In order to rise from a relative unknown who lost to Chicago legend Bobby Rush in 2000 to the cusp of a Presidential nomination today, Barack Obama did not only have to court all elements of the varied coalitions that rule over politics in Chicago, he had to build the pie of voters large enough to be someone all those coalitions wanted to rally behind.  In 1992, Obama, working as a community organizer, registered 150,000 residents throughout Chicago to vote in what ended up being a landmark election, as Carol Moseley Braun became the first female African-American ever elected to the US Senate.

This weekend I attended an Obama Vote for Change rally in South LA which ended up registering 615 new voters.  It was one of over 100 events all over the country; here’s a report of another one in Birmingham, Alabama.  Over 400 volunteers attended the Los Angeles event, heard from a few speakers, were trained in voter registration (most of them were doing it for the first time), and sent out into the surrounding area.  Now, 600-some new voters in the LA area isn’t going to sway much politically or ensure an already-fairly-assured Democratic victory in California.  But it does build the tent, not only for the general election but beyond.  I’ve written at length about how Obama’s gamble is to build an electorate that’s so big that he has a serious, almost insurmountable advantage for both his election and his agenda.  A nationwide effort maximizes resources, keeps that army of volunteers excited and doing work, and builds that base to be dispatched for the general election.  In addition to voter registration, the volunteers were signing up registered voters to volunteer later in the campaign.  We could see a million people on the ground all across the country in November.  That’s special – and different.

John Kerry outsourced the field and mobilization to ACT and other outside groups and it was a stupid way to go.  Obama thinks he has a better idea that will work long beyond the election, and I support that aspect of it.  I worry about his shutting out the outside groups that have come out of the progressive movement since Bush’s first election, but I will note that yesterday’s event was at the campaign offices of Mark Ridley-Thomas, a progressive running for LA County Supervisor, and the event in Huntington Beach doubled as the kickoff event for Congressional candidate Debbie Cook.  So there is a layering effect, where the local candidates are benefiting from Obama’s work at the national level.

On Thursday the House of Representatives passed legislation that would provide federal underwriting for new loans to 500,000 homeowners at risk of foreclosures, as well as increase the limit on FHA loans to $729,750, include tax credits (which are loans to be paid back over 15 years) for first-time home buyers, tighten oversight of the lending industry and provide billions in grants to the states to buy and repair foreclosed homes for resale.  Every California Republican voted against it except one – Diamond Bar’s Gary Miller, not known as any kind of moderate squish (he voted with the majority of House Republicans 96% of the time last year).  The housing crisis is playing out in districts like his, and Miller can’t afford to ignore it.

…Miller, a land developer, called the housing downturn the most serious one he had seen in more than 30 years. “I really wish I could support my Republican colleagues,” he said. “But I’m very concerned about the marketplace.

“A lot of people are losing their homes,” he added. “That not only hurts them, but the neighbors around them because of foreclosure. Their home value drops.” […]

Miller, whose district includes parts of Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Orange counties, disputes the Republican portrayal of the bill as a bailout. Under the measure, lenders must agree to take a significant loss on a homeowner’s debt in return for a federal guarantee that the reduced loan will be repaid.

“I’m not in any way supporting the concept of bailing people out who made bad decisions,” Miller said. “But things happen in life. . . . There are a lot of innocent people out there.”

Here’s why this is notable.  Miller is one of the greediest and most unscrupulous developers out there.  In fact, part of his calculus may just be that it’ll help bail out homeowners who can stay in the developments from which he profits.  However, his concern for “innocent people” hasn’t been borne out by his prior voting record.  What’s different here is that he ran unopposed last year, even as the FBI was investigating him for tax evasion and shady land deals.  This year, three opponents have stepped up to challenge him, and if nothing else, they have forced him to at least pretend his district exists.  This is going to be true in every district we’re contesting in November.  The twin victories by Democrats in special elections in Illinois and Louisiana (and possibly another in Mississippi next Tuesday) has House Republicans ranging from mildly nervous to scared out of their gourds.  And as more swing seats open up (buh-bye, Vito Fossella), there’s no way the NRCC, the campaign arm of the Republicans in the House, can step in with any cash infusion to bail out an incumbent.  Tom Cole, the head of the NRCC (for now), has basically told lawmakers that they’re on their own.  So you’re going to see more out-of-character votes like this for the rest of the year.  And you will be able to tell who’s more nervous by their positions on these votes.  I’d say Gary Miller has a few beads of perspiration on the forehead.

You can also see which issues these lawmakers think will resonate in their particular districts.  Obviously the housing crisis is hitting CA-42 hard.

(yes, I do some netroots work for Ron Shepston, who’s one of the Democrats running in CA-42 to replace Miller)

Don Perata has no ability to end the recall, mind you, but in his mind he’s done it.

First off, let’s say that I’m happy to have been on the right side of Prop. 93, the outcome of which will send Don Perata into the sunset.  What a laughable bit of incompetence this is.

Let’s start with the fact that he doesn’t get to say what’s on the ballot and what’s not.  The authoritarian style of “what I say goes” is the only thing that would’ve doomed this otherwise perfectly justifiable recall of a legislator who forgot his district and went along with an obstructionist GOP that is harming the state to a severe degree.  A real Senate leader would have broadened the race into a referendum on state Republicans and would have done very well.  You either do something like this full-speed or you never start it in the first place.  This half-step just furthers the narrative of Democratic weakness.

Combined with the stab in the back on SD-15, where Perata demanded that nobody contest Abel Maldonado in another winnable seat, the Senate Pro Tem has assured that there is no way we reach a 2/3 majority in 2008.  It’s still possible by 2010, but this is a wave election, a realignment year and we’re waving the white flag in two prime Senate races.  That’s just stupid politics.  I appreciate the need to speed along the budget; the state is broke.  But this recall is over by June 3, and it’s not like everything’s going to be wrapped up by then.  And the stupidest part is that Perata RECOGNIZES that the threat of the recall was helping provide leverage for the Republicans.

In a statement, Perata credited the recall for recent legislation that passed out of the Senate:

“The vote we couldn’t get last year to close the tax loophole for yacht owners — we got that vote,” he said. “The vote we couldn’t get to help homeowners facing foreclosure – we got that vote. You put everyone here on notice — and I don’t think people are going to forget that anytime soon.”

No, you now let everyone off the hook because you’ve proven you can be bullied by a Republican hissy fit and tut-tuts from the conventional wisdom crowd in the media.  No Republican will EVER take a Democratic threat seriously in the near future, crippling the leadership of Darrell Steinberg.  And all the leverage on getting legislation passed in the Senate just ended.

Great friggin’ job, Don.  If you want to just go ahead and quit now and let any stray cat from Berkeley finish out your term, that’d be just fine with me.

…the thought has crossed my mind that Perata is just taking his name and aura off the recall because it’d be easier to pass without him, but if any organization associated with him donated a dime there’d be an even bigger hissy fit cry of “hypocrite,” so his dropping the recall really signals a drop of any financial infusion, and I’m not seeing how Simon Salinas or the Dump Denham group will raise the necessary funds (especially considering that Denham is not restricted by any fundraising limits in a recall).

• CA-03: Bill Durston may be unopposed in the June 3 primary, but he’s running very hard and trying to pick up as many decline-to-state voters as possible.  He’s actually running a GOTV operation.  The gambit here is to prove to donors and the political establishment that CA-03 is competitive.  I also think it makes sense just as practice for the general and for name recognition.

• CA-04: The Club for Growth, whose record this year in primaries is actually a little mixed, has released an ad attacking Doug Ose in his race against Tom McClintock.  There’s plenty of outside money on both sides in this one.

• CA-42: Communications Workers of America, Southern California Council has endorsed Ron Shepston.  It’s somewhat notable considering that Ed Chau got the Cal Labor Fed endorsement.

Anything else you’re hearing, please put it in the comments.  This is an open-source elections thread.

Now Doug Ose is alleging illegal coordination between Tom McClintock and a 501(c)(4) group headed by poster boy for Republican losers in the state:

A California-based group and other local officials filed a Federal Election Commission (FEC) complaint Monday regarding the alleged ties between an ex-aide to Rep. Richard Pombo (R-Calif.) and state Sen. Tom McClintock (R).

McClintock and former Rep. Doug Ose (R-Calif.) are in a bitter primary battle to face off against Democrat Charlie Brown this fall for retiring Rep. John Doolittle’s (R-Calif.) seat.

At issue is the role of Steve Ding – an ex-McClintock consultant and former chief of staff for Pombo – and The Partnership for America, a 501(c)4 advocacy group headed by Pombo.

McClatchy recently reported that Pombo’s group is organizing a $660,000 independent campaign in the 4th congressional district.

Whoever comes out of the primary is going to be tainted by multiple smears, and flat broke.  McClintock and Ose are both willing to risk that because they think the 4th District is automatically Republican, and they’re underestimating the strength of Charlie Brown.

At their peril.

You can read on for McClintock’s ties to Pombo and various Indian gaming groups.

Periodically between now and the primaries on June 3, I’ll be checking in with some brief election news.

• CA-04: Charlie Brown has released his first ad of the cycle.  It’s a bio spot, and it’s a good one.

I would have liked to have seen some specifics about the veterans care challenge, but I understand that it’s well-known inside the district so maybe the allusion to it was all that was necessary.  Certainly he’s taking an above-the-fray stance in the midst of the brutal primary on the other side.  I like it.

• AD-80: I bet you didn’t to see CNA and SEIU supporting the same candidate in virtually anything, especially at this sensitive time, but both of them have come out in favor of Manuel Perez, in addition to the California Medical Association PAC.

• At Election Track, you can follow contributions to all of California’s candidates as we head to the primary.

• CA-08: Cindy Sheehan says she has $130,000 for her challenge to Nancy Pelosi, running as an independent.

• SD-03: Here’s a Joe Nation ad (over the flip) focusing on the environment. Is this running anywhere?