I’m forwarding an Op-Ed that appeared in the Wall Street Journal last week because it highlights my primary issue with the anti-business mentality of our Democratic-elected officials (state and local), as well as showing how the entertainment industry, filled with its liberal crusaders, is going to feel the long-term effects of a non-friendly business environment.
While the Hollywood elite walk the red carpets and talk about how we just need to pay our fair shares, the agents, columnists & contractors who employ much of the entertainment industry, including the stage hands, film support, fashion consultants and numerous catering services for film productions are getting squeezed right out of the city of Los Angeles, and they’re not simply moving to another part of California.
Please read on as the President of Creators Syndicate, well-known to anyone with aspirations in the entertainment industry, warns us about a critical decision he may have to make. (His editorial was so sharp that he was booked on KFI’s John & Ken Show the same day it appeared!)
The business climate is worse than the air quality.
by RICK NEWCOMBE
Los Angeles
If New Yorkers fantasize that doing business here in Los Angeles would be less of a headache, forget about it. This city is fast becoming a job-killing machine. It's no accident the unemployment rate is a frightening 11.4% and climbing.
I never could have imagined that, after living here for more than three decades, I would be filing a lawsuit against my beloved Los Angeles and making plans for my company, Creators Syndicate, to move elsewhere.
But we have no choice. The city's bureaucrats rival Stalin's apparatchiks in issuing decrees, rescinding them, and then punishing citizens for having followed them in the first place.
I founded Creators Syndicate in 1987, and we have represented hundreds of important writers, syndicating their columns to newspapers and Web sites around the world. The most famous include Hillary Clinton, who, like Eleanor Roosevelt, wrote a syndicated column when she was first lady. Another star was the advice columnist Ann Landers, once described by "The World Almanac" as "the most influential woman in America." Other Creators columnists include Bill O'Reilly, Susan Estrich, Thomas Sowell, Roland Martin and Michelle Malkin -- plus Pulitzer Prize-winning political cartoonists and your favorite comic strips.
From the beginning, we've been headquartered in Los Angeles. But 15 years ago we had a dispute with the city over our business tax classification. The city argued that we should be in an "occupations and professions" classification that has an extremely high tax rate, while we fought for a "wholesale and retail" classification with a much lower rate. The city forced us to invest a small fortune in legal fees over two years, but we felt it was worth it in order to establish the correct classification once and for all.
After enduring a series of bureaucratic hearings, we anxiously awaited a ruling to find out what our tax rate would be. Everything was at stake. We had already decided that if we lost, we would move.
You can imagine how relieved we were on July 1, 1994, when the ruling was issued. We won, and firmly planted our roots in the City of Angels and proceeded to build our business.
Everything was fine until the city started running out of money in 2007. Suddenly, the city announced that it was going to ignore its own ruling and reclassify us in the higher tax category. Even more incredible is the fact that the new classification was to be imposed retroactively to 2004 with interest and penalties. No explanation was given for the new classification, or for the city's decision to ignore its 1994 ruling.
Their official position is that the city is not bound by past rulings -- only taxpayers are. This is why we have been forced to file a lawsuit. We will let the courts decide whether it is legal for adverse rulings to apply only to taxpayers and not to the city.
We work with hundreds of outside agents, consultants, independent contractors and support services -- many of whom pay taxes to the city of Los Angeles. This spurs a job-creating ripple effect on the city's economy. Yet I suspect many companies like ours already have quietly left town in the face of the city's taxes and regulations. This would help explain the erosion of jobs.
Regardless of the outcome of our case, the arbitrary and capricious behavior of some bureaucrats is creating a lose-lose situation for everyone involved. If we win in court, the taxpayers of Los Angeles will have lost because all those tax dollars will have been wasted on needless litigation.
If we lose in court, the remaining taxpayers in Los Angeles will have lost because their burden will continue to swell as yet another business moves its jobs -- and taxpayers -- to another city.
As long as City Hall operates like a banana republic, why is anyone surprised that jobs have left the city in droves and Los Angeles is teetering on the brink of bankruptcy?
Mr. Newcombe is president of Creators Syndicate.
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Governor's opportunity to create fiscally responsible Board of Equalization
(As posted in the LA Republican Examiner)
For the past three years, Board of Equalization Members Michelle Park Steel and Bill Leonard have worked tirelessly to try and give business taxpayers opportunities to reconcile their tax debts, only to be consistently opposed by fellow board members Betty Yee and Judy Chu, with State Controller John Chaing often casting the tie-breaker vote to squeeze business owners for every dollar they can. They claim to do so in order to maximize the state’s revenue, but this short-sightedness often results in these businesses leaving the state or simply having to close its doors to liquidate enough assets to pay the board’s imposed debt.
With board member Judy Chu winning Tuesday’s special election to replace former congress member, now Secretary of Labor, Hilda Solis, the opportunity to appoint a third advocate for taxpayers was laid in front of Governor Schwarzenegger. Someone who understands, just as the Governor purports to solicit, that small businesses are the employers of over 70% of the California workforce would symbolize the start the beginning of the business revolution for our Golden State.
But the Governor understands that his selection must also be approved by the State Legislature. So appointing someone like former Assembly Member Ray Haynes or a Tom McClintock “disciple” would prove fruitless. The new selection needs time to build up enough support in the district to run for the seat in the statewide elections in November 2010. The taxpayers need a true advocate who understands what businesses provide to our state, and will ensure that the Democratic legislators will support.
In what may signify as a total understanding of both the opportunity in front of him and the need to have a candidate that the Liberal Democrats in both state houses dare not take on directly, Governor Schwarzenegger appointed former South Bay Assembly Member Jerome Horton, the 2006 runner-up in the Democratic primary to Judy Chu, to serve on the Board of Equalization.
Horton brings a solid reputation and performance record of business-friendly legislation as both a six-year Assembly member representing the 51st District (cities include Inglewood, Hawthorne, Lawndale, Gardena, West Compton and Playa Vista, among others), as well as over 20 years experience working for the State Board of Equalization.
If confirmed by the Democratic Legislature, Horton will become the swing vote on a board that has been split 2-2 between liberal and conservative members. Comparisons to current State Senator Rod Wright, another business-friendly Democrat, have already been spread in leadership circles of both parties, and Republicans would be wise to take advantage of the opportunity to support one who is more aligned with their current cries for lower business taxes and regulations. Democratic veterans know well the similarities between Horton and Wright. Both have established records of switching sides for votes on key anti-business legislation.
In his announcement on Wednesday, Schwarzenegger credited Horton with "supporting tax policies that promote economic growth”. This governor is apparently hoping that pro-business Democrats in California, just as Blue-Dog Democrats are doing across the state, will provide the necessary momentum to challenge their own party’s allegiance to the special interests and anti-business unions bleeding the state economy dry.
This appointment can be summarized as a very bold chess move by the Governor. It will be interesting to see how the leadership of both parties, from their elected legislative leaders to the state party leadership, respond.
For the past three years, Board of Equalization Members Michelle Park Steel and Bill Leonard have worked tirelessly to try and give business taxpayers opportunities to reconcile their tax debts, only to be consistently opposed by fellow board members Betty Yee and Judy Chu, with State Controller John Chaing often casting the tie-breaker vote to squeeze business owners for every dollar they can. They claim to do so in order to maximize the state’s revenue, but this short-sightedness often results in these businesses leaving the state or simply having to close its doors to liquidate enough assets to pay the board’s imposed debt.
With board member Judy Chu winning Tuesday’s special election to replace former congress member, now Secretary of Labor, Hilda Solis, the opportunity to appoint a third advocate for taxpayers was laid in front of Governor Schwarzenegger. Someone who understands, just as the Governor purports to solicit, that small businesses are the employers of over 70% of the California workforce would symbolize the start the beginning of the business revolution for our Golden State.
But the Governor understands that his selection must also be approved by the State Legislature. So appointing someone like former Assembly Member Ray Haynes or a Tom McClintock “disciple” would prove fruitless. The new selection needs time to build up enough support in the district to run for the seat in the statewide elections in November 2010. The taxpayers need a true advocate who understands what businesses provide to our state, and will ensure that the Democratic legislators will support.
In what may signify as a total understanding of both the opportunity in front of him and the need to have a candidate that the Liberal Democrats in both state houses dare not take on directly, Governor Schwarzenegger appointed former South Bay Assembly Member Jerome Horton, the 2006 runner-up in the Democratic primary to Judy Chu, to serve on the Board of Equalization.
Horton brings a solid reputation and performance record of business-friendly legislation as both a six-year Assembly member representing the 51st District (cities include Inglewood, Hawthorne, Lawndale, Gardena, West Compton and Playa Vista, among others), as well as over 20 years experience working for the State Board of Equalization.
If confirmed by the Democratic Legislature, Horton will become the swing vote on a board that has been split 2-2 between liberal and conservative members. Comparisons to current State Senator Rod Wright, another business-friendly Democrat, have already been spread in leadership circles of both parties, and Republicans would be wise to take advantage of the opportunity to support one who is more aligned with their current cries for lower business taxes and regulations. Democratic veterans know well the similarities between Horton and Wright. Both have established records of switching sides for votes on key anti-business legislation.
In his announcement on Wednesday, Schwarzenegger credited Horton with "supporting tax policies that promote economic growth”. This governor is apparently hoping that pro-business Democrats in California, just as Blue-Dog Democrats are doing across the state, will provide the necessary momentum to challenge their own party’s allegiance to the special interests and anti-business unions bleeding the state economy dry.
This appointment can be summarized as a very bold chess move by the Governor. It will be interesting to see how the leadership of both parties, from their elected legislative leaders to the state party leadership, respond.
Monday, July 13, 2009
"Letting Voters Decide": The Democrat cop-out for tax measures
Even though it does not sit in the 54th AD, I want to bring attention of my fellow Republicans within the district to yet another attempt by some tax-and-spend city council members to implement a tax increase without having to claim responsibility for it later. We saw this response by Los Angeles City Council members last December when most of them voted to put Measure B, the boondoggle solar panel measure that was placed on the March 2009 ballot by council members who stated that they were simply letting voters decide. With all of the misleading commercials by both the IBEW and Mayor Villaraigosa, it took a committed drive by the bi-partisan "No on Measure B" group to narrowly defeat it by a single percentage point!
Tomorrow night, the Hermosa Beach City Council will consider placing a tax measure on the November 2009 ballot that will raise the business license fees by as much as 800%! Their process is the same as Los Angeles, except they need 4 of 5 members to place it on the ballot. (Mayor Kit Bobko, a solid defender of his constituents' tax dollars, is already openly opposed to this measure.)
Putting ballot measures in front of voters & letting them decide is like putting food in front of a child & letting her decide whether to eat it. Who is responsible for ensuring the health of the food? Who's responsible for ensuring the food is not rancid, tainted or in another way hazardous to eat? Who would be prosecuted if the child were seriously harmed or died as a result of the food?
Democratic city council members understand the importance of appearing fiscally responsible to their constituents. While voters tend to allow their federal & state legislators be much more liberal on spending, city councils have often been targets for constituents who want their tax dollar spent right. So the latest tactic, as employed by many of the Democratic City Council members in Los Angeles, is to vote to place a measure on an upcoming ballot and claim to be "neutral" on the measure by stating that they simply want the voters to decide.
The proposed motion, forwarded by the city sub-committee specifically organized to explore the feasibility of increasing business license taxes (and "simplifying the tax structure" per the sub-committee's forwarded motion) will be discussed at the regular city council meeting tomorrow night at 7 p.m. at the Hermosa Beach City Hall, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach. Expected speakers from the South Bay Tea Party, the Beach Cities Republican Club and prospective candidates for state & federal offices plan to attend.
Hermosa Beach also has its local election this November. Any incumbent that supports putting this on the ballot can expect to face significant criticism throughout their campaign. Voting simply to put a measure on the ballot and later trying to claim an opposition to it is simply hypocrisy.
The Hermosa Beach City Council meeting scheduled for tomorrow promises to be an active one! City council members need to realize that voters are on to them! If you vote to place a measure on the ballot, you must support it!
I would never place food in front of my children that I would be unwilling to eat myself. Elected officials need to learn their roles as advocates for their constituents.
Tomorrow night, the Hermosa Beach City Council will consider placing a tax measure on the November 2009 ballot that will raise the business license fees by as much as 800%! Their process is the same as Los Angeles, except they need 4 of 5 members to place it on the ballot. (Mayor Kit Bobko, a solid defender of his constituents' tax dollars, is already openly opposed to this measure.)
Putting ballot measures in front of voters & letting them decide is like putting food in front of a child & letting her decide whether to eat it. Who is responsible for ensuring the health of the food? Who's responsible for ensuring the food is not rancid, tainted or in another way hazardous to eat? Who would be prosecuted if the child were seriously harmed or died as a result of the food?
Democratic city council members understand the importance of appearing fiscally responsible to their constituents. While voters tend to allow their federal & state legislators be much more liberal on spending, city councils have often been targets for constituents who want their tax dollar spent right. So the latest tactic, as employed by many of the Democratic City Council members in Los Angeles, is to vote to place a measure on an upcoming ballot and claim to be "neutral" on the measure by stating that they simply want the voters to decide.
The proposed motion, forwarded by the city sub-committee specifically organized to explore the feasibility of increasing business license taxes (and "simplifying the tax structure" per the sub-committee's forwarded motion) will be discussed at the regular city council meeting tomorrow night at 7 p.m. at the Hermosa Beach City Hall, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach. Expected speakers from the South Bay Tea Party, the Beach Cities Republican Club and prospective candidates for state & federal offices plan to attend.
Hermosa Beach also has its local election this November. Any incumbent that supports putting this on the ballot can expect to face significant criticism throughout their campaign. Voting simply to put a measure on the ballot and later trying to claim an opposition to it is simply hypocrisy.
The Hermosa Beach City Council meeting scheduled for tomorrow promises to be an active one! City council members need to realize that voters are on to them! If you vote to place a measure on the ballot, you must support it!
I would never place food in front of my children that I would be unwilling to eat myself. Elected officials need to learn their roles as advocates for their constituents.
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)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
