(This is a wonderful overview of the life of Sen. Oropeza, who died way too soon last week at age 53. Thanks to Seneca Doane for posting this here at Calitics. – promoted by Robert Cruickshank)

(cross-post from Daily Kos)

I’ve blogged once before, under my previous identity, about Jenny Oropeza, my college friend made good.  Jenny was expected to win easy re-election next month to her 28th District State Senate seat, which stretches from Venice Beach through the South Bay cities south of Los Angeles to part of Long Beach, where she made her start in politics.  In that 2007 diary, I was happy to endorse her for the CA-37 Congressional seat, which she lost in a primary to Laura Richardson.  I write for a sadder reason today than loss of a mere election.  Jenny died on Wednesday, October 20.  Her death made the evening news only on Thursday.  I saw it only by happenstance while walking by my daughter watching the evening news.  Jenny will win her final election posthumously on Nov. 2; the new Governor will call a special election.

I was going to write about something else today, but Jenny had a career and life worth celebrating, and so I won’t delay another day.  We have something to learn from her success.

 California State Senator (28th District) Jenny Oropeza, Sept. 27, 1957 – Oct. 20, 2010.

(Funeral information is at the end of the diary.)

I wrote about my early interactions with Jenny in that 2007 diary on the CA-37 special election; I’ll try not to repeat myself here too much here; click the link.  The bare bones: I met her at Cal State Long Beach at the start of 1980, when she was in her first term as Student Body President.  I was the editor of the “alternative” newspaper there — oddly enough, it was a daily — and Jenny charmingly (but not inappropriately) courted my editorial support for a (unprecedented at Long Beach) second term at that school.  I ended up supporting her on the merits.  Easy call.

It’s strange when you meet someone in high school or college who has the ability and discipline to succeed in the “real world” of politics, because at that age you have little to compare it to.  I’ve often been inclined to defend politicians and the tough choices and compromises they must make; much of that, I think, comes from my observation of Jenny and her longterm friend and political partner Sharon Weissman, who was Jenny’s perpetual campaign manager and Chief of Staff.  We tend to view personal political ambition with suspicion; one lesson of Jenny’s life is that we should not be quite so quick to judge.  Jenny was certainly ambitious, but in a way that I think liberals could appreciate.  She wanted to be in office because she knew that she (and Sharon) could do a great job.  And, when in office, she proved it.

Jenny did what she had to do, within bounds, to get elected.  She was a fiendishly hard worker with well-tuned political antennae.  As I later moved into student government myself, I got to know her private side a bit.  She was funny, sometimes profane, incisive, and politically ahead of her time.

She was an advocate of gay rights on campus in 1980, not only before the Clinton Administration but before public recognition of AIDS/HIV, at a time when it was anything but a safe political stance.  She created an environment where our student paper became the first one in California to publish an article on gays and lesbians in our college, complete with names and photos of those who had decided they wanted to come out in that fashion.  As I think of how this came about, in days when such things simply weren’t discussed in print, I realize that the people who had contacted me about the article had probably consulted Jenny first, if not been sent by her.

My favorite interaction with her came when the campus responded to Jimmy Carter’s initiative to require young men born after the end of 1959 to register with the Selective Service.  Our paper banged the drum loudly and profanely in support of a protest rally, and sleepy little commuter school Long Beach State ended up having a rally smaller only than Berkeley’s.  Another student government might have shut us down for some of the more aggressive stances we took; Jenny protected us.

I forget the cause we supported in a subsequent outdoor rally, possibly it dealt with hiking tuition above $50 per semester (even then we could see that tuition hikes would end badly), when she and I were both speakers.  That rally was much less energized.  I think Jenny had already spoken and realized that the crowd was, well, a bit dead.  She sidled over to me and asked me, the wild-haired bearded radical, to do something that she knew she couldn’t do, with her future planned to be within the system, but that had to be done.

I don’t recall her exact words.  One memory I had is that she said something like “Get them more energized.  Rile them up.  Go ahead and curse.”  Another memory, which I don’t remember clearly enough to attribute to her, was her saying “They need to get excited.  When you go out there, say ‘fuck’ a lot.”  Whether that was her advice or my loose interpretation of it, that’s what I did, and the crowd did get a lot more excited.  It ended up being a good rally.  We both understood that sometimes people who don’t expect a future in politics can do things that politicians themselves can’t do.

Does that seem unfair, or wrong?  If she had just been out for herself, perhaps.  But she was a precious commodity and she knew it.  She knew that her career was worth protecting, because when she got into office she would do great things.  And so she did.

I knew Jenny in school as a brunette — to be honest, I have to say “buxom brunette.”  I know that it shouldn’t matter, but it was surely the first thing that everyone who met her in those days noticed — and it did matter at the time, which was a much more openly sexist one.  In those days, when there were only a handful of women in state and federal office, she was put in the position of becoming a feminist pioneer in politics.  Jenny was adroit and ahead of her time in being able to politely and cheerfully deflect unwanted male attention and getting people to focus on her intelligence and the merits of what she had to say.  She was a stereotype-buster.

In later years, she started lightening her hair — what we in Orange County call “the Loretta Sanchez look” for Latinas — and so all of the images I found of her today show her as various shades of blonde.  I wish I could have found at least one of her with the dark hair of her youth.  There are other photos — in time she got older, she got sick — but this is how I’ll remember her.  (I chose another picture to lead off this diary because I think it’s gorgeous and she might well appreciate it.)

Jenny was a strong crusader for public health and environmental protection.  I remember her being this way in college, but it surely accelerated after her own bout with liver cancer in 2004, which despite her remission seems plausibly related to her cause of death.  From the Sacramento Bee:

Oropeza had been largely absent from the Senate since her office announced in May that she had been diagnosed with a blood clot in her abdomen. The Long Beach Democrat, first elected to the Senate in 2006, had battled liver cancer and a tumor during her time in the Assembly.

Her own battle with cancer inspired her to become a champion of cancer prevention in the Legislature.

“I’ve always believed that we ought to regenerate the Earth and be concerned about ozone levels, but I didn’t personalize it until I got sick,” she told The Bee in 2005.

She carried legislation to curb fight cancer-causing chemicals and air pollution, including a ban on smoking at beaches and state parks. Earlier this year, she joined forces with Assemblywoman Noreen Evans, D-Santa Rosa, on legislation that would restore a program that provides mammograms to low-income women who do not have sufficient health coverage.

She was sick enough towards the end that she was one of two Democratic Senators to miss the budget vote two weeks before her death.  She could afford to, knowing there were enough votes to pass it.  Had there not been, I expect that there would have been another profile in courage, where Jenny would have shown up against her doctor’s wishes to settle the issue.

Now here’s where this political obituary takes an unusual turn.

Jenny’s story is also her friend and Chief of Staff Sharon Weissman’s story.  I don’t know when I’ve ever seen a friendship as lasting and productive as theirs.  (I have no idea what Sharon’s plans are now; I haven’t been in touch with her in over three years.  No one would be better equipped to continue Jenny’s legacy in the State Senate, but I’m sure that many others will seek to do so.  She will, as usual, presumably do what she thinks is best for the district.)  But in reading about this tragedy late last night, I found several articles focusing on their amazing collaboration that are worth sharing.  I’ll share just a couple.

This story from the Long Beach Press-Telegram is reprinted in full on Jenny’s official State Senate page, which I interpret to mean it can be quoted in full.  (Editors or P-T staff, let me know if otherwise and I’ll chop it to a few paragraphs, but I hope that you won’t.)

Long Beach Press-Telegram: A trusted aide, and a better friend

Monday, June 19, 2006

By Jenny Marder, Staff writer

LONG BEACH – Sharon Weissman helped Jenny Oropeza apply to college. She introduced her to her husband, Tom Mullins. She was the maid of honor in her wedding.

And she’s run nearly all of her political campaigns, dating back to her race for student body president at Cal State Long Beach.

Over the years, Oropeza has climbed the political ladder, and her recent Democratic primary victory in the 28th Senate State District has her poised for another step up.

But behind her victories for Assembly, City Council, school board even CSULB student body president has been Weissman, her trusted aide, political adviser and the chief of staff in her assembly office.

Oropeza, who is finishing her third term in the State Assembly, calls Weissman “her right arm.”

So hiring her as the top staffer in her council office was a natural choice. And appointing her district director when she won her Assembly seat in 2000 was a no-brainer as well.

“We have worked together and known each other so long,” Oropeza said. “We share a common vision of what’s important.”

With countless meetings and engagements in Sacramento, Oropeza can’t be everywhere at once, she lamented Friday. But her team, led by Weissman, can.

“She really is my eyes and ears in the community, and she can often speak with great authority,” Oropeza said. “She is very important to our relationship with the local community.”

Shared values

As if eyes, ears and a right arm weren’t enough, the two say that shared values have drawn and bonded them together.

And backgrounds that paralleled each other in many ways were at the roots of those values, Weissman said.

“We’re both from backgrounds of very modest means,” she said.

Both grew up in apartments. As children, neither had cars, neither had health insurance.

“So when we talk about things like public transportation, health care, and education as the equalizer these are all things that are not abstract for either of us,” Weissman said. “These are all very real issues for Jenny, as they are for me.”

The two met in high school in a youth business program called Junior Achievement, which teaches students about economics, free enterprise and the stock market.

Weissman, then a senior in high school, was chairing the organization’s mini Chamber of Commerce and looking for someone to volunteer for the “billboard committee.”

Oropeza raised her hand and excitedly volunteered, as she would for a number of subsequent volunteer positions, Weissman said. They became fast friends.

“She actually changed my life,” Oropeza said. “She’s older than me. She helped me figure out how to go to college.”

First campaign

In 1975, they were roommates for a year at CSULB. Weissman, then a student senator, drafted her friend to become involved in student government.

Not long after that, Oropeza would run her first successful campaign for student body president.

As her campaign manager, Weissman would help Oropeza hand out fliers and accompany her while she spoke to campus sororities, fraternities and cultural clubs.

Weissman didn’t know then that it would be the first of many campaigns she would manage for her friend.

“Jenny was always a community activist,” she said. “She has such a passion for the people she represents. She is always making sure they have a vigorous and passionate representative.”

Since her college days, Oropeza has served two terms on the Long Beach Board of Education, two terms on the Long Beach City Council and is finishing her third term on the state assembly.

Shared experience

Their relationship has extended beyond politics. After suffering stage-three ovarian cancer in 1999, Weissman was able to understand and help Oropeza when she was diagnosed with liver cancer.

Weissman brought her dinners and helped her do laundry and other household chores as Oropeza endured a difficult surgery, recovery and ensuing months of chemotherapy treatment.

Their warmth and ease was apparent when posing for a picture Friday in downtown’s Cesar Chavez Park, which the assemblywoman fought to open during her council tenure.

There, Weissman smoothed Oropeza’s collar and put her car keys in her purse. Near the picnic area, where a young boy licked frosting off his fingers, the two put their arms around each other and smiled at the camera.

“Pretend you like each other,” the photographer told them.

Weissman smiled and gave her friend an affectionate squeeze on the shoulder.

“That’s not hard,” she said.

From the Contra Costa Times interview with Sharon:

“I saw her most passionate when she was fighting for her constituents,” she said. “You could never mistake when Jenny was on a mission. She certainly had a look in her eye and could not be gotten off track.”

Even as Oropeza grew sick this year from a blood clot in her stomach, she continued working diligently, even if she was forced to miss much of the legislative session, Weissman said.

“Someone asked her if she was dying, and she said, `No, I have a lot more work to do,”‘ Weissman recalled.

The senator expected that same effort from her staff members and was a “tough taskmaster,” Weissman said.

“She expected the highest quality work from us because she felt that … all of us were paid with taxpayer dollars and they deserve the best,” she sad.

After Oropeza was diagnosed with liver cancer in 2004, which she overcame in 2005, she grew even more driven, Weissman said. Much of Oropeza’s legislation to follow dealt with pollution, smoking, public health and cancer.

“I would be remiss if I didn’t say that having cancer changed Jenny,” she said. “It made her impatient.”

I suppose I’ll quote this much from my 2007 diary:

It is possible that had I attended college with Laura Richardson rather than Jenny Oropeza, I’d be supporting the former.  But, frankly, the odds are against it.  Few people in my college’s student government had the earmarks of someone who would continue on to success in politics; most of them are not people I’d endorse.  Yet Jenny was always clearly on a track towards high public service, and despite that she somehow failed to disgust me.  Her motives towards public service were good — constituency-serving rather than self-serving.  While Jenny and I disagreed at times about various policies, she was someone I’d trust to represent my interests, and someone whose heart was in the right place.  Beyond that, she’ll be a real battler in Congress — and we all know that we need that.

What Jenny taught me is that there is more than one path to progressive achievement.  The path that I (and I sense many critics of professional politicians here) have generally taken is as an outside critic of the government who doesn’t have to compromise, doesn’t have to groom contacts and flatter constituents, with the compromises this inevitably brings.  And this is a good way to be — but it is not enough.  We need people inside the system as well who are willing and able to do the hard work of governing in a progressive direction, who will be honest and clear-eyed and, among other things, will be able to tell us “no” when what we want is too far, while being willing to tell other professional politicians that our interests and desires in a given case as legitimate, and who can write solid legislation to put them into effect.

You need both.  Without us, the likes of Jenny won’t discover many issues that matter and won’t be able to point to us as a force to be reckoned with.  But without the likes of Jenny Oropeza in office, we on the left can become simply a sideshow — often correct, but without political effect — rather than a force.  We need both types — and we should respect those “professional politicians” who do their job conscientiously and well.

That, I realize, is largely why I’m working hard for Jerry Brown, Barbara Boxer, and others this year.  (Note: in this diary, I speak for no candidate or organization other than myself.)

We lost someone important in Jenny Oropeza.  May her successor live up to her high standards; may her colleagues benefit from her example.

Here’s some late breaking news:

A public funeral for state Sen. Jenny Oropeza has been scheduled for Monday.

The funeral will take place at 1 p.m. at Forest Lawn’s Cypress location, according to her chief of staff Sharon Weissman. The address is 4471 Lincoln Ave. in Cypress.

The public is welcome to attend, Weissman said.

By coincidence, I’m tabling for Jerry Brown at Cypress College on Monday.  I guess I’ll be wearing a dark suit and will be taking a long lunch.

Sen. Jenny Oropeza, who was elected in 2006, has passed away after struggling with illness over the past few months. She was just 53.

She is still listed on the ballot for re-election in the 28th Senate district. But as of right now, I do not know how the party can go about changing the nominee. If anybody has any idea on that, please let me know.

Condolences go out to her friends and family.

Jenny Oropeza is a by all accounts a fairly good progressive Senator, but she’s dead wrong on her threat to shut down the proposed ballot measure raising the LA city sales tax by a 1/2 cent to pay for transit projects, because her pet project won’t get funded.

State Sen. Jenny Oropeza put it in no uncertain terms when I spoke to her late this Friday afternoon: she is prepared to kill the bill that would allow a half-cent sales tax increase to go on the November ballot in Los Angeles County to pay for road and transit projects.

“I said in order for the bill to pass the Senate, it is going to have to contain the Green Line extension,” Oropeza, (D-Long Beach), told me. “They” – Los Angeles County transportation officials – “understood that. They are playing a game of chicken and blaming the Legislature. I am praying to God they do the right thing. I don’t want to see this thing go down either.”

I asked her if she was prepared to try to kill the bill – and any chance of a vote in November. Oropeza firmly answered: “Yes I am.”

The most bizarre thing about this is that the Green Line extension is in the proposed ballot language.  But she wants more of a guarantee.  So she’s prepared to undermine the entire set of transit projects – which would improve air quality, lower demand for gas, expand transit, enhance the reputation of transit as successful so that future projects can be built, reduce greenhouse gas emisssions, improve quality of life, etc. – because of silly parochialism.

I don’t want to make it look like this is limited to Oropeza.  Some of our favorite lawmakers – State Sen. Gil Cedillo, Rep. Hilda Solis – have expressed opposition to the project, for largely the same reasons – that not enough of the transit projects in the proposal go specifically to their districts.  But on this one, I have to agree with Mayor Villaraigosa.

“The problem in Sacramento is that there are some who want to engage in the pork barrel politics of asking for even more money than has been distributed for their pet projects,” Villaraigosa added later […] using several maps and visuals, the mayor also said the sales tax revenues would be spent on an equitable basis when factors such as employment density and need are taken into consideration. “On the Westside, there are four times as many jobs than there are homes and people.”

The traffic crisis in Southern California is not going to be solved overnight.  There are specific need areas which are literally impossible to manage by car right now and are completely underserved by transit.  A successful show of support for transit now will only improve prospects for better transit possibilities in the future.  Which projects ought to be included or delayed is an important decision, but I frankly don’t trust legislators with their own agendas to make it.  And almost every one of them is playing this backwards-thinking, anti-progressive, reductionist parochial game where they judge the dollars their district will get against what another district will get and scream bloody murder if they come up a dollar short.  That’s maddening, especially considering that if the sales tax is dropped from the ballot, nobody gets any funding.

Oropeza responded to the Mayor dismissively, taking objection to the characterization of “porkbarrel politics” and leaving the outcome unclear on AB2321, the vote in the legislature that would allow the sales tax hike to go to the November ballot.  The Senate Appropriations Committee vote is scheduled for today, and nobody really knows what the outcome will be.  Labor, which appears to be on board with the increase (at least the building and construction portions of the coalition), will be watching Oropeza and Cedillo’s votes very closely today.

UPDATE: The LA County Board of Supervisors just voted to put the sales tax on the ballot, and ALSO voted to officially oppose the increase.  Don Knabe switched his vote to allow the initiative to be a part of the regular election but maintained his position against the tax.  Meanwhile the vote in the Senate Appropriations Committee has been delayed to Thursday.

Well, Laura Richardson won her race for Congress and will represent the Long Beach area for, I gather, the next 20 years, barrring a redistricting change (but considering this is an 80% Democratic district, how much of a change would that take?).  There’ll be a runoff, but that’s just a formality; the Democrats in the race got close to 80% of the vote (not that there was much of a vote; turnout was about 11%, and Richardson will go to Congress with the support, in the primary at least, of 11,000 voters).

What this really shows is that you don’t mess with labor.  If Jenny Oropeza made a different vote in the State Senate with regard to the tribal gaming compacts, maybe she’d be headed to DC.  But what dismays me is how nasty a campaign Richardson ran, and how in the end it didn’t matter one bit.  She continually claimed that the Congressional seat ought to go to “one of us,” a not-so-subtle swipe at Oropeza’s Hispanic roots (although both of them have Caucasian mothers, apparently).  She also sent a sickening mailer attacking Oropeza for missing votes in the Assembly, at a time when Oropeza had liver cancer.

Ultimately, I don’t think these negative attacks mattered; it was the boots on the ground from labor unions that did.  But that’s the problem; they DIDN’T matter.  Richardson didn’t pay the price for running an ugly and dishonest campaign.  That, combined with the pathetic turnout, should give everyone pause.  This is a low-income and low-information district.  The progressive movement is nonexistent here.  And the same identity politics drove the race, and labor turned a blind eye to it.

And people wonder why it’s hard to take back America…

Add your thoughts in comments.

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.

The primary election to replace Juanita Millender-McDonald is next Tuesday, June 26.  Both main campaigns, State Sen. Jenny Oropeza and Assemblywoman Laura Richardson, have released internal polls showing them in the lead; however, both polls are tight enough to make this a very close race.  Oropeza has about twice as much money for the final days.

There’s not much of an air war going on, but the mailers are fast and furious.  And Richardson continues to engage in not-so-subtle identity politics.

over…

A crowd of nearly 100 people heard State Senator Jenny Oropeza (D., Carson-LB), a polished public speaker with 19 years of elective experience, become audibly emotional, her voice at one point seemingly approaching tears, while retaining her composure to complete her closing statement in emphatic tones. To hear this, click here.

The Senator’s reaction came after fellow Democrat candidate George Parmer, Jr. (“I’m a truck driver, a working man, not a politician”) said that at a candidate forum a day earlier, someone [not a candidate] suggested that he and other less well funded candidates should drop out of the race in favor of a candidate who could win. Mr. Parmer interpreted this to mean defeating a Hispanic candidate [Sen. Oropeza] to benefit a Black candidate…which he likened to returning to the “road to segregation.” To hear his statement, click here.

Following Mr. Parmer and Senator Oropeza, Assemblywoman Laura Richardson (D., Carson-LB) delivered her closing statement, reiterating her stance that the Congressional seat held by the late Congresswoman Juanita Millender-McDonald (D., Carson-LB) should be held by someone from “our community.” Assemblywoman Richardson indicated the phrase means someone with a working class background reflective of the district, along with the legislative experience to do the job. “I’m not speaking about race. I’m talking about respect,” Assemblywoman Richardson said. To hear this, click here.

I don’t know what the outcome will be, but progressive politics suffer when campaigns become a race about “respect” and identity and street cred.  And I sense this is all coming from one particular candidate.

I hope you guys appreciate me, because I managed to get through the entire 90-minute debate for the June 26 primary in the 37th Congressional District to replace the late Juanita Millender-McDonald held on Thursday night.  11 Democrats were on stage, and because they were all given 2 minute opening statements, the debate really didn’t cover much ground.  But actually, the fact that the moderator was a clueless local news anchor from LA’s ABC7 who had virtually no connection to the district was a good thing, as the persistent issues of race played out in the media in the campaign were fairly nonexistent in the debate.

Detailed two-day-late debateblogging on the flip…

Let’s take a look at each candidate’s opening statement:

Ed Wilson: former mayor of Signal Hill, a small city in the district.  He immediately went after the whole ethnicity issue, saying “this is not a black seat or a white seat or a Hispanic seat, it’s your seat.”

Peter Matthews: He’s the PDA-endorsed candidate who has run for office many times, including challenging Millender-McDonald in a primary in 2006 (and getting 10,000 votes).  Matthews is running on the progressive issues on getting us out of Iraq, closing the inequality divide, providing single-payer universal health care, and restoring tax fairness.

Jenny Oropeza: The state Senator was strong on the war, saying “we need to get out of Iraq now.”  She talked about the environment, health care, revising NCLB, and needing to “turn around trade agreements” that sacrifice American job (that was cheering).  She closed with “You know my record,” playing off her experience serving the area.

Laura Richardson: Assemblywoman Richardson is also running on her record.  She kind of messed up her move from talking about Iraq to domestic issues, saying “I want to talk about the war in America” and then claiming that Al Qaeda is running rampant (I think she meant in Waziristan, not Long Beach).  Didn’t seem like much of a public speaker.

Valerie McDonald: The late Congresswoman’s daughter talked about her ties to the area, the need to keep families together in the black community, and the importance of education.

Bill Grisolia: He’s a longtime employee of Long Beach Memorial Health Center, so universal health care was one of his themes.  But he was at his most powerful discussing the war in Iraq, and his desire to cut funding except to bring our troops home.  He also tried to blunt the experience argument by saying “What have the electeds done for you?”

Mr. Evans: I forget his first name and it doesn’t matter.  He’s a far-right immigrant-hating loon who somehow was let into the Democratic primary.  He proudly namechecked Lou Dobbs in the first sentence of his statement and called himself a closed-borders candidate.  There is a sense in the black community that immigrants are in competition with them for low-paying jobs, but this was the most extreme out-and-out black bigot I’ve seen.

Alicia Ford: Spent her entire statement talking about something she did a decade ago that ABC7 didn’t cover, which made her bad.  Also actually said “In Compton, they are without… a lot of things.”  Stirring.

Lee Davis: Her whole statement decried the front-runner assumptions of the media, and said that “if the top three had any self-respect they’d leave this stage right now” to allow for equal access, and then actually WAITED for them to leave the stage.  They, er, didn’t.

George Parmer: a truck driver from Long Beach, the first to actually call for impeachment and call out the Democratic leadership for their sell-out on capitulation in Iraq.

Jeffrey Price: Talked mainly about lobbying and ethics reform.

Albert Robles: a write-in candidate in a 17-candidate field.  Best of luck to you.  I mean, if you can’t get the papers in on time…

The first question was on Iraq, and pretty much the entire field is committed to getting out now, so on that big issue, there’s not a lot of daylight and everyone is on the right side.  Peter Matthews went so far as to suggest that there ought to be impeachment investigations into lying us into war, and announced his support for HR 333, the impeachment of Dick Cheney.  The moderator actually did the “raise your hands” thing on the impeachment question, and I think 8 or 9 candidates raised their hands, including Jenny Oropeza (it was a wide shot on a postage stamp video window, so I could be wrong).  Mr. Evans, of course, kept calling the President the “commander-in-chief” and yelled at everybody for undermining him in a time of war.  I think there’s a place for him in the Connecticut for Lieberman Party.

On Iran, Jenny Oropeza has sadly bought into the bullshit rhetoric that they are a threat to our national security and that all options have to be on the table regarding their nuclear program.  She also said that she thinks diplomacy has failed because this President is incapable of it.  Only Alicia Ford understood that Iran is not an imminent threat, but then she went on about how China is a threat to this country and how in Compton they don’t have “things.”

Transportation and port security was a major topic, with the Port of Long Beach in the district.  Most candidates supported efforts to green the ports, including State Sen. Alan Loewenthal’s $30 container fee for clean air proposal.  Peter Matthews pressed the need for public transit to aid a cleaner environment.  Valerie McDonald was good on this issue as well.  George Parmer, the trucker, maintained that many truckers own their equipment and can’t afford to modernize their trucks, and so some of the funds from the container fee should trickle down to them.  I didn’t see much difference here.

A big topic was the events at MLK/Harbor Medical Center’s ER, which has been in the news lately, as a woman fell dead in the waiting room while the hospital staff did nothing.  Most of the candidates believed MLK/Harbor should remain open and would support the $200 million in federal funding that goes into it annually, though Ed Wilson and Valerie McDonald stressed accountability.  Laura Richardson said a platitude like “this situation must be dealt with” but didn’t explain how.  Peter Matthews mentioned that he organized a picket at MLK/Harbor 2 years ago and the only result was that they cut beds in half.  Bill Grisolia stressed the need for cooperation in the community, perhaps nurses college training partnerships to get more staff in there.  Many stressed the need for universal healthcare so that poor people aren’t relying on the ER as their last resort.

On a question about Wal-Mart, Oropeza proudly claimed that she fought against a Wal-Mart in Long Beach, and now there’s an Albertson’s there!  (Does she not read the news about the looming grocery strike and how Albertson’s in particular is trying to screw their workers again?)  The major candidates were in agreement on this, though only Valerie McDonald mentioned that workers ought to have the right to organize.  I take it she’d support the Employee Free Choice Act.

In final thoughts, Oropeza said she wouldn’t support the current immigration bill but didn’t say why, George Parmer advocated a national paper ballot because “votes are being stolen,” and Ed Wilson wanted to stop Congress from raiding Social Security and Medicare funds.  Laura Richardson took a cheap shot when she mentioned some local shooting and claimed she was the only candidate there (what, if you run for Congress, you have to know where the shootings are?).

My impression is that the candidates, by and large, are fairly similar and fairly progressive, as befits the district.  Oropeza and Richardson are politicians who are playing some political games.  Oropeza doesn’t seem all that informed on a couple crucial issues, and Richardson is clearly running a “vote for me, I’m one of you” race.  I was impressed with Valerie McDonald and Bill Grisolia.  Peter Matthews certainly has all of his progressive chops down, and it will be interesting to see if he can leverage the grassroots energy in Southern California from PDA and translate it into votes.