Democratic activists hoping for big gains in the California legislature this year were dealt a serious blow after campaign finance reports released last Thursday raised troubling questions about Assembly Speaker John Perez's strategic priorities and the California Democratic Party's ability to achieve a two-thirds majority in the State Senate and Assembly.
Democrats would have to pick up at least two more seats in each chamber to achieve the super-majority needed to pass revenue increases over the objections of a Republican minority.
Yet campaign finance reports reveal that Speaker Perez, Sacramento Democratic lawmakers and PACs donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to safe Democratic Assembly districts while virtually ignoring new "swing" districts or defending others against possible Republican pickups.
In the 10th Assembly District (Marin, D+35) Sacramento Democrats gave $80,600 to Mike Allen, an incumbent Assemblymember who moved into the open district when his existing district was carved up and reapportioned. This, even though Mr. Allen is running against two other Democratic candidates and no Republican opposition.
Records also show that most of these donations were given to Allen and Butler during a three-week period last December, and that many Democratic Assemblymembers who donated did not give money to any other Assembly campaigns. The timing suggests a coordinated and conscious effort from leadership to funnel money to these candidates at the expense of other candidates running in more competitive districts.
But as Butler and Allen enjoy the largess of their colleagues in Sacramento while running in districts so safe a Democratic corpse could win, two other candidates running in swing districts which could potentially lead to Democratic super-majorities enjoy no such protection.
Even Democratic State Senator Ted Lieu, whose district overlaps much of AD66, gave $1,000 to Butler, but nothing so far to Muratsuchi.
Additionally, while PACs - including the Professional Engineers in California Government, the State Building & Construction Trades Council and the California State Council of Laborers - gave over $300,000 to Butler and Allen, many of them presumably at Perez's direction, Muratsuchi received only $11,900 in PAC money, including $1,000 from the California League of Conservation Voters - $6,800less than they gave to Betsy Butler.
Typically Republican organization joins with Legislative leaders for a press conference this morning
From the "huh?" department:
Senate President pro Tempore Darrell Steinberg and Assembly Speaker John A Pérez will be joined by leaders of the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Manufacturers and Technology Association and other legislators to announce proposals to improve California's business climate and create much-needed jobs.
A press conference to detail the effort will be held today, September 1, 2011, at 11:00 a.m. in Room 317 of the State Capitol. Steinberg (D-Sacramento) and Pérez (D-Los Angeles) will be joined by Cal Chamber president and CEO Allan Zaremberg, and CMTA president Jack Stewart.
We'll let you know more later today, but guesses are welcome.
Update: well, I guess I should have known, they're going after "regulation":
New business regulations proposed in California would be reviewed for their effect on the economy of the most-populous state under a bill introduced by Democratic leaders who control the state Assembly and Senate.
Senate President Pro-tem Darrell Steinberg and Assembly Speaker John Perez outlined the plan at a news conference with the presidents of the California Chamber of Commerce, the state's largest business group, and the California Manufacturers and Technology Association.(Bloomberg)
Ahh, that evil bastard "regulation" reaching into the cribs of jobs everywhere and strangling them. In reality what needs to be done is to reduce duplicative regulation, where we have agencies overlapping. If done wrong, simply to gut environmental and labor regulations, well, it will be bad.
Here's the thing: The Republicans understand that there have to be some additional revenues. They know that even they couldn't come up with the full $25 Billion in cuts in any way that could possibly help them politically. But, on the other side, they are terrified of their own base.
This is where it gets interesting. Sen. Bob Dutton, the Republican Leader in the Senate asked the Legislative Counsel if there is any way for the Democrats to put something on the ballot on their own, sans the 2/3 majority. Now, Dutton would probably tell you out in public that this is just to stop the tax hikes or something like that. But, you have to think that Dutton was secretly hoping that the Democrats could do the dirty work while the Republicans could maintain their ideological purity by never voting for anything that possibly resembles an increase in taxes.
Speaker Perez, for his part, doesn't seem to be taking the bait, and has cast that aside right from the get-go:
Assembly Speaker John A. Pérez said Wednesday that he has no intention of sidestepping Republicans by trying to place a tax-extension measure on the June ballot by a simple majority vote of the Legislature.
Pérez downplayed a legislative counsel's opinion, sought by Senate Republican leader Bob Dutton, that indicated such a measure could be placed before voters without the support of GOP lawmakers, under narrow circumstances.
"No," Pérez said flatly when asked if he is entertaining such a plan for the tax measure proposed by Gov. Jerry Brown to raise $11 billion for the fiscal year that ends June 30, 2012.
"There is not a single legal analysis that I think holds any water that says we could legitimately put this question before voters on a simple majority vote," Pérez told the Sacramento Press Club. (SacBee)
I'll admit, I'm a bit split on this move. From a practical standpoint, I'm a bit skeptical that the Democrats will, in fact, be able to lure enough GOP votes. Keeping open the majority vote measure as a way to whip some GOP votes into making some sort of deal seems to make some sense.
But, guessing at the Speaker's logic here, in order to pass this thing at the ballot, you are probably going to need at least nominal GOP support. If you have them running around saying how awful this package is, it could create a pretty dicey situation for the actual election.
At any rate, despite the Speaker's protests, I would still not count out the concept of a majority vote measure quite yet.
(Cross-posted from Groundswell, the California League of Conservation Voters blog.)
This morning Assembly Speaker John Pérez and Senate President pro Tempore Darrell Steinberg announced the Clean Energy Jobs Initiative, a package of four bills that focus on green jobs and clean energy growth.
Why the focus on green jobs? You might remember that a couple weeks ago I reported on a report by nonpartisan think-tank Next 10 that shows green jobs in California growing more than three times faster than overall state employment. During this time of economic recession and high unemployment in California, it makes sense for our legislative leaders to focus on the job sector that's growing relatively rapidly.
33% Renewable Portfolio Standard (Sen. Joe Simitian): This measure requires both public and private energy providers to procure 33 percent of California’s electricity from renewable resources (wind, solar, geothermal, etc.) by 2020.
Streamlined Siting for Renewable Energy Projects (Assembly Member V. Manuel Pérez): This measure reduces red tape, expediting the siting and construction of renewable energy projects throughout California.
Career Technical Education (Senator Darrell Steinberg): This measure aligns high school curriculum with high-demand jobs in emerging markets. Grant funding would be provided to high schools for delivering the skills and knowledge students need for successful employment in clean energy field. Such curriculum restructuring will also encourage students to stay in school because they’ll know they’re gaining real-world skills from their studies.
Economic Incentives to Increase Energy Efficiency (Assembly Member Nancy Skinner): This bill would use a portion of state ratepayer funds to provide loan guarantees for residents and small business owners investing in energy efficiency and renewable technologies on homes and commercial property. Reducing loan risk also reduces loan interest rates, increasing demand for energy improvements which in turn increases production and the jobs that come with it.
Assembly Speaker John Pérez Is on the Wrong Side of History
By Dan Bacher
In a historic protest on July 21, over 300 members of California Indian Tribes and their allies peacefully took control of a Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Blue Ribbon Task Force meeting in Fort Bragg to protest the violation of indigenous gathering and fishing rights under Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's controversial MLPA Initiative.
Over 60 immigrant workers from the sea urchin industry, many from indigenous communities in central and southern Mexico that were forced to come to the U.S. after they were driven off their land under NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement), marched side by side with members of the Yurok, Tolowa, Cahto, Kashia Pomo, Karuk, Hoopa Valley, Maidu, Hopi, Navajo and other tribes. Besides them were recreational anglers, commercial fishermen, seaweed harvesters, environmentalists and sea urchin divers and local political candidates.
Alongside tribal flags, participants hoisted banners with slogans including "Keep Away MLPA," "Native Conservation, Not Naive Conservation," "No MLPA," " MLPA=Big Oil," and "RLF - What Are You Funding." Many of the protesters wore blue shirts proclaiming, "M.L.P.A. Taking Tribal Rights Away."
I have been to hundreds of protests on a variety of water and environmental justice issues, but it was simply the most moving event of its kind that I've ever been to. I was touched by the solidarity shown by people from such diverse communities in opposition to a process that that they feel is not listening to them or their needs.
Opponents of the MLPA Initiative believe that Schwarzenegger appointed MLPA officials have railroaded California Indian Tribes and fishing communities on the Central Coast, North Central Coast and South Coast - and now are trying to do it on the North Coast, but they have faced massive resistance there.
The group peacefully took over the task force meeting in a great example of non-violent direct action. After rallying at Oak and Main Street, over 300 people walked a half-mile to the C.V. Star Community Center. Just before heading into the meeting, tribal community members standing twenty deep chanted, "No Way M.L.P.A.!" to the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) members convened inside.
Tribal elders and immigrant workers then spoke on the impact of the MLPA process upon them. Some of the most powerful testimony came from Susan Burdick, Yurok Tribal gatherer, who slammed the Blue Ribbon Task Force members for violation of sovereign Tribal rights.
"We're not going to stop what we have doing for generations," said Burdick. "We have young people here, old people here and we will march everywhere you go."
"What is your real purpose: to start drilling for oil off our coastline?" she asked. "Be honest with us!"
Elizabeth, a worker in the sea urchin industry, told the panel how the MLPA threatened the livelihoods of immigrant workers. "By taking away our jobs by closing areas of coast, you are taking away the opportunity for our kids to go to college and make a better live for themselves," she stated.
Thomas O'Rourke, the chair of the Yurok Tribal Council, vowed that tribal members would be willing to go to jail to defend their rights.
"It is wise to listen to the people who managed these lands for thousands of years," he continued. "We believe in protecting species. We will continue to exercise our right to harvest seaweed and fish as we always have. You wlll have to take us to jail until you go broke and you fix this law."
"Our tribal rights are not negotiable," Dania Colegrove, Hoopa Valley Tribe member and a member of the Coastal Justice Coalition, told the task force. "Get used to it!"
Frankie Joe Myers, organizer for the Coastal Justice Coalition and a Yurok Tribal ceremonial leader, summed up the feelings of many when he said, "This is about more than a fouled-up process that attempts to prohibit tribes from doing something they have done sustainably for thousands of years. It is about respect, acknowledgement and recognition of indigenous peoples' rights!"
When I got back from the protest, I was shocked to hear that Assembly Speaker John Perez, in spite of the massive opposition to MLPA Process from diverse communities, had recently sent a letter to the California Fish and Game Commission strongly endorsing Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's fast-track MLPA Initiative.
In his letter, Perez said he supports "the strongest possible network of marine protected areas based on science" along California's southern Coast.
That is simply not true, since the MLPA as implemented on the Central North Central, South and North Coasts of California has completely taken oil drilling, water pollution, wave energy projects, corporate aquaculture, habitat destruction and all other human uses of the ocean off the table other than fishing and gathering.
"You have a historic opportunity to create a legacy for southern California's oceans and generations to come," stated Pérez. " Please adopt the protections most likely to provide lasting benefits for all Californians by choosing the strongest possible option of Marine Protected Areas in southern California."
However, the real "legacy" of the illegitimate process that John Pérez adamantly supports is the industrialization and privatization of California ocean and bay waters under an initiative privately funded by the shadowy Resources Legacy Fund Foundation. This process has violated the Bagley-Keene Open Meetings Act, the California Public Records Act, the American Indian Religious Freedom Act, the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People and other laws.
The MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Forces, appointed by the worst Governor in California history to kick Tribal members, fishermen and seaweed harvesters of the water in fake "marine protected areas," are dominated by oil industry, real estate, marina development and other corrupt corporate interests.
In fact, the "strongest possible option of Marine Protected Areas" that Perez gushes over was crafted under the leadership of Catherine Reheis-Boyd, the president of the Western States Petroleum Association and the chair of the South Coast MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force, who has called for new oil drilling off the California coast. What kind of "protection" is that?
Perez's increasingly friendly relationship with big oil companies is no secret. Pérez is the author of the "rigs to reef "legislation on behalf of the oil industry that saves them billions in the decommissioning of oil rigs off Southern California, so his strong support of oil industry supported "marine protected areas" that also insulate them from pesky environmental regulations should also come as no surprise.
In a post on the California Majority Report, Marcela Gutierrez, program manager of Wildcoast, spoke up for the MLPA and for Perez's record, stating, "Speaker John Pérez has a strong and consistent record showing his commitment to social and environmental justice."
"Suffice it to reference his work on AB 890, the law passed last fall to address chronic pollution (manganese) to the City of Maywood's water supply. Championing a solution to the oft-ignored problem that plagues Maywood's mostly working-class and immigrant community is hardly the hallmark of a 'corporate green-washer.'"
I roundly applaud Pérez's work on AB 890, legislation that I strongly support. However, that doesn't excuse Pérez from supporting the MLPA Initiative, a widely-criticized process that has united a diverse group of Indian Tribes, fishermen, immigrant workers, environmental justice advocates, conservationists, cities and coastal communities against it.
By supporting the MLPA Initiative, Pérez is on the wrong side of history. If he truly cares about environmental justice and his legacy, he should use his power to convene a legislative oversight hearing to investigate the conflicts of interest, total disregard for indigenous fishing and gathering rights, violation of numerous state and federal laws and greenwashing that have plagued the MLPA Initiative since Schwarzenegger privatized it in 2004. Further, he should call upon the Governor to immediately suspend the MLPA process until this hearing is conducted.
People who care about true ocean protection, rather than the fake "protection" provided under the MLPA, should oppose corporate greenwashing and institutional racism, whether it's Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Assembly Speaker John Pérez, or any other politician that is supporting it.
For more information about the Coastal Justice Coalition's battle against the MLPA's violation of indigeous rights, go to: http://www.klamathjustice.blog...
The Speaker has a budget plan that he is calling the California Jobs Budget. While his language could do better on the framing of revenue, it is certainly a stronger approach than the Governor's cuts-only madness.
"Nothing in the California Forward plan makes it easier to raise taxes or fees. The plan keeps the two-thirds vote requirement to raise taxes, and prevents lawmakers from replacing a tax with a fee to dramatically increase revenue. There's no doubt in my mind that if the California Forward plan had been in effect years ago, our state would be in far better financial shape," said Tom McKernan, California Forward's Republican co-chair.
"The California Forward plan would introduce a key reform to our budget process - performance-based budgeting. That means the Governor, the Legislature and every state agency would have to determine what taxpayers are getting for their money, and how they could do a better job. Many states and local governments have used this practice to balance their budgets and get better results. Why should California get left out?" said former State Senator Bruce McPherson (R-Monterey).
Today's the day. THE DAY? What, you don't know which day today is? Well, it's transition day, of course. Speaker Bass is making way for Speaker Perez.
John Perez officially takes over today as assembly speaker, a position considered the second-most powerful job in California politics.
In a ceremony being compared to an inauguration, Perez will outline his priorities - jobs, jobs, jobs and perhaps a bit on education and, oh yeah, that multibillion-dollar budget problem. He is expected to be speaking to a full house, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, former Gov. Gray Davis and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa - Perez's cousin. (LA Daily News)
These are all important goals, but what role does a Speaker really have in today's broken government? Let's face it, the past two years, the past 6 years, really, have been something of a disaster. The reckoning that we had feared came to pass. And given the 2/3 supermajority rules, we were unable to really fight back. The best we could get was apparently the February deal, which we can all agree was something of a disaster. See May 19.
And into this disaster walks John A. Perez. While both are pretty staunch progressives, it's hard not to notice the differences between he and Speaker Bass. He's an operator of political levers in a way that Speaker Bass never mastered. Perhaps given more time, Bass would have gotten there, but Perez lives and breathes this stuff.
But is that helpful? It's a defining question for the Assembly Democratic Caucus, but perhaps it should be reframed for general purposes. Can Perez be the guy who brings in not only the day to day of operating the Assembly, but also brings forward a grand vision for California that the Legislature has been lacking. It's a big burden to put on anybody.
In California's governmental climate, the role of Speaker must be as much of a media figure as a legislative figure. You must be able to legislate, of course. But given that much of the legislative power now resides in the wishy-washy electorate, the Speaker must be able to go directly to the people.
And that's the question that must be resolved. Perez can never do it on his own, but he must lead the Caucus and the Party into a drive for real communication with all Californians.
Back when John Perez was just starting to take command of the Speaker race, Sen. Gil Cedillo was threatening to run in the primary against him. He never really gave any clear reasons for doing so, just that he had another 2 years left in the Assembly under term limits. Oh, and he had a poll showing that he could win. But, you know how polls go, when a sitting Assembly speaker is challenged, there might be some money flowing to the race.
So, conveniently enough for Cedillo, Asm. Kevin DeLeon has announced that he will be vacating his Assembly seat and running for Cedillo's senate seat.
"It has been and continues to be an honor to serve the communities of our region as a member of the Assembly," De León said, "Today, I am announcing my strong desire to continue that work by running for the California State Senate. Now more than ever we need legislators who are dedicated to protecting vital public services, education, and public safety. These are extraordinarily difficult times and I will work tirelessly for the constituents of the 22nd Senate District." (Capitol Weekly)
This situation is probably the best for all concerned, except that DeLeon doesn't get to become Speaker. At any rate, DeLeon had only one Assembly term left, we get a four year Speaker, and avoid a nasty primary fight.
Los Angeles Democrat John Perez has been elected the next leader of the California Assembly, becoming the first openly gay lawmaker to lead either house of the Legislature.
*** **** **** ***
Perez was elected speaker Thursday on a 48-26 party-line vote. (SJ Merc)
The Republicans, who voted unanimously for Speaker Bass, apparently couldn't bring themselves to vote for a Perez. Whether that is because of his sexuality or his politics, I leave to your judgment, good reader.
Apparently, some sort of deal was reached, and Asm. Kevin De Leon will be backing down from his attempt at Assembly Speaker. That leaves freshman John A. Perez as the lone Democratic candidate.
Assemblyman John A. Perez's final opponent has bowed out, setting the stage for the first-term Democrat to be selected Assembly speaker today -- the first openly gay man to hold the post.
After behind-closed-door talks this week with Perez and other political leaders, Assemblyman Kevin de Leon agreed to bow out and is expected to nominate Perez in an Assembly Democratic Caucus today, Capitol sources said.(SacBee)
While this was a bit more heated and public than you would like to see, it is a good sign that the caucus was ultimately able to weather this storm without bringing the fight to the floor. A vote is expected very soon, with Bass serving some sort of transition period.
While John Perez allegedly has 29 votes for the speakership within the Democratic caucus, there has been no official vote of either the Democratic caucus or the Assembly as a whole. That's going to change this week:
Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, D-Los Angeles, is planning to hold a vote to elect her replacement on the Assembly floor this week. The two front-runners for the job - Assemblyman John Perez, D-Los Angeles, and Kevin DeLeon, D-Los Angeles -- spoke for about 20 minutes this weekend, and were set to meet again today to discuss the race.
The vote would likely be a voice vote, and could come Wednesday or Thursday, as the house reconvenes to discuss education policy. (Capitol Weekly)
The two leading candidates had a conversation over the weekend, and Mayor Villaraigosa is trying to keep the peace amongst the warring LA factions over this race. The troubling thing is that nobody really knows how this is going to play out.
Also of note, it looks like Jared Huffman of Marin is quite close to Perez, as the CW article relies on Huffman for the Perez perspective. I don't know if that means anything, but perhaps Huffman would have a more visible role in a Perez speakership.
You might have noticed that we've been talking about this whole Speaker's race thing. First there were like 4 potential candidates, then two, Felipe Fuentes and Kevin De Leon, and then 3, with the addition of John A. Perez. And then, Speaker Bass announced that she would be the 29th vote for a future Speaker Perez.
Yet things can never be that easy. This is California, and these are Democrats.
First there was the poll about Gil Cedillo challenging Perez for the assembly district. And then, over the last three days or so, there's been a discussion of the number 41. Because for some reason, the fact that Speaker Bass is #29, that a consensus in the Caucus has been reached, that's all now insufficient. 41 has been popping up in whispers around the Capitol, in random hints in quotes in newspapers and on the web.
41 is a powerful number. It's the number that seperates Democrats from ceding power to the Republicans in the Assembly. It's the number that allows progressives to maintain whatever semblance of power. It's the number that keeps vows from being made to Republicans that Democrats will have to maintain.
It's the number that represents the line that Democrats haven't crossed. Sure, it's been flirted with, and Willie Brown crossed it in the 90s to take the Speakership from the Republicans.
There is only one way that the number 41 becomes relevant, if we let this become bigger than it should. If we let personal ambition and personal grievances become larger than what is best for the caucus. And more importantly, if we let what's best for the state take a back seat.
Democrats are the Assembly Majority. The Assembly Majority Caucus chooses the Speaker. The same as it ever was, the same as it should be. The Member who has the majority of the Majority becomes the Speaker. Forget 41. 26 is the number that matters.
Because I believe that John Perez' sexual orientation is playing a role in the ongoing fight over who becomes the next Speaker of the Assembly here in California between the aforementioned Perez and Kevin De Leon. As I'm sure we're all aware, the election of John Perez to the post would make him California's first ever openly gay Speaker. And based on the words coming out of Karen Bass' mouth, it sounds like it should be a done deal, given the fact that the choice of the majority caucus is usually confirmed without issue and Perez supposedly is the choice of the Democratic majority:
Bass said she had not spoken to de León about her decision to endorse Pérez. She said she wanted to be "very respectful and give him some space."
"At the end of the day, democracy prevails," she said, contending that she was the 29th vote in favor of Pérez, which is more than the traditional 26 votes needed to push a nomination forward.
So, why is there still an issue? Because Asm. Kevin De Leon is still fighting, despite a lackluster showing from the Latino Caucus of the Democratic majority, which endorsed him in underwhelming fashion:
On Wednesday morning, de León met with a group of supporters within the Assembly's 17-member Latino caucus at the Sheraton Hotel.
Ten members of the caucus attended the meeting, with seven present pledging their support for de León as speaker. Pérez is also a member of the Latino caucus, but he was not present.
Color me unimpressed, of course, when you claim an endorsement with less than 44% of the vote among voters who aren't your opponent. So all in all, it would seem that De Leon's position isn't all that strong. But now I'd like you to consider the words of another De Leon supporter: Assemblymember and current candidate for Attorney General Pedro Nava:
"I do think that's what really matters and what people should focus on was the number of votes for speaker is not 27 or 29, it's 41," said de León supporter Pedro Nava, D-Santa Barbara.
"I think that we have a large number of very independent-thinking people who are not going to be stampeded into making a decision," Nava said.
Remember what I said about the choice of the majority party usually getting confirmed as Speaker without much hassle. Well, 41 is, of course, the number of votes required to win confirmation as Speaker by full vote of the Assembly. What Asm. Nava's words quite clearly suggest is that De Leon's supporters are contemplating going outside the Democratic Caucus to secure some Republican votes in order to defeat Perez, who would be the choice of the majority of Democrats. If that's not what Asm. Nava meant, I highly encourage him to clarify, because that's the only logical interpretation of his statement.
And if that is the case, why would the Republicans agree to support De Leon against Perez? They're both Latino labor leaders from the Los Angeles area--except one of them is gay, and one of them isn't. And given the fact that many Republicans still see being gay as some sort of terminal character flaw that leaves one unfit for any public or private responsibility, it would be no surprise if that were reason enough for at least some Republicans to join the De Leon faction to support him against the wishes of the Democratic majority.
And then, of course, we return to the plight of Senator Gil Cedillo, who obviously has reasons to support De Leon over Perez because, as I've written earlier, the good Senator so desperately needs to serve in the Assembly for his last two remaining years of eligibility that he is willing to challenge Asm. Perez in the Democratic Primary, even if Perez is elected as Speaker. Obviously, Cedillo has every incentive to promote De Leon's bid, because trying to unseat a sitting Speaker in your own Party's primary undoubtedly won't win you a lot of friends. Of course, there is no word on what Senator Cedillo will do if he either a) loses to Perez, or b) wins and serves his two years. Given his unbridled desire to hold another political office and his lack of ability to do so in either circumstance, I hope he will determine that his life still has value.
But humor aside. How likely is it that Cedillo will able to win a traditional campaign against Perez, regardless of whether the latter is the Speaker? Cedillo won't get the endorsement of the Democratic Party because Perez is the incumbent and he only needs 50% of the delegates. And I really doubt anyone will give a boatload of money to someone who can only serve in the Assembly for one term and then has to leave town with little hope of promotion to a higher office.
And given the fact that they're both strong leaders in the Latino community, the only way I see Cedillo being able to have any chance whatsoever is to make Perez' sexual orientation an issue, most likely in a fashion that is slightly less than above board. And given the fact that Cedillo's previous campaign was more than up to the task of using character assassination in his failed run for Congress, I have no doubt that his next team would be willing to use the same sort of scorched earth approach.
So what's the bottom line? I call on Asm. De Leon and Senator Cedillo not to make this an issue, either in the campaign for Assembly Speaker or in Cedillo's quixotic primary challenge. California Democrats support full and total equality and acceptance of the LGBT community, and it would be a shame if one of our own used the issue for personal gain among a far less tolerant group of people--such as, for instance, the California Republican Party.
Since Willie Brown was termed out, the Assembly Speakership has been pretty much an LA thing. The LA members, and some other muckety-mucks, particularly now the former speaker and current mayor, get together to decide who will be the next speaker. While it might not actually be that simple and quick, it is the gist of it. So, people knew it was pretty much over when Speaker Karen Bass said this:
"I really very deeply believe that John will be a speaker that reflects the strong Democratic values that brought all of us here," Bass said. "The momentum is such that it's time for a resolution." (SacBee)
Of course, the other big competitor, Kevin De Leon, still hasn't conceded anything as he attempts to get 26 votes within the caucus despite Bass's remark that she was Perez's "29th vote."
During such a contentious process, there are always going to be some hard feelings. It's hard to imagine it any other way, such is the system that term limits has given us. Willie Brown's days as Ayatollah of the Assembly are over, and the consistency that Willie provided with his iron grip of the office are also gone. And pretty much everytime, there's a story like this:
Hurt feelings and allegations of treachery are de rigeur when it comes to the politics of the speakership. But the story of Assemblyman John Perez's rise as a candidate for speaker reveals the little talked about Machiavellian side of Karen Bass, a speaker who is often cited for her calm personal demeanor and affable political style.
Bass, D-Los Angeles, came out publicly in support of Perez's speakership bid Wednesday, telling the press about her decision before the caucus had formally chosen a new leader. But Bass's press conference has angered some Assembly Democrats, who complained that they had the idea of a Perez speakership forced upon them with no time to coalesce as a group. (CapWeekly)
In the end, everybody will move past this, and this will be just one more little private score in a town full of scores to settle. One can only hope that the bitterness doesn't extend to policy and that the caucus can move forward with the business of the state. I am sure this will happen in due time, but with a pending budget battle, moping time is a luxury we may not have.
John Perez is not a household name. Yet. In the coming days, Perez may well make history, becoming the first openly gay speaker of any state legislature in the United States.
This, from the California that narrowly voted to undo same sex marriage. This from the same California that faces as much as $40 billion in deficits in 2010. This from the same California that has a minority majority population, but where Latinos are fast becoming the majority. This from the same California that used to provide the best education on the planet to all and now can not graduate the majority of most high school students in Los Angeles.
John Perez is California. He's openly gay. He's Latino. He's a son of Los Angeles. He's an intellectual, a strategist, an environmentalist, a labor leader. He's an organizer, a skilled consensus-builder, a unifier and a stunningly disarming public speaker. John is that rare elected official that we know will hold the public interest at heart.
The only real question is why John would want the job? If he becomes Speaker of the California State Assembly, he'll face the worst problems this state has seen since the depression or even before. But he wants the job -- and I can't imagine a better leader in Sacramento to take it on. John has all of the qualities, and from what I hear, most of the support necessary to win. If the Democrats in the assembly unify behind John and avoid the "speaker wars" that have often marred the period since term limits passed, he will become the speaker.
I've known John for nearly six years. We met in March 2003, when I was a relatively inexperienced but highly motivated supporter of Howard Dean's candidacy for the White House. I had, for years, been involved in politics, but never so deeply as Dean's inspiring campaign to reverse the direction of our country.
At the suggestion of a mutual friend, John met with me at a restaurant at Universal City Walk right after one of the first Dean "Meetups" that would propel that campaign forward. He sat with me, very patiently explaining the who and the what of California labor and progressive politics. He did not need to do that; he could easily have looked at this relative neophyte in state politics and said, "if this is what Dean has to offer, I'm out of here." But he did not. And he was always there to help, after I became Chair of Dean's presidential campaign in California and then went on to found the Courage Campaign.
California rarely has the opportunity to place the assembly in the hands of a speaker for more than a year or two. John would follow Karen Bass, who has lived through one of the worst imaginable times in our history. Karen is a true progressive, and she supports John. So do I. And while these leadership battles seem very arcane and insider, it's time for all of us in this state who support progress to understand that we have a stake in who leads our assembly.
In the next few days, John Perez may well make history. And, as progress marches on, he will eventually live in a state that allows him to marry the man he loves.
The SF Chronicle says that John Perez has locked up the Speakership and the transition will start shortly:
We're hearing that Assemblyman John A. Perez, D-Los Angeles, has the votes to grab the speakership -- if he does, he would become the Assembly's first openly gay leader in California history. (SF Gate blog)
As a gay man myself, such a result would once again remind me why I love this state. Despite Prop 8 and all the ridiculousness surrounding it, I put up with the mess in this state because it offers such opportunity. California has been a leader in civil rights, and will continue to be a leader. This would be just one more step along the road to full equality for the LGBT community.
That being said, Perez, or whomever is the next Speaker, will only continue to preside over the continuing downward spiral. The system is set up to fail. The gridlock, the supermajority, the budget twisted in knots, these are the issues that face the incoming Speaker. Why anybody would want that job is still somewhat beyond me.
Congratulations on that. Perhaps there's still time for a recount.
This will be brief. It is with amusement that I read from Capitol Weekly's Twitter feed that Senator Gil Cedillo is intent on challenging John Perez for his Assembly seat now that he is termed out of the State Senate--even if Perez is elected as speaker, which is an outcome that is looking increasingly likely.
Keep in mind that last time we saw Gil Cedillo, he was engaged in a mean-spirited, borderline racist, and completely mendacious campaign for the 32nd Congressional District against newcomer Emanuel Pleitez and current Congresswoman and former Board of Equalization Chair Judy Chu.
There are a couple of things that really stand out to me about this. First, I was under the impression that Senator Cedillo had already served his terms in the Assembly from 1997 until 2002. If he's contemplating running, he obviously has some eligibility left, but how could it extend beyond one term? I would appreciate enlightenment on this issue. (UPDATE by Robert: According to Capitol Weekly, Cedillo has 1 term left - he replaced Louis Caldera in 1997 when Caldera became Army Secretary under Clinton.)
Second--challenging a sitting Speaker of the Assembly who is also a Latino with roots in the labor movement to move to the lower house? Whose support, endorsements or fundraising does he really think he's going to get if he pulls a move like that? He certainly won't get the support of the CDP, or the prominent members of the local party.
And lastly, after the hit that the Senator's reputation took in light of his disastrous campaign for Congress, why would he want to follow that up by challenging a sitting Speaker when we have an opportunity to have several uninterrupted years of continuous leadership in that position due to the fact that we'll apparently have a Speaker who isn't in his last term?
Sometimes, I guess, the thirst for an office convinces people to do things they probably shouldn't. This is one of those cases.
