Jeff is my brother. But that doesn't mean that we have always agreed. In fact, there have been times in our lives when we were at each other's throats like cats and dogs, Sunni and Shia, Yankees and Red Sox. That's all water long under the bridge, but my point is this: I would not be writing these posts if I didn't honestly believe that he's the best man for the job.
I thought it would be fun to share some family history so that you can better understand the forces that shaped Jeff Morris into the public servant he is today.
Prop 11 is a solution in search of a problem - and a bad solution at that. At a time when our state's budget crisis ought to remind us that the real problem is the ridiculous 2/3 rule, Broderist columnists like the LA Times' George Skelton are trying to put in one last pitch for Prop 11.
In doing so all they accomplish is highlighting the absurdity of their proposal and their cynical approach to politics - assuming that California voters are animated by blind rage and a desire to smash a broken government instead of thinking intelligently about how to fix it.
The interesting thing is that Skelton doesn't even attempt his usual efforts to argue why Prop 11 is needed. The "competitive elections" argument has been proved false by the six or seven competitive races in the Assembly, most of them in districts drawn to favor Republicans. Nor does Skelton attempt to say Prop 11 will solve the budget deficit. He merely assumes it to be a good idea.
Skelton lists "good government" organizations like Common Cause and LWV to suggest that Prop 11 isn't a Republican power grab - never mind the fact that Arnold and other right-wingers are dumping money into it. Nowhere does he explain the real purpose here: to keep Democrats away from a 2/3 majority in the Legislature.
He also gets the details wrong, claiming:
Under the proposal, any frequent voter could apply to be a redistricting commissioner -- as long as the person had no political connections. Prop. 11 drafters really wanted to ensure that commissioners had no partisan agendas.
But as Brian pointed out last night a drafting error excludes frequent voters. This vaunted "independent commission" will include infrequent and uninformed voters - which is fitting given that this proposal speaks primarily to such an audience.
