Assembly GOP wastes no time; Duvall resigns

After Assembly GOP Leader Sam Blakeslee quickly moved to remove him from all positions of authority and legislative influence in the State Assembly, Republican Assemblyman Mike Duvall, caught in a sex scandal, abruptly resigned Wednesday from the Assembly.

Working with Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, Blakeslee wasted no time in deciding that in the best interests of both the citizens of California and the reputation of the California Republican Party, Duvall's comments and actions were simply intolerable.

"The statements he made were inappropriate and unacceptable. I have asked Mr. Duvall to step down from his post as a member of caucus leadership and I have requested that Speaker Bass remove Mr. Duvall as Vice Chairman of the Assembly Utilities and Commerce committee and as a member of the Assembly Rules Committee. This matter is currently under review by the Assembly Rules Committee and we are awaiting their findings."

Shortly afterwards, Duvall released this statement on his campaign web site: "I have come to the conclusion that it would not be fair to my family, my constituents or to my friends on both sides of the aisle to remain in office. Therefore, I have decided to resign my office, effective immediately..."

The action followed published and televised reports that Duvall had a sexual relationship with a female lobbyist. Earlier, Assembly leaders had removed him from the vice-chairmanship of the Utilities and Commerce Committee, his seat on the powerful Assembly Rules Committee and his ranking role in the GOP caucus.

The issue was first reported in the OC Weekly newspaper and by KCAL-TV in Los Angeles.

Duvall had been representing a district that includes Anaheim, Fullerton, Placentia, Orange, Brea, La Habra and Yorba Linda.

Duvall, 54, was caught on an open microphone prior to a July 8 Appropriations Committee hearing describing in detail his relationship with the lobbyist, 18 years his junior, as well as his relations with an another woman. The lobbyist worked for Sempra Energy. Both the lobbyist and Duvall are married. Duvall's words were audible and recorded by the Capitol's television system. In the videotaped sidebar discussion, Duvall offered clues as to the lobbyist's identity.

"And so her birthday was Monday," he said at the Wednesday, July 8 committee hearing. "I was 54 on June 14, so for a month, she was 19 years younger than me. I said, 'Now, you're getting old. I am going to have to trade you in.' And she goes, '[I'm] 36.' She is 18 years younger than me. And so I keep teasing her, and she goes, 'I know you French men. You divide your age by two and add seven, and if you're older than that, you dump us.'"

According to voter-registration records reviewed by and reported by Capitol Weekly, veteran Sacramento-based lobbyist Heidi DeJong Barsuglia turned 36 years old on Monday, July 6.

Duvall had been witnessed by many legislative sources socializing after-hours with Barsuglia. They also say they have seen Duvall with Barsuglia in restaurants, "arm-in-arm" at political fund-raising events and even shopping together for groceries just blocks from the capitol building.

Bass said she had "directed the Ethics Committee to look into the matter," and that the matter also was being reviewed by the Rules Committee.

Even before Duvall resigned, Orange County Republican Party Chairman Scott Baugh said he had seen the video, "and there's absolutely nothing you can defend in anything that was said by Assemblyman Duvall." He added: "My heart goes out to his family, but I think he should go home and consider resigning."

The Capitol Resource Institute, a conservative, self-described "pro-family" advocacy organization that had given Duvall a "100%" score for his voting record on issues of concern to the group, denounced the lawmaker in a statement today.

"It is always disappointing when a champion of traditional values does not practice the same in his private life," said Karen England, executive director of CRI. "And this appears to be the case with Assemblyman Duvall."

Amid the overwhelming evidence against him, Duvall eventually did the right thing by immediately tendering his resignation to allow the citizens of his district to move forward. Of course, the TRUE right thing would have been to never get involved in this kind of mess in the first place.

However, this examiner feels that the Assembly GOP Leader, Sam Blakeslee, as well as other conservative leaders cited, should be commended for taking immediate action rather than making legal or political arguments to stall what would most likely have been an inevitable removal.

If only all political leaders at all levels of government moved this fast to remove an obvious violator of the term "civil servant", maybe the approval ratings of these legislative bodies wouldn't be as far low as they currently are.

Thoughts to ponder for the state elections in 2010...

Was May 19th THAT long ago?

Most local voters remember the overwhelming results of the May 19th special election. Despite the Governor and Assembly Speaker Bass predicting either a victory or a "close loss", over 65% of 4.8 million voters throughout the state sent a strong, direct message that they want state legislators to balance their budget the way citizens have to balance their checkbooks - with no more taxes. The bleeding heart tactics of Democrats & special interest groups who drag out young children, minority teachers, firefighters and cops telling voters how they're all going to lose funding if they don't sacrifice more of their hard-earned salaries are no longer resonating.

But even as the June 30th deadline came and went, state Democrats were still trying to convince their GOP counterparts that they had to compromise what voters already told them they didn't have to compromise - more tax dollars. Democratic Majority Senate Leader Jenny Oropeza (D - Long Beach) is seen in a YouTube video , taken on June 30th in the Senate chambers,pleading with the State Senate GOP, stating that she "doesn't appreciate rhetoric about what took place a few weeks ago", referring to the 65% of voters cited earlier (in Los Angeles County, as well as her own district, the percentage voting "NO" on Proposition 1A was actually over 68%). But this is the rhetoric that Senator Oropeza and her Democratic friends need to hear. Instead, Oropeza proceeds in the video to talk about wheelchair patients not getting bathed. More bleeding heart tactics.

Of course, what Democratic electeds do not mention are the boondoggle commission positions making over $120K a year for one meeting per month, or the excessively high percentage of administrators the state education system employs. While states like New York and Massachusetts dedicate over 80% of their education budgets to teachers and the classroom, California barely clears the 45% threshold. There are many other line items in the state budget worth scrutinizing, but one that is getting major exposure lately is the pension payouts to former government employees at nearly 100% of their former salaries...at the ripe-old age of 50. The primary purpose of a pension is supposed to be to help those that can no longer work day-to-day through long-term investments while they can work. While there are 50-yr-old citizens who can no longer work due to hardships or disabilities, most 50-yr olds are far healthier than their ancestors were at the same age.

So what needs to happen to remind the state legislators that they work for the voters of California? Will they start respecting their will as expressed on May 19th? Most voters now know that this simply is not going to happen. So the follow-on question regarding the state budget should be "why are budgets for education, police & fire so low in the list of budgetary priorities?"

As Audra Strickland pointed out on the Assembly floow a few weeks back, priorities are supposed to be funded first, not last. If there is a risk of police, fire, education, children seniors or disabled having critical services go unfunded, voters from all parties should be asking what other line items in the budget warrant a higher priority than these.

A final L.A. County highlight from May 19th: Los Angeles County actually voted more "conservative" than the statewide average. Prop 1A received 2.5% fewer votes in LA County; Prop 1B received 2.7% less; the others all finished with lower percentages than their statewide totals.

At least for Republicans and other conservatives, this is a highlight. It's hopefully a sign of things to come.

Republicans OPPOSE Propositions 1A-1F; Democrats stay "Neutral"

Well, finally! I am happy to announce that the California Republican Party has officially taken a NO position on all six of the toxic state ballot measures known as Propositions 1A through 1F. There was some debate by a few "intellectuals" who wanted to peel off one or two of these for consideration, but an overwhelming majority of the California Republican Party Executive Committee was ready to support a NO vote for all six of these as a package.

Because let's face it - these are all part of a bag-room deal that needs to be rejected in its entirety. Supporting ANY of these propositions gives the voter the impression that the current level of state government spending is acceptable - and it's NOT! The Republican Party stands for the principle of limited government and reducing the tax burdens on working families and businesses, and that was re-affirmed today.

Two interesting points to note:

- There was actually more debate about these propositions at the County level, where the discussion focused on whether the transfer of funds through propositions 1D & 1E may actually be acceptable. This was based on the fact that neither of these propositions actually raises taxes. However, they do not reduce taxes either. Furthermore, the next action by the special interest groups that these funds come from will have a new ballot measure labeling Republicans as the "evil party that took away funds" by supporting these measures, and it's time for the Democrats to step up if these propositions are truly viable.

- Speaking of the Democratic Party, I recently found out that even the LA County Democratic Party is not endorsing these propositions! Their LA County Executive Committee voted to take "NO POSITION" on the six propositions. Turns out that a combination of fiscally responsible Democrats were joined by a few unions that were not getting a piece of the proposition "action" (and were hence only going to see the higher taxes for their membership) opposed the special interest groups that were lobbying the Democratic Party for support.

So basically - NEITHER party is supporting these propositions. We all know why the Republicans are opposing these. (What we've been beating our heads against the wall about is why it took to darn long!). But why won't the Democrats get behind these?

Maybe they ARE watching the Tea Party footage, and are just a little bit concerned that their candidates in 2010 are going to have to explain their support for the highest sales tax, highest vehicle license tax, and highest income tax in the nation?

Personally, I don't plan on just watching these in CNN with my nose in the air, like most of our Democratic friends are doing. I will BE there with my American Flag & California flag waving proudly! It's time to take back the state for the taxpayers!

Stand by for more on how we will do just that! Until then, save these dates for the next set of Tea Parties across Southern California: May 1st & May 16th. (Locations TBA)

Why the Dems are killing California, but no one cares...

I have been asked often the past few weeks why the Republican leadership in the California State Legislature are catching more blame for the state propositions on the May ballot that threaten to take away tax credits like the dependent child credit and double your vehicle license fee, and their Democratic counterparts and their special interest pandering is going relatively unchecked. I'd like to use an example from my childhood that I think will explain the logic.

I am the oldest of three, and my younger sisters and I are the best of friends. We each have families now, and we stay in frequent contact. When we were growing up, we would do what kids did: argue, fight, do crazy things. But it always seemed like I was getting a little more blame than my sisters. The reason: "I was older and I was supposed to know better!"

When the Democrats continued to increase spending every year with reckless abandon, the citizens of California had one line of defense that was supposed to keep that at bay: The Republicans. Now the voters have to take responsibility for some of the damage that the Democratic leaders have caused. After all, they elected the Democrats to be the majority party. Democrats run on "feel good" campaigns that do not take fiscal or managerial responsibility into account. Democrats appeal to people's sensical urges that make them feel better, and hide from voters the responsibility aspects of their legislation. For years, they have been able to increase budget handouts and earmarks to their special interests without having to substantially increase taxes or fees. This year, the well is much drier, and they had to negotiate what you now see as the six state propositions, 1A through 1F, in order to salvage the financial interests of their true constituents: the special interests and unions that fed their election campaigns.

What the Republicans in both the State Senate and the Assembly were supposed to do this year is finally show the Democrats the results of what they had been preaching all these years. They are supposed to be showing voters that they will do "their job" in being the more responsible party; the "oldest child" that is supposed to know better. Because most of our Republican leaders did not perform their role and teach their Democratic counterparts the error of their ways, conservative voters throughout the state joined others throughout the country in saying "enough's enough!" If the Republican electeds are not going to do their job, then the voters will do it for them! This is why you are seeing much of the tax revolt and tea party activity directed against elected Republicans.

My personal belief is that if our electeds acted more like Congressman (former State Senator) Tom McClintock, the activity would all be directed at the state Democrats. But this is not to mean that the State Democrats are off the hook. The protests taking place throughout the state are taking place in Democratic strongholds like Santa Monica, Pasadena and Hermosa Beach. Most of the attendees are decline-to-state voters that are realizing just how bad the state spending has become. They're learning more about the contract deals strangling the state budget, including those by the teachers union (CTA) and the service employees union (SEIU). (I always like pointing out these two groups because they are the first to complain about how their performance will drop if they don't get funding. Have you seen graduation rates in the LAUSD, as well as the state? Under 50% for both! And have you experienced the "high performance" at the DMV? "Nuff said!)

So the first wave of protest and resentment is against those that Republicans and other conservatives were counting on to support them. Once this wave has had it's effect, including the defeat of the state ballot propositions, the focus will definitely shift to the tax-and-spend Democrats that are the prime movers behind everyone's increased sales tax, increased income tax, and the reduction in the child tax credit. As voters see their spending power go down, and then experience their first adjusted income tax return under the new taxes, they will know who is to blame, and will hold those who take away income from struggling families and redistribute it to their union friends.

The next wave of Republican candidates will have the wave of this momentum behind them. The Democrats will have their usual special interest groups, losing popularity every month as voters learn how these groups are stealing their money!

So stand by, my Democratic friends and electeds! Your time of political reckoning is coming!

Mayor Villaraigosa has to "pull a weekender" for Measure B

There have been many great accomplishments for the rag-tag, rebellious group I have been proud to work with in opposition to Measure B, the solar energy boondoggle that has unified not only city-wide Republicans and Democrats active in the neighborhood councils, but Laborer Union Locals throughout the city who are having city facility work normally set aside for them being transferred solely to the IBEW membership under Measure B. Our combined effort, combined with opposition endorsements from great civic leaders like Laura Chick and Dennis Zine, have resulted in recommendations to vote NO on Measure B from the Los Angeles Times, the L.A. Daily News and our local paper, the Daily Breeze.

To try and swing the tide from the city council members who are now embarrassed for "placing the measure on the ballot for voter to decide" to the DWP & IBEW's failure to address the calculated doubling of energy rates (according to their own endorsed Huron Report), the Mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigosa (who desperately needs this measure passed in order to beef up his political resume for his run for Governor next year) had to initiate a city-wide bus tour this weekend in order to promote Measure B. Fox 11 News covered it last night, and interviewed one of our speakers, Jack Humpreville, about why the measure is having such difficulty.

I want to personally thank all of you that forced our 11% mayor to forgo his regular weekend schedule of finding the closest "televised" public event, away from any of the other mayoral candidates, and forcing him to actually invest personal time in campaigning this weekend. Your phone calls to absentee voters the past four weeks, plus your renewed energy this weekend to call poll voters in key districts, has made a real difference!

This past week, I was very excited to see the energy and activism by two local unions, the Laborers Local 802 and Local 872, who really took the Huron consultant and DWP managers to task at the Wilmington DWP Townhall last Wednesday. You can only imagine how much fun I had speaking on behalf of labor unions being shut out from what is supposed to be their contracted work effort in the city. To their credit, the Laborers Union members are the ones working at our trade schools and junior colleges to train young men and women the trades associated with building and construction, and have a far better record of providing training in under-privileged communities and community colleges. The marketing rep from the Laborers Union specifically asked the DWP about the record of bringing in and training new IBEW members from under-privileged neighborhoods. When the DWP rep "could not recall" the numbers, the marketing rep informed her that the numbers were "practically non-existent".

Now these great union colleagues are taking every phone list I can create for them and calling residents to oppose this measure on behalf of the truly local union residents. Awesome!

So if you see our Mayor's bus driving through the neighborhood, wave "Hello"! And then contact me for a call list to do either Sunday or Monday. But don't worry about the Mayor's precinct...we've already called it and left a message for his household to vote NO on Measure B!

After all, he is a high-propensity voter...

State Budget Resentment Electrifies GOP Convention

Thanks to my good friend and 56th AD GOP ex-oficio, Roger Garrett, I was once again able to participate as a delegate at the California Republican Party Convention in Sacramento this past weekend. As expected, the primary topic of discussion, debate, outrage and concern for most delegates was the defeat of Republican principles and values in the approval of the increased tax-and-spend budget bill by the state Legislature. I could spent most of this blog post talking about how angry people were, and I was even quoted in the Contra Costa Times on Saturday about that I called "very confusing times". "We have to figure out what our party stands for if it's not for less of a tax burden for Californians."

(Here's the link to the article: (http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_11752966?source=rss)

Well, friends, I'm writing to say that I was very proud of how unified our party delegates became this weekend. At the previous conventions I've attended, we've spent hours debating what I will now call secondary issues, including illegal immigration, abortion, gay marriage & affordable housing development. I'm not saying those topics are not important; but every delegate I talked to this weekend, whether from the CA Republican Assembly, the Log Cabin Republicans, the CA Congress of Republicans or the CA College Republicans, firmly agreed that our party's number one mission is to protect the California tax-payer. To his credit, Assemblymember Anthony Adams walked across the street from the Assembly hall to the Sacramento Hyatt to talk to delegates and address why he felt that approving this budget was the right choice. Fellow delegate Matt Kauble and I had a solid 20 minutes to ourselves with Adams, and kept it cordial yet engaging, despite the numerous gestures behind his back by delegates passing by us! (You can imagine what they looked like...) Adams talked about Moody ratings, liquidity, and other financial topics to test our knowledge. Matt is a finance controller, so I let Matt lead the engagement and I simply jumped in with inconsistencies. Adams stated that he would be willing to come down to L.A. County to address Republicans regarding this decision and to basically "take his lumps". I give him a lot of credit and respect for walking across the street and talking to whomever approached him. The other five were conveniently too busy to meet with fellow Republicans at their own convention and explain their actions. Of the five, it was to be expected of State Senator Abel Maldonado, who basically negotiated in his own political agenda into the bill in order to get his approval. Delegates throughout the party have reached a boiling point with these sell-outs, and were ready to hold all six accountable.

And they proved it on Sunday...

The only resolution forwarded to the delegates to consider was to withhold any party funding for re-election of the six Republican legislators that made the unfortunate and misguides decision to vote for the budget. As you can imagine, it was overwhelmingly and loudly approved.

At the Sunday general session, Republican Assemblyman, U.S. Senate candidate & my good friend Chuck DeVore regretted that he would not be able to spent his allotted ten minutes talking about how he was ready to defeat and retire Barbara Boxer, but he gave the delegates the details of what happened in the Assembly and his pledge to continue fighting the Democrats and misguided Republicans. State Senator Jeff Denham, who was targeted for a recall defeated by over 73% last year in a district formerly drawn for Democrats because he refused to stop attacking the Democrats on the budget over-spending issue, announced that not only is he not going away, he's running for Lieutenant Governor. (Here's a real opportunity to tell the special interests that they do not control Sacramento!) And Board of Equalization Member Bill Leonard offered an idea to beat the 2-year 1% sales tax hike coming on April 1st: Go out now and purchase two years worth of as many household items as you can! Should be easy for Costco and Sam's Club members!

The budget issue overshadowed the usual drama of the February convention, the election of chairman, vice-chairman and regional chairs for the CRP. However, the strength of the incumbents, including Chairman Ron Nehring and Vice-Chairman Tom Del Baccaro, allowed for delegates to discuss the gubernatorial race between Insurance Commissioner Stave Poizner and "new Republican" and former E-bay CEO Meg Whitman. The only drama for Los Angeles County was at our regional Vice-Chair caucus meeting Saturday morning, where the question was whether former RPLAC chairman, Dr. Carl Davis, was engineering another surprise candidate to oppose incumbent L.A. County Regional Vice-Chair Doug Boyd, like he did at the RPLAC Organizational Meeting last December. One exchange I heard about was new RPLAC Chairman Glen Forsch advising Doug Boyd that he should lead the caucus meeting as the RPLAC Chairman. After advising Glen that not only was this a conflict of interest, that the meeting would be led by CRP National Committeeman Shawn Steel and Republican State Senator George Runner, there was no further word or action from either Glen or his mentor, Carl, and the nomination & election process went fast.

Personally, this effort to exert some political muscle in Los Angeles County is going to start the quick descent of what little influence the current RPLAC Board has. The current RPLAC board has no elected legislative allies, and only a few rumored and undisclosed donors who are "waiting" to see whether this board can deliver. If Glen and his team do not quickly begin the healing process from the gashes caused by their RPLAC take-over, they are going to find re-energized and well-funded opposition to their seats on both the Executive Board and to their re-elections to central committee seats or ex-oficio positions. Republican Central Committee filings begin in just 12 months...

To wrap up the convention highlights, I think every Republican upset with the state budget deal should take heart that your party delegates and internal party leadership is also upset, and is planning to hold every elected legislator, candidate and fellow delegate accountable for the primary principle that binds us all together: Californians are already taxed the highest in the country, and it's time for that to change!

State Propositions - Part 2

I apologize for the delay in completing my run-through of the propositions. However, I was extremely fortunate to attend the South Bay Lincoln Club luncheon today and listen to my good friend, Stephen Frank, run through them for us. As most of you know, Stephen Frank is a political genius and watchdog who may very well be the best we have at critiquing and analyzing ballot measures like these, as well as executive and legislative action from our legislators. (It's no coincidence I have subscribed to his RSS feed in the left column of this blog from Day 1.)

After talking with Stephen today and listening to his review, I am now prepared to run down the remainder of the propositions for you. I'm going to start where I left off with Proposition 4, as my analysis of the first three was accurate, and run through the next three.

Prop. 4
Waiting Period and Parental Notification Before Termination of Minor’s Pregnancy. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.

Don't let any side spin about this proposition fool you. This is a modified version of the original Parental Notification measure, relaxed in some ways in order to obtain what is hoped to be the necesary majority vote. These are the relevant changes:
- Consent is not required; only notification. The form of notification is either personal written or via mail;
- Medical emergencies;
- another adult family member can be notified if the minor submits a written statement that she fears physical, sexual or emotional abuse from a parent;
- a waiver could be granted by a juvenile court.

Some have asked me if I'm comfortable with all of these exceptions. What I'm less comfortable with is the current state, where no exception is needed because the procedure can be done without ANY notification.

The simple fact that Planned Parenthood, which I believe is simply an organization dedicated to performing as many abortions (especially minority abortions) as possible, is working hard to oppose this proposition tells me that it's better than what exists now and I urge a YES vote on Proposition 4.

Prop. 5
Nonviolent Drug Offenses. Sentencing, Parole and Rehabilitation. Initiative Statute.

Expands drug treatment programs to allow those committing major drug offenses, including meth dealers and other drug felons, to opt out of most of their jail time in exchange for a "commitment" to attend drug treatment programs. Here's the problem - those that attend these programs instead of jail time have a higher rate of committing more drug offenses. (How many celebrities can you think of that have gone through these programs?)

Guess who's supporting this proposition? Owners of treatment centers that will be funded through this proposition. Big surprise!

Know who opposes it? Among others, L.A. County District Attorney, the Honorable Steve Cooley, and State Senator Jeff Denham, the target of the "Don Perata" recall against Republican senators who opposed higher taxes. These two outstanding Republicans have the credibility to convince me - NO on Proposition 5.

Prop. 6
Police and Law Enforcement Funding. Criminal Penalties and Laws. Initiative Statute.

This measure is a comprehensive anti-gang and crime reduction measure that specifically targets the gangs that prey on our children and on the immigrant communities. Specifically, provisions include:
- prohibiting bail to illegal immigrants that commit violent or gang crimes;
- imposes an additional 10-year penalty on gang offenders that commit violent crimes;
- requires convicted gang members to register with local law enforcement every year for five years following conviction or release from custody;
- increases penalties for manufacture or sale of meth, to match that of cocaine;
- additional 10-year penalty for felons that carry loaded or concealed firearms in public; and
- increased penalties for multiple acts of grafitti.

This measure was written by State Senator George Runner, after consultation with Jamiel Shaw, Sr. (father of Jamiel Shaw, Jr., the outstanding football player that was brutally gunned down by Pedro Espinoza, illegal Mexican gang member, simply for being black), and is endorsed by our own L.A. County Sheriff Lee Baca.

This is a close state version of the "Jamiel's Law" we're trying to pass in the City of Los Angeles, and will go a long way toward reducing the ability of gangs to "import" members through illigal immigration.

Vote YES on Proposition 6.

More to follow soon...

FLASH, FLASH, FLASH: Republican lawmakers unveil a no-tax budget at Sacramento press conference - CA

Forwarding from Red County &, of all places, the Los Angeles Times.

Source: www.redcounty.com

"During a 1:30 PM Sacramento press conference, Republican lawmakers led by Senate Republican Leader Dave Cogdill and Assembly Republican Leader Mike Villines unveiled a no-tax budget that funds education at the same level that Democrats proposed while trimming spending in other areas."

Republicans unveil no-tax budget in Sacramento press conference.

By Evan Halper and Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
August 31, 2008
SACRAMENTO -- Republican lawmakers, who are blocking plans by the governor and Democrats to raise taxes, proposed Saturday to balance the state budget instead with borrowing and deeper spending cuts.

Their plan, released 61 days into the new fiscal year, is the first complete budget offered by the Republicans. A vote on the proposal is not expected for days.

The legislative session ends at midnight tonight, and lawmakers are on the verge of breaking the record for the latest budget in at least 60 years, a mark set Aug. 31, 2002.

The failure of lawmakers to reach a budget agreement means the session will have to be extended, but no business other than the budget is likely to be discussed.

"Raising taxes at this point will definitely damage and hinder the economy and make it even more difficult to rebound form this downturn," said Dave Cogdill of Modesto, GOP leader in the state Senate.

Republicans are proposing instead to speed up borrowing against the lottery -- something the governor and Democrats had been proposing for next year -- to generate nearly $2 billion in cash in the current fiscal year. They would also take $349 million from a fund that cities and counties tap for redevelopment projects, including affordable housing.

The plan also would close the state's $15.2-billion gap with the help of $1.4 billion in service cuts beyond those already proposed by the governor and Democrats. The additional cuts would affect dozens of programs. Cash grants intended for the children of needy families, in-home care for the elderly and disabled, and financial aid for college students would all be reduced.

Programs to protect the environment, provide treatment to AIDS patients and offer new immigrants access to healthcare would also be scaled back. A labor studies center at the University of California would be eliminated.

Together, the measures would replace more than $4 billion in new sales taxes proposed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Democrats.

Schwarzenegger dismissed the proposal as one that would merely push more of the deficit into next year.

"We were sent to Sacramento to solve problems once and for all -- not kick the can down the alley for others to deal with in the future," he said in a statement Saturday.

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles) called the GOP proposal a "blueprint for economic disaster."

California State Propositions 2008 - Part 1

As promised, I am planning to go through each of the California State propositions and my personal voting recommendation for each. I may skip a few in order to do a full posting dedicated to those; currently, I plan to skip Proposition 4 (Waiting Period and Parental Notification Before Termination of Minor’s Pregnancy. Constitutional Amendment), Proposition 8 (Limit on Marriage. Constitutional Amendment) and Proposition 11 (Redistricting. Constitutional Amendment and Statute) because there are strong cases for each side that should be addressed.

I should be able to go through the rest in order, so here is Proposition 1:


Proposition 1: SB 1856 (Chapter 697, 2002). Costa.
Safe, Reliable High-Speed Passenger Train Bond Act for the 21st Century.

This is the result of the famous trip that Speaker Nunez made to France, in which his traveling expenses later came into question. Not wanting to have that lavish trip bear no fruit, we now get the chance to vote on a European-style train system from Northern Ca to Southern. One of our Republican heroes in the Legislature, Assembly member Bob Huff, was one of the token Republicans on the trip, and spoke to us at the Peninsula Harbor Republican Club meeting in June about the differences between the questions by Democrats and those by Republicans throughout the trip. From Huff's presentation, I have two questions for those supporting this bill:

1) If we're going to implement a European train system, don't we need a European power source to ensure it doesn't cause rolling black-outs throughout the state? (Or are the Democrats So used to causing these black-outs that they simply want us to get used to them as a condition for living in California?)
- By the way, when our Republican assembly members asked the Europeans this question, they stated that they were able to implement this transit system primarily because they had a robust NUCLEAR power system in place. But I guess we'll just generate the extra electricity needed for this system through wind...maybe we can just rig sails on the trains!

2) If we're in a budget crunch already and need to find $15B+ in spending reductions, is this really the right time to be spending on luxury infrastructure like this?
- This will be a question for all of the bond measures, for which the answer, if the need for the measure is not "this is an emergent need", will always be "NO".

I am urging a "NO" vote on this proposition.


Proposition 2 : 1274. Treatment of Farm Animals. Statute.

"Requires that an enclosure or tether confining specified farm animals allow the animals for the majority of every day to fully extend their limbs or wings, lie down, stand up, and turn around. Specified animals include calves raised for veal, egg-laying hens, and pregnant pigs. Exceptions made for transportation, rodeos, fairs, 4-H programs, lawful slaughter, research and veterinary purposes. Provides misdemeanor penalties, including a fine not to exceed $1,000 and/or imprisonment in jail for up to 180 days. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Probably minor local and state enforcement and prosecution costs, partly offset by increased fine revenue. (Initiative 07-0041.)"

After doing research on the websites of both the supporters and the opposition of this proposition, the issue boils down to the issue of "increased humanity for farm animals" beyond the strict laws already in the California statutes, versus the establishment of "optimal breeding and egg-laying conditions for farm animals", even if they are conditions one would not necessarily endure themselves. When both labor unions like the General Teamsters Local Union 386 & the United Food & Commercial Workers Western States Council join with the California Small Business Association and a bi-partisan list of state legislators in opposing this, there must be a significant impact to one or more essential industries in the California economy. IN this case, my research found that the egg-laying industry in California, one of the last truly robust ones that the liberals haven't yet driven out. Proposition 2 is a risky, dangerous and costly measure banning almost all modern egg production in California, through enforcement of its overly-strict requirements. It was written by animal activists who are part of the "animals are people too" theology, which is probably all I really needed to say to over half of you reading this.

But now you have more objective facts, which is a better basis for me urging a "NO" vote on this initiative.


Proposition 3 : 1271. Children’s Hospital Bond Act. Grant Program. Statute.

"Authorizes $980,000,000 in bonds, to be repaid from state’s General Fund, to fund the construction, expansion, remodeling, renovation, furnishing and equipping of children’s hospitals. Designates that 80 percent of bond proceeds go to hospitals that focus on children with illnesses such as leukemia, cancer, heart defects, diabetes, sickle cell anemia and cystic fibrosis. Requires that qualifying children’s hospitals provide comprehensive services to a high volume of children eligible for governmental programs and meet other requirements. Designates that 20 percent of bond proceeds go to University of California general acute care hospitals. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: State costs of about $2 billion over 30 years to pay off both the principal ($980 million) and the interest ($1 billion) costs of the bond. Payments of about $67 million per year. (Initiative 07-0034.)"

I have heard much less about this proposition, and there is little on the web on it, except that the California Children's Hospital Association Initiative Fund paid consultants over $1 million to gather the signatures to place it on the ballot. With $980 million in principal and over $1B anticipated in interest to pay this off, this is a perfect example of a measure that should "earn your vote" before you support it. Research in Cal-Access shows that almost ALL of the over $5 million raised for this initiative comes directly from the very same hospitals claiming to have the urgent need for this bond money.

Hey, here's a thought...spend the lobbying money on your own improvements. What this "fund committee" has basically done is a shake-down of the children's hospitals throughout California to place an initiative on the ballot to add another $1.98B to our ballooning $15B+ deficit.

I am urging a "NO" vote to this blatant attempt to pull on the heartstrings of Californians and add almost $2B more to our state deficit.

NEWS FLASH - Local Assemblywoman says "Drill now"...sort of

As many of you know, I'm a proponent of the "Drill Now" coalition that believes that the laws of supply and demand still govern modern day economics, and that increasing domestic supplies of oil will not only reduce the price of oil and reduce our dependency on foreign oil, it will increase revenues for the state & local jurisdictions without raising taxes on hard-working families.

Today, this was in the Long Beach Press Telegram & the Daily Breeze:

"By John Canalis, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 08/27/2008 11:31:22 PM PDT

LONG BEACH - A bill by Assemblywoman Betty Karnette, D-Long Beach, could lead to the discovery and extraction of additional oil from the Wilmington Oil Field beneath the harbor and pour hundreds of millions of dollars into city, port and state coffers, officials said Wednesday.

Assembly Bill 2165 would allow the State Lands Commission to negotiate a contract with the city and Occidental Petroleum Corp. to search for reserves and open new wells in the western end of the nation's third-largest oil field.

The agreement could mean an estimated $130 million to the city, $150 million to the port and $200 million to the state over 10 years, according to a bill summary.

'As we face difficult budget times at both state and local levels of government, this bill has the potential to help protect us from cuts to important city services, such as public safety,' Karnette said in a prepared statement.

'And as a Long Beach resident, I'm all for that.'"

Has the issue of higher gas prices reached a boiling point for voters, including Democratic voters throughout Long Beach? As many of you have correctly advised me as early as June, the answer appears to be "YES". With Senator McCain edging past Senator Obama in the Gallup Daily Tracking Poll within days AFTER both the Democratic VP selection and the start of their convention, Democratic pollsters appear worried. Both of these events usually trigger a measurable increase in polling for the party candidate, and the state Democrats need voters to be excited about their presidential candidate in order to hide all of their failings here in California. Because this is not the case, and with 20%-30% of former Hillary voters stating their support for McCain (plus another roughly 20%+ of former Hillary voters still undecided), State Democrats are going to start feeling the pinch.

Assembly member Karnette's legacy will mean little if she cannot successfully hand off her termed-out seat to her mirror-image candidate, Bonnie Lowenthal. With California, and especially Long Beach, being a big source of Hillary supporters, the Democrats need to try to win those voters back. Because Senator Obama's campaign has not yet been successful in securing much more than 50% of them, this leaves open opportunities not only for Senator McCain to compete in California, but for Republican Assembly nominee Gabriella Holt to entertain Democrats & Independents that formerly supported Karnette, and are now taking serious looks at Senator McCain.

I believe this is an attempt by Assembly member Karnette and fellow Democrats to try and take the oil issue off of the table, and I hope our Republican nominees and leadership call them out for what this is...blatant pandering. I understand that Democrats will like this bill because it will provide more funds for them to waste; do you really think that public safety has such a low priority in the state budget that their services would be the first to go? And if so, why aren't Republicans calling for an open, public look at how all state services are funded, and where they are on the Democrat's list of priorities? If Public Safety and Education are so high on their lists, why are they the two subjects always threatened to be cut if another bond isn't passed?

We'll have to see how serious Assembly member Karnette is in ensuring this bill actually gets passed, or if this is merely a political stunt to say "See, Democrats want to solve the oil crisis! We introduced a bill!". I suspect that the worst thing that the Legislature could do, as far as Karnette and the Democrats are concerned, is actually pass this bill. I hope the Republicans call her bluff and pass it!

Then Bonnie can go back to the PV Land Conservancy & the Sierra Club and explain whether she supports Karnette's bill to drill in the district. I think you all know my position...

California Proposition Strategy - "Earn Your Vote or Else"

Many of you are rightfully questioning the number of propositions on ballots each election day, and have figured out the Democratic strategy for getting important propositions crowded in with nanny legislation and expensive bond measures. Where some of you have taken the "when all else fails, vote no" in order to ensure our legislators can't "do more damage", it's critical to get the word out about those propositions we DO need passed in order to hold legislators more accountable to you the voters.

While I am currently working on a quick black-and-white slate form for assembly district precinct chairs to customize for their specific areas, I will ensure the recommended voting for the 12 propositions is included to distribute. But I will need the help of all of you to spread the word. Even better is to help spread the strategy I hope all of us will adopt: Propositions should "earn your vote" in order to be considered. So far, only three propositions have earned my support. I will break these out in separate posts to hopefully make the case and earn your support as well.

Over the next few weeks, unless other local news rises to a level of immediate need in reporting, I plan to dedicate my next few posts to specifically discuss each proposition. You're both welcome and encouraged to forward these comments throughout your statewide friends and family, and to post comments about whether you feel I'm on the right track or should consider a different position. While the overwhelming majority of this blog's readers are Republican, I know I have some Independent and Democratic readers, including RPV City Council member Tom Long (I didn't say they were all "fans"! LOL!). I welcome comments from all sources, and so long as there is no profanity or personal attacks, I allow the comments to be posted without edit. I feel it's important for all of us to see and participate in the comment dialogue.

If you'd like to prepare a position on a particular proposition, send me a word document at stammiam@yahoo.com, and if I agree with the position, I'll gladly post it with your name as a "special guest blogger".

Let's get these propositions vetted on behalf of our fellow Californians!

GOTV Night - Michelle & Shawn Steel join Host Committee; Republican Nominees Holt & Gutierrez confirmed to speak

Fellow Republican Activists & Friends,

I first want to send out a personal thank-you to both the Honorable Michelle Steel, our hard-fighting Board of Equalization Member, and our National Committeeman-Elect Shawn Steel for joining our host committee and lending their valuable support for this important event.

I am also extremely pleased to confirm both of your Republican Nominees, 54th State Assembly Nominee Gabriella Holt & 25th State Senate Nominee Lydia Gutierrez, to our fantastic agenda for Thursday Night's McCain Nation / GOP GOTV Event in San Pedro.

Both Gabriella & Lydia are important additions to our agenda, and these fantastic Republican women will have a dedicated portion of the agenda to present their campaigns, as well as the opportunity through an open forum with you to answer questions about how they will fight for you in Sacramento. This is your opportunity to have your voice heard and to learn how to get these great nominees elected by turning out the vote in your neighborhood!

The agenda includes:
- Two-way audience discussion about the 2008 national election;
- Brief video about Senator McCain;
- Joint conference call with a national Republican VIP;
- Brief overview on how you can Get-Out-The Vote in your local neighborhood;
- Discussion period about our state & local issues, followed by our state candidates (or representatives) telling you how they are going to address these issues when we get them elected.

I expect the California Republican Party to send the media to our event due to the relative size and planned agenda. This will be a good rally for all of us to kick-off our fall campaigns!

If you haven't done so already, please RSVP on our event site at: http://www.johnmccain.com/mccainnation/Default.aspx. (The zip code for our event is 90731.)

The site includes a feature to do driving directions for you. Though it's not required to attend, the RSVP help ensure we plan for seating, refreshments, and campaign literature for the nominees. Please bring as many friends, neighbors, disenfranchised Democrats & Independents, and others as you can!

See you Thursday for this important event in our local efforts to turn out the Republican vote!

John S. Stammreich
Chairman - 54th AD Republican Central Committee

Drill now...or $8 per gallon gas? What is your choice?

Like many of you, I've been listening to the daily talk shows on both the radio and on cable discuss the oil crisis. I believe that unless the Democratic Congress figures out how to get gasoline back down under $4 per gallon, the energy crisis will be a much bigger factor on the November election than the Iraq War or anything else Democrats can stir up. Let's face it: the Iraq War has not been the primary factor in the November elections since 2002 (yes, BEFORE we went in!) when Republicans (and Democrats) campaigned on a strong forceful approach to Iraq. In 2004, Senator Kerry had plenty of skeletons in his closet that our Swift Boat friends were happy to enlighten us about. In 2006, the Republican Party had both entangled itself with various scandals and Democrats did a good job of exposing the wasteful government spending of Republicans. In 2008, I believe the issue that will eclipse the Iraq War will be the cost of gasoline and what each candidate (at all levels) proposed to do about it.

This is where we have a HUGE advantage! Regardless of your income level, political affiliation, or other concern, everyone is affected by the price of gasoline. Even my mass transit friends who still ride the MAX bus from San Pedro to El Segundo (and hence do not commute in a car) have to purchase groceries and other things that are becoming more expensive due to the cost of transportation. Lower income families are affected the most, as they are seeing a higher percentage of their disposable income having to go to the rising cost of gasoline and related expenses. So...our new leaders HAVE to have viable solutions to this growing problem.

The ideas coming from the Democrats center around this basic premise: We have to find someone to BLAME! It's either the speculators, or the naughty SUV drivers (like me) or maybe even the greedy oil companies that want to (heaven forbid) actually make a profit doing business. The latter two "causes" have recently become less promoted by Democrats, likely because most of their fellow voters are also driving SUV's, and voters are starting to see that adding taxes to businesses like oil companies will simply raise the prices at the pump. (Remember - businesses don't pay ANY taxes! Consumers do when the increase costs are flowed into the prices of goods and services.) I particularly like the recent emphasis on blaming the speculators, particularly because Democrats won't admit that the solutions proposed by Republicans would actually address the issue of speculation.

Republicans have been leading the fight to declare now as the time to consider drilling oil domestically. Presidential candidate John McCain has recently acknowledged that high prices combined with our dependency on foreign oil have re-prioritized our need to explore and utilize our natural resources while our technological advances are busy working to strengthen viable energy alternatives. While I hope that all states with oil resources will choose to tap into them, I think McCain has the proper position that gives states the right to decide whether they will drill. (This is one of the basic tenets of the Republican Party - states' rights over federal rights as much as possible). All three states with the most oil reserves, Alaska, California and Florida, are experiencing recent increases in their unemployment rates. Opening the opportunities for oil companies to invest in drilling operations in each of those states will almost assuredly increase employment. What else will it do? Increase supply, of course!

But Democrats claim that we would not see any significant amounts of oil from these operations for 10+ yuears. Thought more credible engineers state that we wold see significant amounts within 3 years, wouldn't forecasts of higher oil amounts (even later than sooner) have a significant impact on the speculation of oil volume? So wouldn't increasing the oil supply take away the alleged "power" of the speculators?

This is more of the Democrats' need to have issues with parties to blame, rather than viable solutions that could dry up an issue. Such is the case with the homeless, the state education system and affirmative action. If any of these issues were to suddenly be declared resolved, activists of these issues would be without purpose. Unfortunately for them, they underestimated the will of their allies, the far-left environmentalists, to drive the price of gasoline so high.

Even Senator Obama has been quotes as saying that he thinks prices should be this high, but that he wishes it hadn't risen so fast. I guess he was hoping that we'd all have to wait for him to be elected before paying so much for gas.

Don't worry Senator! With your party in control of Congress, we're on a pace to see $8 a gallon gasoline by October. What will Americans do then?

California now a "Battleground State", thanks to the CA Supreme Court

No doubt many of your have already heard about the California Supreme Court decision last week to overturn the will of the voters in declaring marriage as being between a man and a woman to be "unconstitutional". This is despite the fact that California voters have been very open to the opportunities of domestic partnerships, including child adoption, partner benefits and other laws protecting members of the homosexual community. Rather than accept California as the role model state for others looking for the middle ground to satisfy large majorities on this issue, activist groups like Freedom to Marry and others are challenging California with an "All or Nothing" attitude.

Because of this irrational persistence, there is an increasing tide of conservatives and moderates who just may ensure that the latter is the case.

I have been in Washington, DC this past week, and I read this editorial in USA Today this morning that makes this same assertion. (You know there's problems on the far left when conservatives like me start agreeing with media outlets like USA Today.) Here are the opening paragraphs from the editorial:

"Our view on same-sex marriage: California ruling invites backlash against gay rights
Civil unions, the best solution, are jeopardized by court decision.
Last week, when California became the second state after Massachusetts to allow gay marriage, same-sex couples celebrated and began planning June weddings. Good for them. But the unfortunate and unnecessary impact of the California Supreme Court ruling might well have been to set back the cause of gay rights more broadly.

"The judges ruled 4-3 that gays' inability to get married amounts to discrimination under California's constitution, even though the state's domestic partnership laws give them the benefits and responsibilities of marriage.

"In other words, pragmatic political compromise on the intensely controversial issue is not allowed in California. It's all or nothing, and recent political history leaves little doubt about what will follow.

"In the three years after Massachusetts' top court legalized gay marriage in 2004, 23 states rushed to adopt constitutional bans on gay marriage. This presidential election year is likely to bring more of the same.

"In effect, California's high court fixed something that wasn't broken. The state's domestic partnership laws have been a model for other states searching for the needed middle ground that addresses the deep-felt national division over gay marriage."


The full editorial, plus opposing views from both sides of the issue, are located here: http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/05/our-view-on-sam.html#more

My take on the ramifications of this ruling is this: the California Republican Party now has a November issue to motivate ultra-conservatives to turn out (and vote for the full Republican ticket), and for moderates (who accepted the domestic partnership middle-ground) to hold Democratic politicians responsible for risking California's status as the original middle-ground state. In my opinion, the persistence of the ultra-left wing activists in the gay-rights community has made California a potential battleground state for McCain.

Why do I believe this?

First, did you notice how quickly Senator McCain scheduled a trip to Stockton after the ruling? Second, have you heard a press release from either Democratic Presidential campaign since the ruling? Senator McCain has already gone on the record as being a defender of the sanctity of marriage between a man & woman, which is still supported by 56% of voters nationwide, according to the Gallup Poll cited in the USA Today editorial. Finally, the right-wing groups that had been pushing for a constitutional amendment about marriage have been given new life, and are now collecting more signatures at a feverish pace.

In our own assembly district, the issue of homosexual marriage will be a volatile one. With Long Beach being a stand-out city on gay-rights issues and activism, no doubt the ruling has been the topic of many local conversations and speeches. But with the heavy concentration of Catholic/Christian Democrats in both East Long Beach and San Pedro who will not be comfortable sacrificing their religious tenants in favor of a secular movement, the 54th Assembly District is going to have plenty of debates and discussions on this topic. Especially after the constitutional amendment measure is confirmed for the November ballot.

If Republicans claim the established middle-ground on this issue by accepting the premise of domestic partnerships while holding the line and protecting the sanctity of "marriage" as being between a man and a woman, I believe we will see moderate districts, including our own 54th AD, lean heavily toward McCain and our other great Republican candidates.

Let's hope the far-left Democrat candidates running this fall feel the pressure from the gay-rights special interest groups to keep leaning even more left. The irrational insistence to claim the "M" word (marriage) for themselves has re-opened a Pandora's Box that conservatives and moderates can work together to close in the best interests of all voters.