To review, thanks to redistricting and a new "open primary" system, Democrats have a realistic shot in 2012 at picking up the two seats in the Assembly needed to achieve a 2/3rds Democratic super-majority and overcome obstruction from Republicans. Without that super-majority, things will continue to deteriorate in Sacramento, with Democrats forced to make draconian cuts to education and the social safety net instead of finding ways to raise revenue to balance the California budget.
"California voter approval of the Democratic-controlled legislature slinks along between 9 and 20 percent in recent Los Angeles Times and Field polls," writes former state Senator Tom Hayden in the Nation magazine. "Despite Democratic majorities in both houses and control of all statewide offices, the Democratic Party seems chronically unable to deliver the minimum that voters want from their government: results. College tuitions keep rising, and college doors keep closing. School funding keeps declining. Wetlands and redwoods keep disappearing. Billions spent on mass transit do not reduce congestion and air pollution. To a disillusioned majority, all the Sacramento fights appear to be about slowing the rate of California's decline"
Yet Democratic leadership and PACs donated over a million dollars to two "incumbent" Assembly members running in super-safe Democratic districts while virtually ignoring other seats in swing districts (source ca.sos.gov)
Mike Allen in AD10 (+35 democratic voter registration) and Betsy Butler in AD50(+33 democratic) together received 5x more money than Al Muratsuchi - a non-incumbent Democrat running in AD66 (+3 democratic) against two better-known and well-funded Republicans.
He has received no money from the California State Democratic Party, while Allen and Butler combined have received over a $100K.
Eric Bauman, Vice Chair of the California Democratic Party, believes it's a non-issue.
"Let's not get caught up in misunderstanding or distorting the challenge. Muratsuchi's race is a November race, not a June race - rest assured he'll be fully resourced in the general election."
Rick Jacobs, founder of the California Courage Campaign, disagreed, raising concerns that throwing resources at safe Democratic seats would damage the CDP's credibility with grassroots activists.
"So then comes the question as to why, given priorities statewide, the leadership raises and spends hundreds of thousands of dollars in AD 50. How does that inspire people to work hard and raise money for 2/3?"
Susie Shannon who serves on the Executive Board of the CDP Progressive Caucus was similarly incredulous. "How do they expect to raise money from the grassroots in the future if they are just going to whittle it away on safe Democatic seats? Any way you slice it, the (money) spent on the Butler primary could have been saved for the Marutsuchi general election to defeat the Republican candidate, or any number of more productive endeavors. I would rather see this money going to overtime pay for the overworked CDP staffers."
The question now is what happens after June 5th if "incumbent" Assembly democrats Butler and Allen end up running against "non-incumbent" Democrats in November instead of Republicans.
Will Democratic candidates facing Republicans in other districts be, as Bauman promises, "fully resourced"? Or will Butler and Allen continue to take the lion's share of Sacramento's and the CDP's pie?
"I would venture many thousands will be spent to support the candidates endorsed by the CDP, and that includes Butler and Allen," said Bauman.
"The CDP and (Speaker John Perez's) priorities should be to make sure we have 2/3 majority so we could actually accomplish some important things like generating revenue, " said Agi Kessler, a delegate to the California Democratic Party and chair of the Democratic Party of the San Fernando Valley.
Concerned that party leadership would waste money on Democrat-on-Democrat races throughout the state, Kessler and other democratic party activists circulated a petition at the CDP convention asking Assembly Speaker Perez to prioritize winning a legislative super-majority when allocating limited resources. They submitted nearly 300 signatures from fellow delegates.
"As of today we've received no response from the Speaker or anyone in his office", said Kessler.
Calitics readers may recall Linda Parks, the Republican Supervisor in Thousand Oaks who just turned "independent" in order to run for Congress in Ventura County's 26th Congressional District. Parks was a Republican for sixteen years and remains obsessed with conservative austerity measures. She has refused to renounce the Paul Ryan budget, and believes that "restoring the nation's bond rating" is the best way to improve the employment situation. She says that she would not repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy while insisting that "everyone will need to share the pain" of cuts. In short, Parks is a classic fiscal Republican pretending to be an independent candidate.
One of the ways that Ms. Parks attempts to bolster that image is by touting her record as Supervisor, including the notion that she hasn't raised her own pay. On multiple occasions Parks made an issue of not raising her own pay as a Supervisor. The DCCC has compiled some of the details:
Parks Highlighted that She Refused Pay Raises on Campaign Website. Parks hypocritically highlighted that she refused several pay raises on her campaign website under the heading "honesty counts." [sendlinda.com, accessed 5/21/12]
Parks Claimed She Would Refuse To Accept Pay Raise. In February 2005, the Ventura County Star reported that Parks voted to renew an expired ordinance that allowed for salary increases for supervisors, but claimed she would refuse the raise for herself. [Ventura County Star, 2/9/05]
Parks Publicly Declined Two Pay Increases During Her First Year in Office. The Ventura County Star reported that Parks declined a 4% and 1% pay raise in 2003. Parks said it was time for "the whole county to tighten its belt." [Ventura County Star, 12/12/03]
The only problem? Parks did raise her own pay as a Supervisor by over $20,000. The original document seen here with Parks' signature states simply:
I, Linda Parks, hereby elect to receive the 5% increase to my biweekly salary that I became eligible for effective 12/27/2009 pursuant to ordinance No. 5316, Establishing Compensation for Board of Supervisors, effective April 24, 2005. The new pay rate will go into effect beginning January 23, 2011. All prior waivers and voluntary directives to reduce salary and benefits are hereby revoked.
That's typical Republicanism, of course: the rich get tax cuts, the middle class gets cuts to vital programs, and Republican politicians like Linda Parks get all the perks on a six-figure salary. While that's par for the course for an average Republican, it's particularly offensive from a self-proclaimed independent fiscal conservative.
It's just another reason why Linda Parks doesn't share our values, and cannot be trusted to represent us in Congress.
Roughly coinciding with Harvey Milk Day and still basking in the glow of President Obama's full evolution on marriage equality, the Obama re-election campaign in California, in conjunction with the Los Angeles County Democratic Party, launched Obama Pride in Los Angeles earlier this week. From the release:
Today, Obama for America-California and the Los Angeles County Democratic Party (LACDP) hosted the official launch of Obama Pride: LGBT Americans for Obama in Los Angeles at the home of LACDP Chair and California Democratic Party Vice Chair Eric C. Bauman and his husband Michael Andraychak, coinciding with Harvey Milk Day as part of the national Obama Pride launch.
In a living room packed with LGBT community leaders and couples from all walks of life, the Obama Pride launch featured a coffee discussion on the President's accomplishments for the LGBT community, the impact of the President's policies on their personal lives, and the challenges in the 2012 election.
"President Obama is the first President to fully embrace all rights for LGBT Americans, from opposing discrimination in employment to supporting marriage equality. In our community, talk about promises kept by the President: 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' is no more; for the first time, federal civil rights law recognizes sexual orientation and gender identity as protected class with the Matthew Shepard and James Bird Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act; for the first time in history, a President of the United States supports marriage equality. LGBT Americans has seen more progress under President Obama than any other time in U.S. history. And we stand with President Barack Obama in 2012," said Eric C. Bauman, LACDP Chair.
Karen Ocamb at Frontiers Magazine has a recap of the day's events, reactions from Obama's supporters in the LGBT community, and the challenges that still await the re-election campaign.
Needless to say, it's amazing what can happen when politicians aren't afraid to demonstrate the courage of their convictions. It's actually motivating!
Oily corporate money is flowing into an Orange County Assembly race, as Late Independent Expenditures push the fortunes of DINO "Oily Tom" Daly.
The primary vehicle is JOBSPAC, A BI-PARTISAN COALITION OF CALIFORNIA EMPLOYERS, which spent a whopping $291,578.25 between May 5th and May 19th to support ConservaDem Tom Daly, County Clerk Recorder and former Anaheim Mayor in AD-69, which is the only majority Democratic district in Orange County.
Daly is in the mold of other OC "Democrats" like Lou Correa, squarely in the pocket of developers, insurance companies and the local corporate giants like Disney. Daly got all of three votes in the party's pre-endorsement caucus, no votes at the DFA endorsement meeting, scant support at the Orange County Young Democrats endorsement meeting, yet was able to block progressive candidate Julio Perez from getting the party endorsement as local electeds Correa and Solorio voted for no endorsement.
The biggest player in JOBS PAC is Chevron, which contributed $375,000 of the $524,000 raised in the second half of 2011. Chevron also contributed the maximum direcly to Daly's campaign, but Daly's anemic fund-raising obviously wasn't going to be enough to buy this election. Chevron has been joined by some of the usual dirty suspects who have pressing issues in front of the legislature. Phillip Morris kicked in $50,000. Farmers Insurance has arrived late to the party with $150,000 contributed last week. The California Charter Schools Association PAC pumped in $25,000 last week.
There's plenty of late money that we expect to see spent in negative mail against Julio Perez, the progressive candidate in the most Latino district in the state. Julio may be the most dangerous threat to corporate interests on the ballot. He's a labor organizer who is smart, well-educated, and avowedly progressive, earning support not just from teachers, nurses, and firefighters, but also from groups like the California League of Conservation Voters.
Julio is supported by a small army of grass roots volunteers, an Independent Expenditure campaign by organized labor, and every local progressive, while Daly gets his local support from Disney's SOAR PAC, the staunchly right-wing OC Tax group, and the Orange County Business Council.
The JobsPAC campaign has been working with Big Lies, including a mailer to Republicans alleging that the sole Republican candidate has dropped out of the race.
Chevron has also supported unemployed Santa Ana Council Member Michele Martinez, a somewhat clueless candidate best known for her inadvertent interview on a train from Sacramento where she boasted of big forthcoming IE's by Indian casinos. If the top two result comes down to Martinez vs Daly, Chevron and their corporate cronies win big.
It's the ugly side of the top-two primary, and it's what the corporate interests hoped for when they campaigned for it. Spend big to take out any progressive, and be happy with a true corporate candidate or someone who can easily be bought.
UpdateToday's reports show another $117,000 in Late Independent Expenditures supporting Tom Daly, this time with the bulk of the money coming from the National Realtors Political Action Committee funneled through their California affiliate.
"The National Association of Realtors out of Chicago," I hear you ask, because you are the kind of reader who wants to know who is jumping into our local races with the force of a herd of elephants, "who are they?" I'm glad you asked! It's the trade association that has, literally, trademarked the term "Realtor" in this country. (In other countries, it's a generic term.) What's their political issue? They want to boost the housing market by - wait for it - opposing regulation of the financial services industry!
That's right - these are the people who don't want to solve the problems of the collapse of the poorly regulated financial sector (and its mortgage fraud and foreclosure abuse, about which they might know a little themselves), and they way they want to do it is to dump literally $250,000 so far into making sure (if they can - and they can't) that Tom Daly beats Julio Perez for a single Assembly seat.
I'm sure we all remember Jason Hodge, the conservadem being supported by big business interests desperate to have a Senator in the 19th State Senate District who will be more pliant than the progressive Hannah-Beth Jackson. Clearly, undermining your own party by campaigning as "the Democrat who doesn't think you need higher taxes" will convey that impression.
Well, Hodge is still campaigning as a Democrat. And in an effort to bolster in Democratic bona fides, he told Timm Herdt, the political correspondent at the Ventura County Star, that he had been a Democrat all his life. Problem? He was lying:
A couple of weeks ago in an interview, 19th Senate District candidate Jason Hodge told me he'd been a Democrat "all my life," and I quoted him as saying so. County Democratic Central Committee vice-chairman David Atkins checked out the claim at the county registrar of voters' office and asserts it's untrue.
In fact, Hodge was from 2002 until 2008 registered as "decline to state" a party affiliation.
Hodge acknowledged that today -- but asserted that doesn't mean he hasn't always been a Democrat in his heart. For example, he said that in primary elections he has always requested a Democratic ballot. A person can be a Democrat, he said, but the voter registration cards give a people an option whether to state or decline to publicly state their party orientation. He chose to decline, he said.
Let's start the simple fact that Hodge's explanation is a pile of crap. Before Prop 14 took effect, voters had the option to register with a political party, or as a "decline-to-state" voter--in other words, not to register as a member of any party. Decline-to-state doesn't mean that you're really registered as a member of a political party, but you just choose not to share that information with the public.
Even worse? Hodge is lying to cover up his lie. He claimed that he has always requested a Democratic ballot. Problem? That's also not true. Here is Hodge's voter registration history, straight from the Ventura County Registrar of Voters (edited to remove his address for privacy reasons):
Notice the entry for the June 2006 gubernatorial, where it says quite clearly that Hodge pulled a non-partisan ballot. If you recall, there was a hotly contested Democratic primary for the right to challenge Arnold Schwarzenegger that year. And apparently, despite being a "Democrat in his heart," Hodge didn't have enough of a Democratic heart to vote for either one.
Here's a piece of advice for Hodge. If you're going to be a business-friendly centrist, then be a business-friendly centrist, be honest about it, and campaign that way. But don't try to become a Democrat out of convenience when you decide it's the best way to suit your political aspirations, and then try to lie to us about it, and then lie again to cover up those lies. People like us who actually have been Democrats all our lives might get a little upset.
There isn't really much to this. It doesn't expose some of Miller's extremism, but, well, outtakes are fun! So, enjoy Republican Rep. Gary Miller's outtakes as he was filming a campaign ad.
Probably the hottest race for Assembly this year is the race in Assembly District 50, where progressive legend Torie Osborn, who has the support of just about every single local Democratic club, as well as that of Julia Brownley and Sheila Kuehl, is going up against South Bay Assemblymember Betsy Butler, who currently represents about 1% of the new 50th Assembly District. The race has a classic "insider vs. outsider" dynamic: Osborn is well known for her nonprofit work for LGBT equality and against poverty, and has a ton of local grassroots support, including just about every single Democratic club that has endorsed in the race. Butler, meanwhile, is taking full advantage of the the money and endorsements that being a sitting legislator can provide. It's well known that I'm an avid Osborn supporter; for a full rundown of all the stories that have made this race a fun one to watch, just check out this summmary from Marta Evry.
So far, Butler's strategy in the race has been to attempt to convince voters that there's nothing particularly special about this election: that she's just your run-of-the-mill incumbent seeking re-election to her district. And even though it might be misleading to claim that when you've only represented 1% of the district, she's technically correct: both the California Elections Code and the rules of the California Democratic Party allow her to claim that (and would also allow her to claim that if she were running in Shasta, but that's a story for another day).
Today, however, changes the equation. I got a piece of mail today from the Butler campaign touting her credentials on women's issues. The piece was obviously designed to be mailed to women, given the introduction--"mothers, daughters, sisters and aunts"--but I received it anyway. It was your typical mailing, except for one part:
Our Assemblywoman, Betsy Butler
And with that, we've transcended from "misleading" to "flat out not true." I live in AD-50, and I don't live in just the 1% that Betsy Butler currently represents. I live in the part that's currently represented by Mike Feuer. The letter is signed by several people who are supporting Butler, and perhaps they could be trying to claim that the signatories are represented by "their Assemblywoman, Betsy Butler." Problem is, that's not true either, as the piece contains the signatures of activists in Beverly Hills (Mike Feuer) and Malibu (Julia Brownley), as well as some who don't live in the district at all.
I'm not sure whether Butler's claim that she already represents me is a sign of desperation given Torie Osborn's strong campaign, or simple disrespect for the intelligence of the voters of the 50th District. All I know is, I'm not a fan.
A few months ago I set a new personal goal: get into nature at least once a week. It really didn't matter what I ended up doing as long as it took me outdoors - hike, trail run, rock climb, wildlife watch, camp, picnic, paddle, soak, swim, sunbathe, backpack, photograph wildflowers... You get the idea.
And what a grand idea it was! Not only have I enjoyed doing all of those activities, but I've also gotten to explore Californian parks that I previously knew little about, if at all.
My guess is that you have a story similar to mine - a love for California's vast and varied open spaces and all that they have to offer. After all, it's hard to live in such a beautiful state and not get out and enjoy its natural features in one form or another.
And now, here's the bad news: many of these treasured open spaces may not be accessible much longer.
Last year Governor Brown called for the closure of 70 state parks. Included on the the hit list are parks that I've fallen in love with like Henry Coe State Park where you can hike amongst old oaks and madrones to a picturesque swimming hole, and Castle Rock State Park where I first began rock climbing.
This week park funding came back into the news with Governor Brown's release of the May budget revise. Not only are parks still on the table for closure, but the revised budget proposes more cuts to the funding of game wardens, rangers, and lifeguards. Those cuts come at a time where the State Park System is already understaffed and overburdened with deferred maintenance totaling to over $1 billion. Furthermore, these parks suffer from the pains of a tightened budget as access prices increase, hours of operation diminish, and select facilities, trails, or camping areas close.
What doesn't make sense is this: continued cuts to the State Park System will not save money, but will in fact cost the state more in the long run. Closing parks means:
-- a loss of revenue for local communities neighboring parks and for the state via taxes generated by tourism;
-- increases in deferred maintenance once the parks reopen their gates; and
-- costs associated with addressing crime, vandalism, and other illegal activities like marijuana cultivation.
While some of the parks on the closure list have found ways to stay open thanks to financial support from their communities or intervention from nonprofits (including Castle Rock and Henry Coe SPs), others have not been so lucky.
Fortunately, Assemblymember Jared Huffman is championing a bill that would provide diverse funding for the State Parks System. Assembly Bill 1589, the California State Parks Stewardship Act of 2012, addresses short- and long-term needs for California state parks, achieving budget savings without wide scale park closures.
Specifically, AB 1589 would:
-- Encourage formation of a state compact that guarantees an ongoing level of state funding for operations and maintenance of state parks.
-- Create a State Park Enterprise Fund to be used for installing modern revenue and fee collection equipment and technologies to increase park visitation and revenues.
-- Produce a California state park environmental license plate which vehicle owners could purchase and have the fees go towards support of state parks.
-- Provide the option for taxpayers to voluntarily purchase an annual state park access pass when they file their taxes.
-- Require the Department of Parks and Recreation to be more transparent about how it evaluates and selects specific parks for closure, and places a cap of 25 state park units on the number of park closures allowed from 2012 to 2016 without legislative approval.
In a ballot with few initiatives, these two get some statewide attention by Brian Leubitz
There are just two measures on the statewide ballot, and KQED's Forum took a look at both today. And while they are each controversial in their own way, they are both worthy efforts. Prop 28 is a measure that would change the way term limits work from a total of 14 years (6 and 8 in the Assembly and Senate, respectively) to a total of 12 years in either house. In the first radio program, former FPPC chair Dan Schnur argues that reforming term limits will allow legislators to grow into their jobs, rather than being thrust into leadership right away. And in a very civil discussion, a vice chairman of the CA Republican Party disagreed and argued for the continuation of the current (broken) system.
They then followed that up with a discussion of Prop 29, the cigarette tax measure that will go to cancer research. As you would expect, there is a heavily tobacco-funded No campaign on that one. It turns out the Yes side isn't entirely without resources. Mike Bloomberg tossed in $500,000 today bringing their fundraising to nearly ten million. While Lance Armstrong and Bloomberg won't match the over $30 million, there will be resources. The discussion on Forum, though, is worth a listen.
Increased budget deficit means big cuts with or without tax initiatives
by Brian Leubitz
With the recent announcement of a bigger than expected deficit, Gov. Brown has announced bigger than expected cuts are coming in his May revision of the budget.
The gap grew, the budget revision states, because Brown over-estimated tax revenues by $4.3 billion and the federal government and courts blocked $1.7 billion in cuts the state wanted to make. The remainder of the difference reflects an increase in the amount of money the state is mandated to spend on education under a complex voter-approved formula.
To close the wider gap, Brown has heightened the cuts he wants to make to Medi-Cal, to $1.2 billion, and maintained another $1.2 billion in welfare and child-care savings he proposed in January.
He also wants to slash payments to people who care for the disabled by 7% and reduce the state payroll through a shorter workweek or wage concessions. He proposed $500 million in cuts to the state's struggling court system, including a one-year freeze on all new construction projects.(LA Times)
That's just the best case scenario there. As horrendous as that may be, if the tax measure in November doesn't pass, Brown is set to do a triggered cut of $5.5 billion and $3b other cuts.
At this point, the waste is gone. We are cutting vital services that won't just magically reappear when times get better. We are fundamentally changing how we treat each other, and we are letting social darwinism run amok. It's a tragedy of immense proportions, and no saviors are riding in from the horizon.
Tenant advocacy and affordable housing proponents in the 50th Assembly District say Betsy Butler's endorsement by a powerful anti-rent control group sows "doubt and mistrust" for her candidacy, and raises serious concerns about her commitment to protecting tenant rights.
On April 25, Butler's campaign issued a press release touting an endorsement by the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles (AAGLA), a landlord and apartment owners lobbying group.
"In her first term in the state Legislature, Assemblymember Butler has demonstrated a genuine understanding of the challenges facing the owners and managers of rental housing in California and has always taken a balanced approach to dealing with legislation affecting the industry," said the association's Executive Director, James Clarke.
In the mid 70s, when Howard Jarvis was our Executive Director and vaunted Tax Reform Campaigner, we passed Proposition 13. In the mid 90s, our Sacramento Lobbyist, Steve Carlson helped draft and pass the Costa-Hawkins Law that protects our members (allowing rent increases upon vacancies) and saving the businesses of countless owners in Santa Monica and West Hollywood and apartment owners across the state from the worst most unreasonable unfair rent control laws.
"This endorsement and your apparent enthusiasm for it will certainly sow doubt and mistrust for your candidacy among the renter voters of Santa Monica, West Hollywood, and West Los Angeles." SMRR co-chairs Patricia Hoffman and Richard Tahvildaran-Jesswein wrote to Butler in reaction to the candidate's press release.
"AAGLA endorsements are based on the candidates they believe would be more supportive of landlord issues and will vote on bills of concern to them," said Larry Gross, executive director of CES. "They clearly believe that Betsy is a better candidate for landlords than (her opponents). This is a very important factor that tenants should keep in mind when they cast their ballots on election day in the 50th district Assembly race."
While Prop 8 Decision Remains pending, President Obama "Evolves"
by Brian Leubitz
It may have been the Amendment 1 vote in North Carolina, but for whatever reason, today the President of the United States announced that he supports marriage equality. From ABC News:
California politicians on the "evolution":
"This is a historic day and another step in our country's long march toward equal rights and justice for all. The President's statement is a milestone and so important for the millions of American families who deserve full equality. None of us can rest until marriage equality is a reality for all Americans." - Sen. Barbara Boxer
"I am proud and elated that the President of the United States today announced his support for same-sex couples across our nation who wish to recognize and validate their relationships through marriage," said Senator Leno. "This is an historic moment for our country, and I applaud President Obama for standing up for freedom, justice and equality for all people in a time when other elected officials are reluctant to do so. Denying committed same-sex couples the choice to marry has no benefit to our society and only divides communities and hurts loving couples and their families. I am confident the President's support will help build momentum for the international movement to achieve full equality for same-sex couples everywhere." - Sen. Mark Leno
"I applaud President Obama for endorsing same-sex marriage," said Congresswoman Sánchez. "If we truly believe in the Constitution, it's clear that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered individuals deserve equal rights. They deserve the right to stand in front of family and friends and proclaim their love and devotion for each other in a ceremony recognized in the eyes of the law. We have a long way to go before we achieve full equality for the LGBT community, but today's announcement by the President puts us one step closer." - Rep. Linda Sanchez
"This is an inspirational, watershed day in an epic struggle. Every day, we are moving closer to living up to our founding ideals as a nation. Every day, we are moving further away from a past in which LGBT people were marginalized, delegitimized, and often completely ostracized, their relationships relegated to second-class status." - Rep. Lynn Woolsey
"Today, President Obama reaffirmed the hope and promise most Americans felt nearly four years ago when he was elected. After yesterday's disappointing defeats in North Carolina and Colorado, the President still had the political courage to do the right thing and publicly support marriage equality. I commend his leadership and commitment to all Americans, and I look forward to the day when such announcements cease to be viewed as momentous and start being viewed as common sense." - Sen. Leland Yee
"The American Dream will be stronger for all of us when marriage equality is achieved across our country, though we still have a long road ahead. I'm proud that President Obama is now leading the way as we continue on that journey." - Eric Bauman, Chair, LACDP
"President Obama's words today will be celebrated by generations to come. For the millions of young gay and lesbian Americans across this nation, their President's words provide genuine hope that they will be the first generation to grow up with the freedom to fully pursue the American dream. Marriage-the promise of love, companionship, and family-is basic to the pursuit of that dream." - Chad Griffin, Chair of AFER and incoming president of HRC
"I'm delighted that President Obama has publicly announced his support for marriage equality. The President's evolution on this important civil rights issue mirrors that of millions of Americans over the last several years, and I'm confident his leadership will help change the hearts and minds of millions more in the days ahead. With his announcement today, President Obama now stands with San Francisco on the right side of history." - Dennis Herrera, SF City Attorney and litigant in Prop 8 cases
"Today's announcement by President Barack Obama moves our country one step closer to marriage equality. With the President's personal support on the issue of same-sex marriage, we celebrate and recommit ourselves to the fight for all families. Here in San Francisco, we stand ready to begin marrying same sex couples, and we will take this hard fought fight all the way to the nation's highest court, if necessary. We remain as deeply committed to the fight for marriage equality today as we were nearly eight years ago when then Mayor Gavin Newsom led the charge on one of the most important civil rights issues of our generation to ensure equal protections and rights for all." - SF Mayor Ed Lee
Remember Jason Hodge, the corporate-backed Democrat running for California's 19th Senate District who "doesn't think you need higher taxes", running against progressive Democrat Hannah-Beth Jackson?
Well, I just got a nice big glossy mailer from an organization called the California Senior Advocates League, saying that Jason Hodge would be the Democrat most capable of defeating the Republicans and calling Hannah-Beth Jackson the derogatory nickname "Taxin' Jackson." What is the California Senior Advocates League? Well, it's a group that only seems to exist come election time. It runs a now-defunct blog called the Silver Dog Blog, whose latest post trashes the Affordable Care Act. And its funders? Mostly the San Diego and California Republican Parties, big oil and pharmaceutical interests. Most recently it received $20,000 from something called JobsPAC. And who funds JobsPAC? Mostly Philip Morris, Chevron, Anheuser-Busch, Anthem Blue Cross, PG&E; and a host of similar companies and institutions.
For what it's worth, the "California Senior Advocates League" doesn't appear to have made the necessary legal filing disclosures to the state, but they have made sure that flashy campaign mailers supporting their favorite "Democrat" Jason Hodge make it to left-leaning voters' mailboxes right before vote-by-mail ballots get there in a few days. There has been no condemnation or mention of the mailer from the Hodge campaign. Keep in mind that this big-money front group didn't just send out a piece to attack Hannah-Beth Jackson. They sent out a piece to promote Jason Hodge. Since the registration numbers dictate that a Democrat will almost certainly win the seat regardless, the big money boys know where their bread is buttered, and it's with Mr. Hodge. After all, why fight an uphill battle to elect a Republican when you can elect a Republican in sheep's clothing instead?
"I'm not surprised that the oil and tobacco companies are behind the mailers attacking me," Jackson said. "After all, I'm supported by the Sierra Club and the Consumer Federation of California. And look at my voting record - I always stood with consumers, working middle class families and the environment. I successfully banned oil tankers and barges from our coast, and have worked against oil company price gouging."
Today is also when Fortune Magazine reported its new Fortune 500 with three of the four biggest corporations in the nation being oil companies, including Chevron.
"These oil and tobacco corporations think they are above the law," noted Jackson. "It's not enough that they launder their money through fake organizations, claiming to represent the interests of seniors. They have failed to report their expenditures against me, even though they were required by law to report the tens of thousands of dollars in postage that they paid last week for the mailers delivered to households today. I'm sure we'll be seeing their reports now that we've exposed them as lawbreakers," Jackson concluded.
This is why it's so crucial to be involved in making the Democratic Party more progressive. No matter how one feels about what is going on in the White House, there are innumerable battles just like this one happening all across America. Battles where progressive Democrats are up against corporate-backed "Democrats" seeking to make the Party just that much more conservative and friendly to big business interests. These are fights we cannot afford to lose.
by Lorena Gonzalez, Secretary-Treasurer and CEO, San Diego Labor Council
I have grown extremely frustrated by the lies and distortions being peddled by out of area groups about Scott Peters in his run for Congress. The San Diego Labor Council has endorsed Scott because of his outstanding record for workers, and his commitment to getting things done. But, on a personal level, as an extremely progressive, pro-worker advocate, I am proud to unconditionally support Scott Peters in his bid for Congress and this is why:
Starting this week one million Californians will pay hundreds of millions of dollars more for their health insurance. It's a plot right out of Groundhog Day, only it happens every Spring, Winter, Summer and Fall.
Health insurance rates in California are like a runaway train and there's no police force or firefighting squad with the power to stop them. Thirty five states require health insurance companies to get permission before raising rates, but not California.
In Studio City, CA a self-employed, single mom watched her health insurance premium triple over the last decade. On May 1st the price will climb by 16%. She asks," If I have to get pre-approval from my insurance company every time I want my health care paid for, shouldn't they have to get approval when they want me to pay more?"
For a decade the legislature has answered no, following the health insurance industries' line that the market and federal health care reform can be trusted to moderate rates. Tell that to the million Californians hit with rate hikes on May 1st.
Over the last decade health insurance premiums have shot up 153% -- growing five times the rate of inflation (29%). Four companies, including Anthem Blue Cross, control 71% of the health insurance market - competition isn't in the cards. As a result Californians don't just move to cheaper plans, they also drop insurance. California has one of the nation's highest uninsured rates.
Since 2003, the California legislature has refused to pass a law requiring that health insurance companies get approval before raising rates in the same way that auto insurance and home insurance companies have to today. That's why consumer advocates like myself have joined with Senator Dianne Feinstein and Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones to qualify the ballot measure that requires health insurance companies to live up to the same standards as other insurance companies.
More than 600,000 voters have signed our petition to make health insurance companies publicly justify their rates, as we rush toward the deadline to qualify for the November ballot. The preview of different future isn't just a Hollywood story. It's within our sights if 200,000 more Californians sign our ballot measure in the next two weeks.
