The Courage Campaign (where I am employed) launched a video tonight that is getting covered by a number of political bloggers. It's a cheeky piece that aims to get Kim Kardashian to support the Millionaires Tax of 2012, a ballot initiative recently unveiled by the Restoring California Coalition, which includes Courage, the California Federation of Teachers, and California Calls.

We thought the public would find it curious that millionaires like Kim — who made more than $12 million in 2010 — only paid 1% more in income taxes than a middle class Californian. So, we made this video to explain the situation. It's just the sort of fun video that can educate people who aren't politically engaged how much is at stake next November. In our focus groups, independent voters tended to think of celebrities (rather than CEOs, bankers, or Silicon Valley execs) when asked who should pay more in taxes. By the way, our initiative actually polls at 67%, the highest support our pollster has ever seen or a tax measure. More on that here.

We're going to start a campaign to get Kim to endorse the Millionaires Tax of 2012. If she gets on board, we'll reach people who never would have learned about the ballot measure otherwise. But most importantly, we have to show people why it's time for people like Kim to pay their fair share. See the full video by clicking below:

Union of Concerned Scientists Warns CA Voters about Misleading Slate Mailer and ‘Trojan Horse’ Attack Against State’s Clean Energy Law; Urges Voters to Vote NO on 26

With most voters’ attention diverted by the oil industry’s efforts to derail the state’s landmark clean energy and climate law with Proposition 23, another, less scrutinized oil-industry-funded ballot measure–Proposition 26–also poses a serious threat to the environment and clean energy.

Proposition 26 has received nearly $16 million from Chevron and other big oil companies, as well as alcohol and tobacco interests, to get themselves off the hook from paying for environmental and health damage they cause and shift that burden to taxpayers.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) is alerting California voters to beware of misleading ‘slate mailers’ arriving in their mailboxes just before the November 2 election. UCS strongly urges a ‘NO’ vote on Prop. 23 and Prop. 26.

“While Prop 23 is a frontal assault on our clean energy law, Prop 26 is more like a Trojan horse,” said Dan Kalb, UCS California policy manager. “As deceptive as the Prop 23 campaign has been, the campaign to pass Prop 26 is even more insidious. Not only do the oil and tobacco companies behind Prop 26 hide the fact that it would starve state and local public health, clean air, and clean energy programs, but now they are funding misleading slate mailers that misinform voters about what the pro-environment position really is on Prop 26.  The pro-environment position on Prop 26 is a definite NO.”

Voters have already begun receiving a for-profit mailer with the headline “Californians Vote Green” recommending votes on Props 25 (no) and 26 (yes) that are the opposite of what the state’s leading public health and environmental organizations recommend.  UCS and several other leading environmental and consumer groups strongly support Prop. 25 and oppose Prop. 26.

“This pay-to-play ‘green’ mailer sinks to new lows when it comes to false advertising,” said Kalb.

                                                                                                                                                                            (cont.)

Proposition 26, which is vague and poorly written, threatens California’s efforts to bolster green jobs by cleaning up the state’s energy supply and cutting global warming pollution.  According to UCS, if passed, Proposition 26 could:

~ Prevent the California Air Resources Board from collecting a fee from polluters to fund CARB and other agencies implementing policies to reach the state’s 2020 global warming emission-reduction target. Those policies include standards for renewable energy and low-carbon fuel.

~ Prevent CARB from levying fees on global warming pollution as part of an economy-wide cap on emissions.

~ Eliminate funding streams for public transportation, crippling implementation of SB 375, which is designed to help Californians drive less, pollute less, and spend less money on gas.

Proposition 26 threatens California’s clean energy and climate laws by oddly redefining taxes, Kalb explained.  Under current law, the state and municipal governments have the authority to impose narrowly-defined fees on industries whose activities harm public health or the environment and then use that revenue to correct and prevent those harms, as long as the amount of the fee bears a reasonable relationship to the harm.

Fees require a simple majority to pass in the Legislature, while taxes require a two-thirds super-majority vote. Proposition 26 would redefine fees as taxes, establishing a nearly impossible hurdle that could dry up funding for CARB and local governments to implement vital energy and environmental clean-up programs.

“If Californians want to support a clean environment and vibrant economy in California, they should vote ‘NO’ on Props 23 and 26,” said Erin Rogers, manager of the Western States Climate and Energy Program at UCS. “If passed, these measures won’t just put the brakes on California’s clean energy laws, they will send a message to businesses, entrepreneurs and investors in the state’s booming clean tech sector that California is no longer open for business. That’s a rotten deal, especially considering that clean tech is one of the only bright spots our state’s economy.”

In the state that puts most propositions before voters, in the country that puts most questions before the electorate, Liberty Hill asked: How do you decide how to vote? True confessions with cameo appearances by Assemblyman Bob Blumenfield and California Common Cause director Kathay Feng.

Ray Lutz for Congress 2010

www.VoteRayLutz.com

Media Contact: Christine Cullinan

619-447-3246 / [email protected]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

“Hunger Strike” Debate to Air on TV

Where: Cox Cable Channel 23 (Channel 18 in North County)

When : 9 p.m., Monday, October 25, 2010

Also available at: http://www.copswiki.org/Common…

Produced by Citizens’ Oversight Projects (COPS)

San Diego County, Calif. (Oct 22, 2010) –  The “Hunger Strike Debate” can be seen in the San Diego County area on Cox cable television, channel 23 (channel 18 in north areas of the county) at 9:00 pm on Monday, October 25, 2010. The debate features Michael Benoit (L), incumbent Duncan D. Hunter (R), and Ray Lutz (D). The show is presented on the Public Access Channel and produced by Citizens’ Oversight Projects.

The debate was sponsored by the East County Chamber of Commerce and held at the Cuyamaca College on October 15, 2010. Steve Hamann, Editor of The East County Herald moderated.

Lutz and Benoit conducted an eleven-day hunger strike to coerce reluctant Hunter to agree to a debate. The hunger strike garnered national attention including articles in Politico, Newsweek, Time, The New York Times, the L.A. Times, The Atlantic and numerous other regional publications, and proved to be too much to withstand any further display of reluctance by the Hunter campaign.

Approximately 200 people attended the debate and the video is about 82 minutes in length.

Michael Benoit and Ray Lutz conducted a series of debates in other areas of the county, including Alpine, Poway, Lakeside, and Kearny Mesa, but Hunter declined to appear at those events. Videos of other debates are also available at

http://www.VoteRayLutz.com/Deb…  

Meg Whitman truly believes that California is for sale. She has spent a record-breaking $140 million of her own money in an attempt to buy the state. But California isn’t just some eBay item Whitman can bid on.

Whitman has run 80,000 TV ads to promote her conservative version of a future for California. That one video above is fighting against the, at least, $60 million Whitman has spent buying up airtime and producing commercials for herself.

What else has Whitman spent her money on in this race? Here are some recent calculations. On staff and spouse travel, lodging and meals: $2,643,529. Fundraising events: $1,028,538. On campaign consultants: $11,085,653. On print ads: $4,247,724. On polling and survey research: $1,254,627.

In all of this tossing of money around like life is a game of Monopoly, Whitman’s true goal is an attempt to buy democracy. She’s acting on a belief that if she throws enough of her own wealth out to woe voters, she can buy their votes. As if California is up for auction and the deciding factor of who wins is who bids enough.

California is not for sale. Please share this blog and the above video with other Californians who cannot be bought.  

$2.655 Million To Date To Sacramento Political Committee That Doesn’t Disclose Industry Funding In Ads Supporting Villines, Attacking Jones.

Insurance companies’ addition of $1.365 million this weekend to their campaign to elect Mike Villines as CA insurance commissioner is consistent with Consumer Watchdog’s expectation that the industry will spend at least $5 million before election day.  

The following insurance industry contributions, totaling $2.655 million, have been given to a Sacramento political committee called "JobsPAC," since late September: 

• George Joseph, Chairman of Mercury Insurance – $775,000
• Allstate Insurance – $700,000
• Liberty Mutual – $490,000
• Progressive Insurance – $390,000
• Anthem Blue Cross – $100,000
• Health Net – $100,000
• Farmers Insurance- $100,000

To date, JobsPAC has spent approximately $845,000 on ads attacking candidate Dave Jones and $566,000 on ads supporting Mike Villines.  Consumer advocates expect that JobsPAC will report another one million dollar expenditure on the race in the next few days and another two to three million dollars in insurance industry contributions and campaign expenditures before election day.

Because the industry money is first going to JobsPAC, the fact that it came from insurance companies will not be disclosed to voters who see or hear the ads.  A copy of the television advertisement being aired can be viewed here.  The advertisement’s disclosure, which makes no mention of insurance company funding, reads: "PAID FOR BY JOBSPAC, A BI-PARTISAN COALITION OF CALIFORNIA EMPLOYERS.  NOT AUTHORIZED BY A CANDIDATE OR CANDIDATE-CONTROLLED COMMITTEE."

This insurance industry campaign to choose the next insurance commissioner is becoming an electoral deception of epic proportions.  Most of the information Californians will get about the candidates for insurance commissioner will be delivered in advertisements entirely paid for by the insurance industry and voters won’t even know it.

———————–

Posted by Doug Heller, Executive Director of Consumer Watchdog, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to providing an effective voice for taxpayers and consumers in an era when special interests dominate public discourse, government and politics. Visit us on Facebook and Twitter.

Dear Friend,

Arnold Schwarzenegger has been a disaster for California and we should expect nothing less than Schwarzenegger’s third term with Meg Whitman.  

We know what electing a naïve political “outsider” who will “run California like a business” means for our future.

But late Thursday night – the reality could not have been made clearer.

After all the TV cameras and journalists had gone home, Schwarzenegger took an axe to several important bills that would enhance transparency at our public universities, combat the HIV/AIDS epidemic and fund critical domestic violence shelters.

Schwarzenegger sided with Sarah Palin and well-heeled donors by vetoing SB 330, which would have subject all aspects of our public universities to the state’s public records act – despite strong bipartisan support and endorsement from California’s major newspapers.

Schwarzenegger, like George W. Bush, ignored public health experts by vetoing legislation to allow pharmacies to sell sterile needles to adults without a prescription. 47 states have amended their laws in light of overwhelming evidence that criminalizing access to sterile syringes led drug users to share used ones, and that sharing syringes spread HIV, hepatitis B, hepatitis C and other blood-borne diseases.

Schwarzenegger continued a disturbing trend on women’s issues, vetoing legislation to allow local communities to raise a fee to fund domestic violence shelters.  After eliminating all funding for domestic violence shelters two years in a row, he has now forced battered women and their children into a choice between homelessness and returning to their abuser. These victims literally cannot survive another year with this Governor.

Friends, we’ve seen this movie before. The “political outsider” who chooses to listen to the “powerful Sacramento interests” he promised to ignore over and over again. Meg Whitman will be Arnold’s third term – and she is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to buy this election.

Jerry Brown needs our help — Will you join me in supporting Jerry Brown today?

With your help, we can finally elect a governor who will do right by the people he was elected to serve.

Sincerely,

Senator Leland Yee