Through a series of vacancies and some early action, California has suddenly become ground zero for Congressional elections.  Here’s the latest news on some of the races.

• CA-32: The special election for Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis’ seat will coincide with the statewide special election on May 19th.  The major candidates, Board of Equalization member Judy Chu, State Sen. Gil Cedillo and Obama transition official Emanuel Pleitez, actually met in a forum last week sponsored by the Southwest Voter Registration Project,  and the Latino Professional Network.  I didn’t learn about it until a press release popped up in my inbox from Cedillo’s press flack touting “Cedillo is Victorious in First Debate”.  Seeking a somewhat less biased opinion, I struggled to find a news report until coming across this in the Whittier Daily News.

Immigration issues dominated the agenda when three of the leading Democratic candidates to replace new Labor Secretary Hilda Solis met face to face for the first time at a forum Thursday night.

“Today I met with the president … I could have said anything … what I said was, ‘Mr. President, please stop the raids. Please stop the raids now,’ ” Cedillo said of a meeting with Barack Obama during the president’s town hall meeting in Los Angeles on Thursday.

Cedillo is known for repeatedly introducing legislation to allow undocumented immigrants to obtain drivers licenses, but he said that his legacy goes far beyond: “In 11 years of the legislature … I have written 80 bills signed by three governors. I have fought to defend immigrants, because I believe it is the right thing to do.”

Chu discussed being raised by an immigrant mother in South Central Los Angeles, fighting against an English- only movement in Monterey Park, and pushing legislation in Sacramento to protect outdoor migrant workers and require contracts negotiated in a certain language to be printed in that language.

“I support bills that will bring justice to immigrants. Many times immigrants do not have a voice in the political system, and it is up to us, who are in elected positions, to be able to speak up for them,” she said.

Pleitez, too, was born to an immigrant mother, who crossed the border from Mexico while pregnant with him. He said his childhood growing up at the “mercy of the generosity of the people of my community” in back rooms and back garages of neighbors created a debt that he owes to the district.

“I was able to move on to Stanford University, Goldman Sachs … but I will never forget … this debt that I have,” he said.

“I will leverage my youth to organize around the country … to really pass immigration reform.”

This was the last scheduled debate where every major candidate has committed to attend, and judging from the article, observers found little differentiation between the candidates on the issues.  Cedillo vowed not to vote for any health care system that didn’t include immigrants “regardless of immigration status,” but given the audience I would expect that kind of rigidity.  I hope there will be a wider range of issues discussed in a public way, and as I have in the past I invite all the candidates to share their views here on Calitics.  We should have at least one response in the coming weeks.  Meanwhile, PowerPAC, a new group targeted at youth of color which aided President Obama in California and across the nation last year, endorsed Gil Cedillo.  He also received the endorsement today of former Assemblyman Ed Chavez.

• CA-10: The field is still assembling after last week’s announcement that Ellen Tauscher will leave Congress to work on arms control policy in the State Department.  While Sen. Mark DeSaulnier has not formally announced, such an announcement is expected.  In the meantime, Adriel Hampton, a municipal investigator for the San Francisco City Attorney’s office, is among the first to formally announce.  Hampton clearly seeks to leverage social media and Web 2.0 (he has a Ning site, in addition to Facebook and Twitter) to create buzz for his outside-the-establishment campaign.  Hopefully he’ll pop up around here as well.  I’m not seeing a lot of substance behind the “hey kids, let’s put on a Government 2.0 show” announcement, but I’m sure that will come.  Perhaps others can fill in the missing pieces here. (Actually, Robert did, below.

Meanwhile, the Yacht Party still must believe that this seat holds the same demographics as it did when it was represented by a Republican in 1996, because they continue to trot out names to contest the seat.  Melanie Morgan is touting someone.  Yes, Spocko’s Melanie Morgan.

Conservative activist, author and former radio talk show host Melanie Morgan sent an e-mail yesterday saying she’s “squealing like a schoolgirl” to announce that Catherine Moy – executive director of the Move America Forward group of which Morgan is chairwoman; co-author with Morgan of “American Mourning;” and a Fairfield City Council member – will run in the special election to succeed Rep. Ellen Tauscher, assuming Tauscher is confirmed to a high-ranking State Department post.

“The conservative counter-insurgency has begun, and I’m going to do everything in my power to get Cat elected,” Morgan wrote. “Cat has terrific name recognition in the area, a devoted following and she is entirely capable of running this race and winning it – as a rock-solid conservative who has never voted to raise a single tax, and has a solid record on national defense working relentlessly with the largest pro-troops grassroots organization in the country.”

I don’t think Morgan knows what the word “counter-insurgency” means.  Will she be seeking out groups inside the district to reconcile differences and win hearts and minds with a movement of primary resistance?

Other Republican names are floating out there, but the one that brings a smile to my face is tom Del Beccaro, Vice Chairman of the Yacht Party and recent founder of a PAC dedicated to stopping the Fairness Doctrine, which has already been stopped by a full vote in the US Senate.

• CA-48: It takes two years to run for Congress at the least, if not multiple cycles.  So I appreciate Irvine City Councilwoman Beth Krom’s kickoff in CA-48 to unseat John Campbell, bringing 300 people to Shady Canyon for the affair.  Both Steve Young (the most recent candidate in the district) and Rep. Loretta Sanchez enthusiastically endorsed Krom’s candidacy, so expect the field to clear.  It’s quixotic, but we need more windmill-tilters taking back red districts.

Perhaps the most important part of Barack Obama’s Southern California trip, in my view, was not hearing the perspectives of a nervous public, or checking out battery technology in Pomona, or using the bully pulpit to speak to the nation on the Tonight Show.  It’s that he got stuck in traffic.

He got caught in traffic on the 110. He bantered with Jay Leno. And he sought to reassure people worried about the sagging economy and the spiraling national debt.

President Obama ended a two-day swing through Southern California on Thursday, a trip that exposed him to both celebrity and everyday struggles. Like many people navigating the freeways at midday, he was briefly tied up in traffic, his motorcade wheezing along at 10 mph as he made his way from west of downtown Los Angeles to Burbank. But he also got to trade quips on “The Tonight Show” with Leno, mixing a sober assessment of the AIG bonus scandal with details about his life inside the White House.

Traffic has actually improved in the LA area over the last six months, at least in peak hours with less workers traveling.  But it remains incredibly difficult to move for large chunks of the daytime, which decreases productivity and causes harmful and unnecessary carbon emissions.  Los Angeles’ transit infrastructure has been abysmal for so long that few remember how it was built, along streetcar lines.  Increased revenue from Measure R can spark a transit revival, with a subway to the sea, a Green Line to LAX, and increased light rail and bus service throughout the region, but that will take years if not decades, especially without federal aid.  

This week, Ray LaHood, the Secretary of Transportation, put a post up at the Department of Transportation’s blog, one of the ugliest-looking blogs I’ve ever seen, what I imagine a blog from 1982 would look like if they had blogs or the public Internet back then… but I digress, because the content is excellent:

Today, I was proud to address my former colleagues in the House of Representatives and co-present a DOT-HUD partnership to help American families gain better access to affordable housing, more transportation options, and lower transportation costs.

As I told House members, “One of my highest priorities is to help promote more livable communities through sustainable surface transportation programs.” That means roads, rails, and transit. It means safer passage for pedestrians, for bicyclists.

After housing costs, transportation takes the biggest bite out of the typical household budget. That’s why a partnership between HUD and DOT can be so effective; we have the ability to ease the largest financial burden on many American families. We’re talking about 60% of the average working American family’s expenses. HUD Secretary Donovan and I can cut these costs by focusing our departments’ efforts on creating affordable, sustainable communities.

While so many of the decisions about smart growth and livable communities are typically made at the local, the federal government can absolutely play a role in encouraging better development decisions, either through the bully pulpit or grants in aid.  Housing, transportation and energy are all intimately linked.  A community with residential and commercial spaces close together, which provides durable transit options between home and work, whether through bike lanes or light rail or whatever, allows for reducing carbon emissions through auto transit.  It means a more vibrant neighborhood and a higher quality of life.  Communities that cater just to businesses get abandoned at night.  Bedroom communities are sleepy during the day.  It doesn’t make any sense.  Not to mention that reducing housing and transportation costs in tandem frees up money for economic activity for small businesses that cater to the area.

Clearly, the status quo is unsustainable.  Just ask the guy in the motorcade stuck on the 110 last Thursday.

Last week I took a look at the growing Bushville on the American River in Sacramento, which has been garnering national attention as a powerful symbol for these troubled economic times.  It was clear at that time that the city government led by Mayor Kevin Johnson needed to do something to ameliorate the situation.  The decision has been made.

Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson promised to first make alternative shelter space available for the estimated 150 men and women who inhabit the squalid encampment near the American River, at the edge of the city’s downtown.

Johnson, who toured the area with California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger a day earlier, said he hoped to have the ramshackle settlement cleared of tents and debris in the next two to three weeks.

“We want to move as quickly as we can,” he told a news conference, insisting the city was determined to treat the tent dwellers with compassion.

“They are people out there. We have to do whatever we can do,” he said. “We as a city are not going to shy away from it. We’re going to tackle it head-on.”

Advocates for the homeless applauded the mayor’s action. Municipal authorities in Sacramento have been debating the fate of the tent city for weeks.

150 seems like a very low number, when news outlets have reported as many as 1,200 homeless staying in the encampment.  Of course, that could simply be a matter of media overhype (local shelter organizers apparently fed this as well).  However, even if the numbers are correct, finding shelter space for 150 deals with those made homeless as of today.  With unemployment skyrocketing, there will be more left homeless tomorrow.  And next week.  And next month.  While most in the encampment did not fit the profile of the “recession homeless” (a closer look reveals that the tent city grew out of multiple closures of other shelters, which is probably because of the recession anyway, so we can go around and around on this), such a group does exist and will need help over the next year as the state struggles.  The fact that so many homes lie vacant and are owned by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, i.e. the US taxpayer, suggests there are solutions to this problem beyond the short term if creative solutions are made.

There’s a livestream of this town hall meeting at the Miguel Contreras Learning Center here.  It’s about to get underway.

It would be nice if somebody asked him about the guy introducing him, the Governor, and why he hasn’t taken a position on changing unemployment benefit law, and why his staff has talked about rejecting the stimulus funds, and why members of his party voted against it en masse.

…Arnold, introducing the President, touts all the money coming in to California from the stimulus package… but you know, not enough to hit the trigger and stop the worst cuts to health care for the needy.  There’s this weird tightrope that Arnold is walking, saying how much California is getting from the stimulus but not SO much that he isn’t forced to screw poor people.

Update by Robert: Obama simply doesn’t get it on education. 26,000 teachers are being fired in CA. Instead he rattles off an attack on teachers unions for wanting more money without reform, and on parents for not watching over their kids. This isn’t about reform or video games but staving off outright collapse. Obama doesn’t actually understand what is happening in CA.

Update by Dave I’m not sure why this second town hall was needed.  It’s almost a note-for-note replay of the first one, in the same region, which will generate the same news stories.  Obama’s opening remarks were almost verbatim, and the questions – which aren’t screened so this is not his fault – are treading pretty much the same territory.  Just doesn’t seem necessary.

The latest report of registration, current up to February 2010, shows that voters have continued to register Democratic in higher numbers even since the general election.  There are now 17.3 million registered voters, 74.4% of all eligible adults, and Democrats have a 2.32 million vote advantage over Republicans.  By the percentages, the state consists of 44.52% Democrats, 31.14% Republicans, and 19.99% decline to state, with smaller parties rounding out the rest of the voters.

2010 is the last year before a new census and new district lines, so the district-level numbers only apply for the next election cycle.  Still, a close reading makes clear where Democrats should be focusing their registration efforts and resources for the next year.

In Congress, there are two Republican-held seats where Republicans hold less than 40% of the registration share, seen as a key dividing line.  Those are Dan Lungren’s CA-03 (39.7% Republican-37.7% Democratic) and, surprisingly, Buck McKeon’s CA-25 (39.7% Republican-39.2% Democratic), which has changed dramatically over the past few years and could be ripe for a well-funded, legitimate challenger.  Obama won that district 50-48 as well.  With only 351,421 registered voters in CA-25, there are additional non-voters waiting to be registered there to tighten up those numbers even further.  CA-19 also has a shortfall of voters which could lead to a tightening of the rolls.  

In the State Senate, the only even-numbered seat (the ones up for election in 2010) that deserves a focus is SD-12, where Jeff Denham is termed out.  There are 47.5% registered Democrats and 33.1% registered Republicans.  Democrats in that region are fairly conservative, and so there may not be a progressive coming out of that district, but there’s no reason on Earth why Democrats shouldn’t own that seat.  Especially since there may be 100,000 unregistered voters out there.

As for the Assembly, the numbers look good in AD-05, AD-26 (Dems have a 42-39 lead in registration), AD-30 and AD-36, with a few other marginal possibilities based solely on the voter reg. numbers (AD-38, AD-63, AD-64, and AD-65 come to mind).  There is absolutely a path to pick up three seats and a 2/3 majority in the Assembly, if the net is cast wide enough.

Of course, oftentimes Democratic officials focus too much, in my view, on voter registration statistics, and shoudl recruit good candidates and give them the resources they need to compete instead.  But in this off-year, registration stats offer an opportunity to determine where to target.  You can dig through them yourself at the Secretary of State’s page.

When the Administration announced an end to medical marijuana raids by the DEA, they abruptly took back the statement a few hours later.  There was a bit of confusion about the new policy.  Eric Holder put an end to that.

Attorney General Eric Holder signaled a change on medical marijuana policy Wednesday, saying federal agents will target marijuana distributors only when they violate both federal and state law.

That would be a departure from the policy of the Bush administration, which targeted medical marijuana dispensaries in California even if they complied with that state’s law.

“The policy is to go after those people who violate both federal and state law,” Holder said in a question-and-answer session with reporters at the Justice Department.

Good.  There is little justification to waste Justice Department resources harassing Californians and Americans in 12 other states engaging in perfectly legal activity.  Holder must follow the law but he also has discretion in setting priorities, and it’s good to see him recognize that arresting local businessmen and their patients makes no sense.  There remain questions about outstanding medical marijuana federal court cases with over two dozen dispensaries, and hopefully the solution will be to drop the charges.

In a related story, Maxine Waters wants to end mandatory minimum sentencing for federal drug offenses, and the bill has 15 co-sponsors.  The Bureau of Prisons budget has increased 25-fold since mandatory minimums were introduced.  Small drug cases belong in state courts, where offenders could be given treatment instead of jail.  Furthermore, these kind of drug cases disproportionately impact minority communities.

H.R. 1466, the Major Drug Trafficking Prosecution Act of 2009, seeks to repeal mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenders and to give courts the ability to determine sentences based on all the facts, not just drug weight. It would also refocus federal resources on major drug traffickers instead of low-level offenders. There is currently no companion bill in the Senate.

Sen. Boxer, your office phone is ringing.

Ellen Tauscher is leaving Congress:

“For the past 13 years, I have had the honor and privilege of serving you in Congress. Representing California’s 10th Congressional District always has been and remains – especially in these trying times – my first priority.”

“Last week, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton asked me to serve as Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security.”

“While her offer is both generous and flattering, I did not take the decision lightly. I accepted it after much soul searching and long discussions with my family and friends.”

Her mission will be an important one – to fulfill the Obama Administration’s goal of eventually ridding the world of nuclear weapons, and in the near term reducing stockpiles through trade agreements with Russia and ensuring the security of loose nuclear materials around the world.  Given that she has supported the Reliable Replacement Warhead system in the past, which would usher in a new generation of nuclear weapons and work directly counter to proposals like the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, I am dubious that this is her best role:

Those of us who are interested in working toward a world free of nuclear weapons realize that progress will involve many steps, some large, some small. One important step will be ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). Some CTBT supporters suspect that the outlines of a deal are coalescing: those who want the RRW will try to make the CTBT and the RRW a package deal, arguing that we will be able to maintain a reliable, safe nuclear deterrent without testing, as the CTBT would require, only if the weapon labs are allowed to proceed with weapon modernization. The Congressional Strategic Posture Commission interim report appears to be at least sympathetic to this view. This artificial link is based on both faulty logic and a long list of unstated and unsupportable assumptions.

The assertion that our nuclear weapons need any modernizing implies, usually implicitly, that current weapons are antiques that are not quite up to snuff. Chilton, in the article cited above, specifically links U.S. modernization to Russian and Chinese nuclear weapons. This superficially makes sense: after all, we don’t send our military out to fight with World War II vintage tanks, ships, and airplanes. Certainly the United States should be armed with the latest and best nuclear weapons; at the very least, our weapons have to be at least as modern as any possible competitors, right? The simple analogy to conventional weapons doesn’t hold because of the types of tasks assigned to nuclear weapons and some confusion about just what a “nuclear weapon” is […]

Simple uranium bombs with high reliability and yields of twenty kilotons (or the power of the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima) or more would be easy to manufacture. We could design such a weapon, perhaps build one or two, and put the plans on the shelf in case we ever needed it. I can’t help but imagine those language-free schematic assembly instructions that come along with unassembled Ikea furniture, describing how to put a bookshelf together without special skills or complex tools. We should design the Ikea Bomb. The DOE’s arguments for a new nuclear bomb design would be a lot more convincing if DOE were eagerly trying to design themselves out of a job rather than looking at a future that has them building nuclear weapons forever.

Nuclear weapons modernization is a complete myth, and Tauscher has perpetuated it.  Regardless of the positives of her leaving Congress, she is a terrible choice for the safety of the world.  I’ll leave it to you to determine the relative benefits of the trade-off.

The Governor will not need to announce any special election for this seat until Tauscher is confirmed, which could take “weeks, if not months,” as she notes.  District sources tell me that labor’s voice matters here, and all the serious candidates come from the legislature, in particular Asm. Tom Torlakson and Sen. Mark DeSaulnier (who lives outside the district in Concord, but that’s not required under state law).  Of the two, only one will run, and Torlakson has been gearing up for a statewide run for a while, though Congress may offer a more attractive platform.  While Buchanan has seemingly been groomed for this position, it’s probably too soon for her to make the jump, and AD-15 does not have a deep Democratic bench and would be likely to flip back to the Republicans if she vacates.  Either way, we’re looking at a special election for Congress, followed by another special election for the legislature.  At this rate, the legislature will be missing bodies until early 2010.  And that’s horrible news, given the conservative veto and the need for every single vote on budget and tax issues.