I’ve heard of independent expenditures before, but never one that was bigger than the campaign’s own war chest:

In the last two weeks, a Riverside County Indian tribe has independently spent more than $270,000 on behalf of a Democratic candidate in Tuesday’s special election to fill a Long Beach area congressional seat.

The expenditures by the Morongo Band of Mission Indians greatly outweigh other donations in the relatively quiet race to replace Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald, who died in April. Since June 14, Morongo has paid for door hangers, newspaper ads, mailers and phone calls to voters on behalf of Jenny Oropeza, a state senator from Long Beach.

The amount spent in the Morongo campaign — by law such expenditures cannot be made in consultation with the candidate — has exceeded the $219,000 Oropeza reported raising in direct donations for the entire campaign as of June 6. It is more than 2 1/2 times the $105,000 that Oropeza’s chief competitor, Assemblywoman Laura Richardson (D-Long Beach), reported collecting by the same date.

Oropeza voted for the gaming compacts that would triple the number of slot machines at the Morongo casino, without allowing casino workers full ability to organize and collectively bargain.  The compacts would also not offer much in the way of oversight into casino finances, which in a way is the whole point, since the state is supposed to receive 15-25% of the proceeds from the new slot machines, but may not be able to determine what those proceeds are.

But none of this kept Oropeza from breaking a state Senate campaign promise by voting in support of the compacts.  And her reward is a quarter of a million dollars in advertising.

Incidentally, Morongo might want to double-check their voter lists.

(her opponent Laura) Richardson said she got two pieces of Morongo-paid mail at her home.

She called the Morongo expenditures “off the charts” but predicted that voters “are going to see through exactly what’s going on.”

Maybe, maybe not.  And my sense is that voters aren’t all that interested in the mass of mailers and robocalls, especially in the middle of June in a special election that will likely not garner 15% turnout.  Still, it’s interesting to see the lengths to which Morongo will go to pay back their supporters.  If they really wanted to help Oropeza, however, they would spend money for GOTV machinery instead of ads and calls, to counter the network of labor groups that will be helping Richardson turn out her voters, mainly because of the very Morongo compacts Oropeza signed.

This was a significant week in Bill Richardson’s campaign for President, with a major address on climate change and how to end the bloodshed in Iraq. 

It was also a significant week for peace and stability in Korea and Asia – which highlights Richardson’s expertise in foreign affairs and his diplomatic skills. With Richardson as President we get two for the price of one – a can-do leader on domestic issues and an experienced diplomat that knows how to bring people and nations together.

First, Richardson spoke in D.C. at the Take Back America Conference and set forth an unambiguous approach to Iraq – total withdrawal of U.S. forces combined with a diplomatic offensive:

But there is a fundamental difference in this campaign — and that’s how many troops each of us would leave behind. Other than the customary marine contingent at the embassy, I would leave zero troops. Not a single one. And if the embassy and our embassy personnel aren’t safe, then they’re all coming home too.

No airbases. No troops in the Green Zone. No embedded soldiers training Iraqi forces, because we all know what that means. It means our troops would still be out on patrol with targets on their backs.

A regional crisis is worthy of military intervention. A true threat to our country’s security is worthy of war. But a struggle between a country’s warring factions, where both sides hate the United States, is not worthy of one more lost American life.

Richardson also discussed his plan to addressing climate change:

I’m proud to have the most aggressive plan of anyone running for president. Within twelve years, my plan would reduce global warming pollution by 20 percent, lower demand for oil by fifty percent, and push fuel economy standards to 50 miles per gallon.

By the year 2040, my plan would require that 50 percent of our electricity be generated from renewable sources and would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent.

You can read the plan for yourself at my campaign website or you can listen to the League of Conservation Voters. They rated it the most aggressive plan with the highest goals of any other candidate. These aren’t pie in the sky proposals, but they are ambitious.

If we can spend billions waging war in a country that never had weapons of mass destruction … then we can certainly find the will to stop the mass destruction of our planet.

It’s time that we as a nation chose the collective good over the desire to collect goods. And frankly, buying carbon offsets isn’t enough. Just like paying somebody else to go to church doesn’t make you religious … paying somebody else to conserve doesn’t make you a conservationist.

Earlier this year, Richardson visited North Korea and helped revive U.S.-North Korean negotiations on nuclear weapons issues.  During his April visit, North Korean leaders promised Richardson that they would meet with U.S. officials and representatives of the International Atomic Energy Agency to monitor the shutdown of North Korea’s nuclear reactor, in exchange for the U.S. unfreezing funds owned by North Korea and held outside the country. 

In statement issued by the campaign, Richardson noted:

North Korean leaders made a promise to me to invite Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill to meet in North Korea. This high-level meeting comes on the heels of progress made toward shutting down the Yongbyon nuclear facility. Both of these actions are important steps in the process toward the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

In an Op Ed published in The Hill, Richardson called on Congress to pass and fully fund the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2007 in order to move America to a reliable and verifiable paper-ballot system now, and discussed efforts in New Mexico to adopt paper ballots:

In 2005 a grassroots coalition of concerned New Mexicans demanded action — and we acted. Working together with these citizens and the state legislature, I fought for legislation to increase voter confidence in our democracy through specific and concrete measures. We improved and standardized training for poll workers. We established statewide standards for provisional ballots to ensure that voters in low-income areas will not be disenfranchised. We made absentee voting fair, simple and uniform. And we established a random, statewide 2 percent audit of voting machines.

One year later, I signed a bill to move New Mexico to an all-paper-ballot system using optical scanners to count votes. We ended the hodgepodge of systems that confused voters and raised questions about reliability.

New Mexico’s conversion to a paper-ballot system made sense. Paper ballots are the least expensive, most secure form of voting available. . . .Using optical scanners meant quick and accurate results, while at the same time paper ballots became the permanent, verifiable, durable record of the vote.

Campaigning in Iowa, Richardson was asked to respond to John Edwards’ claim that he is more electable than Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama. Richardson noted that the Rocky Mountain and Southwest states were becoming increasing Democratic:

We in the Democratic Party seem to be nominating candidates that maybe are very strong in the East Coast and the far West Coast.  The only dispute I have with the senator’s perception is that I can deliver the Rocky Mountain states that other candidates can’t.

When questioned on his position on abortion rights, Richardson made clear his support:

Democrat Bill Richardson says that if he’s elected president, he would reject any Supreme Court nominees who believe Roe versus Wade should be overturned. . .  Richardson made the comment today in Des Moines, acknowledging that his stance probably upsets some people. Presidents typically say they don’t ask potential justices about their views on specific cases, but Richardson says he would make an exception for Roe versus Wade.

Another article on the question of abortion rights observed:

Richardson said he’d treat abortion rights differently than other issues because it’s so crucial to so many Americans. ‘‘I say this because we always dance around this issue,’’ said Richardson. ‘‘I’m also going to ask them, you do support civil rights, right? You do support a right of privacy, right?’’

By not directly discussing standards for picking nominees, Richardson said presidential candidates hide vital information from voters. ‘‘I would put men and women on the court who would shape policy for a generation,’’ said Richardson. ‘‘That’s the biggest legacy of a president. We’re already paying for the Bush legacy with these last few decisions on privacy and choice.’’

Questioned on his position on illegal immigration, Richardson stated:

I have to deal with this issue every day as the governor of New Mexico. There are four border states, and we are one of them. Am I for this wall? No. It’s a 10-foot wall. First of all, Congress didn’t fund the whole thing. And do you know what’s going to be built? Eleven-foot ladders.

Richardson criticized the new Senate energy bill passed by the Democrats as a Band-Aid approach that did not go far enough to curb our dependency on imported oil or spur serious technological innovation and promote renewable energy:

A haunting question hangs over the new energy bill passed by the Democratic-controlled Senate just before midnight Thursday: Would it work if it became law?

The real answer lies far in the future, but skepticism was rampant Friday. One prominent presidential candidate, New Mexico’s Democratic Gov. Bill Richardson, called it a “Band-Aid approach,” a sentiment expressed by other critics. Some called price-gouging provisions in the bill virtually meaningless, and President Bush has threatened to veto any bill containing such provisions.

Democratic leaders held out great promise for the legislation, saying it would reduce the nation’s reliance on foreign oil and help keep gasoline prices in check. “A giant leap forward,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) declared.

. . .In counterpoint to high Democratic praise in the Senate, Richardson, who served as energy secretary in the Clinton administration, said in a statement the bill did not go far enough and would not break U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

“It’s another Band-Aid approach, not the comprehensive medical treatment our nation’s energy policy needs,” he said. He called for a 50 m.p.g. fuel economy standard for cars instead of the 35 miles per gallon in the bill, which would have to be attained by 2020.

Richardson called for legislation that would incorporate the following elements as part of a comprehensive, integrated approach to climate and energy policy by 2020:

* Sharp incentives for making the plug-in car 50% of the auto market, giving consumers the option to fuel up at a fraction of the cost of gasoline;
*  A 50 mpg fuel economy standard for conventionally fueled vehicles, helping stimulate technologies that save fuel and save consumers gas money;
*  A 30% renewable energy requirement, which will help fuel our plug-in cars and will cause the retirement of dirty old coal plants;
*  A 20% improvement in energy efficiency across the board;
*  A climate change cap and trade program that auctions rights for industries and utilities to emit carbon at lower and lower levels — at least 20% less by 2020, and 80% less by 2040.

Finally, Richardson spoke on the importance of LGBT rights and Pride Month:

I am very pleased to join my friends in the GLBT community and Americans across the country in celebrating Pride Month. This month is a deserved commemoration of the contributions of GLBT Americans to the United States and a welcome symbol of how far we have come as a nation.

We must also acknowledge that we are in the midst of a difficult struggle for basic human rights and we have a long way to go. This month is a worthy symbol of our progress towards full civil rights for every American, but we cannot ignore the challenges we still must conquer before we can truly move forward and create a better society.

So much of the news on the Presidential campaign is impacted by how the political editors, commentators and talking heads in D.C. and N.Y.C. view the race.  They often determine the press coverage that occurs, and can have their biases. 

I’m from California and supporting Bill Richardson.  I want to share commentary on Richardson from two active Democrats from New Mexico who have watched him in office for years.  These commentaries were originally posted on DailyKos and MyDD. They give you a much better sense of Richardson and his record than what you’ll find elsewhere.

“For those of you who don’t already know me, I am Cara Valente-Compton. During the week I am a mild-mannered stay at home mom of four small kids in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Well, maybe not so mild-mannered, depending on the day. Today, for instance, I am dealing with the emotions of a 9 year old who is being manipulated by her “BFF” and a 5 year old eating popcicles in her closet, so I am a little on the grouchy side. On the weekends I work at a local Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, helping the nurses care for the preemies and sick babies. I love it.

I have had a lifelong passion for politics. I remember watching the 1972 conventions, both democratic and republican, with my parents. I was four. I have watched every convention since, for both parties. I was raised to make an informed choice between the parties, but I knew the moment I saw Jimmy Carter speak at the DNC in 1976 that I was a democrat. My father even tried to take me to a Gerry Ford rally at the Winston-Salem airport, but I threw up on the tarmac.

Over the years I have worked hard for a number of candidates. I started with Dukakis in 1988, and was wildly enthusiastic for Clinton in 1992 and 1996. But I have never been so sure of a candidate in my life as I am of Bill Richardson.

Yes, that’s right. I am betting on the dark horse in the race this time, and here is why…

First I must say that I have personal reasons for liking Bill Richardson so much. Back in 1990 I was a Bernalillo County Young Democrat and was asked by a Lt. Governor candidate to make a speech for him at our state party convention. It was my first opportunity to speak to a large group, and I was pretty nervous. Well Bill Richardson, then Congressman from northern New Mexico, was on the dais with me, and we met and exchanged a few words and I told him how nervous I was, and he was so great. He said not to worry, just pretend it was a group of five, not five hundred, relax, and be natural. I took his advice, and it worked. I didn’t speak for more than about five minutes, but it was pretty easy after his pep talk. When I was done he gave me a big, fatherly hug and said, “You did such a great job I am going to let you give all my speeches from now on!” I knew he was just saying that, but it really made me feel better, and I never had problems speaking in public again.

Now, that said, I have a number of other reasons to be supporting Richardson, and honestly if I felt that there was one other candidate more worthy of support I would be working for her or him. But there isn’t. Bill Richardson is by far the superior candidate of either party.

Richardson’s foriegn policy credientials are widely known in the political world. He served under Bill Clinton as the UN Ambassador, and has negotiated with hostile leaders on a number of occasions to release hostages and prisoners. He even brokered a cease fire agreement between Al Bashir and the rebel leaders in Darfur. Other American diplomatic efforts were rebuked, I have heard that Al Bashir refused to meet with Jesse Jackson, he refused to meet with Barak Obama. Though the cease-fire was fragile and broken within days, Richardson knows how to negotiate and leverage third party relationships to acheive peaceful resolutions to conflict.

Bill Richardson is also the strongest candidate on the issue of Iraq, and is demanding that Congress act NOW to remove our troops, not wait until October to think about it.

I am most concerned, as a mom of four, about how a president leads our nation at home, and Richardson’s domestic accomplishments are really vast. On a personal note, again, my husband and I left New Mexico in 1996 shortly after we were married because we didn’t feel that we could raise a family here. The economy was terrible, we were young and dead broke, and the job market was awful. Crime was really high. Everywhere it seemed was bad news, and we decided that we wanted to have kids right away, and so we moved to Missouri. It took us nine years to get back home, and we are so glad to be back.

Since returning to New Mexico we have been amazed at the changes, and credit the improvements in large part to Bill Richardson. Job creation in New Mexico is particularly impressive, with 82,000 new jobs having been created under Bill Richardson’s watch. Now in a state of about 1.5 million, that is a huge improvement. Richardson encouraged companies to bring their businesses here by offering tax incentives to businesses that paid employees over the prevailing wage, so these are by and large great jobs. They are also innovative companies, like Tesla Motors, building mid-sized electric cars, Eclipse Aviation, and new alternative energy plants, such as biomass, solar, and wind farms.

Speaking of energy, Richardson was the former Secretary of Energy. As Governor, Richardson fought for the creation of a light rail system that has connected the major towns and cities along the Rio Grande Corridor, from Belen to Bernalillo, and will eventually reach past Santa Fe to Las Vegas. The League of Conservation Voters says that Bill Richardson is the strongest candidate on energy and environmental issues, and can “restore America’s reputation as leaders” in this all too important issue. Richardson’s plan calls for a huge reduction in carbon emissions over the next decade, and New Mexico is following the Kyoto accord. Richardson also has a new book on the horizon, “Leading By Example: How We Can Inspire an Energy and Security Revolution” which is slated for release in November.

Richardson has brought real tax relief to every New Mexican by reducing state income taxes, and eliminating sales taxes on food and medicine altogether. New Mexicans now have more of their own money to spend. In doing this he has also managed to fund social programs, like pre-k programs, and balance the state budget.

Richardson has a great record on health care. Thanks to him every child in our state is covered until age 5. It is far from universal coverage, but it is a good start. And thanks to his efforts and the efforts of his wife Barbara the number of children lacking immunizations is down dramatically. The Richardsons have also helped to create a new wing at the University of New Mexico Hospital, called the Bill and Barbara Richardson Pavillion, which deals largely in pediatric medicine, with intensive care units for infants and childrens and a new emergency room for “peds”. He has also committed New Mexico to a leadership role in stem cell research, and this year signed into law a bill legalizing the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes.

Bill Richardson has also been instrumental in law enforcement. New Mexico has traditionally had a huge problem with drunk driving, and under this administration’s tough standards drunk driving is down significantly. Also, being a very rural state, we were developing a huge problem with meth labs. Richardson has cracked down on this problem, making harder to attain the ingredients for meth and aiding law enforcement in cracking down on offenders.

Is it any wonder, in light of all he has done for New Mexico, that Jon Stewart of the Daily Show called Bill Richardson “Batman”? I personally agree. We need a hero for President, not empty rhetoric. Join me in supporting Bill Richardson, and visit my grassroots website at www.richardsonbringshope.com. If you have any questions, too, you can email me at [email protected].”

——————

“Bill Richardson has a knack for giving diverse groups what they want most without terminally alienating people who don’t want that, whatever “that” happens to be.  He gave the pugs an upper tax bracket rate cut right out of the box in 2003, which pissed off a lot of liberal Democrats like me.

However, there were a few things I didn’t know at the time which the Governor certainly did.  First, the tax cut didn’t take effect immediately.  When oil prices went through the roof, the state had a windfall of revenue despite the loss from the income tax.  If oil and gas prices hadn’t shot up the way they did, he could have put off the tax cut a while longer.  Second, by giving pug voters what they wanted most, he was able to set the stage for several important liberal initiatives that would have been more difficult to achieve otherwise.

He convinced the voters to allow more investment money (our “Permanent Fund” from oil, gas, and mineral severance taxes) to be used for education.  It was a very close vote, but he got it done.

He convinced the legislature to spend a huge amount of money for a commuter train between Belen (south of Albuquerque) and Santa Fe, which has been talked about for more than 20 years.  This train will likely be extended south to Las Cruces and North to the Colorado border, where it will possibly connect to the incipient Colorado commuter train system.  We will soon have commuter rail linking the major metropolitan areas of the state, which now don’t even have bus service between them!  This is a really big deal for New Mexicans, and Big Bill set it all up by cutting Repugnant opposition off at the knees by giving them their core economic need.

Gov. Richardson even convinced the legislature and southern NM voters to approve even more money for a commercial spaceport, which will fuel economic development in that depressed part of the state for at least the next 50 years. 

Most important to me, Governor Richardson got behind the paper ballot early in 2005, recognizing that his Democratic base needed to know that they weren’t being cheated at the ballot box.  I can tell you that we would not have the paper ballot in NM without he Governor’s support.  Period.

Governor Richardson actually represents all of his constituents.  When he was my Congressman in ultra-liberal Santa Fe, he was reliably liberal, leading the fight against WIPP, the radioactive dump we have here.  When he couldn’t delay it any longer, he made good and sure that we got the Federal highway money we needed so that radioactive waste wouldn’t be shipped through the center of town.  What’s more, he told people exactly what he had to do, even though they didn’t want to hear it.

Now that he’s the Governor of the whole state, including the heavily conservative southern part of the state, he has more varied interests to serve.  Yet I’m certain that he’s still just as liberal as he used to be.  Sometimes I don’t understand what he’s trying to accomplish, but I can’t argue with the results.  Bill Richardson is a political genius.

Bill Richardson was reelected in the biggest landslide in NM history because he does a great job.  He’s done amazing things in NM, and if you give him a chance he’ll do great things for the whole country.  We need him.”

 

(Rep. Solis is a fine Congresswoman who did us all a favor by challenging (and defeating) Rep. Martinez. – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

Just got word that Congresswoman Hilda Solis from Los Angeles is doing a live online chat on Saturday, June 23rd at 11am PST/2pm EST at firedoglake!

Solis is one of the most progressive leaders in the House and one of the party’s rising stars.

For more info, check out www.hildasolis.org.  She’s also on youtube, facebook, and myspace.

Hector De La Torre on the Democratic radio address and my blow-by-blow response:

Hello, this is Assemblymember Hector De La Torre.

HI

How would you feel if your city government seized your land for no other reason than to build a strip mall or a Wal-Mart Supercenter?

CHEATED. ABUSED. EXPLOITED. INFURIATED. SOLD OUT BY GOVERNMENT WHO’S SUPPOSED TO PROTECT MY PROPERTY RIGHTS. I THINK THAT’S ENOUGH

If you’re like most Californians, you’d be understandably upset.

NO S**T

In 2005, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision known as Kelo versus New London, Connecticut.

I’M WELL AWARE

Some argued that this case greatly expanded the ability of state governments to purchase private property from one person for the private gain of another person or corporation.

IT DID GREATLY EXPAND IT. STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, BUT I THINK YOU LEAVING OUT LOCAL WAS UNINTENTIONAL

Many feared the Kelo decision was overly broad and would unduly endanger private property rights. To protect homes and small businesses, I authored Assembly Constitutional Amendment 8, the Eminent Domain Reform Act.

IT IS OVERLY BROAD. TELL ME ABOUT ACA 8

The Eminent Domain Reform Act prohibits State or local governments from using eminent domain to acquire an owner-occupied home for transfer to another private party. This is unprecedented.

OKAY, BETTER THAN NOTHING AT ALL. BUT WHAT ABOUT RENTAL PROPERTIES? APARTMENTS? BUSINESSES? FARMS? CHURCHES?

TAKING AWAY THE ROOF OVER YOUR HEAD ISN’T AS BAD AS TAKING AWAY WHAT PAYS FOR THE ROOF OVER YOUR HEAD. WHY? IF THEY TAKE AWAY THE LATTER, YOU’LL LIKELY ALSO LOSE THE ROOF OVER YOUR HEAD

This constitutional amendment also would prohibit government from using eminent domain to acquire property where a small business is located to transfer to another private party

SOUNDS GOOD! EXCEPT THIS DEFINES SMALL BUSINESS AS <25 EMPLOYEES, WHILE CALIFORNIA LAW DEFINES SMALL BUSINESS AS <100 EMPLOYEES

unless there is a comprehensive plan to eliminate blight.

LOOPHOLE ALERT! BLIGHT, OF COURSE, BEING WHATEVER THE GOVERNMENT SAYS IT IS. CITIES CAN DECLARE A NEIGHBORHOOD TO BE BLIGHTED (UNDER EXTREMELY VAGUE STANDARDS IN THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE) AND THEN TAKE ANY PROPERTY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO CONSTRUCT A SHOPPING MALL, LUXURY HOMES, ETC… THIS LOOPHOLE COMPLETELY NULLS THE PREVIOUS POINT YOU MADE

But before eminent domain is allowed a small business owner must have the opportunity to be a part of the new development.

THE OPPORTUNITY BEING WHATEVER THE GOVERNMENT WANTS, AND THE GOVERNMENT MAY WAIVE IT

If a small business does move, it will receive the fair market value of the previous location, moving expenses, expenses to reestablish the business at a new location, and compensation for the increased cost of rent or mortgage payments for up to three years.

BETTER THAN WHAT THEY HAVE NOW. HOWEVER, THIS MISSES THE ENTIRE POINT: IF THEY OWN THE PROPERTY, THE GOVERNMENT SHOULDN’T HAVE THE RIGHT TO FORCE SOMEONE TO MOVE FOR SOMEONE ELSE’S PRIVATE GAIN.

In short, this is legislation grounded in a simple concept: the government should not have the ability to abuse its eminent domain privileges, and during the rare times when eminent domain is appropriate, business owners will be fairly compensated.

NO, THIS IS LEGISLATION GROUNDED IN PROTECTING THE STATUS QUO WHILE MAKING PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT REFORM HAS TAKEN PLACE. THIS IS WORSE THAN NOTHING.

This philosophy has guided legislative Democrats for years.

IF THERE’S ANY ISSUE WHERE I QUESTION MY ALLEGIANCE TO THE DEMOCRATS, IT’S THIS! THE LEGISLATIVE DEMOCRATS HAVE REPEATEDLY TOLD ME, ON THIS ISSUE, THAT THERE’S FROSTING ON MY CUPCAKE WHEN THERE ISN’T. NOW YOU’RE TRYING TO SELL ME PAPER DISGUISED AS FROSTING

Last year, the State Legislature listened to voters and passed several new laws to protect peoples’ homes.

LIKE WHAT?

We made it harder for government to proclaim an area “blighted.”

OH, YOU MEAN SB 1206? BULLS**T. AGAIN, YOU’RE TRYING TO TELL ME THE PAPER IS FROSTING. THOSE STANDARDS IN THE BILL WERE VAGUE, AND MOST WERE ALREADY CURRENT LAW. LOOK AT ALL THE TIMES IT SAYS “MAY” INSTEAD OF “MUST” AND LOOK AT ALL THE UNDEFINED TERMS.

Raising the requirements for an area to be declared blighted helps protect property owners.

AND SB 1206 DIDN’T DO THAT!

An area has to be declared blighted before a redevelopment agency can use eminent domain.

THAT WAS ALREADY THE CASE! THE PROBLEM IS THAT BLIGHT IS SO VAGUELY DEFINED THAT IT IS WHATEVER THE GOVERNMENT SAYS IT IS. SB 1206 DID NEXT TO NOTHING

Raising the requirements for an area to be declared blighted helps protect property owners.

AND SB 1206 DIDN’T DO THAT

To keep the process out in the open, we increased state oversight by involving the Attorney General, the Department of Finance and the Department of Housing and Community Development to protect your rights as a property owner.

DON’T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THAT. BUT GIVEN THE TRACK RECORD IN CLAIMING TO PROTECT PROPERTY RIGHTS WHEN YOU’RE NOT, I’M NOT GOING TO GIVE THIS THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT

Now that these bills have been signed into law, California has clearly taken steps to protect the rights of homeowners and other property owners.

THE ONLY BILL WITH ANY TEETH THAT CAN BE REFERRED TO HERE WAS SB 1650. SB 53, 1206, 1210, AND 1809 WEREN’T EVEN WORTH THE PAPER THEY WERE PRINTED ON

And with your support, the Eminent Domain Reform Act will take those protections even further, into the California state constitution.

NO, I’LL SUPPORT REAL EMINENT DOMAIN REFORM, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS BILL, JUST LIKE THOSE OTHER ONES, ISN’T EVEN WORTH THE PAPER IT’S PRINTED ON. I’D RATHER HAVE NOTHING THAN THIS PIECE OF CRAP

To add, this proposal doesn’t even define “private person” which is an essential term. So this proposal would allow for the taking of property for private use if the government participated in some undefined way. The government could construct a public facility, condemn the surrounding land and give it to private developers.

Lastly, this proposal doesn’t entitle the person to attorney fees if the court rules that the government isn’t in compliance with this section. Thereby, this continues to deny many property owners a day in court

(bumped- – promoted by dday)

I have exciting news about our Calitics end-of-the-quarter fundraiser.  As you all know, we’re starting a tradition of holding a bar event every three months at the end of the quarter to raise money at our ActBlue page for progressive California candidates.  There’s an event in San Francisco and an event in Santa Monica.  And boy, have we snagged a great co-host: the talk of the blogosphere, fresh off her powerful and brilliant speech at the Take Back America Conference, Santa Monica’s own… Digby!

Details on the flip:

The proprietress of Hullabaloo has graciously accepted our invitation to co-host the event.  Here’s what you do:

Drop a few shekels in the Calitics Act Blue page for great progressive candidates like Jerry McNerney, Charlie Brown, Mark Leno (state Senate candidate), or the Calitics CaliPAC, our new state and federal PAC that we set up to help fund progressive infrastructure and build a progressive majority. (we’re on the honor system, folks, but please give if you can)

Then, join us Wednesday night for our end-of-the-quarter celebration (in association with Drinking Liberally Westside Los Angeles), and meet the lady who crashed Google Video’s servers this week!

Details:

The Cock & Bull
2947 Lincoln Blvd
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Wednesday, June 27  7:00pm-whenever

This should be a heck of a lot of fun, a way to help some good candidates, and a great opportunity to thank Digby for her tireless work exposing the massive fraud that’s been perpetrated on this nation, and being one of the most tranchant, insightful, and unyielding voices in the blogosphere.  We are fortunate to have her in this movement, and we’re ecstatic that she’ll be able to join us Wednesday night.

Won’t you join us as well?

(Related: We Are All Digby Now)