As many of you already know, a recent Field Poll survey was released showing Senator Dianne Feinstein slipping in her approval rating. 43% of California voters surveyed approve of Sen. Feinstein, while 39% disapprove-- the highest disapproval rating she's had since first being elected to office in 1992. While these numbers don't necessarily spell trouble for California's senior senator, they do indicate that people are starting to think of a changing of the guards in the Golden State. It most certainly has crossed her mind as well.
There are always politicians and prominent Californians waiting in the wings for political jockeying. With Feinstein reaching 80 years of age soon, more and more elected officials are prepping their resumes and spending extra time coddling donors in preparation for the inevitable.
So it begs the speculative question, who would be ready and able to run a statewide campaign for the United States Senate in the event of Senator Dianne Feinstein's retirement? Who would make a great Senator? Who should make for a great race? Who would be an abysmal choice? In this "fantasy draft" diary, I've narrowed it down to the 13 most probable potential candidates who are at least thinking about a potential run from the Democratic side. All the apparent pros and cons will be listed, and your suggestions/comments are always welcome. And by all means, if you know of any Republicans that would seem likely, include those as well!
Just a few minutes ago, City Administrator Ed Lee was selected as Interim Mayor for soon to depart (?) Gavin Newsom.
City Supervisors selected City Administrator Ed Lee as interim mayor, putting an end to a long and agonizing debate over who will replace outgoing Mayor Gavin Newsom.
While away in Hong Kong, Lee has been the center of media attention and political discussion since Tuesday when his name emerged as the leading candidate for interim mayor. (SF Weekly Blog)
The vote went down at 10-1, with outgoing D6 supervisor Chris Daly being the lone dissenter. Of that, Daly said:
I've seen go along to get along. If you want to do more than that, if you think there's a fundamental problem with the way things are in this world, then go along to get along doesn't do it. ([SFBG I've seen go along to get along. If you want to do more than that, if you think there's a fundamental problem with the way things are in this world, then go along to get along doesn't do it."])
In the end, a strong show of support organized by Chinatown power broker Rose Pak and former Mayor Willie Brown pushed this historic mayor over the top. Lee will become the first Asian-American Mayor of San Francisco, and will not be running for re-election. Apparently, part of the deal was that Lee would retain much of Newsom's staff for the duration of the term.
Not much is known about Lee, but he is said to be personally close with most of the supervisors. His politics are unclear, but one can expect a pretty steady hand from Newsom's administration.
We are about to witness the biggest fumble in the history of progressive politics in San Francisco and the blame rests squarely on the shoulders of David Chiu. I will haunt you. I will politically haunt you for the biggest fumble in history. It's on, like Donkey Kong."
- Supervisor Chris Daly, January 4, 2011 (Beyond Chron)
And thus the phrase "It's on like Donkey Kong" entered the San Francisco political lexicon. The whole story is somewhat (well, vastly) more complex. But let me outline what I've learned while being away, and the timeline as I see it. KQED and the SF Appeal have good wrap-ups.
1) The current Board, which leaves office on Saturday, tried to pass a declaration that the Mayor has left his job already, that he should have been inaugurated, and the procedure of a technical inauguration doesn't matter. They then pushed for the Sheriff Mike Henessey, who is pretty universally respected. However, being that this process is more about personal power politics than respect, things didn't go so smoothly. Henessey was only able to get 5 votes, rather than the required 6.
2) Bevan Dufty and Sophie Maxwell went to a closed-door meeting with Newsom, and thereby reversed their previous votes against City Administrator Ed Lee, and suddenly, the little known Lee had 7 votes. This includes the support of Eric Mar, one of the core bloc of progressive votes on the Board.
3) The Board was recessed after several Supervisors objected to the fact that they had neither spoken to Lee nor had the opportunity to talk to him, as he is currently in Hong Kong.
4) When the Board came back, that's when we get Daly's above quote about haunting Board President David Chiu's career. The episode, along with the fact that Lee is out of the country, were enough to get the vote delayed until Friday.
5) Oh, and as an added bonus, the incoming Board can change the interim Mayor at their discretion, so it is all seems a bit temporary.
It seems clear that Lee is willing to take the job, as long as he can get his old job back once the new Mayor is elected in November. A deal seems to be in place to retain most of Newsom's staff in a possible Lee administration. Lee's connections to Rose Pak (a Chinatown powerbroker) seem to tilt the balance of power in his direction, with her ties to both David Chiu and incoming D6 supervisor Jane Kim. The rumored other leg of this deal is the possible appointment of Chiu to the now vacant District Attorney's post that AG Kamala Harris recently left.
This works on many levels for Newsom. First, it gets a relative moderate to keep the seat warm until November, which was really Newsom's main goal. But as an added bonus, Ed Lee becomes the first Asian-American Mayor of San Francisco, and takes that potential honor away from Sen. Leland Yee.
But, being that Maxwell joined the 5 member progressive core to stall the vote until Friday, there is a lot of wiggle room here. The SFBG's Tim Redmond sees the big problem with Lee being that we just don't really know where he stands. Perhaps more information about that comes out today and tomorrow in time for the Friday vote, or perhaps this is all pushed to the new Board. Either way, this just seems to be San Francisco political theater taken to a new level.
I'll admit, San Francisco is a pretty hard city to leave. On several occasions, I've made the decision to stay in town. Yet, then again, I didn't run for statewide office, while Gavin Newsom did. However, while all of the other statewide officers are being sworn in on Monday, he is going to wait until he's good and ready:
Mayor Gavin Newsom left Tuesday morning with wife Jennifer and daughter Montana to Los Cabos, Mexico, and will return from vacation Saturday. But he won't spend the weekend packing up for Sacramento - looks like he'll be here well beyond his lieutenant governor's Monday start date.
"He's going to leave at some point," assured Newsom's spokesman, Tony Winnicker. "He will assume the office of lieutenant governor in January."
Of course, there's the big reason that he wants the new Board of Supervisors, to be sworn in Jan. 8, to pick his replacement. But there are also a lot of loose ends to tie up - and Newsom, busy burnishing his legacy, wants full credit. {SF Gate)
Of course, some of those loose ends are in fact something of a big deal. However, I leave up to your judgment on whether it is a good idea or not to just cool your heels, and let the state linger. To me, it seems a bit bizarre. After all, he fought for the past couple of years to get out of SF for Sacramento, but now he can't seem to quit us.
As an aside, but the CW has the Mayor's race down to Board President David Chiu and SFPUC General Manager Ed Harrington at this point. I'm not entirely convinced that this delay really changes the calculus all that much, but there will likely be some machinations that could end up suprising the entire political community in San Francisco. Perhaps, Mayor Newsom has some play left up his sleeve worthy of the Triple Play.
By now, you may have heard that much of San Francisco's political leadership is moving on up in about a month or so. But just how San Francisco moves on from Gavin Newsom and Kamala Harris (note: I worked on her campaign, but I have no inside details on this) is still up in the air. The Wall Street Journal has something of a primer on the issues. It's a decent enough start, portraying the various scenarios. For a more entertaining take, watch the Necessary Conversation video on your right. But as somebody who is pretty involved in local politics, these are the decision points, as it were, that I see:
1) When will Gavin Newsom switch gigs?
Officially, Abel Maldonado's term ends on January 3, like all other statewide officers. And that is the date that Gavin Newsom is supposed to be sworn in as LG. However, he is trying to push back that date a few days in order to get his replacement selected by the new Board of Supervisors that is sworn in on Jan 7.
Of course, if he is able to push back his inauguration date, the other thing that would bring him is the ability to appoint the interim DA. He's hinted that he would respect the opinion of Kamala Harris on that pick, but would, if he makes that call, be the one with the final decision on DA.
At this point it isn't totally clear whether he will push the date back, but, legally it looks like he might be able to do it. That has to give it a pretty good chance of happening, I'd say it's a 60% shot now.
2) Does anybody have 6 votes?
That is the big question, and right now, it seems that there are only a few people that could legitimately claim to have those votes. And one of them, Asm. Tom Ammiano, has said that he doesn't want the job. Sup. Chris Daly seems intent on twisting Ammiano's arm into taking the gig. State Sen. Mark Leno would probably have the votes as well, but as he was just appointed Senate Budget Chair, I'm not sure that he would want the gig either. Sen. Leland Yee really, really wants the job, but doesn't have the 6 votes. City Attorney Dennis Herrera and Assessor Phil Ting are also running for mayor, but don't appear to have the 6 votes necessary
Now, if nobody is able to get to 6 votes, the Board President automatically becomes acting mayor. Right now that is Sup. David Chiu. Chiu is also the favorite to retain that position on the new board, and would thus get the mayor's new gig. Now, that wouldn't make him "interim" mayor, but just acting. The big difference is that the acting mayor can be replaced by the board, whereas the interim mayor cannot. Chiu is also rumored to be considering a full run at the Mayor's office if he is named to be interim Mayor. And, running as something of an incumbent, he would at least be in a much stronger position than he is for that right now.
Oh, and just to make things more complicated, there have also been rumors that Chiu is interested in the DA position as well.
3) A care taker?
If the progressive bloc can't get something together to choose an interim mayor, Sheriff Mike Henessey and SFPUC General Manager Ed Harrington are rumored "caretaker" Mayors. The election is just 11 months away, so a caretaker mayor would allow the voters to actually choose the next Mayor.
There are really too many variables to consider, but hopefully this flood of information will somewhat valuable as we watch to see the dominoes fall in San Francisco.
Much has been written about how Jane Kim beat San Francisco's "progressive machine" last week to win the District 6 Supervisor race. But a precinct analysis of the election results tells a far bigger story, and explains how she pulled it off. Just like Howard Dean's Fifty State Strategy helped Democrats win nationwide, Jane Kim was everywhere - and conceded no part of District 6. Debra Walker carried the North Mission and a few progressive pockets, but racking up margins in some core precincts is not enough when your opponent actively contests every neighborhood. Kim beat Walker in the Tenderloin (where she had a better operation), and easily won the Chinese precincts - but also carried places like Treasure Island and the Western Addition. And as Jane's field coordinator for condos in Eastern SOMA, I'm very proud she won those precincts by a landslide - as we were the only campaign to show up. These were the Rob Black voters of 2006, but Kim proved that even a progressive can win those neighborhoods - if you bother to talk to them.
Here I will cover the eight constitutional offices, three State Supreme Court justice confirmations, and nine ballot measures. In the second diary, I will cover the U.S. Senate race and the House races, and in the third the state legislature. I will also combine my regular registration updates within the diaries.
Speaking of registration updates, as you will see in the layout of the statewide registration numbers, Democrats are more pumped up here, adding almost half a million voters to their rolls since 2008. The Republicans in comparison added just 13,000 in the same amount of time. So if you are looking for a lethargic Democratic base, look elsewhere because you won't find it here!
Key: I will list the incumbent first, in boldface (in the case of open seats, the incumbent party first without boldface), and all minor parties after the two major parties.
D: Democratic
R: Republican
L: Libertarian
G: Green
AI: American Independent
PF: Peace and Freedom
NP: Nonpartisan
SW: Socialist Workers
Race Ratings Toss-up: Margin by less than 5%
Lean: Margin by 5-10%
Likely: Margin by 10-15%
Strong: Margin by 15-20%
Solid: Margin by more than 20%
Governor: Ex-eBay CEO Meg Whitman (R) vs. Attorney General Jerry Brown (D), Laura Wells (G), Dale Ogden (L), Chelene Nightingale (AI), Carlos Alvarez (PF), and Lea Sherman (SW-W/I)
Profile: I see no way Whitman can win. Running as an outsider when the current governor, who also ran as an outsider, is leaving office with 20% approval ratings, is a surefire losing strategy. And pissing voters off by running ads nonstop and spending nine-figure sums of money while they're forced to cut back is not going to help at all. Brown is leading by example, running on a shoestring budget and calling for everyone to sacrifice, meaning no sacred cows. Polls may not yet show it, but in my opinion I think Whitman is finished. In fact, I'll be very surprised if she even manages to make it a low-teen loss.
Outlook: Likely to Strong Brown (D pickup)
Lieutenant Governor: Interim Lt. Gov. Abel Maldonado (R) vs. S.F. Mayor Gavin Newsom (D), Jimi Castillo (G), Pamela Brown (L), Jim King (AI), and C.T. Weber (PF)
Profile: Here we have quasi-incumbent Abel Maldonado, appointed after John Garamendi went to Congress, running to be elected in his own right against Newsom. While Maldonado is moderate for a Republican (though that is not saying much), being closely associated with Arnold is going to be a huge liability, which I do not think he will overcome.
Outlook: Lean Newsom (D pickup)
Attorney General: S.F. DA Kamala Harris (D) vs. L.A. DA Steve Cooley (R), Peter Allen (G), Timothy Hannan (L), Dianne Beall Templin (AI), and Robert J. Evans (PF)
Profile: This is the only statewide race in California I am worried about, and where my theory (that California has just become too Democratic for even a moderate Republican to win barring unusual circumstances) will be put to the test. Cooley is not that bad for a Republican, having had the audacity to stand against popular opinion of issues such as three strikes and Jessica's Law, though he is also against dispensaries for medical marijuana. Harris is a rising star in Democratic circles, and is a more formidable opponent than any of Cooley's challengers in the past. The wild card is the big enchilada of L.A. County, where Harris' name ID is low and she'd need to win by 18-20% to win statewide. I am of course pulling for Harris because I want our bench to stay nice and full for the inevitable retirements of DiFi probably in 2012, Boxer probably in 2016, and for the open governorship in 2014 or 2018; and also because she has courageously stood up to Prop 8, while Cooley pledges to defend it in court.
Outlook: Toss-Up
Secretary of State: SoS Debra Bowen (D) vs. businessman Damon Dunn (R), Ann Menasche (G), Christina Tobin (L), Merton D. Short (AI), and Marylou Cabral (PF)
Profile: Bowen is a lock for reelection.
Outlook: Solid Bowen
Treasurer: Treasurer Bill Lockyer (D) vs. State Senator Mimi Walters (R), Kit Crittenden (G), Edward Teyssier (L), Robert Lauten (AI), and Debra Reiger (PF)
Profile: Lockyer is a lock for reelection.
Outlook: Solid Lockyer
Controller: Controller John Chiang (D) vs. State Senator Tony Strickland (R), Ross Frankel (G), Andy Favor (L), Lawrence Beliz (AI), and Karen Martinez (PF)
Profile: A rematch from 2006, only with Democrats more pumped up, Chiang will win by a wider margin this time around.
Outlook: Strong to Solid Chiang
Insurance Commissioner: State Assemblyman Mike Villines (R) vs. State Assemblyman Dave Jones (D), William Balderston (G), Richard Bronstein (L), Clay Pedersen (AI), and Dina Padilla (PF)
Profile: In California, when a non-damaged Democrat is up against a generic Republican, the Democrat wins. Take it to the bank.
Outlook: Likely to Strong Jones (D pickup)
Superintendent of Public Instruction: Retired Superintendent Larry Aceves (NP) vs. State Assemblyman Tom Torlakson (NP)
Profile: Torlakson voted against Race to the Top and believes parents, teachers, students, and communities alike all need to come together to improve our schools, while Aceves believes that the problem with public schools is the teachers and hedge funds and billionaires should have more control over K-12 education. This will be a close one.
Outlook: Toss-Up
State Supreme Court confirmation - Tani Cantil-Sakauye: Voters are being asked whether to confirm Tani Cantil-Sakauye, Arnold's pick to replace Chief Justice Ron George. She is seen as uncontroversial, but likely to share Arnold's views on corporate power.
Outlook: Lean Confirm
State Supreme Court retention - Ming Chin: Chin was in the minority that voted to uphold the state's ban on marriage equality in 2008, and is one of the most right-wing justices on the state Supreme Court. I want to see him go, but it doesn't look likely.
Outlook: Likely Retention
State Supreme Court retention - Carlos Moreno: Moreno was the only justice who courageously voted to overturn Prop 8 at the State Supreme Court last year, and has been a reliable vote for equality and so should be voted to be retained.
Prop. 19 (Marijuana): If passed, this proposition would legalize the possession and growing of marijuana for personal use of adults 21 years and older, and allow state and local governments to regulate and tax related commercial activities. This proposition winning may make Washington reexamine its own policy towards marijuana, since what happens in California often makes it way to the other side of the country. Polls have shown Yes leading by single digits, so I'll call 19 a passing proposition.
My recommendation: YES! 10/21/2010 Outlook: Lean Pass
Prop. 20 (Redistricting Congressional Districts): This proposition would amend the state Constitution be amended to have the Citizens Redistricting Commission (prop 11 from 2008) redistrict for the U.S. House of Representatives seats. This initiative calls for each district being composed of people of the same income level and people with the same work opportunities, which to me feels like a backdoor to the old bygone Jim Crow ways. And passing this prop while giving free passes to Republican-controlled legislatures in Texas and Florida to gerrymander the hell out of those states is likely to put California at a disadvantage when competing for federal dollars. In addition, there is no way this commission can be held accountable.
My recommendation: NO! 10/21/2010 Outlook: Toss-up/Lean Fail
Prop. 21 (Vehicle License Surcharge): Establishes an $18 annual vehicle license surcharge to provide funds for maintaining the state parks and wildlife programs, and grants surcharged vehicles free admission to the state parks. Our cash-starved state parks could use the extra funds. In addition, the governor can't take funds from this coffer when other coffers are low. The tough economy may dampen the chances of this prop passing, though.
My recommendation: YES! 10/21/2010 Outlook: Toss-Up
Prop. 22 (Local Government Funds): Prohibits the state from taking funds used for local government services. It is well-intentioned but flawed. The cities and counties would get an immediate payment of over $1 billion, forcing further cuts to vital public services.
My recommendation: NO! 10/21/2010 Outlook: Toss-Up/Lean Fail
Prop. 23 (Suspension of AB 32): Backed by Texas oil interests, this prop would suspend AB 32 until unemployment dropped to an unrealistic 5.5% for a whole year and hurt the state's fledgling green jobs industry, doing the exact opposite of what its backers claim: it would actually kill more jobs than create more jobs. (Here in "business-friendly" Texas, the economic situation is also pretty bad, with unemployment here at its highest level since the late '80s [and me being unable to find a job to save my life] and an $18 billion deficit for the 2011 budget session, which will make 2003 look like the good old days.) Polls have shown a low double-digit lead for the No side.
My recommendation: NO! NO! NO! 10/21/2010 Outlook: Likely Fail
Prop. 24 (Corporate Loopholes): A long-overdue measure that would close corporate tax loopholes, reducing the budget deficit by $2 billion.
My recommendation: YES! 10/21/2010 Outlook: Toss-Up
Prop. 25 (Majority Vote on Budget): Another very long-overdue measure that eliminates the ridiculous 2/3rds rule to pass a budget in the state legislature. This prop is passing by double-digits in the polls.
My recommendation: YES! YES! YES! 10/21/2010 Outlook: Likely Pass
Prop. 26 (Two-Thirds Vote on Fees): Would require two-thirds vote approval for the imposition of certain state and local fees, including those on businesses that adversely impact the local community and environment. The last thing we need is higher vote thresholds.
My recommendation: NO! NO! NO! 10/21/2010 Outlook: Toss-Up
Prop. 27 (Redistricting Commission): This proposition eliminates the Citizens Redistricting Commission from Prop 11, which barely passed, suggesting some voters have some doubts about its effectiveness. This commission also gives Republicans much more power than their current share of the population.
My recommendation: YES! 10/21/2010 Outlook: Toss-Up
President Clinton is going to be making a swing through California to do some fundraisers and a pair of rallies for Gavin Newsom and Jerry Brown. The CDP has the deets on the two rallies, and you can sign up at:
Let's get together to make some noise and spread the word about how important it is that every Democrat vote. Whether you vote by mail this month or if you come out to the polls on November 2 - we need your vote.
LOS ANGELES
Friday, October 15 - Doors open at 6:00 p.m.
UCLA - Dickson Court (outdoor location), Charles E. Young Drive and Dickson Court, Los Angeles, 90084
I'm proud to support Mayor Newsom for many reasons, however, as a pre-medical student, I find his advocacy of accessible healthcare especially noteworthy. When speaking to students on my campus about Mayor Newsom's accomplishments, I exclaim that San Francisco is the birthplace of American universal healthcare, and continue on about the success of "Healthy San Francisco." Launched in 2007 with former SF Supervisor and current Assemblymember Tom Ammiano, Healthy SF has made groundbreaking efforts to provide health care access for San Francisco's 73,000 uninsured.
Over the past 3 years, more than 50,000 SF residents have benefitted from this plan. Leaving no one behind, Mayor Newsom expanded his focus from young adults to all city residents who need affordable and accessible healthcare. While improving the quality of living in SF, Healthy SF has consistently been applauded as a model for universal health care. As such, Mayor Newsom was appointed as the chair of the U.S. Conference of Mayors Health Care Reform Task Force, working towards a plan for federal health care reform. Real-life experience, at both a local and national level, is why Mayor Newsom stands as the leading candidate for Lt. Governor.
What this program shows about Mayor Newsom's character is that he is truly compassionate about the issues affecting his constituents. One of Mayor Newsom's top priorities is ensuring that the needs of working and middle class families come first. Since the beginning of his mayorship, he has promoted societal inclusiveness through innovative programs similar to Healthy SF including SF Promise, JobsNow, and Sunday Streets. Whichever plan you look at, there is one common denominator: a consistent understanding of what people truly need.
Mayor Newsom looks towards providing Californians with the same ear, intent on listening to their problems and fighting for solutions. Under the leadership of our future Lieutenant Governor, Californians will be provided with accessible and affordable programs under the principles that guided the formation of Healthy SF.
Manisha Goud is the Los Angeles Regional Director of Students for Gavin Newsom. Join Students for Gavin Newsom on Facebook at www.facebook.com/studentsfornewsom.
Meg Whitman just spent $100 million in her bid for Governor of California, $91 of which came from her own pocket. It disgusts me that a candidate who claims she can get California on the right track injects into her campaign millions of her own wealth to fuel her own ambitions and propaganda. What could come of that money? Surely, enough to ease some of problems facing hardworking Californians. For students, this money could actually place importance on the value of our education. It made me wonder what this money could do for the student who couldn't return to college this fall because of a reduction in his financial aid, about the student who couldn't pay the latest UC fee hikes, and about the student whose family cannot afford to send her to college at all.
Attorney General Jerry Brown, on the other hand, knows the issues facing parents and students, starting two public schools in Oakland in his tenure as Mayor. He understands the value of an education and how to engage students with all interests. Brown whole-heartedly agrees that more attention must be due to California's public school system in order for it to survive. Similarly, we must also turn to leaders like Mayor Gavin Newsom, whose City and County of San Francisco shines in California as the epitome of innovative ideas and pragmatic solutions put to practice.
As young people become more disenfranchised by California's political system, it is crucial to change the status quo that is tearing our state apart. Those who place personal ambition over proposing legitimate solutions to fix California must be stopped. As a student who fears the loans awaiting her upon graduation, I highly trust Brown and Newsom's abilities to help students like myself gain affordable higher education.
One of Mayor Newsom's main priorities as a candidate for Lieutenant Governor is to get the public education system back on track, by increasing the quality and accessibility of schools within the CSU and UC systems. He understands every student's desire for a quality education without being penalized by endless fees, finding themselves ineligible for state grants, and carrying a heavy burden of loans upon graduating. Higher education should be accessible to all, regardless of financial background. How else will California move forward with the leaders of tomorrow if they can't afford the rights to an education?
While shaking up San Francisco, Mayor Newsom made unprecedented progress in promoting an affordable and accessible higher education by launching "SF Promise," an initiative that guarantees an college education, with financial support provided, at San Francisco State university to all qualified San Francisco State Unified School District students. Projects like this, which benefits hundreds of students, can easily grow at the state level, spurring enrollment in colleges across the state.
The partnership of Brown and Newsom in Sacramento will bring the Golden State out of a depression it suffers on all levels. Our state will thrive once again through job growth, environmental protection, reduced crime rates, clean energy expansion, a strong education system, and so much more that will rebuild California.
Students of California, this is our election to win. We can no longer sit and watch as unqualified persons are elected to office only to serve private interests. By mobilizing by the thousands, we'll be able to fight for our rights as young people looking towards a brighter future. By electing Gavin Newsom for Lt. Governor, we'll have our voice heard on the UC Board of Regents and CSU Board of Trustees, strongly fighting for affordable education for everyone. No more will students forego a higher education or be prevented from returning to school. Please join students from across the state as we build the movement to reform California at www.studentsforgavinnewsom.com.
Manisha Goud is the Los Angeles Regional Director for Students for Gavin Newsom. Join Students for Gavin Newsom on Facebook at www.facebook.com/studentsfornewsom.
After clinging to the comfort of undergraduate education for five years at my university in Austin, Texas, the time came to load up the truck, sedate the cat, and drive the 1,789 miles back to my family home in the Bay Area. Driving literally and figuratively toward my future, a Moriarty-esque companion would have been a welcome change from the mostly flat, unpopulated areas through which I-40 runs. Instead, my companion was my own mind, which ran a looped broadcast of the same thought: "What am I going to do with my life?"
Luckily, a week after making the journey back to my hometown, FaceBook led me to an opportunity (other than the opportunity to procrastinate). I chanced upon a recent post by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom calling for interns to join his campaign for Lieutenant Governor of California. One interview and two weeks later I had joined the family at "Newsom Land" with a bevy of other young interns.
Most interns begin their day at the civilized hour of ten in the morning. Such was the case on my first day in mid-July. After a brief introduction to the obligatory guidelines and relaxed office atmosphere, we began our first project: identifying supporters. Equipped with highlighters, pens, and an endless pile of names, we began our work in utter silence. For an hour we continued in this fashion, all undoubtedly trying to be productive in spite of being distracted by the obvious question: when were we going to meet Mayor Newsom?
I'd lost myself to the data entry entirely, completing each sheet with a rhythmic enthusiasm fueled by first day jitters. The silence persisted until a suited figure appeared from behind the partition. "Can't we get some music in here?"
I turned to the intern next to me and inquired after her views on Lady Gaga. Interns at other tables followed suit and the office became pleasantly cacophonous with the varied musical tastes of my coworkers. Mayor Newsom soon came to every station and personally thanked each of us for our time. I shook his hand and told him that I took his advice and was the first to break the silence to the tune of "Alejandro". I sincerely hope my suggestion to bring in Lady Gaga for a campaign concert is taken seriously.
Now in our second week, interns and volunteers have gotten used to Mayor Newsom's presence at campaign headquarters. It's a mutually distracting relationship; he'll crack jokes about installing a bowling ally as we call undecided voters; we'll banter with him as staffers coax him back to important meetings. We all affirm the common perception: Mayor Newsom is an extremely personable individual. More importantly, we enjoy being able to attach our stars to a man who espouses our political philosophy and has therefore earned our respect and support.
Waking up to catch the bullet train from the South Bay, I know I'm headed to an office brimming with dedicated individuals. The occasional outburst of laughter brought puts us all at ease as we create a campaign, block by block, to ensure that citizens of California elect a strong leader who has demonstrated countless times that he talks the talk and walks the walk. Since the first day, I've become increasingly confident about the importance of my roll in the campaign. Not only will the experience be professionally rewarding for me as I seek more work after November 2nd, it's also great to see our efforts come to fruition, be it voter turnout at weekend rallies or a full guest list for the office opening party. Most importantly for me, I'm stimulated and energized by working toward the tangible and crucial goal of helping Mayor Gavin Newsom become the next Lieutenant Governor of California.
Alexis is proud to be an intern with Gavin Newsom's campaign for Lieutenant Governor of California. If you are interested in being an intern or a volunteer, please email Eric Lee at elee@gavinnewsom.com
(cross-posted with permission from my post on DailyKos)
There are few things worse for a politician than an unpaid tax lien, especially in a state like California where our perennial budget crisis makes it even more important for our politicians to demonstrate their commitment to paying their fair share.
Enter Lieutenant Governor Abel Maldonado, who was appointed by Governor Schwarzenegger to the position after John Garamendi won the special election created by the appointment of Ellen Tauscher to the position of Undersecretary for Arms Control.
According to the Los Angeles Times, Abel Maldonado has had a substantial tax lien placed on his family farm:
The single-page IRS lien indicates that Maldonado owes the government $111,146 for underpaying a category of taxes that include Social Security, Medicare and federal withholding contributions for employees on his 6,000-acre farm in Santa Barbara County.
An IRS spokesman declined to comment on the ongoing case.
Maldonado's people claim that this lien actually arises from a dispute about whether certain vehicles are for public or private use. But as someone who has administrated tax payments for small businesses, this seems like a strange defense: the category of taxes that the IRS is claiming that Maldonado owes are "form 941" taxes, which withhold income taxes, social security taxes and Medicare taxes from employee paychecks. It is possible for this form 941 withholding lien to be the result of a dispute over whether a vehicle is for personal or business use, as the IRS explains in its employer's guide:
You may choose not to withhold income tax on the value of an employee's personal use of a vehicle you provide. You must, however, withhold social security and Medicare taxes on the use of the vehicle. See Publication 15-B for more information on this election.
So this is apparently what this dispute is about. But even if we grant Maldonado the benefit of the doubt here, there's a much larger problem: the tax lien is over $111,000. Do you realize how much the IRS would have to have been estimating the value of the "company vehicle use" he had been engaging in to rack up a tax bill that high? Simple mathematics based on the applicable tax rates would indicate that the total valuation of the "vehicle use" would have to have been in the high six figures, which is unconscionable in and of itself.
Bottom line is, Maldonado has some explaining to do. And it's not even the first time:
It is the ninth time since 1992 that federal, state or local tax collectors have resorted to liens against the Santa Maria Republican's family farm in an effort to compel payments totaling more than $240,000, public records show.
For Lieutenant Governor, California has a much better choice in San Francisco mayor and marriage equality hero Gavin Newsom.
"We're not waiting for permission or for someone to save the day-we have to take action now."
-Gavin Newsom
San Francisco Mayor and California Democratic nominee for lieutenant governor Gavin Newsom is a man who stands up for what he believes in. His willingness to take bold political risks and his unwavering personal integrity have led him to constantly be ahead of the curve on many important social and economic issues, from marriage equality and universal health care to homelessness and education. But the environment is truly the sole issue where Mayor Newsom's unrelenting desire to create revolutionary reform by staying true to his personal convictions is most apparent.
Mayor Newsom's political record proves that he is a fierce and passionate advocate for the environment. In 2006, while most of this country's leaders were engaged in a contentious debate over whether or not climate change is real, Mayor Newsom had already authored the Urban Environmental Accords, closed a fossil-fuel burning power plant, created the country's largest alternative fuel fleet of buses and cars and passed numerous laws to help San Francisco's residents and businesses be more environmentally conscious. From solar panels and mandatory composting and recycling to authoring the strongest municipal green building standards in the United States for new construction and major renovations, Mayor Newsom has turned San Francisco into one of the greenest cities in the world and has established himself as one of the greenest mayors in the country.
When it comes to the environment, Mayor Newsom makes an effort to practice at home what he preaches in public. He owned a Saturn EV1 electric car in the 1990's, recently purchased a Tesla Roadster and his official mayoral SUV is a hybrid. His winery, CADE, located in Napa, recently received Gold LEED certification, making it the first winery in the state to achieve this status. Though Mayor Newsom openly admits that "it's not enough that [he has] an electric car", it is clear that he, like many Californians, is dedicated to living a greener and more sustainable life.
As a student who is currently enrolled in a California State University, I have witnessed the devastating effects that the higher education crisis is having on this state. My student fees have increased with the coming of each new semester. My professors have had to completely redesign their courses so that they can teach as many students as the fire code will allow in a classroom at a time. My fellow students and I are "crashing" any open classes left and right, trying to get enough units to reach full-time status so that we can qualify for financial aid and health insurance.
My fellow students and I are idealistic and optimistic. We believe in hope and change. And we want a candidate for governor who will make higher education reform the top priority in their campaign. As the situation stands Meg Whitman has not made higher education a priority in her plan to govern California and it is doubtful that she will ever see the direct correlation between the health of the state's higher educational system and the condition of our state's economy.
Jerry Brown, however, still has the time to make higher education reform the pinnacle of his gubernatorial platform. Brown should learn from San Francisco Mayor and Democratic candidate for Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom's campaigns for Governor and Lieutenant Governor. As a candidate for both offices, Mayor Newsom made higher education reform one of his top concerns. And as a result, Students for Gavin Newsom established chapters at 36 colleges and 35 high schools up and down the state, making it the arguably the largest grassroots student movement ever organized in the state of California.
After the preparations had been made, the tally sheets from our phone calls completed, the carpools worked out, and the volunteers scheduled, I headed to Los Angeles with the hope that after the weekend was complete, there would be no question in the minds of the CDP delegates that Gavin Newsom has the grassroots support necessary to win the Lt. Governor's race against whatever the GOP throws at us in November.
In the weeks prior to the convention, our team of students from all across the state had been talking to delegates, volunteers, and fellow young voters about Mayor Newsom's candidacy and about his bold, new ideas that will be required to dig California out of our seemingly never ending state of economic misery.
The pitch was not hard to make. Young people are drawn to Newsom's campaign. We see public higher education becoming unaffordable to more and more Californians. We fear that in five or ten years our state won't be able to compete in an evolving global economy, and we worry that the living wage jobs that we will need in order to support our families will be harder and harder to find. While we are confident that our state will come to its senses when it comes to Gay Marriage and LGBT rights, we are concerned that the relentless beat of the status quo won't provide the framework necessary to drastically change the way we look at issues like immigration, the environment, and budget & tax reform. We have watched the forces of regressiveness drag our state (and our futures) under the surface, and we are ready and eager to support Gavin Newsom, who has proven time and time again in San Francisco that tangible change is not only possible, but it is also necessary.
Our apologies for being a little quiet here on Calitics this weekend. The convention has been a wee bit hectic for all of us. We'll get you a more detailed recap soon, but there were a few details that were worth sharing.
In the Insurance Commissioners race, Dave Jones was able to squeak out the endorsement. It was certainly a dramatic race, with both campaigns doing a really good job of rallying support. But in the end, Dave Jones' progressive base was simply too much for Hector de la Torre to overcome. The endorsement won't necessarily bring a big windfall, Chair Burton has said that they won't be spending any money in primaries. But, hey, Jones will now get that lower postage rate that everybody was seeking. Of course, the cache of the Democratic Party endorsement will be quite powerful on the mail that we will likely be seeing coming out of Jones' campaign very shortly. I like both of these guys, but in the interest of full disclosure, I did end up voting for Dave Jones. Either will make a much better insurance commissioner than Steve Poizner, that's for sure.
In the LG race, Gavin Newsom won the outright vote, but didn't get the endorsement. I know the Hahn folks were trying to spin this as a win, but I just don't get it. Newsom had already declined to seek the endorsement a while back, and it was Janice Hahn's campaign who forced the issue. If I recall correctly, the vote was about 57-43 52-42 in favor of Newsom. Which, considering Newsom's past, is fairly respectable. But, again, I'm not entirely sure why we went through the process. Perhaps Garry South figured it would make Gavin work and might cause some sort of game-changing drama. That clearly didn't happen, and Hahn is still looking for some way of overcoming Newsom's advantage in name ID.
On the Props, the resolutions committee went the right way on all the props, and we'll approve them. They supported Prop 15, the fair elections initiative, and Prop 13, a measure that would change the way seismic retrofits are taxed. They opposed Prop 14 ("open" primaries), Prop 16 (PG&E Power Grab), and Prop 17 (Mercury Insurance power grab).
General session is about to start, and we'll wrap up the festivities, approve reports of the committees, and perhaps get a chance to vote on a few endorsements. I know at least one campaign was trying to get signatures, but I don't know what came of it. A full recap to come soon.
A post was made on Calitics on February 28th concerning Lt. Governor Candidate Janice Hanh's proposal to "lay off private contractors rather than lay off city workers." A case was made then that it was a mistake to throw private contractors under the bus without regard to the fiscal impact to the City of Los Angeles. Now the CEO of the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce, in an article published recently in CityWatch with the heading Being Attacked Under Another Name, roundly criticizes Candidate Hahn and attempts to teach her a thing or two about the impact of her suggestion.
From the article...
In Los Angeles, some members of the L.A. City Council are also taking advantage of the "name" ruse. During last month's debate over the city's unsustainable budget, Councilmember Janice Hahn told a packed room that "It's time for us to lay off private contractors and keep our city workers!" Councilmember Paul Koretz also wants the city's independent contractors to take a 10 percent across-the-board cut before any layoffs of city workers.
With SF Mayor Gavin Newsom now officially running for Lt. Gov, this could make a significant difference for that race as well as the future of San Francisco's governance:
San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom's idea of holding a special election to name his successor if he's elected lieutenant governor appears to be DOA.
Newsom doesn't have the six votes on the Board of Supervisors needed to place a charter amendment on the November ballot to require an election, and there doesn't appear to be much interest downtown for an expensive and rushed petition to get the 47,000 signatures needed to go around the supes. (SF Chronicle)
Thing is, this is ultimately a good government measure. People should get the right to vote for their mayor, but as Supervisor Chris Daly pointed out, they should also get the right to vote for their Supervisor. I think they would likely get a good chunk of support for a measure that allowed for special elections for both offices. However, I don't think that option is on the table. So, we work with the system that we have got. It may not be perfect, but it generally works.
Of course, this leaves a problem for Mayor Newsom. Much of his base of support will only support him if he can ensure that he won't be replaced by a mayor significantly to his left. And with a majority of the Board of Supervisors being to his left, that seems to be the likely scenario. Under the State Law, if he won LG, he would take office on Jan 3, 2011, and any new board of Supervisors wouldn't be seated until Jan 8, 2011. Thus, any gains made by "moderates" in the 2010 board elections won't affect the Mayoral appointment. The current board is the board that chooses Newsom's replacement.
So, that leaves Newsom one option to win back his friends, bump back his swearing-in date. At this point it is far from clear if that is possible, and to do so for the sole purpose of affecting his replacement would certainly look hyper-political. And it would likely leave a bad taste in the mouths of San Franciscans.
Of course, there is an option in the LG race as well. In order to get to the general, Newsom will have to defeat Janice Hahn: whom we found impressive in an interview in November. Newsom has an early lead in polling that he spread around before entering the race. However, that almost certainly reflects name ID more than anything else.
Hahn faces an uphill climb, and it is unclear whether she can raise enough money to raise her name ID up enough to compete with Newsom. On a related note, she's filed an FPPC complaint against Newsom for potentially exceeding voluntary spending limits and taking too much money from a few donors, saying that the Gov. campaign and the LG campaign should be considered one race. The outcome of that decision could also have serious ramifications for the LG race.
Mayor Gavin Newsom has entered the race for Lieutenant Governor, a job he ridiculed while running for Governor - and his supporters include San Francisco progressives who figure it's an opportunity to get rid of him. Nonetheless, an endorsement list that includes House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the California Teachers Association and Sacramento's legislative leaders (along with an opponent with unimpressive fundraising totals) should make Newsom the front-runner for the Democratic primary. But it won't be pretty - given that Garry South (who ran his gubernatorial campaign) now works for his competitor, L.A. City Councilmember Janice Hahn. The Hahn campaign has been vicious on Gavin so far, using the kind of scorched-earth tactics that South is famous for. Newsom may win the nomination on June 8th, but he could end up suffering the same fate as Garry South's last victim. Phil Angelides had much of the Democratic leadership behind him when he ran for Governor, but only won the primary after a bruising fight with South client Steve Westly. And it left him so bloodied that he went on to lose the general election by a landslide.
On behalf of the City's small businesses, I am pleading with the Board of Supervisors to declare a moratorium on headline-grabbing legislation. We simply can't afford it. Small businesses are still fighting through the economic downturn. At the same time, the City is struggling to close a $500 million budget deficit, laying off thousands of workers and fighting to keep vital services available. In this climate, there's just no room for politics-as-usual. But they're at it again. This time, the Small Business Commission on Monday will decide whether to support Mayor Gavin Newsom's idea that small business owners who sell mobile phones need to post San Francisco-specific product labels for customers. In the words of one public health official, if the government starts requiring warnings on everything with undefined risks, everything "from apples to xylophones" would have to be labeled. The last thing we need is the City getting into the business of mandating product labels in convenience stores, dry cleaners, and restaurants for all kinds of different products. What's next? Will I need to get my labels approved by the government with information on what ingredients are in the hair product I sell? As many as 15,000 city workers are facing lay-offs. Nine hundred school workers, including 10 percent of the City's teachers, are facing lay-offs. Metered parking may be extended to Sundays. The City's police force faces $30 million in cuts. We just don't have the luxury of spending money on silly nannny-state ordinances. San Francisco politics is a circus. We all know that. We all know that won't change. But on behalf of small businesses, we're asking that our political leaders stop the merry-go-round at least until we've weathered the economic storm.
