Western Democrat

Meanwhile, back at the ranch: House Edition

President Bush’s dismal poll numbers, the flagging economy, beset with rising energy prices in the midst of a housing crisis, and the huge number of Americans who say the country is on the wrong track, all mean that Democrats could expand on their 2006 gains in Congress. Here are some House districts in the West where the outcome is not a forgone conclusion:

AK-AL
AZ-1
AZ-3
AZ-5
AZ-8
CA-4
CA-11
CA-50
CO-4
ID-1
NM-1
NM2
NV-2
NV-3
OR-5
WA-8
WY-AL

My favorite contests are CA-4 and WY-AL where Charlie Brown and Gary Trauner, respectively, hope to swing their districts into the Democratic column. Such a swing would be a fitting end to the Bush presidency, whose actions were eerily predicted by a satirical piece seven years ago.

Leo Brown | June 17, 2008 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) Permalink: Meanwhile, back at the ranch: House Edition | TrackBack (0) California, Congress, Wyoming

A Stealthy Private Army on the Border

As anyone who has been in the Navy or the Marines knows, San Diego has a lot of military bases. But until recently nobody knew that a stealthy private army was building their own base here, right on the border.

Just two months after local opposition thwarted its effort to build a massive outdoor training facility near San Diego, the private military company Blackwater USA is being accused of secretly trying to build a new one just blocks from the US-Mexico border. Blackwater received approval for the 61,000 square-foot indoor facility in Otay Mesa, California, by filing for permits using the names of two subsidiaries.

Fortunately, Democratic Congressman Bob Filner is on the case.

… they [Blackwater] don’t like to operate under any laws, as we know in Iraq. And, you know, they shoot first and ask questions later. And people—parents of family members have had great trouble getting any truth about what went on there. And that’s what we’re concerned about. Anybody who is training private armies or mercenary soldiers is a real danger to democracy. We know that from history. So this is not a company that we trust… They have operated in this situation with great secrecy, with—under different subsidiaries and shell corporations, and we don’t know exactly what they’re really doing or where other permits may have been pulled under different names.

Leo Brown | May 3, 2008 | Comment on This Post (4 so far) Permalink: A Stealthy Private Army on the Border | TrackBack (0) California, Policy Issues

Best in the West

From the beginning of Western Democrat, it was recognized that the West offered the Democratic Party a way out of a recurring pattern of electoral defeat.

The primary season reaches another critical junction this Tuesday. Democrats looking to win in November would do well to visit 270toWin.com and look at the state polls. Poll numbers can be fickle things, but the overall impression is clear: Barack Obama would run much better in the West than Hillary Clinton. The margin is, in fact, the difference between victory and defeat in November.

Consider six states in the West. The first three were won by Kerry, and are must wins in 2008. The second three were lost my Kerry, but would have put him in the White House had he won all three.

The first three are California, Oregon, and Washington. According to recent state polls, Obama would win California by 27%, Oregon by 1% and Washington by 17%. Hillary would win California by 19%, lose Oregon by 3%, and tie in Washington.

The second three are Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada. Obama would will all three by 7%, tie to 15% (two polls), and 12%, respectively. Hillary would lose Colorado by 14% and lose in Nevada by 9% (no recent poll from this source for New Mexico).

Leo Brown | March 2, 2008 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) Permalink: Best in the West | TrackBack (0) California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Presidential Politics, The Big Strategy, Washington

San Diego fires

I live in San Diego, and the fires here are the top of the national news. There is not much I can add to all the reports on the internet, TV, and radio, except to say that city and county government, state and federal government, volunteer agencies, and the people of San Diego have been doing a good job of orderly evacuations and heroic firefighting in a very tough situation. When this is all over, perhaps in a week or two, the losses will be totaled, and there should be some serious discussion about how to prevent or mitigate future fire disasters, which will surely threaten Southern California again.

Leo Brown | October 23, 2007 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: San Diego fires | TrackBack (0) California

The Continued Rise of the Southwest

America’s population is making a diagonal shift from the Northeast to the Southwest. Five of the nation’s largest cities are in the Southwest: Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Diego, and San Jose. Phoenix is now that nation’s fifth largest city, displacing Philadelphia, now at number six. Mesa and Fresno are now bigger than Cleveland, Pittsburgh and Buffalo. Seven of the ten largest American cities lie within 500 miles of the Mexican border. In 1910, in contrast, the ten largest American cities were all within 500 miles of the Canadian border.

What this means to the Democratic Party is that the Northeast and Midwest aren’t a sufficient base by themselves for the future of the party. With the GOP dominating the once solidly Democratic South, Democrats must look Southwest for growth and electoral majorities. Arizona, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico have a combined 29 votes in the Electoral College and a corresponding number of seats in the Senate and House of Representatives. Moreover, the 2010 Census will undoubtedly raise that number beyond the current 29. Meanwhile, neighboring blue California’s population will continue to grow, reaching perhaps 60 million by 2050 with a Hispanic majority possible by 2042.

Newsweek is already predicting that the 2008 Presidential race will be decided in the Southwest. Their analysis:

The rise of the Swing-State Southwest (and the power of the Latino voters in it) is a function of timing, geography, demographics—and the Electoral College....The Southwest's ascendancy is linked to one key demographic: its vast, rapidly growing—but still politically unsettled—Hispanic vote….Generally speaking, [Hispanics are] culturally traditional, religiously devout and open to conservative appeals from the GOP. Economic populists, all too familiar with the trials of race-based discrimination, they feel an emotional bond with Democrats, too….In 2006 the Hispanic vote that went to the GOP dropped precipitously, to 30 percent. The war in Iraq was one reason, analysts say, but the main one was the war over immigration.

Given the mean-spiritedness of the recent immigration debate, the trend away from the GOP is likely to continue and even accelerate, strengthening the future Democratic base in the Southwest.

Leo Brown | July 11, 2007 | Comment on This Post (3 so far) Permalink: The Continued Rise of the Southwest | TrackBack (0) Arizona, California, Colorado, Demographics, Nevada, New Mexico, Presidential Politics, Republicans, The Big Strategy

Field Poll

The latest Field Poll is out for the Democratic Presidential Primary in California.

The leaders are Clinton (41%), Obama (28%), and Edwards (13%), but adding Al Gore to the mix would put him in second place at 25% and drop Clinton to 31%. Bill Richardson is in fourth place in single digits. Clinton runs strongly among Latino voters, support that Richardson could erode if and when his campaign gains traction. Clinton has the highest reported unfavorables (19%), Edwards the lowest (6%). The California primary is still ten months off, so a lot can happen to change these numbers.

Leo Brown | April 3, 2007 | Comment on This Post (3 so far) Permalink: Field Poll | TrackBack (0) California, Presidential Politics

California spreading the Blue into the West

This is an interesting video from Peter Leyden of the New Politics Institute. While I cringed every time he said "becoming more like California," at least in migration numbers he has a point.

This hasn't been something we've talked about, but the more migration into urban areas of the West, the better chances Democrats have there, to put it frankly. Between 2000 and 2004, a period when Democrats won more than a few elections in the West, California lost nearly half a million people, most of those going to other places in th West.

Emmett O'Connell | March 15, 2007 | Comment on This Post (6 so far) Permalink: California spreading the Blue into the West | TrackBack (0) California, Regionalism, The Big Strategy

2008 and House Candidates in the West

Swing State Project recently listed ten Democratic House Candidates who ran close, but unsuccessful, races in 2006, and should run again. These are good candidates who ran in tough districts and now have some name recognition for a second attempt. Of particular note is that half of these are in the West:

Charlie Brown CA-4
Larry Grant ID-1
Tessa Hafen NV-3
Darcy Burner WA-8
Gary Truaner WY-AL

The New York Times and CQ Politics recently reported a list of fifteen close 2006 House races. Again five, though not the same five, are in the West.

CO-4
NV-3
NM-1
WA-8
WY-AL

Combining the two lists already gives us seven House seats to watch in the West in 2008. Two of the seven are in blue states (CA, WA). Two are in the red states (ID, WY). Three are in red states considered to be trending purple (CO, NV, NM).

The focus in 2008 will be on the top of the ticket, but we are now seeing how important control of the House is. Continuing or expanding Democratic control of the House in 2008 may well depend on having a Presidential ticket that can run well in the West.

Leo Brown | January 6, 2007 | Comment on This Post (4 so far) Permalink: 2008 and House Candidates in the West | TrackBack (0) California, Colorado, Congress, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Washington, Wyoming

Post-Election Statehouse Roundup

To quote Buffalo Springfield, "there's something happening here". Post-election, Western Democrats have made great gains in the states, building strong majorities in the legislatures and taking or retaining several governorships. Here's a look at the numbers, courtesy of NCSL.

Arizona

Pre-Election

Senate 12-18 Republican majority

House 21-39 Republican majority

Post-Election

Senate 12-18 Republican majority

House 28-32 Republican majority

Pickups

Senate – stays the same

House - +7 seats

Democratic Governor Janet Napolitano was overwhelmingly re-elected.

California

Pre-election

Senate 25-15 Democratic majority

Assembly 47-32-1 (Ind.) Democratic majority

Post-Election

Senate 25-15 Democratic majority

Assembly 48-32 Democratic majority

Pickups

Senate – stays the same

Assembly - +1 seat

Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was re-elected.

Colorado

Pre-Election

Senate 18-17 Democratic majority

House 35-30 Democratic majority

Post-Election

Senate 20-15 Democratic majority

House 39-26 Democratic majority

Pickups

Senate – +2 seat

House - +4 seats

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Bill Ritter was elected Governor.

Idaho

Pre-Election

Senate 7-28 Republican majority

House 13-57 Republican majority

Post-Election

Senate 7-28 Republican majority

House 19-51 Republican majority

Pickups

Senate – stays the same

House - +6 seats

Republican gubernatorial candidate C.L. “Butch” Otter was elected.

Montana

Pre-Election

Senate 27-23 Democratic majority

House 50-50

Post-Election

Senate 26-24 Democratic majority

House 50-49-1 (Ind.) Democratic majority

Pickups

Senate – -1 Seat

House – stays the same

Democratic Governor Brian Schweitzer is up for re-election in 2008.

Nevada

Pre-Election

Senate 9-12 Republican majority

House 26-16 Democratic majority

Post-Election

Senate 10-11 Republican majority.

House 27-15 Democratic majority

Pickups

Senate – +1 seat

House - +1 seat

Republican gubernatorial candidate Jim Gibbons was elected.

New Mexico

Pre-Election

Senate 24-18 Democratic majority

House 42-28-2(Ind.) Democratic majority

Post-Election

Senate 24-18 Democratic majority

House 42-28 Democratic majority

Pickups

Senate – stays the same

House – stays the same

Democratic Governor Bill Richardson was overwhelmingly re-elected.

Oregon

Pre-Election

Senate 17-11-2(Ind.) Democratic majority

House 27-33 Republican majority

Post-Election

Senate 17-11-2(Ind.) Democratic majority

House 31-29 Democratic majority

Pickups

Senate – stays the same

House - +4 seats

Democratic Governor Ted Kulongoski was re-elected.

Utah

Pre-Election

Senate 8-21 Republican majority

House 19-56 Republican majority

Post-Election

Senate 8-21 Republican majority

House 19-56 Republican majority

Pickups

Senate – stays the same

House – stays the same

Republican Governor Jon Huntsman is up for re-election in 2008.

Washington

Pre-Election

Senate 26-23 Democratic majority

House  56-42 Democratic majority

Post-Election

Senate 32-17 Democratic majority (not since 1965)

House 63-35 Democratic majority

Pickups

Senate – +6 seats

House - +7 seats

Democratic Governor Christine Gregoire is up for re-electionin 2008.

Wyoming

Pre-Election

Senate 7-23 Republican majority

House 14-46 Republican majority

Post-Election

Senate 7-23 Republican majority

House 17-43 Republican majority

Pickups

Senate – stays the same

House - +3 seats

Democratic Governor Dave Freudenthal was overwhelmingly re-elected.

kencamp | November 22, 2006 | Comment on This Post (4 so far) Permalink: Post-Election Statehouse Roundup | TrackBack (0) Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Governors, Idaho, Legislatures, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, Wyoming

Room to Grow in the West

Western Democrats did well in 2006. Here is a link to some helpful maps. Particularly noteworthy were pickups in Montana for the U.S. Senate and the Colorado for governorship, plus four pick-ups in the House of Representatives. And we won the office of Secretary of State in the swing states of New Mexico and Nevada. (Think Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004 for the importance of this). But we could have done better, and in 2008 we can. For the Senate in 2008 think Colorado and New Mexico. There is still room to grow in the West.

But returning to 2006, Senate pickups in Arizona and Nevada were possible. Governor’s mansion pickups were possible in Alaska, Nevada and Idaho. Additional House pickups were possible in California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Washington, and Wyoming. And we didn’t win the election for Secretary of State in Colorado. These races were close enough to be considered competitive. Several of the competitive House districts in 2006 could be just as competitive in 2008.

So while we are still basking in the warm glow of victory, let us ask ourselves, what could we do better? Any campaign can be critiqued, but I think the biggest factor is that we were outspent. Jack Carter was outspent four to one in Nevada. The GOP and the Club for Growth poured a ton of money into ID-1. The national GOP was spending much more in CA-4 than the DCCC was. And so it went in many districts. Meanwhile Hillary Clinton spent $30 million defeating token opposition in New York. Now I understand that each candidate can raise his or her own funds, and the national committees carefully decide where to spend scarce resources, but more seed money in planting season and more money at harvest time would go a long way in the West. Something to think about for 2008.

Leo Brown | November 21, 2006 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: Room to Grow in the West | TrackBack (0) Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Governors, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Senators, The Big Strategy, Washington, Wyoming

Tester leading...

Of course, the big story in the West is that Jon Tester is leading Conrad Burns. As of 9:30 Mountain Time, he's up 49% to 48% leading by less than 2000 votes, out of nearly 400,000 cast.

In the US House, Democrats won Arizona-5, Arizona-8, California-11 (goodbye Pombo!), and Colorado 7 (Perlmutter). It's still too close to call in California-4 (Brown/Doolittle), New Mexico-1 (Madrid/Wilson), Washington-8 (Burner/Reichert), and Wyoming at-large (Trauner/Cubin). DailyKos has a Western election results tracker.

In the governor's races, Democrats won in Colorado and Oregon - but lost in Alaska, Idaho, and Nevada.

Kari Chisholm | November 8, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) Permalink: Tester leading... | TrackBack (0) Arizona, California, Colorado, Congress, Governors, New Mexico, Senators, Washington, Wyoming

Checklist for Tuesday

CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington) created a go-to guide on corruption in Congress to expose and hold accountable members of Congress for their questionable conduct. The list was updated in September to reflect the latest information and the resignation from Congress of three former members of the list, Congressmen Cunningham, Ney, and DeLay.
Here are members of CREW’s list in the West. Note that a Democrat made the list.

Senate:
Conrad Burns (R-MT)

Members of the House:
Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO)
Ken Calvert (R-CA)
Richard Pombo (R-CA)
John Doolittle (R-CA)
Rick Renzi (R-AZ)
Jerry Lewis (R-CA)
Maxine Waters (D-CA)
Gary Miller (R-CA)

Those of you living in Montana, Colorado, and Arizona are watching these races closely.

Unfortunately, some districts have been so gerrymandered that it may take more than one election cycle clean house via the electoral process. The last California redistricting was designed to protect incumbents, which may be why so many Californians are on the list. At least two of these Californians, however, are in tight races.

For Charlie Brown vs. John Doolittle, check out this conclusion from an editorial from the Tahoe Daily Tribune:

Despite the glib picture Mr. Doolittle likes to paint out of desperation, this Congressional race is not between liberals and conservatives. In fact, politics isn't really what's at stake. This election is about right vs. wrong, abuse of power, leading with integrity, protecting the earth, protecting the country and living within our means. For that Charlie Brown has our vote on Nov. 7.

For Jerry McNerney vs. Richard Pombo, check out this conclusion from an editorial in the Modesto Bee:

If you prefer the politics of extremes; if you're OK with selling off national parks; if backroom dealmaking and tainted money suit you; if you embrace out-of-balance budgets and the concentration of wealth — Pombo's your man. But he's no longer ours.

Law enforcement has already taken its toll on CREW’s list.

Let’s see how many the voters will remove tomorrow.

Leo Brown | November 6, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) Permalink: Checklist for Tuesday | TrackBack (0) Arizona, California, Colorado, Congress, Montana, Senators

CA-04 and the power of simple stories

The fallout from the Foley scandal continues to dominate the headlines. Glenn Greenwald blogs that this is because it is a scandal that everyone can understand.

This scandal has resonated so powerfully because it is shining such a powerful light on the towering hubris, utter lack of intellectual and ethical integrity, and deeply engrained corruption that accounts for virtually every other Bush disaster -- from Iraq to law-breaking scandals to torture to Abrahmoff-type corruption schemes and everything in between.... for so many reasons -- its relative simplicity, its crystal clarity, the involvement of emotionally-charged issues, the salacious sex aspects -- this Foley scandal circumvents that whole dynamic [of GOP counter-spin]. People are paying attention on their own. They don't need pundits or journalists to tell them what to think about it because they are able to form deeply held opinions on their own. None of the standard obfuscation tactics used for so long by Bush followers are working here. To the contrary, their attempted use of those tactics is making things much worse for them, because people can see that Bush followers are attempting -- through the use of patently dishonest and corrupt tactics -- to excuse the inexcusable.

Sometimes a simple story tells more than any complex analysis. Sometime ago I read a simple story on Kos by Charlie Brown, our candidate in CA-04, about his son, Captain Jeff Brown and Congressman John Doolittle (also CA-04). The scene is in Iraq.

…the crew gets one more request: "Can one of the members of the [Congressional] delegation ride up in the cockpit?" You see, C-130s aren't real comfortable - there are only troop seats in the back cargo area. The cockpit isn't a lot better, but it's a little more comfortable, quieter, and it's not a troop seat. The crew wasn't crazy about visitors riding up there with them, but you can't say no to a Congressman.
… this member of the delegation was John Doolittle. John sat down in the cockpit and spoke for a minute with the aircraft commander. He didn't say anything to the rest of the crew. Nothing to the flight engineer. Or the navigator. Or the copilot. He didn't ask any of them where they were from. Or what it's like in Iraq. Or what he and the rest of Congress could do to help.
The flight was just over an hour up to Talafar and uneventful. As the congressional delegation was climbing off the airplane, the copilot leaned over to ask the aircraft commander to give John a message. So the aircraft commander went down to the ramp to see the delegation off, and as John stepped off the C-130 and onto the ramp the aircraft commander said to him: "Congressman Doolittle: Charlie Brown and his son hope you had a nice flight."
The copilot was my son, Jeff Brown, Air Force Captain.
John Doolittle sat next to my son for over an hour and didn't ask him his name. He didn't ask him where he was from. (Jeff, of course, is from John's District here in California.) He didn't ask how long Jeff had been in Iraq. (It was Jeff's third tour, and he's now scheduled for his fourth.) And he didn't ask what Congress could do to help him and the rest of the troops there in Iraq.
But I've asked. And Jeff told me, that if John had asked what he needed, he would have asked to make sure Congress fixes the cracks in the C-130 wings, because many of the aircraft are grounded, and many more are restricted on how much weight they can carry, and they're flying the heck out of those planes. Jeff would have asked to make sure Congress gives good medical care to the wounded, because he flies them out of Iraq. And Jeff said he would have asked to make sure Congress gives the best care to the families of the remains of fallen soldiers, because he flies them out of Iraq too.
But John Doolittle didn't ask. He didn't talk to the airmen. They were just his drivers that day. John Doolittle sat next to my son for over an hour and didn't have the courtesy to even ask his name.
My name is Charlie Brown, Lt. Colonel, USAF, retired. I'm running for Congress because we need Congressmen and women who care.

Leo Brown | October 8, 2006 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: CA-04 and the power of simple stories | TrackBack (0) California, Congress, Republicans

Fighting Dems: Western Theater

Patriotism is not limited by geography, so the Western focus of this post is in no way intended to slight the “Fighting Dems” in other parts of the country. See their national website here.

Below is a list Western Fighting Dems. These are fresh troops, veterans running for Congress in the West on the Democratic ticket. Click on their names for a link to their respective websites. They are strong on national defense, strong on military experience, and the people we need in Congress to put America back on course.

AZ-03 Herb Paine
CA-03 Bill Dunston
CA-04 Charlie Brown
CA-46 Jim Brandt
CA-50 John Rinaldi
CO-05 Jay Fawcett
CO-06 Bill Winter
NV Senate Jack Carter

Their mission: take back the Hill. Let’s give them our support.

Leo Brown | September 18, 2006 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: Fighting Dems: Western Theater | TrackBack (0) Arizona, California, Colorado, Congress, Nevada

CA-11

Richard Pombo has earned the dubious distinction of making the list of the most corrupt members of Congress. Two Congressmen on the list, both R’s, have already pled guilty after long denials of wrongdoing. The list is bipartisan. Two Democrats made the list.

Why should this concern you? Because, as one blogger put it, we all live in Richard Pombo’s district. This guy is so bad he has attracted a cottage industry of anti-Pombo bloggers. See Pombo Watch, Say No to Pombo, Vote Pombo Out, and Pombo in Their Pocket. This last has some entertaining ads.

Our man is Jerry McNerney.

CA-11 is close enough to the Bay Area that progressive volunteers can commute to help Jerry.

Leo Brown | September 17, 2006 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) Permalink: CA-11 | TrackBack (0) California, Congress, Republicans

Asking Congress to get something done

From the Albuquerque Tribune:

AUSTIN - Accusing Congress of abdicating its responsibility to control immigration and secure the U.S.-Mexico border, Gov. Bill Richardson and three other border-state governors have signed a letter urging federal lawmakers to pass comprehensive immigration reform before the end of the year.

Richardson, fellow Democrat Janet Napolitano of Arizona, and Republicans Rick Perry of Texas and Arnold Schwarzenegger of California signed the letter Friday at the close of the two-day Border Governors Conference.

They joined the governors of six Mexican states in signing a joint declaration on issues ranging from tourism and trade to education and border security. They pledged to share information about human, drug and arms trafficking, and to work together to prevent agricultural terrorism and ensure high food safety standards.

In their letter to House and Senate leaders, the governors said: "We urge you to get back to work and pass legislation that puts the interest of taxpayers first and solves this crisis once and for all."

It is interesting how you can get all the border state governors to agree on the framework, along with governors from another country and you can't get elected representatives in Congress to do anything except grandstand and play to special interests.

The chances of anything getting done regarding this issue are next to none before the 2006 election. The GOP will play up the open border as an issue but their credibility on this issue is severely hampered by the fact that even though they controlled both houses and the presidency, they achieved next to nothing for the American people.

Western Governors and politicians may find themselves frustrated by the lack of true concern from D.C. regarding this issue but their recourse is limited. Most national Republicans cater to the elements of nativism or fear and comprehensive solutions are a direct assuault on the ideology of the far right.

I suggest a very simple solution:

VOTE DEM IN 06.

Landon Mascareñaz | August 28, 2006 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) Permalink: Asking Congress to get something done | TrackBack (0) Arizona, California, Congress, Governors, National Leadership, New Mexico, Policy Issues, Regionalism

Republicans for...

Republicans for Ritter (CO-Gov) is a great post on Western Democrat.

But check out what some Republicans are saying about the GOP candidate in Idaho.

Republicans for Grant (ID-1)

"That idiot [Grant’s opponent, Bill Sali] is just an idiot. He doesn’t have one ounce of empathy in his whole fricking body. And you can put that in the paper.” Bruce Newcomb, Republican Speaker of the House, Idaho Statesman April 8, 2006

And former Republican primary candidates Pete McCloskey and Tom Benigno have endorsed Jerry McNerney in California.

Republicans for McNerney (CA-11)

“You know, I never really thought I’d be doing this. I’ve been a Republican for 57 years. My family have been Republicans for four generations,” said McCloskey. “But I’ve concluded two things: Jerry McNerney is an honest man; Richard Pombo is not. I’m confident that Jerry McNerney is an honorable man who will vote his conscience.”

And in Colorado

Republicans for Fawcett (CO-5)

"It's not as unusual as you would think…We're both retired Air Force Academy graduates, both Desert Storm veterans, we're both Bronze Star recipients; Jay [Fawcett] and I have a lot in common." Scott Hente, City Councilman

If we are to reclaim the vital center, we will need the votes of thoughtful Republicans like these. There aren’t enough Democrats in some of these districts to win unless we attract GOP voters in significant numbers.

Leo Brown | August 25, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) Permalink: Republicans for... | TrackBack (0) California, Colorado, Idaho, Republicans

Down ballot races

We don’t want to neglect the down ballot contests. Good government requires good people at all levels. The contests are too many to catalog here, and as the saying goes, all politics is local.

CQ Politics highlights the following legislative battlegrounds that should be of interest to our readers:

Colorado (House and Senate). Democrats presently hold a 35-30 advantage in the House and an 18-17 lead in the Senate. They would like to expand those majorities in November and also install Democrat Bill Ritter as governor. Ritter, a former Denver district attorney, is polling well against Republican Rep. Bob Beauprez.

Montana (House). The state House is split 50-50 (but has a Democratic Speaker because Montana law requires the Speaker to be of the same party as Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer).

Oregon (House). Democrats, who control the governorship and the Senate, are seeking to erase the GOP’s 33-27 majority in the House.

The article suggests that Democratic prospects are good for these and similar elections this November.

USA Today highlights the Secretary of State contests in Colorado, Nevada, California, and New Mexico, among others.

Winning at the local level is a precursor to winning nationally, but prosaic as it may be, the most important thing is to have good people in public offices--honest, hardworking, intelligent, and pragmatic people, men and women who can get things done for the common good. Of course, since the Secretary of State counts the votes, honesty and fairness are paramount qualifications for that position. The Secretary of State, governor, and the legislature can assure that we have clean elections with a verifiable paper trail, or, if the offices fall into the wrong hands, they can corrupt the very foundations of democracy.

Leo Brown | August 24, 2006 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: Down ballot races | TrackBack (0) California, Colorado, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon

Gas and Property Rights and fishermen

Now here's an interesting mix of issues. On one side you have the current gas and oil boom across the west that is pitting not only ranchers and small property owners against big Oil and Gas, their state governments and the BLM, but also (as pointed out here by the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel), hunters and anglers (thanks Coyote Gulch).

On the other side, you have a somewhat under the radar, astro-turf, sagebrush rebellion sweeping the West with five eminent domain initiatives.

One of the key pieces to the entire Western Democrat theme is the connection of the bullets and bait folks to the Democratic Party. Once they feel that we have their interests in heart (like protecting stream access in Montana for Schweitzer), they'll forget about voting for a Republican.

Anyway, here is a good part of the Daily Sentinal piece, leaves you thinking how to bring the bullets and bait crowd into the property rights fight:

Alliances among groups who once considered themselves at odds with popular environmentalism are occurring throughout the West, and they’re being noticed by politicians, chief among whom are Colorado’s gubernatorial candidates.

“It feels like a natural alliance, a coming-together of common interests to fight forces that are threatening our outdoors,” said Evan Dreyer, spokesman for Democrat Bill Ritter’s gubernatorial campaign. “I think that for a very long time, this was something that was fought on the fringes, the environmentalists on the far left and the hunters’ groups on the far right. I think there is an agreement that they can be more effective by coming together and finding that middle ground.”

Emmett O'Connell | August 22, 2006 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: Gas and Property Rights and fishermen | TrackBack (0) Arizona, California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, The Big Strategy, Urban/Rural Divide, Washington

CA-50: Instant Replay

I was out of town on vacation the week prior to the election, so I missed the non-stop barrage of ads in this election, which is in a district neighboring my own.

Had Francine Busby won a Congressional seat this week, the title of this report would be “7.0 on the Richter scale.” As it is, the election was a noticeable rumble, but not the big one. Busby lost by 4%. Two years ago she lost by 22% with very little money against an incumbent. This is a very Republican District with a 15 point registration edge for the GOP, but one where Democrats had hopes because the previous Congressman, “Duke” Cunningham, fell from the status of war hero to that of felon at the end of his career. Busby’s margin was not far from Gore’s and Kerry’s in this district, hence my title, instant replay

In the last San Diego mayoral election Donna Frye led all candidates in the initial vote, but failed to gather enough Republican and Independent votes to assemble a majority in the run-off. In the Congressional primary, Francine Busby likewise led all candidates, but likewise failed to build much beyond that to find the necessary majority. Again, the instant replay aspect comes to mind.

November will be a rematch between Busby and Bilbray. Unless there are new developments, it will be another instant reply. However, the GOP will have to continue to spend considerable money to hold what would normally be a safe GOP seat.

A few lessons:

1. Money counts. Busby did much better than in 2004 partly because she had more money. Nevertheless, she was seriously outspent, possibly by two to one. The Republicans will not hesitate to spend whatever it takes to hold on to their power. The lesson for November is obvious. A party that is considerably outspent will generally lose. Getting rid of the GOP crowd in D.C. won't be easy. Their fingers will have to be pried off the levers of power one by one. This means not only a push at election time, but on-going media, fund raising, think tanks, grass roots organization, campaign finance reform, etc.

2. All politics is local. This district is conservative, white, and affluent. What works here might not work elsewhere. What works elsewhere might not work here. For a Democrat to win this district he or she must not only energize the Democratic base, but also reach out to a significant number of Republican votes or at least convince the Republicans to stay home. The GOP spent a lot of time and money making sure the Republicans turned out. The corruption issue alone was not enough for Busby because Bilbray was not closely tied to Cunningham. Bilbray played the anti-immigration theme hard, a logical strategy for this district, but one that won’t necessarily play as well elsewhere in California.

3. Political patterns are ingrained. No tectonic shift has hit this district. The easiest way to win this district would be by some redistricting in 2010. As currently drawn, the California congressional districts are not very competitive. Nevertheless, it drains the GOP coffers when they have to spend a ton of money to defend a safe district.

4. Whatever moral victory can be claimed from a close race in a GOP-leaning district, in the final analysis, if you don’t get the most votes, you don’t get to go to Congress. If you don’t win a majority of the House, you are still on the outside looking in.

Leo Brown | June 8, 2006 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: CA-50: Instant Replay | TrackBack (0) California, Congress

Misleading Headline in CA Governor's Race

In a headline that is misleading and inaccurate at best, the Washington Post declared today that “Calif. Democrats pick Schwarzenegger challenger”.

While it’s true that the California State Democratic Party did have its convention over the weekend, and delegates did vote to endorse state Treasurer Phil Angelides,  the Party did not pick Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s challenger in the November election. The Party merely endorsed Angelides and put its muscle and support behind him.

Memo to the Washington Post: California Democrats will pick Schwarzenegger’s challenger in the June primary. The voters choose the challenger, not the Party. Steve Westly is a Democrat and is running for the nomination. And as of today, Westly is leading Angelides in the polls.

Whether you’re for Angelides or for Westly, to me, this is another case of the media creating the news, not reporting the news accurately.

kencamp | May 1, 2006 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) Permalink: Misleading Headline in CA Governor's Race | TrackBack (0) California, Governors

CA-50

I don’t live in CA-50, but I live close enough to see the campaign being played out. Because every seat in the House is crucial this year, this race has drawn national attention and national money.

The special election is being held this Tuesday to fill the seat left vacant by the resignation of Randy “Duke” Cunningham, who pleaded guilty to bribery and related charges.

There are 18 candidates, but only one major Democratic contender, Francine Busby, who had previously run against Duke. No one issue seems to dominate the campaign, other than the desire to rid the district of the Cunningham scandal.
Francine is leading in the polls. However, if she doesn’t get more than 50% of the vote, there will be a runoff between the top two candidates from each major party on June 6.
This is a GOP-leaning district. It will not be easy for Francine to get to 50% on Tuesday. Not impossible, but not easy. Voter turnout will be critical. If it goes to a runoff on June 6, Francine could still win, but it again won’t be easy because the Republicans will tend to unite behind their one remaining candidate. And, of course, the seat will be contested in November, presumably with the same candidates. In any event, the GOP has had to throw a lot of money into what is a normally safe district. But this could be Francine’s year after all. Those wishing to help can go to this link.

Leo Brown | April 8, 2006 | Comment on This Post (6 so far) Permalink: CA-50 | TrackBack (0) California, Congress

Why Campaign Finance Reform is Necessary

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of California is the latest example of why campaign finance reform is necessary. Where else but in the United States of America could a high school student find the resources to give the maximum donation of $44,600 to Governor Schwarzenegger for his re-election campaign? Does anyone out there know of a teenager with $44,600 to their name? Capitol Weekly has the story.

Because Elizabeth Arkley is 18 years old, she, like any other adult, can  donate up to $22,300 to Schwarzenegger for both the gubernatorial primary and general election. Elizabeth's parents, Cherie and Robin Arkley and her college-aged sister, Allison, each gave $44,600 to the governor's reelection campaign.

This process, for the uninitiated, is what is known as bundling. Elizabeth Arkley may not have $44,600 but because her parents have more than enough, and because she is at least 18, under California law, she can donate the maximum to the Governor under her own name. So what politically active, rich parents do is donate the maximum in the names of all of their family members who are legally eligible to donate.

In all fairness, Schwarzenegger's Democratic challengers, Phil Angelides and Steve Westly, have donors who have bundled their donations and done the same thing.

It is has been proven that young people aren’t the most politically active age group, so while Elizabeth Arkley might be politically active, what about all of the other youth who have donated large sums to Governors, Presidential candidates and others? Are they all politically active, and if so why aren’t they voting? Also, teenagers are notorious for rebelling against their parents. Are we to believe that Elizabeth Arkley and all the other teenagers who have donated actually support the candidates their parents support?

Mainly, bundling is a way for big money donors to skirt campaign finance laws and to gain favor with the candidate of their choice. How many of George W. Bush’s Rangers bundled donations?

It’s time for serious campaign finance reform. More power to the 18 year old who is able to donate $44,600 in an election cycle, but I’m willing to bet there are less than 5 of them out there. And while the Supreme Court has equated political donations with free speech, there has to be some way to stop the madness. I’ve been hearing more about it lately and perhaps public financing of elections is the answer.

kencamp | March 2, 2006 | Comment on This Post (5 so far) Permalink: Why Campaign Finance Reform is Necessary | TrackBack (0) California, Election Reform, Governors, Policy Issues

Another Land Grab

The Bush administration wants to sell off our patrimony to pay for bad budgeting and cover the cost of tax cuts for the super rich. The LA Times editorializes about a huge proposed sale of forest land:

The president's proposal would amount to the biggest sell-off ever of forest land — 300,000 acres — with California taking an especially big hit.

If the sales were raising money to purchase other land more valuable to the nation's heritage, this move would be defensible, even sensible. But President Bush's budget plan is to use the proceeds to make its annual contribution to programs for rural schools and roads. Sales of land represent a one-time capital gain. Schools and roads — or other programs — will need funding year after year.

The rural program keeps local education and other services going in forest towns where public revenue from timber has dried up. It's scheduled to expire at the end of 2006, but there is broad congressional support for continuing it for five more years. Which raises the question: Which of the American public's possessions will the president auction off next year?

There is a GOP pattern here. Rep. Pombo and Rep. Hunter, both R-CA, tried last year to grab public lands and even steal a national park.

Leo Brown | February 15, 2006 | Comment on This Post (1 so far) Permalink: Another Land Grab | TrackBack (0) California, Policy Issues

Cry for the roadless rule

When the Bush administration announced their plan for handling the Clinton era Roadless Rule, I chimed in saying that we shouldn't be afraid (as Western Democrats) of Bush's idea. The opening of allowing Western governors a chance to influence the final product was a place for Western Democrats to show how they could wisely balance local concerns and by coming up with a better plan that the federal government.

Now, they're just ignoring what our Western governors are saying and going their own way. Washington state recently joined a lawsuit with California, Oregon and New Mexico to force the federal government to listen to the locals.

Now we can complain, but ironically because the Republican federal government is ignoring the concerns of states, that according to the Western Republican credo have a better understanding of what is going on in their own communities. "Screw local communities though, we want to make some money," is pretty much what the rest of the GOP is saying.

So, chock with one up with Rep. Jim Gibbons plan to sell federal land to big companies back east and the federal government allowing gas and oil to run over ranchers. Oh, and I might as well mention the administration's plan to pay for tax cuts by increasing the utility bills of Northwesterners and by selling public land to companies back east.

Emmett O'Connell | February 11, 2006 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) Permalink: Cry for the roadless rule | TrackBack (0) California, Governors, New Mexico, Oregon, Policy Issues, Regionalism, Washington

Cindy Sheehan May Challenge Dianne Feinstein

USA Today is reporting that Cindy Sheehan announced on Saturday that she’s strongly considering running for U.S. Senate against Dianne Feinstein. Sheehan is in Venezuela where she met with President Hugo Chavez and participated in the World Social Forum. Sheehan’s main reason for running is that Feinstein won’t call for an immediate withdrawal of troops in Iraq.

"She voted for the war. She continues to vote for the funding. She won't call for an immediate withdrawal of the troops," said Sheehan, who gained international attention when she set up a protest camp near U.S. President George W. Bush's Texas ranch last year.

"I think our senator needs to be held accountable for her support of George Bush and his war policies," she added.

To me Cindy Sheehan is an example of another liberal activist who doesn’t quite get it. Activists of both parties tend to want what they want, when they want it and refuse to compromise ever. This does not make for good politics or good public policy. Sometimes you have to compromise.

You can be for peace and an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, but the reality is that if U.S. troops leave immediately the vacuum will be filled by Al Qaeda and we’ll be staring down another government run by a group that is comparable to Hamas in its violence and every bit as fundamentalist as the mullahs in Iran. And that new government will help Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, wipe Israel off the face of the earth as he has proposed. That all would be bad for our national security.  I agree with Cindy Sheehan that we should be out of Iraq, but only in a planned, methodical way. And it should be done as soon as possible.

Second, Sheehan running against Dianne Feinstein is a quixotic pipe dream at best. As the LA Times reports, Feinstein is arguably the most popular politician in a state that votes Democratic.

The reasons others have stayed out are many: Feinstein is California's most popular elected official, according to polls, and she has raised at least $6.9  million to seek a fourth term. She is well-known to most voters, the state has tilted strongly toward Democrats for more than a decade, and the national political climate has soured for Republicans in recent months.

If Cindy Sheehan wants to run for office, I’d encourage her to do so. But she should pick a race against someone who is less popular and has more negatives. Overall, Dianne Feinstein is a good Democrat who deserves to continue her service.

 

kencamp | January 30, 2006 | Comment on This Post (4 so far) Permalink: Cindy Sheehan May Challenge Dianne Feinstein | TrackBack (16) California, Senators

Pombo getting some Abramoff in his stocking

Richard Pombo is getting some coal in his stocking, courtesy of the FBI (thanks to Say No to Pombo).

Emmett O'Connell | December 24, 2005 | Comment on This Post (0 so far) Permalink: Pombo getting some Abramoff in his stocking | TrackBack (29) California, Congress

Scott Chacon for Congress is dead, long live Margee Ensign

Scott Chacon, Rep. Richard Pombo's open source opponent in the CA-11, has pulled out of the race. His reason for leaving the race is the same the one he has for joining in the first place: whether any suitable candidate is challening Pombo:

Margee is unbelievably qualified, technologically savvy, internationally and politically experienced and still amazingly humble. We are continually impressed with her passion, kindness and strength of character. She is exactly who I want representing me. I have volunteered to do whatever I can to help her campaign and she has very graciously accepted.

If you look at Ms. Ensign's website, you might see why he likes her so much. She has picked up almost exactly where Chacon left off with his ground breaking website package.

Chacon also reminds us that Pombo, as many congressional Republicans are, is vunerable in the next go-round:

Pombo has gained national attention for his questionable and controversial acts while at the same time his congressional mentor Tom DeLay is being prosecuted for corruption charges. Because of this negative attention, the DCCC and other democratic-leaning organizations have targeted our eleventh district. Pombo and the Republican party are vulnerable, so now candidates and money are pouring into this race.

Emmett O'Connell | December 8, 2005 | Comment on This Post (3 so far) Permalink: Scott Chacon for Congress is dead, long live Margee Ensign | TrackBack (28) California, Congress, Election Reform

Young can win the CA-48, you can help

Doing my part by pointing to a great argument for Steve Young in California. Help Turn Orange County Blue:

I was going to do a long diary this afternoon analyzing why this race is winnable and we shouldn't give up or slack off on it, but now I will take the opportunity (ironically) to be a slacker and put a condensed version in this comment:

1. This is one of 16 districts in California where Kerry did better than Gore (along with 1, 2, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 23, 29, 36, and 53), losing 59-41 rather than 60-40. It is a step in the right direction and may be a sign of increasing Dem strength.

2. The net partisan balance is 58.5-41.5 GOP. This makes it more Dem-friendly than the seats held by the following:

TX-17 (Edwards--31.8% Dem)
UT-02 (Matheson--32.8%)
MS-04 (Taylor--33.5%)
ND-AL (Pomeroy--37%)
MO-04 (Skelton--38.5%)
SD-AL (Herseth--39.8%)

Not a long list, but a win is certainly not out of the question.

3. Most of all, the presence of Minutemen head and American Independent Party candidate Jim Gilchrist makes this very doable. Gilchrist took about 15% in the open primary and is well-financed and running a real campaign. There is a likelihood that he builds on that and ends up with about 20%. As a right-wing hardline anti-immigration candidate, that 20% is coming straight from GOPer John Campbell's hide. In fact, if the same breakdown of voters shows up on Tuesday as voted in 2004 and Gilchrist takes 20%, the likely result is Young 41, Campbell 39, Gilchrist 20. Remember the special election in the heavily Dem Nem Mexico 3d in 1997 (replacing then-newly appointed Energy Secretary Bill Richardson)? The Greens did what they always do in New Mexico and the final result was 43 R, 40 D, 17 G.

4. Finally, the California GOP is laboring with the twin albatrosses of Bush and Schwarzenegger around their necks. The dismal performance of the ballot initiatives last month speaks to the apathy and disenchantment of the GOP. Turnout stands to work in our favor.

Emmett O'Connell | December 4, 2005 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) Permalink: Young can win the CA-48, you can help | TrackBack (23) California, Congress

Duke is out, Steve could be in

Heady days down in Orange County now-a-days. Duke Cunningham finally took a fall in CA-50, and Steve Young has a chance to win in CA-48. Even though not many are giving him much a chance, the Duke fall out could inspire Southern Californians to send a Dem Congress. If you want to make a last minute donation to Young, go here.

Emmett O'Connell | November 29, 2005 | Comment on This Post (2 so far) Permalink: Duke is out, Steve could be in | TrackBack (21) California, Congress

Ethics in the West notes

Jonathan Singer and Dan Slater point out a couple of house races in the West where ethics and the Republican culture of corruption will come into play. I don't think I need to remind anyone why clean government is important in the West.

In California Steve Filson (a former Air Force pilot, a Fighting Dem) is taking on powerful Rep. Richard Pombo, who is having some of his own ethics problems.

With Bob Beuaprez running for governor, his CO-7 seat is open, but Rick O'Donnell is already having ethics problems.