My last post discussed the issue we have with finding more Republicans to take on the special interests of Long Beach, such as the SEIU and the teacher's union, or TALB. On Thursday, your local central committee got together at Francelli's Restaurant on 4th Street in Long Beach to discuss these issues, endorsement recommendations & long-term strategies for sparking the Republican resurgence. The foundation is there with both LBARP & the LB Lincoln Club, but the responsibility for getting more Republicans into office in Long Beach still rests with this committee.
Our meeting kicked off with an introduction to these issues by Long Beach City Council member Gary DeLong from the 3rd District, which has historically been the standard bearers of Republican activity in Long Beach. Mr. DeLong gave a thorough and straight-forward analysis of the current political climate in Long Beach, including the challenges that the Long Beach Unified School District board is facing from TALB. The three primary recommendations from our committee were: 1) Forwarding an endorsement recommendation for incumbent Jon Meyer to the County Executive Committee; 2) Recommending non-partisan support for incumbent Felton Williams; and 3) Encouraging all local Republicans to get involved with the recall effort of TALB loyalist Michael Ellis. Currently, the composition of the LBUSD board includes 2 of the 5 members loyal and devoted to the TALB agenda. One of these members is censured board member Michael Ellis, who has been asked publicly by the Long Beach Chamber of Commerce, the Long Beach Press-Telegram and by both incumbent board members up for re-election to resign. Despite the public outcry from parents, teachers and civic leaders for Ellis' resignation, TALB has not yet (as of this post) concurred with the desires of the citizens of Long Beach. My analysis of the reason that follows is purely my own, but I think most of you will agree it a solid one.
Both incumbents up for re-election, Mr. Jon Meyer (Republican) & Dr. Felton Williams (Democrat), have joined with fellow board member Mary Stanton in holding back the liberal influence of TALB, and have been targeted in April's election by two candidates that have proven to be TALB puppets, "mediator" TALB lawyer Paul Crost & "teacher" TALB activist Rosa E. Diaz. Both were recruited by TALB to specifically go after Meyer & Williams in order to hopefully take over the LBUSD board. With TALB loyalist David Barton safely in place for two more years, TALB needs one of two things to happen: 1) Both TALB candidates defeat their incumbent opponents; or 2) if only one does, they need to defend Ellis' seat. So if both TALB candidates become strong contenders, they can then join the popular movement to call for Ellis' resignation and preserve their image. If only one of the candidates mounts a strong challenger, then they need to sugar-coat the Ellis situation in hopes of still achieving their majority.
But what if...both LBUSD incumbents mount strong campaigns and defend their seats well? THIS poses a great challenge for TALB that I hope motivates Republicans throughout Long Beach, regardless of their district, to action.
If the TALB is unable to gather traction for either of their candidates, they will then have to decide how to defend their hold on the LBUSD 5th District seat. Do they continue supporting Ellis to keep the vote but possibly damage their chances of defending either of their two seats in 2010? Do they quickly urge Ellis to resign, or join the recall effort, in hopes of finding a new TALB loyalist to fill the vacancy before parents & free-thinking teachers do? Even TALB loyalist board member Barton joined with the other three members in the vote supporting the censure motion against Ellis, indicating that even TALB will soon have to cut ties if they stand any chance of gaining its desired majority.
Rumors have already surfaced about possible candidates to run for Ellis' seat, but I'd like to table that posting until the rumors become a little more viable. For now, the best news about the recall effort has been the great support that recall signature gatherers have been getting within the 5th District. There's no doubt in my mind that the minimum number of signatures will be exceeded by a solid 15%-20%, ensuring this makes the November ballot for Long Beach residents of the LBUSD 5th district. Then TALB will definitely have their political hands full trying to decide what to do.
I've got a recommendation for TALB: How about starting a new practice of representing what's best for the students & parents of Long Beach? How about finding better representatives of your organization than drunk-driving, money-hiding candidates like Ellis. So what happens when Meyer and Williams are re-elected and Michael "Shane" Ellis is recalled (or finally wises up and resigns)?
It's up to all of us to make sure that TALB has to deal with that very question. Links to the two election campaigns & the Long Beach Chamber of Commerce, leading the recall effort, are in my "Relevant Websites" column at left. Please get involved where you can!
The hearts & minds of the youth of Long Beach are at stake - we can't let them down!
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Friday, January 18, 2008
Long Beach Republican candidates...where are you?
With the exception of the 4th seat on the Long Beach Unified School District, not one Republican filed for ANY of the elected seats for the three Long Beach government bodies. Five of the incumbents were able to file for re-election without any challenger, including the 2nd, 4th & 8th Districts of the City Council, and both open seats on the Long Beach Community College District board. The only three races with challengers were the Long Beach City Council 6th District, and both open seats on the school board. I understand the issues of party registrations in Long Beach districts, but this never stops Republicans in other tough cities and legislative districts from at least filing and challenging incumbents. What happened to reduce Republican activism in Long Beach? Who is leading the charge to restart the political motivations in districts throughout Long Beach? I think I know this answer, and want to point out some key local Republicans who have recently stepped up to take on this challenge.
At last night's Long Beach GOP Straw Poll event at the Reef restaurant, co-sponsored by the Long Beach Area Republican Party (LBARP) club and the Long Beach Lincoln Club, I witnessed the revitalization of both organizations that have worked hard for years but have been mostly dormant; almost as dormant as the previous central committees prior to the current term. The electricity in the room and the interest by attendees to get involved in local upcoming races was a true testament to the new leadership that has become involved to work for the benefit of all of Long Beach. The new LBARP chairman, Hilary Poochigian, has worked hard to get the club's activities reorganized and staffed with local volunteers. The new chapter chair for the Long Beach Lincoln Club, former council member Frank Colonna, has led the efforts to bring Long Beach Republican donors and supporters together and to provide a much-needed forum for Republican leadership, discussion and cooperation. I encourage all Long Beach Republicans to get involved with one or both organizations. (Links to both organizations are in the "Relevant Websites" section to the left.)
Another motivated volunteer that I expect to watch take a stronger and more profound leadership role in Long Beach Republican efforts is Randy Terrell. Randy has brought enthusiasm and dedication by researching Long Beach politics, and has been getting the word out throughout Long Beach for the need for Republican locals to get involved. The online newspaper, LBPost.com, has given Randy a dedicated column, and I go to it regularly. (The link is also in the left margin.) I look forward to more young Republicans joining Randy in helping take back the great city of Long Beach.
Before I conclude, I wanted to give a quick snapshot of the one race where Republicans actually filed. Incumbent LBUSD board member Jon Meyer is being challenged by fellow Republican Karen Hilburn, liberal Democrat lawyer and TALB (LB teacher's union) supporter Paul Crost and Linda Sanchez Democrat congressional aide Patrick Rodriguez. The primary concern for this race, which was very openly discussed at last night's event, was that Republicans would split our voter base, likely allowing the TALB loyalist to take the seat. Both Republicans in this race bring strong credentials to their campaigns, but we must do everything we can to not turn over this seat, the only Republican opportunity in April's election. This is where the local Republican Central Committee must step up and do its job...even if a few Republicans do not agree. Our committee will be listening to both candidates and evaluating both their platform & their strength to win the seat. We will discuss and debate who should be recommended for endorsement to the county party executive committee. Republicans are always encouraged to support whichever candidate they feel they want to support, but we also want to ensure we hold this important seat.
As for the other two races, I will evaluate each in a future post and give a recommendation regarding which candidate would do more to promote our principles and values, and possibly be a coalition builder with us on future races, including the assembly race later this year. I believe each race offers such an opportunity. However, I would much rather prefer to have encouraged fellow Republicans that live in and understand these Long Beach districts. But building networks and foundations like that take time; we'll have to continue working within these districts to promote the party principles and how their implementation helps residents of all income levels.
I believe both Republican support organizations in Long Beach are on a solid path toward future victories and gains, and I look forward to supporting and contributing to these. I hope all of you are as well. Success in Long Beach is critical toward the success of our party throughout the 54th Assembly District.
At last night's Long Beach GOP Straw Poll event at the Reef restaurant, co-sponsored by the Long Beach Area Republican Party (LBARP) club and the Long Beach Lincoln Club, I witnessed the revitalization of both organizations that have worked hard for years but have been mostly dormant; almost as dormant as the previous central committees prior to the current term. The electricity in the room and the interest by attendees to get involved in local upcoming races was a true testament to the new leadership that has become involved to work for the benefit of all of Long Beach. The new LBARP chairman, Hilary Poochigian, has worked hard to get the club's activities reorganized and staffed with local volunteers. The new chapter chair for the Long Beach Lincoln Club, former council member Frank Colonna, has led the efforts to bring Long Beach Republican donors and supporters together and to provide a much-needed forum for Republican leadership, discussion and cooperation. I encourage all Long Beach Republicans to get involved with one or both organizations. (Links to both organizations are in the "Relevant Websites" section to the left.)
Another motivated volunteer that I expect to watch take a stronger and more profound leadership role in Long Beach Republican efforts is Randy Terrell. Randy has brought enthusiasm and dedication by researching Long Beach politics, and has been getting the word out throughout Long Beach for the need for Republican locals to get involved. The online newspaper, LBPost.com, has given Randy a dedicated column, and I go to it regularly. (The link is also in the left margin.) I look forward to more young Republicans joining Randy in helping take back the great city of Long Beach.
Before I conclude, I wanted to give a quick snapshot of the one race where Republicans actually filed. Incumbent LBUSD board member Jon Meyer is being challenged by fellow Republican Karen Hilburn, liberal Democrat lawyer and TALB (LB teacher's union) supporter Paul Crost and Linda Sanchez Democrat congressional aide Patrick Rodriguez. The primary concern for this race, which was very openly discussed at last night's event, was that Republicans would split our voter base, likely allowing the TALB loyalist to take the seat. Both Republicans in this race bring strong credentials to their campaigns, but we must do everything we can to not turn over this seat, the only Republican opportunity in April's election. This is where the local Republican Central Committee must step up and do its job...even if a few Republicans do not agree. Our committee will be listening to both candidates and evaluating both their platform & their strength to win the seat. We will discuss and debate who should be recommended for endorsement to the county party executive committee. Republicans are always encouraged to support whichever candidate they feel they want to support, but we also want to ensure we hold this important seat.
As for the other two races, I will evaluate each in a future post and give a recommendation regarding which candidate would do more to promote our principles and values, and possibly be a coalition builder with us on future races, including the assembly race later this year. I believe each race offers such an opportunity. However, I would much rather prefer to have encouraged fellow Republicans that live in and understand these Long Beach districts. But building networks and foundations like that take time; we'll have to continue working within these districts to promote the party principles and how their implementation helps residents of all income levels.
I believe both Republican support organizations in Long Beach are on a solid path toward future victories and gains, and I look forward to supporting and contributing to these. I hope all of you are as well. Success in Long Beach is critical toward the success of our party throughout the 54th Assembly District.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Misrepresented Voter Propositions on February 5th Ballot
One of the things that really burns me up is when legislators create horrible propositions and rely on misrepresentation to fool ignorant voters to vote for them. On the February 5th ballot, there are two such propositions that are being misrepresented to voters, Proposition 93 the "Term Limit Reduction Measure") statewide and Proposition S (the "Communication Tax Reduction Act") in the City of Los Angeles. I do take solace in the fact that these Democratic legislators at both the state level and in the Los Angeles City Council realized that they need to market their schemes as conservative practices. Term Limits and Tax Reductions...what conservative voter wouldn't vote for those?
The issue with both of these is each ballot measure does the exact opposite of what their titles state. To start, Proposition 93 on the statewide ballot markets itself as a Term Limit Reduction measure. It does reduce the OVERALL length of a state legislator (going forward) from 14 years to 12 years, but allows the legislators to serve all 12 years in either the Assembly or the State Senate. Here are the two things that Assembly Leader Nunez and State Senate Leader Perata (the two primary sponsors of this measure) do not want you to know:
1) The measure will allow all of the current legislators to start their 12 years "now" (as in 2008), as opposed to counting the number of years they have already served toward the twelve. Proposition 93 will lock most of them in until 2020due to the inherent strength of incumbents. When's the last time a CA state legislator was voted out of office or had their seat switch parties? So if you favor the gross overspending by our state Legislature and its consistent performance of passing nanny legislation, passing this measure will lock in twelve more years of just that!
2) The current requirement is that legislators can only serve 8 years in the State Senate and only 6 years in the Assembly. This measure extends the number of years legislators can serve in each, which also retains incumbents. Termed-out assembly members and state senators usually have to decide whether to compete against each other for an overlapping district in order to "stay employed". This is one of the few incentives for legislators to appeal to a broader base. If they can't, then they'll be limited to the 6 to 8 years that their limited agenda can support.
The latest television ads for Proposition 93 talk about how important "experience" is, and that our current legislators can't gain the necessary experience in less than 6 years. Boy, I wish my employers had been open to giving me 6-8 years to become "experienced" before I could solve any problems! Our current legislators sure have found ways to run up our state spending beyond its revenues over the past 6 years! Why should we reward them with 4-6 more years of job security? Do you really think that these current legislators are now going to use their renewed term extensions to suddenly solve the financial problems they created? What indication do any of us have that the current legislators have learned "the error of their spending ways", and are now going to work with the Governor to reduce their spend-happy ways? If Proposition 93 passes, get ready for a HUGE tax hike! This is the only solution that Assembly Leader Nunez is considering to fix the state budget crisis.
I urge everyone to vote NO on Proposition 93!
(If you're not a voter in the City of Los Angeles, the next proposition will not be on your ballot. But it's still important to see what kind of misleading ballot measures exist on a local level as well as the state level.)
In 2007, the State Court of Appeals affirmed a Superior Court decision that found the current Communications Tax in Los Angeles to be constitutionally illegal. It was never submitted to the voters of Los Angeles for approval, and the heavily-Democratic Los Angeles City Council continued to ignore advice to place the tax on a measure for the voters to approve. (Maybe because they know that even Democrats have a threshold of the number of taxes they want to pay.) Villaraigosa’s so-called tax “reduction" from 10% of current phone services to 9% is actually a tax hike. Even though the Superior Court threw out the tax hike in July 2005, over two years ago, the City kept collecting it anyway, about $162 million per year. What the Mayor and the City Council don't want voters to know is that if you vote “no,” you don’t pay the tax at all, because the court threw it out. If you vote “yes,” the tax comes back, and not only will we continue to pay the tax on our phone services, but it will add Internet, DSL, wireless services, text messaging, instant messaging, VoIP, PCS and other similar services at the "reduced" 9% tax rate.
But this is not necessarily why voters need to vote NO on this proposition. The issue of this measure is the misrepresentation of the measure to voters. The Mayor's office and the Democratic City Council members are calling this measure a "tax reduction", when it is in fact a "Tax Preservation".
Lately they have been trying to appeal to social liberals by talking about the government services that will be cut if the measure fails. And there will have to be cuts, as the City will lose about $270 million. The City will have to ask the tough questions about its spending, such as why it allows the contractor for the new LAPD Headquarters downtown (a friend of the Mayor's) to run over budget by over $140 million without any accountability. They'll also have to reconsider the $285 million in pay raises to the public service employees. The list goes on and on, and my opinion is that the City Council should be able to tighten its belt. Those that cannot propose such fiscal responsibility should be voted out next year; I'll be holding my council member, Janice Hahn, to just such a standard.
There MUST be more conservative voters in both the State of California & within the City of Los Angeles than I have recently assumed! To have to market these propositions in such a manner as to try and attract naive conservative voters shows that even liberal legislators understand that basic human nature favors conservative principles and values. But of course...most of those reading this posting could have told them that!
The issue with both of these is each ballot measure does the exact opposite of what their titles state. To start, Proposition 93 on the statewide ballot markets itself as a Term Limit Reduction measure. It does reduce the OVERALL length of a state legislator (going forward) from 14 years to 12 years, but allows the legislators to serve all 12 years in either the Assembly or the State Senate. Here are the two things that Assembly Leader Nunez and State Senate Leader Perata (the two primary sponsors of this measure) do not want you to know:
1) The measure will allow all of the current legislators to start their 12 years "now" (as in 2008), as opposed to counting the number of years they have already served toward the twelve. Proposition 93 will lock most of them in until 2020due to the inherent strength of incumbents. When's the last time a CA state legislator was voted out of office or had their seat switch parties? So if you favor the gross overspending by our state Legislature and its consistent performance of passing nanny legislation, passing this measure will lock in twelve more years of just that!
2) The current requirement is that legislators can only serve 8 years in the State Senate and only 6 years in the Assembly. This measure extends the number of years legislators can serve in each, which also retains incumbents. Termed-out assembly members and state senators usually have to decide whether to compete against each other for an overlapping district in order to "stay employed". This is one of the few incentives for legislators to appeal to a broader base. If they can't, then they'll be limited to the 6 to 8 years that their limited agenda can support.
The latest television ads for Proposition 93 talk about how important "experience" is, and that our current legislators can't gain the necessary experience in less than 6 years. Boy, I wish my employers had been open to giving me 6-8 years to become "experienced" before I could solve any problems! Our current legislators sure have found ways to run up our state spending beyond its revenues over the past 6 years! Why should we reward them with 4-6 more years of job security? Do you really think that these current legislators are now going to use their renewed term extensions to suddenly solve the financial problems they created? What indication do any of us have that the current legislators have learned "the error of their spending ways", and are now going to work with the Governor to reduce their spend-happy ways? If Proposition 93 passes, get ready for a HUGE tax hike! This is the only solution that Assembly Leader Nunez is considering to fix the state budget crisis.
I urge everyone to vote NO on Proposition 93!
(If you're not a voter in the City of Los Angeles, the next proposition will not be on your ballot. But it's still important to see what kind of misleading ballot measures exist on a local level as well as the state level.)
In 2007, the State Court of Appeals affirmed a Superior Court decision that found the current Communications Tax in Los Angeles to be constitutionally illegal. It was never submitted to the voters of Los Angeles for approval, and the heavily-Democratic Los Angeles City Council continued to ignore advice to place the tax on a measure for the voters to approve. (Maybe because they know that even Democrats have a threshold of the number of taxes they want to pay.) Villaraigosa’s so-called tax “reduction" from 10% of current phone services to 9% is actually a tax hike. Even though the Superior Court threw out the tax hike in July 2005, over two years ago, the City kept collecting it anyway, about $162 million per year. What the Mayor and the City Council don't want voters to know is that if you vote “no,” you don’t pay the tax at all, because the court threw it out. If you vote “yes,” the tax comes back, and not only will we continue to pay the tax on our phone services, but it will add Internet, DSL, wireless services, text messaging, instant messaging, VoIP, PCS and other similar services at the "reduced" 9% tax rate.
But this is not necessarily why voters need to vote NO on this proposition. The issue of this measure is the misrepresentation of the measure to voters. The Mayor's office and the Democratic City Council members are calling this measure a "tax reduction", when it is in fact a "Tax Preservation".
Lately they have been trying to appeal to social liberals by talking about the government services that will be cut if the measure fails. And there will have to be cuts, as the City will lose about $270 million. The City will have to ask the tough questions about its spending, such as why it allows the contractor for the new LAPD Headquarters downtown (a friend of the Mayor's) to run over budget by over $140 million without any accountability. They'll also have to reconsider the $285 million in pay raises to the public service employees. The list goes on and on, and my opinion is that the City Council should be able to tighten its belt. Those that cannot propose such fiscal responsibility should be voted out next year; I'll be holding my council member, Janice Hahn, to just such a standard.
There MUST be more conservative voters in both the State of California & within the City of Los Angeles than I have recently assumed! To have to market these propositions in such a manner as to try and attract naive conservative voters shows that even liberal legislators understand that basic human nature favors conservative principles and values. But of course...most of those reading this posting could have told them that!
Saturday, January 5, 2008
Central Committee...what the heck is that?
So the first question I get from friends when I tell them my position is "what the heck is a central committee?" Each assembly district in California has a Republican Central committee comprised of seven elected members plus ex-oficios who are either partisan elected officials or party nominees for legislative offices and reside within the district. The primary purpose of these committees is to win elections for Republicans within the district. In the case of our district, it is our job to work within the cities of Long Beach, San Pedro, Avalon, Signal Hill & the cities of the Palos Verdes Peninsula to increase Republican representation on city councils, school boards & other local positions.
Elections are held every two years in conjunction with the June primaries. Many who run for this committee do so because they somehow feels that being on this committee will help them in their follow-on campaigns for other positions. My personal opinion is that these types of members have contributed to the lack of satisfactory performance & activity of this committee prior to my election to this committee. How can a committee member dedicate time, resources & motivation to local races throughout the district when they're focused solely on their own? I'll talk more about my issues with these types of members in future posts.
Membership in the Central Committee should be for those who are Republican activists/political junkies who are willing to continuosly be working on political campaigns. For example, in 2007, we started in January supporting Nancy Long for Signal Hill City Council, then some of us worked on Dick Vladovic for LAUSD between February & May, as well as the Republican slate for LA Community College Board. With the special elections this year, we spent time this summer on COL John Kanaley's campaign for the 37th CD, and then had to quickly prepare for the Palos Verdes elections for RPV City Council and the PVPUSD board for November. Finally, we're already researching the candidates who have filed for the Long Beach elections in early 2008. And oh yea, all of us have presidential candidates we're supporting and participating with. (I'm the 46th CD Chair for Rudy Guiliani!)
Now, not every member is as politically active as that; a few are even more active than that. My point here is that those considering being a member, an alternate or otherwise participating need to understand the expectations. They will definitely be this high (or higher) for 2008 and I will be seeking out and working to get six other future members for the 2008-2010 term that feel as passionate as I am & are going to put in the amount of time needed.
My golf game has suffered, but it's for a greater good.
More to follow on the central committee and political events going on in San Pedro & Long Beach this month.
Elections are held every two years in conjunction with the June primaries. Many who run for this committee do so because they somehow feels that being on this committee will help them in their follow-on campaigns for other positions. My personal opinion is that these types of members have contributed to the lack of satisfactory performance & activity of this committee prior to my election to this committee. How can a committee member dedicate time, resources & motivation to local races throughout the district when they're focused solely on their own? I'll talk more about my issues with these types of members in future posts.
Membership in the Central Committee should be for those who are Republican activists/political junkies who are willing to continuosly be working on political campaigns. For example, in 2007, we started in January supporting Nancy Long for Signal Hill City Council, then some of us worked on Dick Vladovic for LAUSD between February & May, as well as the Republican slate for LA Community College Board. With the special elections this year, we spent time this summer on COL John Kanaley's campaign for the 37th CD, and then had to quickly prepare for the Palos Verdes elections for RPV City Council and the PVPUSD board for November. Finally, we're already researching the candidates who have filed for the Long Beach elections in early 2008. And oh yea, all of us have presidential candidates we're supporting and participating with. (I'm the 46th CD Chair for Rudy Guiliani!)
Now, not every member is as politically active as that; a few are even more active than that. My point here is that those considering being a member, an alternate or otherwise participating need to understand the expectations. They will definitely be this high (or higher) for 2008 and I will be seeking out and working to get six other future members for the 2008-2010 term that feel as passionate as I am & are going to put in the amount of time needed.
My golf game has suffered, but it's for a greater good.
More to follow on the central committee and political events going on in San Pedro & Long Beach this month.
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
Kick-off of the 54th AD Republican Blog
Welcome to the first posting of my New Year's resolution - communicating as openly as possible to the many dedicated Republicans working hard throughout the 54th Assembly District to get our local candidates elected. I look forward to continuing the great strides we made in 2007 to begin implementing the state-wide strategy of getting our party central committee involved in local races and local issues. Many will question this "amking partisan what has been non-partisan", but my simple answer is that the Democratic Party has been doing it for over 25 years. It's about time they had some true political competition, and we plan to take it to the next level here in this assembly district.
From election to the local neighborhood council to involvement in numerous campaigns over the past ten years, I look forward to continuing my proactive approach to community involvement and conservative activism through the 54th Republican Central Committee. I believe in getting past closed-minded positions and getting to the real issues of the district's concerns. Bad attitudes, false impressions and closed minds have no place in our communities or our party, and often result in special interests and our local officials ignoring the will of its citizens when creating their plans.
For example, I believe in good, smart development that contributes to and provides benefits for the surrounding community. Long Beach, Palos Verdes & San Pedro are ripe with opportunities for new business & new residences, but these should not add unnecessary burdens to those that came to this great district first. I'm also unsatisfied with the performance of our public schools in preparing our children for both college and their future careers. A pet peeve of mine is long-time residents of a community telling me "that's the way it's always been" about an issue or concern. I refuse to believe that when good neighbors like you believe issues impacting our community need to be addressed, and I want to make sure they are addressed.
In Los Angeles, the Mayor of Los Angeles discussed the fiscal dilemma of property tax revenues going down and the "need" to continue the illegally-created Telephone User's Tax. With a lack of fiscal discipline by most Los Angeles City Councilmembers, it's no wonder why. How many feel-good programs can be placed on the backs of Los Angeles taxpayers? Instead, our misguided City Council has taken a position to continue increasing taxes on the current tax base (and pray, I guess, that the existing base of taxpayers won't migrate their businesses and residential spending to neighboring cities.) Regardless of your political affiliation, are you more prone to buy your gas, groceries & clothing where you can save money? Don't you think this will extend to telephone and internet users as well? Why aren'y elected city council members required to complete an economics course that truly studies the affects of localized taxation?
I wanted to kick off this blog with some rantings on my mind, and to let you know that I look forward to flowing out information about opportunities to get politically involved & make a difference in 2008. Let me know if there are specific issues in our district that I need to focus on. It's all about bringing to light issues that the current group of "career politicians" hope we'll ignore. With your help, we'll continue to make them address these issues or ensure they are voted out of office!
Stamm I Am
From election to the local neighborhood council to involvement in numerous campaigns over the past ten years, I look forward to continuing my proactive approach to community involvement and conservative activism through the 54th Republican Central Committee. I believe in getting past closed-minded positions and getting to the real issues of the district's concerns. Bad attitudes, false impressions and closed minds have no place in our communities or our party, and often result in special interests and our local officials ignoring the will of its citizens when creating their plans.
For example, I believe in good, smart development that contributes to and provides benefits for the surrounding community. Long Beach, Palos Verdes & San Pedro are ripe with opportunities for new business & new residences, but these should not add unnecessary burdens to those that came to this great district first. I'm also unsatisfied with the performance of our public schools in preparing our children for both college and their future careers. A pet peeve of mine is long-time residents of a community telling me "that's the way it's always been" about an issue or concern. I refuse to believe that when good neighbors like you believe issues impacting our community need to be addressed, and I want to make sure they are addressed.
In Los Angeles, the Mayor of Los Angeles discussed the fiscal dilemma of property tax revenues going down and the "need" to continue the illegally-created Telephone User's Tax. With a lack of fiscal discipline by most Los Angeles City Councilmembers, it's no wonder why. How many feel-good programs can be placed on the backs of Los Angeles taxpayers? Instead, our misguided City Council has taken a position to continue increasing taxes on the current tax base (and pray, I guess, that the existing base of taxpayers won't migrate their businesses and residential spending to neighboring cities.) Regardless of your political affiliation, are you more prone to buy your gas, groceries & clothing where you can save money? Don't you think this will extend to telephone and internet users as well? Why aren'y elected city council members required to complete an economics course that truly studies the affects of localized taxation?
I wanted to kick off this blog with some rantings on my mind, and to let you know that I look forward to flowing out information about opportunities to get politically involved & make a difference in 2008. Let me know if there are specific issues in our district that I need to focus on. It's all about bringing to light issues that the current group of "career politicians" hope we'll ignore. With your help, we'll continue to make them address these issues or ensure they are voted out of office!
Stamm I Am
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
