Special interests buy legislative seats

Government of, by and for 

the Special Interests

• Million and millions of special interest dollars is being poured into California state Assembly races. 
• The only "choice" voters are given is which one of the bought and paid for candidates to anoint. One thing for sure, the new Assemblymen will eagerly represent the Oligarchs who paid for their campaigns. The voters back home are an optional extra.

35th California Assembly District

(San Luis Obispo Tribune)  -  In the race for the Republican-leaning 35th California Assembly District, Democratic candidate Dawn Ortiz-Legg raised nearly $170,000 more than her Republican opponent, Jordan Cunningham, and outspent Cunningham by about $106,000 in the three-month span from July 1 through Sept. 24 (the state filing period differs from the federal one).

Ortiz-Legg reported raising $530,807 during the three-month period, nearly 80 percent of the total $680,058 she’s raised. Ortiz-Legg also spent more this period than any other — $361,044 of the total $498,874 she’s spent the entire race.

Ortiz-Legg, a San Luis Obispo-based solar energy consultant, ended the period with more cash on hand than Cunningham, with $189,944. She reported $3,820 in debts.

Her larger contributors this period include the California Democratic Party, the Democratic Central Committee for Marin County, the campaign committees for various Democratic state assembly members, and PACs for various education and labor unions, including the California State University Employees Union.

Cunningham, a Templeton-based attorney, raised nearly 70 percent of his total $524,055 contributions in the last three-month filing period — $361,704. He spent $254,747, leaving him with a balance of $178,246 and an outstanding debt of $20,962.

Cunningham’s donors in the last period include the California Republican Party, the Republican Party of San Luis Obispo County, PACs representing several labor unions, companies such as Phillips 66 and Phillip Morris USA, and individuals including San Luis Obispo County District Attorney Dan Dow and Assessor Tom Bordonaro.

Read More . . . .

See more big spending
sacbee.com

The central coast's 35th Assembly District

How three surfers in a garage turned California's grizzly into a fashion icon

Willie Travis makes T-shirts at The Dolphin Shirt Company. (Al Seib / Los Angeles Times)

That Can Do Spirit Still Exists

(Los Angeles Times)  -  As often happens in the annals of California innovation, the story of how one of the state’s last grizzly bears came to be a global fashion icon begins in an 8-by-8 foot garage.

In the early 1980s, three young surfers — Kevin Greenwood, Mark Travis and Andrew Batty — set up shop in the Central Coast beach town of Cayucos, seeking to join forces in the T-shirt trade. They named their enterprise Dolphin Shirt. Co., decorating their apparel with images of orcas, sea lions and, yes, dolphins.

It was tough going at first: To purchase supplies, the partners often pooled their pocket change. In time, though, Dolphin Shirt expanded, first into a barn, and then to a small shop here near the railroad station.

Enter the bear.

Kevin Greenwood, Willie Travis and his parents Martie and
Mark Travis, left to right, all manage The Dolphin
Shirt Company. (Al Seib / Los Angeles Times)

“I noticed that animals were selling,” recalled Don Pimentel, a self-employed architect dabbling in T-shirt design. “I said, ‘Wow, I can do that.’”

In 1985 Pimentel painted a bear, working off an outline of the grizzly that marches across the California flag. He presented it to Dolphin and then headed to Hawaii.

While Pimentel was away, the partners expanded on his design. His rendition of the bear, with his signature found just below its rear, right paw, remained. But now a red star hovered over the bear’s snout and a bar ran across the bottom, underscoring the legend “California Republic.”

In short, the shirt makers had more or less replicated the California state flag, whose design is rooted in the banner of the so-called Bear Flag Revolt of 1846. They sold eight dozen shirts right off the bat.

“It just started going,” Greenwood said, “and going and going. And it’s still going.”

Thirty years later, the no longer quite-so-young surfers — Greenwood gives his age as 59 and a half and three quarters — find themselves riding a fresh wave of global enthusiasm for all things California. The trend goes far beyond bear-flag themed T-shirts and related knick-knacks and spin-offs.

“California as a brand is incredibly valuable overseas,” said economist Kevin Klowden, who directs the Milken Institute’s California Center in Santa Monica. “It probably does better outside the state than inside.”

Read More . . . .

Another phony Democrat vs Democrat "election"

Assemblywoman Cheryl Brown and challenger Eloise Reyes

"Corruptus in Extremis"

• California's phony "election reform" has given us this Democrat vs Democrat contest - one of 16 such races in the state.
• Not only do voters have no meaningful choices on their ballots, but the candidates are nothing more than the bought and paid for lackeys of outside special interest groups.
• Local voters have no real choice. They only have the right to vote for bought off candidate "A" or bought off candidate "B".

(89.3 KPCC)  -  As Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton battle for the White House, races further down the ballot in California are getting heated — and expensive.

Outside groups are spending millions in local races to help their favored candidates reach Sacramento. This year, no state race has seen more outside spending than the 47th Assembly District in the Inland Empire.

There, outside groups have thrown more than $3.7 million into the election, with more than $1.4 million of that coming since the primary. Oil industry and labor groups have been the biggest spenders.

This working class, largely Latino and African-American area includes Colton, Fontana and San Bernardino. The election pits two Democrats against each other, attorney Eloise Reyes and incumbent Assemblywoman Cheryl Brown, who was first elected to the seat in 2012.

Their contest hinges on economic and environmental issues. "The region desperately needs jobs, but it also has significant environmental concerns that need to be addressed," said Karthick Ramakrishnan, who teaches political science at the University of California, Riverside.

Read More . . . .

The 47th Assembly District in San Bernardino

One Party Rule - California Democrats could regain supermajorities in Legislature

"Corruptus in Extremis"

• As the pathetic GOP vanishes into the dust bin of history California "elections" become Democrat vs Democrat affairs. Election "reform" has taken away any other choices for voters.
• Other countries where only one party is on the ballot include Communist North Korea, Communist China, Communist Vietnam and Communist Cuba. Now the People's Republic of California joins their overseas Brothers in holding mock, pretend elections.
• Election Reform  -  But the idea of true election reform is dead on arrival.  All hail corrupt elections and the one-party state.

(Sacarmento Bee)  -  One hundred state legislative seats will be filled four weeks hence, and the Capitol will see a final wave of newcomers as 20 legislators depart under the state’s old term-limit law.

Under revised term limits enacted in 2012, legislators may remain in one house for up to 12 years, dampening the forced turnover that had seen about a third of the 120 seats change occupants every two years.

After this year, for instance, no Assembly member will be forced to leave until 2024. Thus, this could be the last election until then for interest groups to have a major effect on the Legislature’s partisan makeup and the tenor of its Democratic majority.

This could be a very rough year for Republicans as California turns ever bluer. The GOP’s share of registered voters has dipped to scarcely a quarter while those of Democrats and declined-to-state voters continue to swell, with the latter now just three percentage points behind Republicans.

Moreover, it’s a presidential year, which means a higher voter turnout that favors Democrats, especially as they gleefully use Donald Trump as a club to batter GOP legislative and congressional candidates.

Democrats gained two-thirds supermajorities in both legislative houses in 2012, but lost them two years ago, when voter turnout plunged to a record low. They need two more Assembly seats and one more in the Senate to regain their supermajorities, and there are enough shaky GOP-held districts to make it possible in at least one house.

Four first-term Republican Assembly members who grabbed seats two years ago, all in districts with Democratic registration pluralities, are under siege – David Hadley, Young Kim and Marc Steinorth in Southern California and Catharine Baker in Contra Costa County.

Two open Senate seats in Southern California that had been held by Republicans also could change partisan hands this year.

That said, even if Democrats regain supermajorities, it may not mean much in policy terms, given the substantial number of moderate Democrats who are unlikely to support such liberal goals as tax increases.

Therefore, the real legislative election issue this year is what kind of Democrats fill the seats that they either regain from Republicans or are vacant due to term limits.

Thanks to the “top-two primary,” another recent change in election law, there are 11 Assembly districts and five Senate districts that have Democrat-vs.-Democrat runoffs, and several of them are clearly contests between moderate and liberal Democrats.

The most significant is Eloise Reyes’ challenge, backed by unions and other liberal groups, to San Bernardino Assemblywoman Cheryl Brown, who belongs to the Assembly’s moderate bloc. Brown is receiving heavy support from business interests, which have counted on the bloc for support on key issues such as reducing carbon emissions.

Interestingly, all of the Senate’s Democrat-on-Democrat duels, and several of those in the Assembly, including the Brown-Reyes runoff, are also contests between candidates of different ethnic backgrounds, reflecting intraparty rivalries of another kind.

more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/dan-walters/article107368922.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/dan-walters/article107368922.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/dan-walters/article107368922.html#storylink=cpy

Read More . . . .

Free Elections in Germany

But NOT in California

American readers do not be frightened 
by all these parties on the ballot

Multiple political parties on the ballot and winning seats is what the rest of the world calls free elections. You can actually find parties on your ballot that you can believe in.
.
Maybe, just maybe, we should try free elections in the United States.
.
Berlin state election, 2016 

Spanish-language ad back Democrat in Central Valley race

(Los Angeles Times)  -  A new Spanish-language ad in the 21st Congressional District race focuses on Emilio Huerta's family connection to the district, repeatedly mentioning his mother, labor rights icon Dolores Huerta.

The ad refers to Huerta's opponent, Rep. David Valadao (R-Hanford), as Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump's "comrade." Valadao announced months ago he would not vote for Trump.

The Central Valley district is 71% Latino and Democrats have targeted it as a potential pick-up opportunity in the fall.

Here is the English translation of voiceover from the ad from House Majority PAC, a political action committee that supports Democratic House candidates:

"From his mother, he learned that every human being has dignity and deserves respect. The son of Dolores Huerta, Emilio today continues the fight for the rights of farmworkers and working families.

"While Donald Trump insults us, and his comrade Republican Congressman Valadao voted to cut funds for our children’s education, Emilio Huerto continues on our side. For education, jobs and healthcare, Emilio Huerta."

Read More . . . .

• 
  

California's 21st congressional district election, 2014
Primary election
Party		Candidate	Votes	%
	Republican	David Valadao (incumbent)	28,773	63.0
	Democratic	Amanda Renteria	11,682	25.6
	Democratic	John Hernandez	5,232	11.5
Total votes			45,687	100.0
General election
	Republican	David Valadao (incumbent)	45,907	57.8
	Democratic	Amanda Renteria	33,470	42.2
Total votes			79,377	100.0
	Republican hold

California's Pretend One-Party Elections

Welcome to Rigged Elections

• Big Fucking Wow.  A U.S. Senate "debate" was held between two open borders, big government loving, high taxes loving Democrats.  
• All other political parties and independents have been effectively banned from all future general election ballots by the corrupt "election reform" pushed through by the GOP and Democrats.
• Nothing to report on this staged, phony "debate". I refuse to even vote for that office.

(Mercury News)  -  The two candidates for California’s open U.S. Senate seat clashed in a series of pointed exchanges Wednesday over each other’s competence and ability to get things done, highlighting the stakes in their only televised debate.

State Attorney General Kamala Harris and Rep. Loretta Sanchez, both Democrats, dueled over issues from crime to terrorism, seeking to sway voters in a race that has been largely overshadowed by Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

The tone was often sharply critical. Harris used the hour-long matchup at California State University, Los Angeles, to repeatedly criticize Sanchez for her poor attendance record in Washington, saying the race is about “who shows up, and who gets things done.”

Read More . . . .

Sample of a Free Election

U.S. Senate elections are more of a bidding war between Cartels of Billionaire Special Interest Groups than true elections where the people select a representative.  

,

Still in the past the voters had multiple political parties to choose from. Today in the corrupt People's Republic voters get a one-party only U.S. Senate "election".

1992 special United States Senate election, California

Party		Candidate	Votes	%
	Democratic	Dianne Feinstein	5,853,651	54.29
	Republican	John F. Seymour (incumbent)	4,093,501	37.96
	Peace and Freedom	Gerald Horne	305,697	2.84
	American Independent	Paul Meeuwenberg	281,973	2.62
	Libertarian	Richard Benjamin Boddie	247,799	2.30
	No party	Write-ins	122	0.00%
Invalid or blank votes			591,822	5.20
Total votes			11,374,565	100.00
Voter turnout			54.52%
	Democratic gain from Republican

One-Party Rule
Other countries where only one party is on the ballot include Communist North Korea, Communist China, Communist Vietnam and Communist Cuba.
.
Now the People's Republic of California joins their overseas Brothers in holding mock, pretend elections.

Democrats Abolish Freedom of the Press

Democrats Attack Freedom of the Press

(Life News)  -  California Governor Jerry Brown has signed an oppressive, Planned Parenthood-backed bill to stop whistleblowers and journalists from conducting undercover investigations of any “health care providers.”

The Center for Medical Progress’s undercover video project did a lot of damage to Planned Parenthood when it revealed the abortion giant’s baby body parts operation. Through the California bill, Planned Parenthood is trying to stop anyone from trying to expose its horrendous practices ever again.

The legislation makes it a crime for anyone to record undercover footage of “health care providers,” including abortion facilities. An original version of the bill also would have punished third parties, including journalists and lawyers, who do nothing more than report or distribute the footage, the Courthouse News Service reports. Violations include stiff fines and jail time, according to the report.

California Assembly Bill 1671 is almost assuredly going to become the subject of a lawsuit not only from pro-life groups who wish to expose the abortion industry but other political groups, the media and defenders of free speech who want to engage in similar undercover journalism.

After Governor Brown signed the bill, David Daleiden emailed LifeNews:

“The Center for Medical Progress never recorded “confidential” communications, so California’s existing recording law and the new distribution provision are simply inapplicable to our work. However, it is clear that Planned Parenthood does not want to be held accountable to the public whose taxpayer money it gladly takes by the hundreds of millions, and will even attack freedom of speech and the freedom of the press in order to maintain its own arbitrary levels of secrecy.”

SIGN THE PETITION! Congress Must De-Fund Planned Parenthood Immediately

The amended version removed the penalties for third parties who distribute the footage. But that was not enough even for some of Planned Parenthood’s allies. The Los Angeles Times editorial board published a strong op-ed against the bill. The American Civil Liberties Union of California, which often partners with Planned Parenthood on legal cases, also opposes the bill, citing First Amendment concerns about freedom of the press.

Here’s more from the report:

Kevin Baker, legislative director for the American Civil Liberties Union of California, said they share Planned Parenthood’s concerns about privacy, but the measure is written too broadly and could inadvertently catch people in criminal activity. Lawyers and journalists who share material from a whistleblower, he said, could be held liable for aiding and abetting.

Opponents point to [bill sponsor state Assemblyman Jimmy] Gomez’s own live Facebook video from a hospital last week, when he was treated for a broken elbow sustained in a legislative softball game, as an extreme example of the bill’s reach. Could the conversations captured in the background as Gomez discussed his injury be considered an infraction?

“You might be inadvertently recording conversations and posting them online in ways that violate the wording of this law,” Baker said. “That’s the problem of the bill. It isn’t limited.”

During the debate on Wednesday, state Sen. John Moorlach, R-Costa Mesa, called out the hypocrisy of the bill.

“When ‘60 Minutes’ uses a hidden camera and discovers a unique story, it’s called outstanding journalism,” Moorlach said. “But when a private citizen does it and unmasks a very, very unpleasant truth, it’s a call for legislation.”

State Sen. Loni Hancock, D-Oakland, a pro-abortion lawmaker, also expressed concerns about the bill.

“Everyone is supportive of Planned Parenthood, because it was a terrible thing that happened to them,” Hancock said, but added that First Amendment rights “are absolutely core values.”

Read More . . . .