When voters weigh candidates for legislative office every two years, they make decisions based primarily on how they believe the candidates will vote on key issues. They review campaign brochures, position papers, websites, and talk to friends and co-workers within their networks.
However, South Bay constituents only have a 2 in 3 chance of their current state senator even casting a vote! The Sacramento Bee reported December 7th on the California legislators’ absence & abstention records, and Senator Jenny Oropeza, D-Long Beach, topped all 120 state legislators, missing 931 votes so far this session – about one-third of possible votes.
(from Sacbee.com):
“Oropeza said she missed most of those votes while caring for her mother, who lives alone in Southern California and became ill earlier this year."
“Oropeza said she herself came down with the flu at one point during the session, and she had planned a Mediterranean cruise for November, when the Senate typically is not in session. When the Senate was called backed to deal with water issues, Oropeza said she couldn't cancel without losing $6,000. And, anyway, she was already aboard her ship.”
‘"It's very important to be there for votes," Oropeza acknowledged, adding that she kept in contact with her staff and was prepared to do whatever it took to get to Sacramento if a bill hinged on her vote.”
One question that will be on South Bay voters’ minds is “What if I had experienced the same situations at my job? Would my job still pay me for basically missing a third of my work hours?”
[end of quote]
In the entitlement world that Oropeza lives in, along with the SEIU and the CTA, excuses for “reasonable absences” are supposed to be accepted on the backs of taxpayers. Legislators like Oropeza have worked in this entitlement world for most of their adult careers, either as elected officials or government worker.
In the private sector, we don’t get such luxury. We have what’s called “Personal Time-Off (PTO)”, and we are allotted a certain amount of paid hours each year, with an approved amount of carryover to the next calendar year. If we use more than we are allotted, the time becomes “unpaid leave”. With exceptions for bereavement & jury duty, the system encourages personal time management and personal responsibility.
The more important issue brought up by the Sacramento Bee article is the practice by legislators to “check in” at morning roll call, and then be absent for significant portions of the legislative day. The article continues:
“Oropeza was counted as present during roll call on days where she missed about half of the 931 votes, according to a Bee review of Senate daily journals. Her absences tended to come at the beginning or end of the week. In addition, her office said roll call often is taken early in the day and she would sometimes leave later to attend to her mother or official business.”
Again, voters in the South Bay need to ask themselves in 2010 whether they would receive similar privileged treatment at their place of employment. How would most businesses run if all their employees had to do was “check in” at the beginning of the day and be paid for a full day’s work?
It appears Senator Oropeza has been living in the entitlement world of Sacramento politics and only performing as a part-time legislator. She has shown what can be accomplished by legislators only participating one-third of the time.
Could this be an indirect endorsement by Senator Oropeza for the Part-Time Legislature Amendment? Are the pundits arguing how legislators need the hours allotted to full-time status going to reconcile Senator Oropeza’s “part-time” status?
What is certain is that South Bay voters need a state senator who is truly “present”, not just marked down as such, when the State Senate is in session. Senator Oropeza has not met that need, and South Bay voters will hopefully hold her & other legislators accountable next November.
Showing posts with label Oropeza. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Oropeza. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Monday, July 13, 2009
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.
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.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Call our local state Legislators today
Forwarded from Jon Fleischman, CRP Vice Chairman for the Southern Region and publisher of Flash Report (www.flashreport.com)
We sent a message to Sacramento on May 19th! What is it going to take for them to properly receive it?
I think it's going to take November 2010 to truly shake up Sacramento. It's going to take an overhaul in both how the Legislature performs and, because they refuse to change, those performing the overhaul. Honestly, do you see Senator Jenny Oropeza suddenly "getting it" and becoming fiscally conservative? Assemblymember Bonnie Lowenthal is still fairly new, but her latest e-blast to us here in the 54th tells us that she's been fully assimilated into the "borg" that is Assembly Speaker Karen Bass' mandatory rhetoric for all Democratic legislators.
Great post by Jon follows. Let's heed his action and heat up the phone lines!
Bonnie's Office # is 310-548-6420 (I already talked to her in person on Saturday. Her response was the typical "protect the children...blah, blah, blah)
Jenny's office # is 310-318-6944 (I don't expect her back in town until the per-diem budget runs dry. Gabriella Holt's group is going to change all that by making the per-diem run out much faster! The union grip will be weakened considerably when this happens!)
Light up the lines!
John
Subject: Have You Contacted GOP State Legislators?
GOP Legislators: Stand Firm And Don't "Kick The Can" -- Your State Is Counting On You
by Jon Fleischman - Publisher
Today is the last day of the 2009-2010 fiscal year, and it is the final opportunity for the State Legislature to place on the Governor's desk a comprehensive fix to next fiscal year's way-out-out-whack budget before we are actually IN that fiscal year. By "comprehensive fix" -- I mean a package of cuts and reforms that ensures that state government will be able to make it all of the way to June 30, 2010 without having yet another "fiscal crisis" where we are back at the cliff, again.
Governor Schwarzenegger has been 100% on message since the May 19th Special Election -- we need a complete fix for the budget situation -- one that does so taking into account that the voters overwhelmingly rejected tax increases to do so.
Legislative Democrats, unbelievably Sunday (in the Assembly) and yesterday (in the Senate) rammed through billions of dollars in illegal majority-vote tax increases for what appears to be the sole purpose of sticking the legislative "middle finger" up at California voters -- especially since the Governor has and continues to make it clear that any legislation that hits his desk with tax increases will be vetoed -- look for that to happen today.
Republican legislators need to keep the pressure on Democrat lawmakers who, understanding the world of politics, are under immense pressure internally. The public employee unions don't just wield a big stick -- they are swinging a multi-million dollar PAC baseball bat, and are prepared to make a pinata out of any Democrat who votes for comprehensive cuts. That said, they probably don't have to bother swinging that bat because the liberal ideologues in the Democrat caucus are probably prepared to drive off of the proverbial cliff before they make the kinds of cuts that are needed.
I have written several times already about the inherent and perilous danger of "partial solutions" to the budget crisis -- where some cuts are adopted, but cuts that fall far short of what is needed to make it all the way through the 2009-2010 fiscal year. Passing these kinds of cuts is a recipe for another show-down well into the new fiscal year, when the case will be made that the shorter time window make it far more difficult to make and implement cuts to state spending. Which is really the goal of the Democrats -- partial cuts now -- and then push for tax increases after the Summer. And why not? They've already seen Republicans who spent years vocalizing anti-tax sentiments cave in last February to massive increases in sales, income and car taxes. Why shouldn't they hold out hope?
Republicans hold the strategic advantage right now. It is right now at this time and in this place that the argument has flipped from February, where it was whether Republicans will support taxes to avoid insolvency -- to whether or not the Democrats will make enough cuts to do so. And believe me, the Democrats will do anything to "kick the can" into next fiscal year.
Which brings into play this issue of around $3 billion in available cuts to eduction in the fiscal year ending today that the Democrats, and at least as of three days ago, Assembly Republicans want to implement. I have spoken to many legislators who have said to me, "If we don't take those cuts now, before the fiscal year ends, we'll never be able to take them."
To those folks I have responded that there is always a reason to delay needed, comprehensive reforms. Today it is some education cuts, tomorrow it will be something else. Let us consider the effect of pushing through those cuts today (in a wonderful, happy show of bipartisan love). First and foremost, we will have "kicked the can" probably into the Fall on having to make cuts to avoid insolvency and the issuance of IOU's. Understand that without this back pressure, the Democrats in the legislature WILL NOT produce comprehensive cuts. Also not that while $3 billion in cuts will have been achieved, what is the "opportunity cost" of pushing out the pressure for a real solution (the one that protects taxpayers)?
The biggest financial cost is that if the Democrats get even nine weeks of a breather, than means that over 1/5th of the call-in $17 billion in cuts that the Governor has proposed for FY 2009-2010 will have been lost. That's around $2.5 billion in lost cuts -- or nearly the entire amount "saved" by rushing into a deal today. Also, as I mentioned above, as we get into the fall, it becomes that much harder for cuts to be implemented in time to impact this fiscal year (nothing happens quickly in government -- except implementing tax increases).
A number of the GOP legislators that I spoke or emailed with told me that it would be folly not to take the $3 billion in education cuts on the table today -- "Cuts without strings? How can I vote against that? The next time I see cuts like this, they may be attached to tax increases!"
Mark my words, making partial cuts today, that do not solve the state's entire FY 2009-2010 problem do come with "strings" -- they come with emboldening the Democrats in Sacramento, and in moving the debate time and circumstances.
Every Republican legislator needs to remember what the political atmosphere was like in the State Capitol this past January and February. That is what you are inviting back into the process if you don't hold the line against partial fixes and short-term "kick the can" cuts.
Unlike last February, we now have an opportunity to face this budget crisis with all Republicans united -- legislators and the Governor. Let's take that opportunity to accomplish a complete victory. We do this by keeping the pressure on for a comprehensive and total solution.
We sent a message to Sacramento on May 19th! What is it going to take for them to properly receive it?
I think it's going to take November 2010 to truly shake up Sacramento. It's going to take an overhaul in both how the Legislature performs and, because they refuse to change, those performing the overhaul. Honestly, do you see Senator Jenny Oropeza suddenly "getting it" and becoming fiscally conservative? Assemblymember Bonnie Lowenthal is still fairly new, but her latest e-blast to us here in the 54th tells us that she's been fully assimilated into the "borg" that is Assembly Speaker Karen Bass' mandatory rhetoric for all Democratic legislators.
Great post by Jon follows. Let's heed his action and heat up the phone lines!
Bonnie's Office # is 310-548-6420 (I already talked to her in person on Saturday. Her response was the typical "protect the children...blah, blah, blah)
Jenny's office # is 310-318-6944 (I don't expect her back in town until the per-diem budget runs dry. Gabriella Holt's group is going to change all that by making the per-diem run out much faster! The union grip will be weakened considerably when this happens!)
Light up the lines!
John
Subject: Have You Contacted GOP State Legislators?
GOP Legislators: Stand Firm And Don't "Kick The Can" -- Your State Is Counting On You
by Jon Fleischman - Publisher
Today is the last day of the 2009-2010 fiscal year, and it is the final opportunity for the State Legislature to place on the Governor's desk a comprehensive fix to next fiscal year's way-out-out-whack budget before we are actually IN that fiscal year. By "comprehensive fix" -- I mean a package of cuts and reforms that ensures that state government will be able to make it all of the way to June 30, 2010 without having yet another "fiscal crisis" where we are back at the cliff, again.
Governor Schwarzenegger has been 100% on message since the May 19th Special Election -- we need a complete fix for the budget situation -- one that does so taking into account that the voters overwhelmingly rejected tax increases to do so.
Legislative Democrats, unbelievably Sunday (in the Assembly) and yesterday (in the Senate) rammed through billions of dollars in illegal majority-vote tax increases for what appears to be the sole purpose of sticking the legislative "middle finger" up at California voters -- especially since the Governor has and continues to make it clear that any legislation that hits his desk with tax increases will be vetoed -- look for that to happen today.
Republican legislators need to keep the pressure on Democrat lawmakers who, understanding the world of politics, are under immense pressure internally. The public employee unions don't just wield a big stick -- they are swinging a multi-million dollar PAC baseball bat, and are prepared to make a pinata out of any Democrat who votes for comprehensive cuts. That said, they probably don't have to bother swinging that bat because the liberal ideologues in the Democrat caucus are probably prepared to drive off of the proverbial cliff before they make the kinds of cuts that are needed.
I have written several times already about the inherent and perilous danger of "partial solutions" to the budget crisis -- where some cuts are adopted, but cuts that fall far short of what is needed to make it all the way through the 2009-2010 fiscal year. Passing these kinds of cuts is a recipe for another show-down well into the new fiscal year, when the case will be made that the shorter time window make it far more difficult to make and implement cuts to state spending. Which is really the goal of the Democrats -- partial cuts now -- and then push for tax increases after the Summer. And why not? They've already seen Republicans who spent years vocalizing anti-tax sentiments cave in last February to massive increases in sales, income and car taxes. Why shouldn't they hold out hope?
Republicans hold the strategic advantage right now. It is right now at this time and in this place that the argument has flipped from February, where it was whether Republicans will support taxes to avoid insolvency -- to whether or not the Democrats will make enough cuts to do so. And believe me, the Democrats will do anything to "kick the can" into next fiscal year.
Which brings into play this issue of around $3 billion in available cuts to eduction in the fiscal year ending today that the Democrats, and at least as of three days ago, Assembly Republicans want to implement. I have spoken to many legislators who have said to me, "If we don't take those cuts now, before the fiscal year ends, we'll never be able to take them."
To those folks I have responded that there is always a reason to delay needed, comprehensive reforms. Today it is some education cuts, tomorrow it will be something else. Let us consider the effect of pushing through those cuts today (in a wonderful, happy show of bipartisan love). First and foremost, we will have "kicked the can" probably into the Fall on having to make cuts to avoid insolvency and the issuance of IOU's. Understand that without this back pressure, the Democrats in the legislature WILL NOT produce comprehensive cuts. Also not that while $3 billion in cuts will have been achieved, what is the "opportunity cost" of pushing out the pressure for a real solution (the one that protects taxpayers)?
The biggest financial cost is that if the Democrats get even nine weeks of a breather, than means that over 1/5th of the call-in $17 billion in cuts that the Governor has proposed for FY 2009-2010 will have been lost. That's around $2.5 billion in lost cuts -- or nearly the entire amount "saved" by rushing into a deal today. Also, as I mentioned above, as we get into the fall, it becomes that much harder for cuts to be implemented in time to impact this fiscal year (nothing happens quickly in government -- except implementing tax increases).
A number of the GOP legislators that I spoke or emailed with told me that it would be folly not to take the $3 billion in education cuts on the table today -- "Cuts without strings? How can I vote against that? The next time I see cuts like this, they may be attached to tax increases!"
Mark my words, making partial cuts today, that do not solve the state's entire FY 2009-2010 problem do come with "strings" -- they come with emboldening the Democrats in Sacramento, and in moving the debate time and circumstances.
Every Republican legislator needs to remember what the political atmosphere was like in the State Capitol this past January and February. That is what you are inviting back into the process if you don't hold the line against partial fixes and short-term "kick the can" cuts.
Unlike last February, we now have an opportunity to face this budget crisis with all Republicans united -- legislators and the Governor. Let's take that opportunity to accomplish a complete victory. We do this by keeping the pressure on for a comprehensive and total solution.
Friday, May 22, 2009
Over 70% of 54th AD voters tell Arnold (and Bonnie) NO!
By now most of you know the overwhelming results of this past Tuesday's special election. Despite the Governor and Assembly Speaker predicting either a victory or a "close loss", the voters throughout the state sent a strong, direct message that no more tax revenue will be acceptable. The bleeding heart tactics of the Democrats, who drag out young children, minority teachers, firefighters and cops to do commercials 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.
Voters now know that this simply is not going to happen. If so, the follow-on question would be "why are budgets for education, police & fire so low in the list of budgetary priorities?"
I have a few highlights from Tuesday:
- For the first time in a long while, 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.
- Here in the 54th AD, Prop 1A finished over 6% below the statewide average, limping in with just barely 28%. Prop 1B also finished over 6% below the statewide average. Our new assemblymember, Bonnie Lowenthal, endorsed the statewide ballot measures, as evidenced by her staff members assigned to the neighborhood councils and HOA's handing out literature specifically showing a lack of opposition to them.
- Similar results are seen in the results of the 28th State Senate District, the race that you all know I'm running for in 2010.
- San Pedro native Carmen Trutanich rose above the slime that his opponent, Jack Weiss, was trying to drag them both through and will now show the City of Los Angeles what a "TRU" public servant can do!
- Republican Tina Park did a fantastic job with a late-season rally to unseat a Democratic imcumbent from the Los Angeles Community College Board. This is the first time in recent memory that a Republican has sat on that board, and Tina will have a lot of support, based on Tuesday's results, for criticizing how the Measure J funds are spent.
So the primary question I'll leave you with is this: Do you think our state legislators understood, or will make a sincere effort to understand, the results we gave them this past Tuesday?
Somehow, I anticipate the answer to this question will drive the 2010 elections. (Hey, a candidate can dream...!)
Voters now know that this simply is not going to happen. If so, the follow-on question would be "why are budgets for education, police & fire so low in the list of budgetary priorities?"
I have a few highlights from Tuesday:
- For the first time in a long while, 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.
- Here in the 54th AD, Prop 1A finished over 6% below the statewide average, limping in with just barely 28%. Prop 1B also finished over 6% below the statewide average. Our new assemblymember, Bonnie Lowenthal, endorsed the statewide ballot measures, as evidenced by her staff members assigned to the neighborhood councils and HOA's handing out literature specifically showing a lack of opposition to them.
- Similar results are seen in the results of the 28th State Senate District, the race that you all know I'm running for in 2010.
- San Pedro native Carmen Trutanich rose above the slime that his opponent, Jack Weiss, was trying to drag them both through and will now show the City of Los Angeles what a "TRU" public servant can do!
- Republican Tina Park did a fantastic job with a late-season rally to unseat a Democratic imcumbent from the Los Angeles Community College Board. This is the first time in recent memory that a Republican has sat on that board, and Tina will have a lot of support, based on Tuesday's results, for criticizing how the Measure J funds are spent.
So the primary question I'll leave you with is this: Do you think our state legislators understood, or will make a sincere effort to understand, the results we gave them this past Tuesday?
Somehow, I anticipate the answer to this question will drive the 2010 elections. (Hey, a candidate can dream...!)
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Why I am running for the State Senate
I consider those of you who actually take time to read my rantings and ravings to be special friends and supporters, and I wanted you to be among the first to know that I have filed candidacy papers to run for the California State Senate in 2010.
As you know, I have worked many political campaigns over the past 10 years; including campaigns for Republicans, Democrats and Independents. All have shared my basic principles of limited government, lower tax burdens on families/small businesses, and government’s role to serve its citizens, not the other way around.
Taxpayers from all political parties are banding together at Tea Parties across California and the nation to tell our elected officials that they have had enough. California’s legislators continue to engage in wasteful spending and propose higher taxes every year to pay for it. This month, six state ballot propositions (1A - 1F) threaten to increase the tax burden on California working families and small businesses to their highest levels in our state history. I cannot sit idly by and allow this madness to continue. I feel it is my calling to stand for the most important “special interest”: You, the taxpayers throughout California.
I am challenging Senator Jenny Oropeza in 2010 for the 28th State Senate District. This district includes Torrance, Carson, Redondo Beach, Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, El Segundo, Lomita, and the Los Angeles neighborhoods of Venice, Mar Vista, Harbor City, Wilmington, and my own Northwest San Pedro. I plan to officially kick-off my campaign in mid-May, shortly following our defeat of Propositions 1A-1F. I commit to you an aggressive campaign for the principles and values you have always known me to possess and require in your elected officials. Our state legislators, including Oropeza, need to learn how their wasteful spending and alliances with special interest groups are hurting the working class of California.
Thank you so much for your support for me these past few years. As the Obama administration continues to place heavy tax burdens on Americans and make mistakes to both domestic and foreign policy, we need to also focus on the significant lack of priorities our state government has set for California's future! We will send a message to Senator Oropeza and her tax-and-spend friends running California that the taxpayers will have a formidable defender of their quality of life and their pocketbooks in November 2010. Because as we all know,
It's STILL about the economy, ... Jenny!
javascript:void(0)
As you know, I have worked many political campaigns over the past 10 years; including campaigns for Republicans, Democrats and Independents. All have shared my basic principles of limited government, lower tax burdens on families/small businesses, and government’s role to serve its citizens, not the other way around.
Taxpayers from all political parties are banding together at Tea Parties across California and the nation to tell our elected officials that they have had enough. California’s legislators continue to engage in wasteful spending and propose higher taxes every year to pay for it. This month, six state ballot propositions (1A - 1F) threaten to increase the tax burden on California working families and small businesses to their highest levels in our state history. I cannot sit idly by and allow this madness to continue. I feel it is my calling to stand for the most important “special interest”: You, the taxpayers throughout California.
I am challenging Senator Jenny Oropeza in 2010 for the 28th State Senate District. This district includes Torrance, Carson, Redondo Beach, Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, El Segundo, Lomita, and the Los Angeles neighborhoods of Venice, Mar Vista, Harbor City, Wilmington, and my own Northwest San Pedro. I plan to officially kick-off my campaign in mid-May, shortly following our defeat of Propositions 1A-1F. I commit to you an aggressive campaign for the principles and values you have always known me to possess and require in your elected officials. Our state legislators, including Oropeza, need to learn how their wasteful spending and alliances with special interest groups are hurting the working class of California.
Thank you so much for your support for me these past few years. As the Obama administration continues to place heavy tax burdens on Americans and make mistakes to both domestic and foreign policy, we need to also focus on the significant lack of priorities our state government has set for California's future! We will send a message to Senator Oropeza and her tax-and-spend friends running California that the taxpayers will have a formidable defender of their quality of life and their pocketbooks in November 2010. Because as we all know,
It's STILL about the economy, ... Jenny!
javascript:void(0)
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Lowenthal, Oropeza & Hahn, obviously...but VLADOVIC?!
Among the liberal, anti-business politicians that are listed as supporters of the unpredictable Department of Water and Power energy rate hike on residents and businesses in the City of Los Angeles, the website lists the usual suspects who care more about their union pandering than their constituents' wallets, including Assemblymember Bonnie Lowenthal, State Senator Jenny Oropeza, and "San Pedro" / L.A. City Council member Janice Hahn. All three of these ladies have a past performance of making such horrible endorsements, and all have received my support during the few times that they display a glimmer of understanding how the economic engine truly works. In this situation, it does not take a CPA to understand that increasing the energy rates for residents and small businesses throughout the city will reduce spending power and the ability of businesses to employ as many residents. But as far as our Democratic leaders are concerned, so long as it helps satisfy one of the largest contributors to local elected campaigns, they can check the box.
What surprised me was scrolling down the list of supporters on the IBEW propaganda website and noticing someone who I assumed would be a little more knowledgeable about how the rate hike will affect the families of his students, LAUSD Board Member Richard Vladovic, whom many of us conservatives worked hard to get elected over the two liberal, union-friendly alternatives in 2007. I consider Dick a personal friend, and his endorsement for this measure surprised me. Even though he has his own union ties, I would have assumed that his long-time association with conservative principles, including his registration as a Republican until December 2006, would have steered him toward the decision in the best interests of the voters and not the special interests.
If you want to know what the informed residents and small businesses truly think, all one has to do in Los Angeles is look at which way the 90+ neighborhood councils are leaning. So far, every neighborhood council that has taken up a motion to consider this measure has voted to oppose it! EVERY ONE! A complete list will soon be available on www.VoteNoMeasureB,com, but just take my word for it.
The only people endorsing this measure are either working for the IBEW (and willing to steal money out of the pockets of residents to give to themselves in undeserving jobs) or looking for some sort of recognition or acknowledgement from the IBEW for a future political campaign. Like I said, the usual liberal, business-hating politicos are front and center on the supporter list.
It's just a shame that someone I thought was above it has decided that the slop in the trough tastes just fine!
What surprised me was scrolling down the list of supporters on the IBEW propaganda website and noticing someone who I assumed would be a little more knowledgeable about how the rate hike will affect the families of his students, LAUSD Board Member Richard Vladovic, whom many of us conservatives worked hard to get elected over the two liberal, union-friendly alternatives in 2007. I consider Dick a personal friend, and his endorsement for this measure surprised me. Even though he has his own union ties, I would have assumed that his long-time association with conservative principles, including his registration as a Republican until December 2006, would have steered him toward the decision in the best interests of the voters and not the special interests.
If you want to know what the informed residents and small businesses truly think, all one has to do in Los Angeles is look at which way the 90+ neighborhood councils are leaning. So far, every neighborhood council that has taken up a motion to consider this measure has voted to oppose it! EVERY ONE! A complete list will soon be available on www.VoteNoMeasureB,com, but just take my word for it.
The only people endorsing this measure are either working for the IBEW (and willing to steal money out of the pockets of residents to give to themselves in undeserving jobs) or looking for some sort of recognition or acknowledgement from the IBEW for a future political campaign. Like I said, the usual liberal, business-hating politicos are front and center on the supporter list.
It's just a shame that someone I thought was above it has decided that the slop in the trough tastes just fine!
Friday, February 29, 2008
Why Jenny Oropeza is NOT a businesswoman
Sorry for the week off. I enjoyed a weekend at the California Republican Party Convention in San Francisco, and was planning to write about the results. But I HAD to respond to the editorial in the Thursday Daily Breeze by State Senator Oropeza, who believes that your mortgage tax deduction is a "loophole" that needs to be filled.
In other works, you STILL don't pay enough taxes!
Senator Oropeza states in her editorial that "Leadership means solving problems." She continues..." government leaders must make difficult public service funding decisions with a fixed amount of revenue, and single parents must balance food, clothing and housing needs within the limits of their paychecks. Leaders of all kinds cannot afford to ignore reality; instead, they must make hard decisions with the information at hand." When I first read the editorial, I thought she had literally switched parties, or at least had a VERY good dinner meeting with fellow Senator Tom McClintock. But then she goes on to state "Beyond a few small fee increases, the governor has not proposed new or higher taxes to help balance revenues - echoing the party line issued by legislative Republicans." Thank you, Governor Schwarzenneger!
Democrats continue to miss the basic point of Senator McClintock: The business community does not pay taxes! Furthermore, rich individuals and families are not the most hurt by increased taxes; the poor and missle class are! For businesses, sales tax and other expenses are collected through the price of their products. Any increase of either are readily transferred to the consumer through increased prices. As for the rich, the costs of increased taxes are paid through less spending, whether it's eating out, traveling, purchasing nicer clothes, etc. Those employed in these industries that are dependent upon rich spenders are the hardest hit. This means restaurants, hotels, retail stores & other employers of low and middle class Americans.
The Long Beach Press-Telegram reported it better today: "With the state still facing a massive budget deficit, lawmakers have launched an effort to examine how many of the estimated $50 billion in tax credits and deductions they can reduce or eliminate to help balance the books. Those credits - sometimes called 'loopholes' by critics - range from the mortgage interest deduction to research credits for business to enterprise zones in the inner city. Many of them represent politically popular benefits that analysts say will be very difficult to eliminate when a two-thirds vote is required."
I'm surprised that those in Senator Oropeza's district, which includes Carson, El Segundo, Torrance, the Beach Cities and my portion of San Pedro, have tolerated someone who believes that her constituents need to sacrifice their tax deductions, which I'm sure are used primarily on essentials & retail (aka, economic stimulus). Jenny had a cake walk to get elected her first term; with these types of comments and liberal opinions, she needs to have a true challenge in 2010. Maybe something for the 53rd and 54th AD committees to work on together.
I may know someone interested...
In other works, you STILL don't pay enough taxes!
Senator Oropeza states in her editorial that "Leadership means solving problems." She continues..." government leaders must make difficult public service funding decisions with a fixed amount of revenue, and single parents must balance food, clothing and housing needs within the limits of their paychecks. Leaders of all kinds cannot afford to ignore reality; instead, they must make hard decisions with the information at hand." When I first read the editorial, I thought she had literally switched parties, or at least had a VERY good dinner meeting with fellow Senator Tom McClintock. But then she goes on to state "Beyond a few small fee increases, the governor has not proposed new or higher taxes to help balance revenues - echoing the party line issued by legislative Republicans." Thank you, Governor Schwarzenneger!
Democrats continue to miss the basic point of Senator McClintock: The business community does not pay taxes! Furthermore, rich individuals and families are not the most hurt by increased taxes; the poor and missle class are! For businesses, sales tax and other expenses are collected through the price of their products. Any increase of either are readily transferred to the consumer through increased prices. As for the rich, the costs of increased taxes are paid through less spending, whether it's eating out, traveling, purchasing nicer clothes, etc. Those employed in these industries that are dependent upon rich spenders are the hardest hit. This means restaurants, hotels, retail stores & other employers of low and middle class Americans.
The Long Beach Press-Telegram reported it better today: "With the state still facing a massive budget deficit, lawmakers have launched an effort to examine how many of the estimated $50 billion in tax credits and deductions they can reduce or eliminate to help balance the books. Those credits - sometimes called 'loopholes' by critics - range from the mortgage interest deduction to research credits for business to enterprise zones in the inner city. Many of them represent politically popular benefits that analysts say will be very difficult to eliminate when a two-thirds vote is required."
I'm surprised that those in Senator Oropeza's district, which includes Carson, El Segundo, Torrance, the Beach Cities and my portion of San Pedro, have tolerated someone who believes that her constituents need to sacrifice their tax deductions, which I'm sure are used primarily on essentials & retail (aka, economic stimulus). Jenny had a cake walk to get elected her first term; with these types of comments and liberal opinions, she needs to have a true challenge in 2010. Maybe something for the 53rd and 54th AD committees to work on together.
I may know someone interested...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
