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)
Showing posts with label San Pedro. Show all posts
Showing posts with label San Pedro. Show all posts
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Republican Values victorious on Tuesday
I know some of you will think this is a bit of a spin job, but the results of Tuesday's election for Los Angeles County, and specifically the City of Los Angeles, should give those of us loyal to conservative principles and values much hope. From the defense of EVERY Republican local seat to the voting trend symbolized by the results of key measures, the liberals are starting to lose their grip on this county, slowly but surely.
The 54th AD had two Republican candidates in Palos Verdes Estates up for election Tuesday against a Democrat who ran on the "why can't I break the law and disturb my neighbors" campaign. Incumbent James Goodhart and PVE Planning Commissioner George Bird ran great campaigns that represented what most of the voters in PVE were looking for. Their sole opponent was Democrat Sheryll Iannitti, who would not likely have received our endorsement has she been a Republican anyway due to her reason for running. This was the woman who ran for office because she was upset that the city asked her to remove her Halloween decorations from city property. She was basically running on an assumption that residents of Palos Verdes Estates wanted "change"; anyone familiar with PVE like I am can tell you that's not the best campaign slogan on "the Hill".
Congratulations to our two endorsed elected candidates!
For San Pedro Republicans, Tuesday night seemed somewhat bleak and uneventful to start. Mayor Villaraigosa was leading by a comfortable margin, Janice Hahn had pretty much locked up her third term, and Measure B was still in a slight lead despite every neighborhood council from the Northern San Fernando Valley to Coastal San Pedro opposing it. When most of the voters went to bed, even the IBEW has issued their announcement talking about how great their Measure B victory was.
But something funny happened around 1:00am...the majority vote turned to NO!
The final bulletin issued at 1:45am Wednesday morning shows only 49.7% of voters supporting Measure B, signifying a trend that resulted from the voting public learning more about the issues of the measure. I have been pretty detailed in my earlier posts about Measure B, so I won't repeat them. The trend of voting was a result of the absentee voters and districts closer to downtown L.A. being the first counted. As the precincts from the San Fernando Valley, Westside, and Harbor area came in, the gap narrowed until it flipped right before the end of counting the nearly 250,000 votes.
But the battle to defeat Measure B is not yet complete. Another 46,000 ballots remain from late absentees turned in at polling places, provisional ballots, and ballots with issues and discrepancies. The No on Measure B team has committed members observing the counting daily, and it looks like the trend downward for Measure B should continue. I look forward to announcing the official defeat of this measure.
There was much to be proud of Tuesday for those who believe in the Republican principles and values of limited government and better business practices. Now we hope to begin the resurgence of the Party through taking local seats from Democrats, and it starts in Long Beach in just 4 1/2 weeks...
The 54th AD had two Republican candidates in Palos Verdes Estates up for election Tuesday against a Democrat who ran on the "why can't I break the law and disturb my neighbors" campaign. Incumbent James Goodhart and PVE Planning Commissioner George Bird ran great campaigns that represented what most of the voters in PVE were looking for. Their sole opponent was Democrat Sheryll Iannitti, who would not likely have received our endorsement has she been a Republican anyway due to her reason for running. This was the woman who ran for office because she was upset that the city asked her to remove her Halloween decorations from city property. She was basically running on an assumption that residents of Palos Verdes Estates wanted "change"; anyone familiar with PVE like I am can tell you that's not the best campaign slogan on "the Hill".
Congratulations to our two endorsed elected candidates!
For San Pedro Republicans, Tuesday night seemed somewhat bleak and uneventful to start. Mayor Villaraigosa was leading by a comfortable margin, Janice Hahn had pretty much locked up her third term, and Measure B was still in a slight lead despite every neighborhood council from the Northern San Fernando Valley to Coastal San Pedro opposing it. When most of the voters went to bed, even the IBEW has issued their announcement talking about how great their Measure B victory was.
But something funny happened around 1:00am...the majority vote turned to NO!
The final bulletin issued at 1:45am Wednesday morning shows only 49.7% of voters supporting Measure B, signifying a trend that resulted from the voting public learning more about the issues of the measure. I have been pretty detailed in my earlier posts about Measure B, so I won't repeat them. The trend of voting was a result of the absentee voters and districts closer to downtown L.A. being the first counted. As the precincts from the San Fernando Valley, Westside, and Harbor area came in, the gap narrowed until it flipped right before the end of counting the nearly 250,000 votes.
But the battle to defeat Measure B is not yet complete. Another 46,000 ballots remain from late absentees turned in at polling places, provisional ballots, and ballots with issues and discrepancies. The No on Measure B team has committed members observing the counting daily, and it looks like the trend downward for Measure B should continue. I look forward to announcing the official defeat of this measure.
There was much to be proud of Tuesday for those who believe in the Republican principles and values of limited government and better business practices. Now we hope to begin the resurgence of the Party through taking local seats from Democrats, and it starts in Long Beach in just 4 1/2 weeks...
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Will the L.A. City Council get stung by Proposition B?
To give you an idea of just how much of a "third rail" the ballot measure known as Proposition B is here in Los Angeles, I've copied in the latest article from CityWatch, the publication that I trust to keep the best watchful eye on what the L.A. City Council is up to. I have some good friends writing for CityWatch, including Stephen Box (one of the writers below).
In addition to the article below about L.A. Councilmember Bill Rosendahl's lukewarm position, I was a personal witness to our own councilmember, Janice Hahn, giving a neutral response to her position on Proposition B when asked by DWP Committee chair, Dr. Soledad Garcia, at last night's Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council meeting. I think Hahn gave a good, politically safe answer, given the growing unpopularity of this measure, as well as the process of how the L.A. City Council placed it on the March ballot. As the newest appointee to the DWP Committee as the lead liaison for Hahn's district, I am committed to representing both the low to middle-income residents, as well as the numerous small businesses, who will be hard hit by the passage of this rate hike measure.
Here is the latest article from CityWatch (http://www.citywatchla.com):
DWP Workshop Notebook
By David Lowell and Stephen Box
DWP General Manager, H. David Nahai, spent Saturday morning giving a three-hour "Renewable Energy" presentation to a crowd of approximately 70 community leaders representing Neighborhood Councils from throughout the city, most of whom were sitting on the edge of their seats waiting for the discussion of Measure B to come up.
Measure B is the City's proposed "Green Energy and Good Jobs for Los Angeles Act," which has been called "risky" by the City's own analyst and will appear on the March 3rd ballot. Nahai and Assistant GM Aram Benyamin went to great lengths to steer clear of the topic, instead demonstrating incredible message control and sticking to the polished PowerPoint presentation that was well received.
Their efforts to bypass B went askew, however, when Councilman Bill Rosendahl dropped by and jumped into the mix, announcing "I have not made up my mind. I voted to put it on the ballot but I haven't voted to support it because, frankly, I want to understand the details that are to be presented to us as a Council. I might end up supporting it, I might not." (Click here for Rosendahl video)
Rosendahl echoed the sentiment of literally everybody by stating "I believe whole-heartedly in Solar. We're in California. It's Sunny. My roof is flat." He continued by endorsing the DWP's union and the opportunity to bring more people into the DWP workforce while at the same time developing the private sector partnerships and supporting solar housing collectives such as proposed in Mar Vista.
Rosendahl polled the room and found that many were opposed to measure B, that many were undecided, that everybody reckoned that they had an open mind and that there were two people in support of Measure B, one of whom was Gary Baratta who explained "Solar Power has to go forward. There is absolutely no reason not to go forward. The DWP is the only party in a position to develop the infrastructure necessary to deliver power." Gary went on to urge Nahai to ignore the City Charter and to stop contributing funds to the City's general funds.
This softball suggestion from Baratta allowed Nahai to respond vigorously that the DWP would by no means violate the City charter and that it was their desire to abide by the rules and obligations and processes.
Nahai called the meeting a success saying "I think it went well. There were many probing questions and the feedback from the audience was that the presentation was very comprehensive. It was a good meeting. As for Measure B, the DWP has no position on Measure B. We are waiting on financial reports from Huron and we will release them as part of our outreach."
Jack Humphreville “thought the presentation was great, very informative and very interesting. The thing is,” he said, “I came to hear about Measure B."
DWP Advocacy Committee Chair Soledad Garcia agreed, "Solar energy is not the issue, we're all for it. The DWP has much to answer for if we are to work together to develop a solar plan for Los Angeles.”
Rusty Millar, Co-Chair at the Silver Lake NC was unconvinced saying "The LADWP asks us to trust them but they never came to the Neighborhood Councils as required by the City charter and they never revealed any information on the cost of Measure B. I want to know how much, how it will be paid and what the fiscal impact on the city will be."
Barbara Moynihan Burke called the entire process "A travesty!. I was there in Van Nuys when they voted on Measure B. It was called as a "special" with 24 hour notice and then it was over. No financials, no information, no opportunity for feedback from the community. I protested to Council President Garcetti based on process and based on content and yet it's still underway."
Jeff Jacobberger and Tony Butka both referred to the meeting as an informative and comprehensive big-picture presentation of the future of LA's Renewable Energy program but both also left with their expectation of a discussion of Measure B unmet.
Observers Everett Littlefield and BONC Commissioner Al Abrams seemed destined for the Diplomatic Corps. They both argued for open minds. Littlefield said "I'm union and I believe in unions but not when we're getting less for more. I have an open mind and I think like an investor, I think like a rate payer, and I think like a homeowner who wants to install solar. I need to know that everything we do is financially sound." Abrams echoed and said "It's our DWP, we're the stakeholders. We owe it to the DWP to wait and see, to keep an open mind and to evaluate the Huron financial report."
In summary: the Department got good marks for their solar presentation but disappointed many when they avoided the hot-button Solar Energy Prop B issue. ◘
CityWatch
Vol 7 Issue 4
Pub: Jan 13, 2009
In addition to the article below about L.A. Councilmember Bill Rosendahl's lukewarm position, I was a personal witness to our own councilmember, Janice Hahn, giving a neutral response to her position on Proposition B when asked by DWP Committee chair, Dr. Soledad Garcia, at last night's Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council meeting. I think Hahn gave a good, politically safe answer, given the growing unpopularity of this measure, as well as the process of how the L.A. City Council placed it on the March ballot. As the newest appointee to the DWP Committee as the lead liaison for Hahn's district, I am committed to representing both the low to middle-income residents, as well as the numerous small businesses, who will be hard hit by the passage of this rate hike measure.
Here is the latest article from CityWatch (http://www.citywatchla.com):
DWP Workshop Notebook
By David Lowell and Stephen Box
Measure B is the City's proposed "Green Energy and Good Jobs for Los Angeles Act," which has been called "risky" by the City's own analyst and will appear on the March 3rd ballot. Nahai and Assistant GM Aram Benyamin went to great lengths to steer clear of the topic, instead demonstrating incredible message control and sticking to the polished PowerPoint presentation that was well received.
Their efforts to bypass B went askew, however, when Councilman Bill Rosendahl dropped by and jumped into the mix, announcing "I have not made up my mind. I voted to put it on the ballot but I haven't voted to support it because, frankly, I want to understand the details that are to be presented to us as a Council. I might end up supporting it, I might not." (Click here for Rosendahl video)
Rosendahl echoed the sentiment of literally everybody by stating "I believe whole-heartedly in Solar. We're in California. It's Sunny. My roof is flat." He continued by endorsing the DWP's union and the opportunity to bring more people into the DWP workforce while at the same time developing the private sector partnerships and supporting solar housing collectives such as proposed in Mar Vista.
Rosendahl polled the room and found that many were opposed to measure B, that many were undecided, that everybody reckoned that they had an open mind and that there were two people in support of Measure B, one of whom was Gary Baratta who explained "Solar Power has to go forward. There is absolutely no reason not to go forward. The DWP is the only party in a position to develop the infrastructure necessary to deliver power." Gary went on to urge Nahai to ignore the City Charter and to stop contributing funds to the City's general funds.
This softball suggestion from Baratta allowed Nahai to respond vigorously that the DWP would by no means violate the City charter and that it was their desire to abide by the rules and obligations and processes.
Nahai called the meeting a success saying "I think it went well. There were many probing questions and the feedback from the audience was that the presentation was very comprehensive. It was a good meeting. As for Measure B, the DWP has no position on Measure B. We are waiting on financial reports from Huron and we will release them as part of our outreach."
Jack Humphreville “thought the presentation was great, very informative and very interesting. The thing is,” he said, “I came to hear about Measure B."
DWP Advocacy Committee Chair Soledad Garcia agreed, "Solar energy is not the issue, we're all for it. The DWP has much to answer for if we are to work together to develop a solar plan for Los Angeles.”
Rusty Millar, Co-Chair at the Silver Lake NC was unconvinced saying "The LADWP asks us to trust them but they never came to the Neighborhood Councils as required by the City charter and they never revealed any information on the cost of Measure B. I want to know how much, how it will be paid and what the fiscal impact on the city will be."
Barbara Moynihan Burke called the entire process "A travesty!. I was there in Van Nuys when they voted on Measure B. It was called as a "special" with 24 hour notice and then it was over. No financials, no information, no opportunity for feedback from the community. I protested to Council President Garcetti based on process and based on content and yet it's still underway."
Jeff Jacobberger and Tony Butka both referred to the meeting as an informative and comprehensive big-picture presentation of the future of LA's Renewable Energy program but both also left with their expectation of a discussion of Measure B unmet.
Observers Everett Littlefield and BONC Commissioner Al Abrams seemed destined for the Diplomatic Corps. They both argued for open minds. Littlefield said "I'm union and I believe in unions but not when we're getting less for more. I have an open mind and I think like an investor, I think like a rate payer, and I think like a homeowner who wants to install solar. I need to know that everything we do is financially sound." Abrams echoed and said "It's our DWP, we're the stakeholders. We owe it to the DWP to wait and see, to keep an open mind and to evaluate the Huron financial report."
In summary: the Department got good marks for their solar presentation but disappointed many when they avoided the hot-button Solar Energy Prop B issue. ◘
CityWatch
Vol 7 Issue 4
Pub: Jan 13, 2009
Friday, January 9, 2009
Los Angeles Update: Proposition B ballot argument to keep its "teeth"
As many of you have learned over the past month, I have volunteered my services to fight a power grab by the IBEW union to pay for a sole-source boondoggle solar project for themselves on the backs of Los Angeles City residents & businesses. This measure threatens to double or even triple the electrical rates of all residents & businesses in the City of Angels; not just those registered as Republicans! ;-)
The opposition leaders to this deceitful proposition submitted a proper ballot argument for the March 2009 election, but the IBEW hired a slick law firm to challenge much of the wording in order to remove most of the "bite" from the ballot argument. Candidate for Mayor David Hernandez stepped up with his own resources to lead the fight in court against this attack, and I was able to get the news personally from him last night that he and the opposition leaders had scored a great victory in court.
Below is the article from the L.A. Times from the same reporter that originally blew the whistle on this scheme by the IBEW, DWP and the L.A. City Council. He tells it best:
Judge upholds wording of Measure B's ballot argument
He refuses to remove key passages warning that Los Angeles' solar energy initiative in the March 3 election would create a monopoly.
By David Zahniser
5:02 PM PST, January 8, 2009
A judge on Thursday refused to remove key passages used by neighborhood activists in their ballot argument against Measure B, the solar energy proposal heading to Los Angeles voters in the March 3 election.
Mitchell Schwartz, a political strategist who staged Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's 2005 inaugural gala, had asked the judge to take out wording in the voter pamphlet warning that the solar plan would give a monopoly to the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the union that represents employees at the city's Department of Water and Power.
But Superior Court Judge David P. Yaffe said the measure -- which has been embraced by Villaraigosa and the City Council -- is open to a range of interpretations. "The proposition is so vague and so encompassing that speculation about just about anything is fair game," he said.
Yaffe issued a tentative ruling that is expected to become final today. But his statements did little to end a heated debate over the solar proposal, which seeks to add 400 megawatts of solar energy to rooftops and parking lots by 2014.
Those who signed the argument against Measure B accused allies of the mayor of using expensive lawyers to squelch the opposition's political views. After Schwartz went to court, signers of the ballot argument against Measure B hired a lawyer -- city attorney candidate Noel Weiss -- and dubbed themselves "the Solar 8."
The group's members includes former DWP president Nick Patsaouras, now a candidate for city controller, and former Los Angeles Daily News editor Ron Kaye.
In his tentative ruling, Yaffe also refused to remove language that warned that "no competitive bidding" would be used by the solar program. And he declined to take out wording that warned that the DWP would use "outdated technology" for the initiative. "The judge did the right thing," Weiss said.
Schwartz, who served last year as state campaign director for President-elect Barack Obama, did not attend the hearing. But attorney Stephen Kaufman, who represented Schwartz, said opponents of Measure B had made false or misleading statements that would be corrected during the campaign.
In the opponents' ballot argument, "the implication is that this is a self-serving deal being foisted on the voters here, and that is simply not the case," Kaufman told the judge.
He said his client scored one important victory, by forcing opponents of Measure B to remove a passage stating that no public hearings had been held on the solar proposal. Instead, the argument will say that the DWP did not provide "engineering or operational input" before Measure B went on the ballot.
The measure was proposed by Working Californians, an advocacy group headed by two high-level officials from the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. The Measure B campaign paid for Schwartz's legal fees.
Schwartz, president of the Los Angeles League of Conservation Voters, was part of a select group that attended a Feb. 29, 2008, presentation on the solar plan by the union's Local 18 business manager Brian D'Arcy. His public relations firm, Bomaye Company, provided services to the DWP between 1999 and 2003. During that period, the firm helped promote the DWP's green initiatives, including one of its existing solar programs.
Schwartz's latest firm, skImpact, has a contract with CH2M Hill, a company that has been accused by the DWP of overbilling. But Schwartz said he is not doing any work related to the city or its electrical utility -- and only joined the lawsuit at Kaufman's request.
"I'm not part of the insider crew at all," he said. "I know them, but I'm not part of them. I just think the solar thing is really good."
david.zahniser@latimes.com
The opposition leaders to this deceitful proposition submitted a proper ballot argument for the March 2009 election, but the IBEW hired a slick law firm to challenge much of the wording in order to remove most of the "bite" from the ballot argument. Candidate for Mayor David Hernandez stepped up with his own resources to lead the fight in court against this attack, and I was able to get the news personally from him last night that he and the opposition leaders had scored a great victory in court.
Below is the article from the L.A. Times from the same reporter that originally blew the whistle on this scheme by the IBEW, DWP and the L.A. City Council. He tells it best:
Judge upholds wording of Measure B's ballot argument
He refuses to remove key passages warning that Los Angeles' solar energy initiative in the March 3 election would create a monopoly.
By David Zahniser
5:02 PM PST, January 8, 2009
A judge on Thursday refused to remove key passages used by neighborhood activists in their ballot argument against Measure B, the solar energy proposal heading to Los Angeles voters in the March 3 election.
Mitchell Schwartz, a political strategist who staged Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's 2005 inaugural gala, had asked the judge to take out wording in the voter pamphlet warning that the solar plan would give a monopoly to the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the union that represents employees at the city's Department of Water and Power.
But Superior Court Judge David P. Yaffe said the measure -- which has been embraced by Villaraigosa and the City Council -- is open to a range of interpretations. "The proposition is so vague and so encompassing that speculation about just about anything is fair game," he said.
Yaffe issued a tentative ruling that is expected to become final today. But his statements did little to end a heated debate over the solar proposal, which seeks to add 400 megawatts of solar energy to rooftops and parking lots by 2014.
Those who signed the argument against Measure B accused allies of the mayor of using expensive lawyers to squelch the opposition's political views. After Schwartz went to court, signers of the ballot argument against Measure B hired a lawyer -- city attorney candidate Noel Weiss -- and dubbed themselves "the Solar 8."
The group's members includes former DWP president Nick Patsaouras, now a candidate for city controller, and former Los Angeles Daily News editor Ron Kaye.
In his tentative ruling, Yaffe also refused to remove language that warned that "no competitive bidding" would be used by the solar program. And he declined to take out wording that warned that the DWP would use "outdated technology" for the initiative. "The judge did the right thing," Weiss said.
Schwartz, who served last year as state campaign director for President-elect Barack Obama, did not attend the hearing. But attorney Stephen Kaufman, who represented Schwartz, said opponents of Measure B had made false or misleading statements that would be corrected during the campaign.
In the opponents' ballot argument, "the implication is that this is a self-serving deal being foisted on the voters here, and that is simply not the case," Kaufman told the judge.
He said his client scored one important victory, by forcing opponents of Measure B to remove a passage stating that no public hearings had been held on the solar proposal. Instead, the argument will say that the DWP did not provide "engineering or operational input" before Measure B went on the ballot.
The measure was proposed by Working Californians, an advocacy group headed by two high-level officials from the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. The Measure B campaign paid for Schwartz's legal fees.
Schwartz, president of the Los Angeles League of Conservation Voters, was part of a select group that attended a Feb. 29, 2008, presentation on the solar plan by the union's Local 18 business manager Brian D'Arcy. His public relations firm, Bomaye Company, provided services to the DWP between 1999 and 2003. During that period, the firm helped promote the DWP's green initiatives, including one of its existing solar programs.
Schwartz's latest firm, skImpact, has a contract with CH2M Hill, a company that has been accused by the DWP of overbilling. But Schwartz said he is not doing any work related to the city or its electrical utility -- and only joined the lawsuit at Kaufman's request.
"I'm not part of the insider crew at all," he said. "I know them, but I'm not part of them. I just think the solar thing is really good."
david.zahniser@latimes.com
Monday, August 11, 2008
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
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
Saturday, August 9, 2008
South Bay / San Pedro Republican Get-Out-the-Vote 2008
Fellow 54th AD Republicans,
It's time to kick off the fall campaign season with a motivating rally for the Republican ticket! August 14th is McCain Nation Night, so let's get together for John McCain's first national event day and get organized for the election. All of our local GOP candidates need our support!
South Bay / San Pedro Republican Get-Out-the-Vote 2008
August 14th, 2008 7:00pm
1891 N. Gaffey St. San Pedro, CA
Please come to my event to talk about John McCain's agenda for America and to discuss what we can do to help him win. Then listen to other local candidates or their representatives to learn how you can help them get elected. As the election is only a few months away, this event will focus on making sure every supporter is empowered to get out the vote in their neighborhood.
John McCain consistently puts his country before his political interests and is committed to addressing the tough issues America cares about most. Our Republican candidates are also taking on the special insterests killing California, and they need our help! Please join us for this important and fun event!
Invited speakers include (partial list):
Lydia Gutierrez – Republican Nominee, 25th Senate District
Brian Gibson – Republican Nominee, 36th Congressional District
Gabriella Holt – Republican Nominee, 54th Assembly District
I hope you can join us for this important event!
Very Best Regards,
John S. Stammreich
Chairman - 54th AD Republican Central Committee
It's time to kick off the fall campaign season with a motivating rally for the Republican ticket! August 14th is McCain Nation Night, so let's get together for John McCain's first national event day and get organized for the election. All of our local GOP candidates need our support!
South Bay / San Pedro Republican Get-Out-the-Vote 2008
August 14th, 2008 7:00pm
1891 N. Gaffey St. San Pedro, CA
Please come to my event to talk about John McCain's agenda for America and to discuss what we can do to help him win. Then listen to other local candidates or their representatives to learn how you can help them get elected. As the election is only a few months away, this event will focus on making sure every supporter is empowered to get out the vote in their neighborhood.
John McCain consistently puts his country before his political interests and is committed to addressing the tough issues America cares about most. Our Republican candidates are also taking on the special insterests killing California, and they need our help! Please join us for this important and fun event!
Invited speakers include (partial list):
Lydia Gutierrez – Republican Nominee, 25th Senate District
Brian Gibson – Republican Nominee, 36th Congressional District
Gabriella Holt – Republican Nominee, 54th Assembly District
I hope you can join us for this important event!
Very Best Regards,
John S. Stammreich
Chairman - 54th AD Republican Central Committee
Monday, April 28, 2008
Why the Central Committee elections matter...
Until I moved to San Pedro and got more involved with the County Party, I had never heard of County Central Committees. When I worked campaigns for gubernatorial candidate Dan Lungren, Bush 2000, and congressional candidate Tim Escobar in 2002 and 2004, I never once heard of the central committee structure or how they were "supposed" to be working to get out the Republican vote. I have some theories why, but I think more importantly than why past committees have been pretty much irrelevant in the campaigns I have worked over the past 10 years, I want to instill in everyone that reads this why we need stronger and more effective central committees.
I was introduced to the central committee organization in 2006 working for Michael A. Jackson's campaign. My first impression was that the central committee's purpose was to give seven people plus ex-officios a status as being the "Republican authority" of their respective district. They were supposed to meet once a month and discuss opportunities to recruit more Republicans for office. What I saw throughout Los Angeles County were a few members in each district trying to do just that; but I also noticed those that ran for central committee strictly for their own agendas. They assumed that a position on the committee meant coffers of money would open up, and that they were "entitled" to support from every Republican in their district, if not through donations at least every Republican vote in the district. What they failed to do was reach out and ask voters and locally-elected leaders HOW they could earn their support.
My biggest priority for my first term was to learn HOW to earn the support of the local leaders and learn from them how to win elections in their parts of the district. The biggest lesson I have learned is that voters do NOT want activists as legislators, so much as they want leaders that have shown action in their activism. They also want intelligent legislators who work their way up through their local councils, school boards and community organizations. If you look at the Democratic leaders who have been successful, they all came from local elections; so have most of the Republican elected legislators. So it makes sense that we need to get more active in electing more Republicans to our local offices in the district.
So long as we play the Democrats game of "non-partisan" elections, they will continue to win majorities on our city councils. No where is this more evident than in our three primary parts of the 54th Assembly District. In Long Beach, the Democratic Party has engaged in a 12-year effort to maintain an ultra-high majority. They have done this through the unions & special interest organizations, and I have to commend one of my counterparts, Sergio Carrillo, for keeping the "non-partisan" message resonating well. Not only have local Democratic candidates been able to hide behind this, they've even been able to convince Republican voters that local elections are somehow non-partisan. So let me ask a few questions about "local issues" to see if we could afford a little partisanship:
1) Do you like paying MORE property taxes or LESS property taxes?
2) Do you prefer MORE social welfare programs or LESS programs?
3) Do you prefer MORE local government regulations on small businesses, or LESS?
4) Do you prefer MORE crime (through ignoring increasing crime trends), or LESS crime by getting tougher on criminals and gangs (think City of Los Angeles vs. City of Torrance)
5) Do you prefer MORE local government spending or LESS government spending?
I hope now you can see why promoting Republican principles and values in local races is essential. But who should be taking on the responsibility to promote these by finding and supporting local Republicans throughout each district? THIS is the official mission of your local Republican Central Committee, and one that I take very seriously.
So long as I am chairman of the 54th AD Republican Central Committee, local Republicans who seek to make a difference in their city, be it Long Beach, Signal Hill, Avalon, Los Angeles, Rolling Hills Estates or Rancho Palos Verdes, will have a group of Republican leaders behind them. This is why I am running for another term on the committee; because we have work to do in 2009 & 2010.
To close, I have learned of an effort by a few candidates to divide Long Beach (& Avalon) Republicans from those in Palos Verdes & San Pedro by marginalizing the importance of a cross-district level of support. These "Greater Long Beach" candidates are missing a key component in their campaign: Support from ANY Long Beach elected Republican. Meanwhile, I am pleased to state that two of our best Long Beach Republican leaders, Long Beach Councilman Gary DeLong and LBUSD Board member Jon Meyer, have endorsed me, as well as my friend Davina Keiser, for election on June 3rd. I have received numerous other endorsements from across the district, and I have posted them at the top of the left column. Many of these leaders have expressed a desire for our central committee members to work together across the district and help each other when each local race comes up. Those I have endorsed understand this purpose, and voting for these seven will increase the strength of our committee to seek out good Republican candidates and give them the necessary volunteer and operational support to win local election.
I hope you will make sure to vote on June 3rd for myself and my six friends, and spread the word to all of your Republican friends in Long Beach, Avalon, Signal Hill, San Pedro and the Palos Verdes Peninsula. We have a lot of work to do, and a divided committee will have the same problems in 2 years that past committees did. A united committee will be able to effectively take on the unions and special interests battling to take over our local governments and our local schools.
Your vote matters on June 3rd!
I was introduced to the central committee organization in 2006 working for Michael A. Jackson's campaign. My first impression was that the central committee's purpose was to give seven people plus ex-officios a status as being the "Republican authority" of their respective district. They were supposed to meet once a month and discuss opportunities to recruit more Republicans for office. What I saw throughout Los Angeles County were a few members in each district trying to do just that; but I also noticed those that ran for central committee strictly for their own agendas. They assumed that a position on the committee meant coffers of money would open up, and that they were "entitled" to support from every Republican in their district, if not through donations at least every Republican vote in the district. What they failed to do was reach out and ask voters and locally-elected leaders HOW they could earn their support.
My biggest priority for my first term was to learn HOW to earn the support of the local leaders and learn from them how to win elections in their parts of the district. The biggest lesson I have learned is that voters do NOT want activists as legislators, so much as they want leaders that have shown action in their activism. They also want intelligent legislators who work their way up through their local councils, school boards and community organizations. If you look at the Democratic leaders who have been successful, they all came from local elections; so have most of the Republican elected legislators. So it makes sense that we need to get more active in electing more Republicans to our local offices in the district.
So long as we play the Democrats game of "non-partisan" elections, they will continue to win majorities on our city councils. No where is this more evident than in our three primary parts of the 54th Assembly District. In Long Beach, the Democratic Party has engaged in a 12-year effort to maintain an ultra-high majority. They have done this through the unions & special interest organizations, and I have to commend one of my counterparts, Sergio Carrillo, for keeping the "non-partisan" message resonating well. Not only have local Democratic candidates been able to hide behind this, they've even been able to convince Republican voters that local elections are somehow non-partisan. So let me ask a few questions about "local issues" to see if we could afford a little partisanship:
1) Do you like paying MORE property taxes or LESS property taxes?
2) Do you prefer MORE social welfare programs or LESS programs?
3) Do you prefer MORE local government regulations on small businesses, or LESS?
4) Do you prefer MORE crime (through ignoring increasing crime trends), or LESS crime by getting tougher on criminals and gangs (think City of Los Angeles vs. City of Torrance)
5) Do you prefer MORE local government spending or LESS government spending?
I hope now you can see why promoting Republican principles and values in local races is essential. But who should be taking on the responsibility to promote these by finding and supporting local Republicans throughout each district? THIS is the official mission of your local Republican Central Committee, and one that I take very seriously.
So long as I am chairman of the 54th AD Republican Central Committee, local Republicans who seek to make a difference in their city, be it Long Beach, Signal Hill, Avalon, Los Angeles, Rolling Hills Estates or Rancho Palos Verdes, will have a group of Republican leaders behind them. This is why I am running for another term on the committee; because we have work to do in 2009 & 2010.
To close, I have learned of an effort by a few candidates to divide Long Beach (& Avalon) Republicans from those in Palos Verdes & San Pedro by marginalizing the importance of a cross-district level of support. These "Greater Long Beach" candidates are missing a key component in their campaign: Support from ANY Long Beach elected Republican. Meanwhile, I am pleased to state that two of our best Long Beach Republican leaders, Long Beach Councilman Gary DeLong and LBUSD Board member Jon Meyer, have endorsed me, as well as my friend Davina Keiser, for election on June 3rd. I have received numerous other endorsements from across the district, and I have posted them at the top of the left column. Many of these leaders have expressed a desire for our central committee members to work together across the district and help each other when each local race comes up. Those I have endorsed understand this purpose, and voting for these seven will increase the strength of our committee to seek out good Republican candidates and give them the necessary volunteer and operational support to win local election.
I hope you will make sure to vote on June 3rd for myself and my six friends, and spread the word to all of your Republican friends in Long Beach, Avalon, Signal Hill, San Pedro and the Palos Verdes Peninsula. We have a lot of work to do, and a divided committee will have the same problems in 2 years that past committees did. A united committee will be able to effectively take on the unions and special interests battling to take over our local governments and our local schools.
Your vote matters on June 3rd!
Thursday, April 3, 2008
San Pedro H.S. Seniors get it...why don't Democrats?
I had the opportunity to join 54th Assembly Republican candidate Gabriella Holt at San Pedro High School yesterday to talk to the senior class about the 54th AD campaign and opportunities to get involved. Also attending the day-long session were the two Democratic candidates, Long Beach Vice-Mayor Bonnie Lowenthal & Long Beach City Councilmember Tonia Reyes Uranga. All three candidates, and their campaign reps, were very cordial & we enjoyed a day of listening to each other speak to six separate government classes about the 54th Assembly seat race.
What impressed me the most about the sessions were the great questions that the seniors asked the candidates. My assessment of the three candidates' performance could be summarized as this: The Democrat candidates talked to the students like they were 8th graders; Gabriella & I talked to them like they were adults. Not that we talked over their heads; I think both Democrats did that at times, especially Ms. Lowenthal. Our focus when we talked to them were on issues that they could relate to & would affect them directly. I'll give an example.
We made sure that the primary topic of discussion was the state budget. We did not shy away from talking about the education portion of the budget, and we pointed out to the students that the Democrats have had the last 12 years in charge of both houses of the Legislature to spend wisely, and have chosen not to. We used two analogies to make our point: First, we talked about their own budgets. We asked them how many would be able to go ask their parents for more money simply because they had spent all of theirs. Knowing how San Pedrans raise their children to be accountable and independent, we knew the answer would be none. Second, we asked them how much businesses like Starbucks pay in taxes. (Any fan of Tom McClintock knows this answer...NONE.) When I asked them why businesses don't pay taxes, most of them knew the answer...that businesses flow their tax increases to consumers in the price of products, like that cup of coffee. We then drew the relationship to the jobs they will be looking for in the very near future, and it made sense.
When it was Mrs. Uranga's turn to speak, she focused on Air Quality issues and the education budget as well. For the Air Quality discussion, she talked about "little particles" in the air, using her fingers like she was plucking them out of the air. She made a few good points about the need to be cleaner, but then she talked about how those "mean Republicans" wanted to take money away from schools. She talked about the Governor cutting the budget, but had no answer for fixing the budget besides raising taxes. Gabriella was able to talk about how her school district had the same problem in 2002, and found wasteful spending that resulted in saving EVERY teacher's salary. Among these was over $60,000 a year for bottled water for the administration. This is a teacher's salary saved from just this one savings action. Democrats are not willing to cut their wasteful spending in order to save teacher salaries. But they're willing to tax you more instead!
Ms. Lowenthal's discussion points kept changing during each of the six sessions. She was extremely defensive each time, and seemed to be trying to anticipate what Tonia and especially Gabriella were going to say. She would often turn around to Gabriella and state to the current group one of the points she thought Gabriella wold make, and then try to refute it pro-actively. Of course, because Democrats are used to misrepresenting Republican positions even to each other, Ms. Lowenthal often got the point wrong. This opened the opportunity for Gabriella to quickly re-introduce the topic (correctly) and then use a different example to prove the same point. Bonnie grossly underestimated the scope of the event, originally showing up with only a handful of fliers by herself. When she noticed that the other two candidates had more material and support, she made a quick phone call and got her campaign manager over there. When she talked, she listed all of her endorsements (people and groups these students never heard of) and
then tried to convince them how "greedy luxury boat owners and recreational vehicle owners needed to pay their fair share." Easy enough, but more proof that Bonnie does not know much about San Pedro. Boating and Sport Fishing are big with San Pedrans, and many of these students own their own ATV's or Sea-Doos. So when we got a chance to talk about these, it was simple. When these get taxed higher, fewer get sold, which means fewer get built. This means fewer people employed to build them.
Overall, the students who paid attention were smart and analytical. Questions like "If you don't cut the Education part of the budget, what part DO you cut?" and "How do you plan to deal with the gang violence in L.A.?" showed me that they were thinking extremely logical. Another question I liked was " What are you going to do to ensure people get off of welfare?". I watched as each Democrat candidate fumbled around in their head, probably searching for which talking point was appropriate. Meanwhile, Gabriella and I stood back and smiled as we waited so Gabriella could complement the students asking the questions and give them the intelligent answers they deserved.
In the end, we signed up a huge number of volunteers who are excited to get their volunteer hours working for Gabriella Holt. Despite the presence of two Democrat candidates (meaning there was twice as much time for the Democratic platform to be pitched), these students were able to sort out the truth from the talking points. We even received interesting comments from the Democratic candidates; both confessed that they did not expect a Republican candidate to come to the school. Both have been underestimating the Republican chances because of our past history in the district. If there's one thing Gabriella Holt did on Wednesday, it was to put a little fear in both Democrat candidates that the election for this seat will not nearly be over after June 3rd.
If you want to learn more about the Republican candidate making her two Democrat challengers squirm nervously when they're together, go to http://www.gabriellaholt.com/.
What impressed me the most about the sessions were the great questions that the seniors asked the candidates. My assessment of the three candidates' performance could be summarized as this: The Democrat candidates talked to the students like they were 8th graders; Gabriella & I talked to them like they were adults. Not that we talked over their heads; I think both Democrats did that at times, especially Ms. Lowenthal. Our focus when we talked to them were on issues that they could relate to & would affect them directly. I'll give an example.
We made sure that the primary topic of discussion was the state budget. We did not shy away from talking about the education portion of the budget, and we pointed out to the students that the Democrats have had the last 12 years in charge of both houses of the Legislature to spend wisely, and have chosen not to. We used two analogies to make our point: First, we talked about their own budgets. We asked them how many would be able to go ask their parents for more money simply because they had spent all of theirs. Knowing how San Pedrans raise their children to be accountable and independent, we knew the answer would be none. Second, we asked them how much businesses like Starbucks pay in taxes. (Any fan of Tom McClintock knows this answer...NONE.) When I asked them why businesses don't pay taxes, most of them knew the answer...that businesses flow their tax increases to consumers in the price of products, like that cup of coffee. We then drew the relationship to the jobs they will be looking for in the very near future, and it made sense.
When it was Mrs. Uranga's turn to speak, she focused on Air Quality issues and the education budget as well. For the Air Quality discussion, she talked about "little particles" in the air, using her fingers like she was plucking them out of the air. She made a few good points about the need to be cleaner, but then she talked about how those "mean Republicans" wanted to take money away from schools. She talked about the Governor cutting the budget, but had no answer for fixing the budget besides raising taxes. Gabriella was able to talk about how her school district had the same problem in 2002, and found wasteful spending that resulted in saving EVERY teacher's salary. Among these was over $60,000 a year for bottled water for the administration. This is a teacher's salary saved from just this one savings action. Democrats are not willing to cut their wasteful spending in order to save teacher salaries. But they're willing to tax you more instead!
Ms. Lowenthal's discussion points kept changing during each of the six sessions. She was extremely defensive each time, and seemed to be trying to anticipate what Tonia and especially Gabriella were going to say. She would often turn around to Gabriella and state to the current group one of the points she thought Gabriella wold make, and then try to refute it pro-actively. Of course, because Democrats are used to misrepresenting Republican positions even to each other, Ms. Lowenthal often got the point wrong. This opened the opportunity for Gabriella to quickly re-introduce the topic (correctly) and then use a different example to prove the same point. Bonnie grossly underestimated the scope of the event, originally showing up with only a handful of fliers by herself. When she noticed that the other two candidates had more material and support, she made a quick phone call and got her campaign manager over there. When she talked, she listed all of her endorsements (people and groups these students never heard of) and
then tried to convince them how "greedy luxury boat owners and recreational vehicle owners needed to pay their fair share." Easy enough, but more proof that Bonnie does not know much about San Pedro. Boating and Sport Fishing are big with San Pedrans, and many of these students own their own ATV's or Sea-Doos. So when we got a chance to talk about these, it was simple. When these get taxed higher, fewer get sold, which means fewer get built. This means fewer people employed to build them.
Overall, the students who paid attention were smart and analytical. Questions like "If you don't cut the Education part of the budget, what part DO you cut?" and "How do you plan to deal with the gang violence in L.A.?" showed me that they were thinking extremely logical. Another question I liked was " What are you going to do to ensure people get off of welfare?". I watched as each Democrat candidate fumbled around in their head, probably searching for which talking point was appropriate. Meanwhile, Gabriella and I stood back and smiled as we waited so Gabriella could complement the students asking the questions and give them the intelligent answers they deserved.
In the end, we signed up a huge number of volunteers who are excited to get their volunteer hours working for Gabriella Holt. Despite the presence of two Democrat candidates (meaning there was twice as much time for the Democratic platform to be pitched), these students were able to sort out the truth from the talking points. We even received interesting comments from the Democratic candidates; both confessed that they did not expect a Republican candidate to come to the school. Both have been underestimating the Republican chances because of our past history in the district. If there's one thing Gabriella Holt did on Wednesday, it was to put a little fear in both Democrat candidates that the election for this seat will not nearly be over after June 3rd.
If you want to learn more about the Republican candidate making her two Democrat challengers squirm nervously when they're together, go to http://www.gabriellaholt.com/.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
