Posted by Former Blogger Chris Emami on May 22, 2012
As if the first 1 wasn’t bad enough another “Budget Watchdogs” piece arrived in the mail later last week. It might actually be worse than the one I posted yesterday.
The slate mail business is going to slowly start to disappear here very shortly, for a number of reasons. Initiatives being moved to November will make it almost impossible in a June election. Also it is clear that with so many new slates arriving voters do not trust these advertisements anymore.
Here is the piece:
Posted in Mail, Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
Posted by Scott Carpenter on May 19, 2012
Much has been written, and assumingly will be written, about Republican Party of Orange County Chairman Emeritus Tom Fuentes, who just passed away after a long bout with cancer. After multiple bouts with cancer and fighting it valiantly, The Lord called Tom home late last night.
Winston Churchill was often called “The Last Lion,” and Ted Kennedy was often called “The Lion of the Senate,” it could said that Tom Fuentes was the “Lion of Orange County.” Few, if any, have ever been more influential in Orange County politics than Tom, his impact on Republican politics is literally immeasurable. He was truly a statesman and principled to his core. Tom defeated political foes who had conspired to replace him as OC GOP chairman, and stood tall on his principles in those battles. Though Chairman Fuentes never sought the limelight or public office beyond Community College District Trustee he became a standard bearer for conservative principles. Through his life of activism and leadership surely Tom was given opportunities to sell his beliefs down the river for personal gain, he never waivered.
In the world of politics where self-interest is rampant, loyalty is fleeting, true friendship is all too rare and principles are routinely abandoned, Tom Fuentes was an oak. Everything he did in politics had one sole purpose: “the cause.” The conservative cause, as Tom described it at the 2011 OC GOP Flag Day Salute, dedicated to “people and noble ideas.” Tom properly personified those noble ideas dedicated to people rather than money or power. He was not involved in politics for any reason other than he believed in conservative principles, he believed they served people well, he believed they served our country well, and his actions were driven by advancing those principles. Not only was he a great mentor and teacher, he was a shining example. Tom was the real deal because he actually cared about principles over politics…he was a statesman.
Tom was an incredible political leader, but more importantly he was amazing human being. His enormous generosity, zest for life and genuine kindness and care for others are lessons I will remember for the rest of my life. Like so many others I was fortunate to come to know Tom as a friend and a mentor. He was always unbelievably selfless with his time, knowledge and advice on nearly any issue whether it was political or personal. No matter who you were if you wanted to meet with Tom he would find the time and offer any advice he could give.
Despite all the attention and friendships Tom gained through politics it was his service to others that really defined him. He was the founding chairman of the Orange County Food Bank and active in many other charities. He spoke glowingly of the accomplishments of his children Michelle, TJ and Joey; and his wife Jolene was the joy of his life. Tom was active in the Catholic Church and had an unshakable faith in God. In fact when I learned of Tom’s cancer returning I asked him if there was anything I could do for him, all he asked for were my prayers. I would often joke with Tom that I could only offer protestant prayers, to which he replied he appreciated both the prayers and the humor.
And that’s who Tom Fuentes was. He was a sincere and joyful man. Even in the face of terminal cancer he shared stories and jokes when I visited him at his bedside. Several times in his last few months he would tell me he was going to switch political parties because it would be better for the Democrats to lose one than for us to lose one. Despite all the odds Tom beat cancer once and far outlived every doctor’s predictions when it returned. Through all the pain and treatment he always stood strong with grace, serving as an example yet again.
Reflecting on his passing I’m reminded of the words of late North Carolina State coach Jimmy Valvano’s words when he was faced with cancer: “Cancer can take away all my physical abilities. It cannot touch my mind, it cannot touch my heart and it cannot touch my soul. And those three things are going to carry on forever.” The Chairman Emeritus exemplified those sentiments in his own battle and will live on because of it also.
Goodbye Tom, The Lord has called you home after a job most well done, and now all we can do is humbly say “Thank you.”
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Tom Fuentes | 3 Comments »
Posted by Former Blogger Chris Emami on May 11, 2012
The Lincoln Club of Orange County has announced their endorsements for the June 2012 primary election. TIming was right for their picks as absentee ballots dropped this week. One notable candidate missing from this list is State Senate Republican leader Bob Huff of the 29th District. Huff has had a rough couple of weeks with the CRP forgetting to endorse him as well. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments »
Posted by The Master Cylinder on May 7, 2012
The June primary is nearly, and the debate over Proposition 29 grows more intense, not surprisingly since it is about the only major issue on the ballot.
Predictably, proponents are trying to focus attention on the “No on 29” being funded by the Big Tobacco bully that only cares about the potential threat to its profits. But voters aren’t stupid and can figure that out for themselves. After all, when Proposition 10 was in the ballot in 1998, the tobacco companies were up front in their ads about their leading role against that tobacco tax, and with that issue out of the way, they focused on their policy arguments against Prop. 10.
And it nearly worked: Prop. 10, a “sin” tax to fnd early-childhood development programs, barely passed at a time of great economic growth in California (remember when we had prosperity?).
Prop 29. taxes on something bad (cigarettes) for something good (cancer research). But there are broader policy issues in the fine print that voters ought to be concerned about. Voters should question the sincerity of its laudable goal — cancer research — when you learn that this measure creates a new 9-member board composed of political appointees that would have complete control over how $735 million in new taxes are spent with no accountability to the public.
Despite the best intentions of its supporters, examples of questionable management have emerged since Prop. 10’s passage. When you consider that Prop. 10 was a better crafted measure with more built-in accountability, and that Prop. 29 imposes literally no transparency and accountability on the very people providing the funds, we can have zero confidence Prop. 29 won’t result in the abuse of tax money.
And if that doesn’t convince you of the bad policy in this measure, just read this editorial from the LA Times. You would expect that one of the most liberal publications in the country would be more than eager to stick it to the tobacco industry, but even the LA Times editorial board acknowledged this flaw and encouraged a no vote. The last thing we need in California is another government entity using taxpayer dollars to serve their own self interests. It’s no wonder politicians have a reputation for being crooked and dirty. Voters need to put the kibosh on Prop. 29.
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »
Posted by OC Insider on April 25, 2012
As we’re still getting to know the candidates for Assembly in the 72nd District, one question I keep hearing people ask over and over again is: Does Troy Edgar still support wasting taxpayer dollars on fanciful high speed rail?
Just as importantly he should come clean about how much taxpayer money he spent traveling around the country lobbying for high speed rail.
Everyone knows that Troy Edgar was a lifelong Democrat and only switched parties when he decided to run for office. Unfortunately for Orange County, despite the ‘R’ next to his name he has governed like a Chicago Democrat. Edgar’s push for an illegal trash contract and constant desire to raise taxes and fees are well known.
What is a little less known is that, for a brief period of time, Los Alamitos paid a large sum in order to join the Orangeline Development Authority (OLDA). At the time, the mission of OLDA was promoting a high speed maglev rail line that would run from Irvine to Palmdale.
Troy Edgar was named Vice Chairman of OLDA and quickly became one of the most active proponents of this high speed rail boondoggle.
He quickly started lobbying Orange County cities and agencies. He frivolously worked on getting the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) on to support the project. Before presenting to OCTA, he bragged about “his previous lobbying efforts toward the OCTA to prepare for this event.”
Fortunately for Orange County and California, OCTA turned Troy Edgar and his levitating high speed train down. No doubt, by saying no to Troy Edgar, OCTA saved taxpayers billions.
Here are just a few of the problems that OCTA found with Troy’s Train.
From OCTA July 26, 2007 Staff Report:
“OCTA has not committed right of way”
“Financial plan appears extremely optimistic”
“$18 average fare is assumed for 20-mile trip”
From OCTA CEO Arthur Leahy, August 9, 2007 Memo:
“The Orangeline financial plan appears extremely optimistic.”
“Investors expressed concern about the Orangeline’s ability to secure right-of-way for the project and to receive the necessary environmental approvals.”
“Only one of the Orangeline’s 14 member cities, Los Alamitos, is located in Orange County, and none of the seven the seven Orange County cities directly bordering the PE Railroad right-of-way has joined the Orangeline.” (OLDA Minutes May 9, 2007)
“In March 2007, the La Palma City Council adopted a resolution explicitly opposing the use of the PE Railroad right-of-way for any future transit project, including the Orangeline.”
Furthermore, in true Chicago Democrat style, Troy Edgar could not take no for an answer and wanted OCTA to bully Orange County cities that did not want this project going through their town.
La Palma city councilman, Ralph Rodriguez spoke in opposition to the project.
“The City of La Palma opposes this particular project since it would be disruptive to the residential properties that are adjacent to the subject right-of-way” (OCTA Transit Planning and Operations Committee Meeting May 10, 2007)
How did Troy Edgar react? He urged OCTA to ignore the city of La Palma.
“Troy Edgar, Councilman, City of Los Alamitos, stated this is an opportunity to provide clean technology and asked staff to keep the Orangeline project as an option and append the Long-Range Transportation Plan to include this project. (OCTA Transit Planning and Operations Committee Meeting May 10, 2007)
Not being able to take a hint and realize that he is lobbying for a tax dollar black hole that is not wanted by either the impacted cities or the taxpayers who would have to foot the bill, Troy Edgar decided it was a good idea travel to New York and lobby private investors for this project. He even brags about it in the OC Register.
“He will talk later this month to potential investors in New York”
I wonder just how much this trip cost. In fact, I would like to know how much all of Edgar’s lobbying efforts cost. He traveled all over the state on behalf of this project. In addition to his OLDA per meeting stipend of $100 (yes, he took a stipend for his OLDA meetings), how much did taxpayers have to pay for all of his travel?
Can we trust Troy Edgar to oppose High Speed Rail if we send him to Sacramento? I would have to say, absolutely not! If this entire saga makes one thing clear, it is that Troy Edgar cannot be trusted with taxpayer funds.
Posted in 72nd Assembly District, Los Alamitos, Uncategorized | Tagged: High Speed Rail, Troy Edgar | 5 Comments »
Posted by Former Blogger Chris Emami on April 20, 2012
H/T to Total Buzz for posting on their blog the story on California potentially forcing bloggers to reveal if they have received payments from political campaigns.
I am sure that this will open me up for attack in the comment section, but I feel the need to take a stance against the idea of blogger payment disclosure (full disclosure I am a blogger). “OC Political” does receive money from advertisers or in the case of a client that has retained us as consultants we will provide an advertisement as part of the contract. We do not attempt to hide our advertisers our clients (simply look to your left). The real problem here is the bigger issue of California and the amount of overregulation they impose.
We openly disclose who our consulting clients are when writing posts that may impact them or potential opponents that they may face in an election. The reason we do this is to maintain our credibility as a blog and to ensure that our readers are aware of any potential bias that we may have.
However, having California regulate blogger payments is simply an overburdensome regulation. We already are supposed to be tracking this in the form 460’s filled out by all candidates that disclose who they received campaign contributions from and what they spent campaign money on as well.
FlashReport author Jon Fleischman sums the problem up best in his quote to the Orange County Register blog:
How would the Fair Political Practices Commission handle anonymous blogs? Would advertising revenue fall under the regulated payments? How would the commission educate amateur bloggers?
As stated before, we here at “OC Political” believe in disclosing our financial interests in campaigns, but only for the purpose of maintaining our credibility. Other blogs can do whatever they want in terms of disclosure, but should they choose not to disclose a financial gain from supporting a candidate or opposing a candidate the end result should simply be a loss of credibility not an FPPC fine.
With much bigger issues at play in California than blogging I think this is simply another smoke screen to distract away from the real budgetary problems that California faces.
Posted in California, Uncategorized | Tagged: Jon Fleischman | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Former Blogger Chris Emami on April 17, 2012
We move on to a contested Assembly race that is in the heart of Orange County. Contrary to popular belief, we here at OC Political are not supporting Tom Daly. However, the fact does exist that in a post Prop 14 world it would have been better to see the Democrats fight each other in June and then continue to fight each other in November.
Credit goes to Meridian Pacific for posting these maps on their website.
This seat is currently the lone Democratic stronghold with a 22 point registration advantage. Also, in 2008 and 2010 Republicans lost all major races in this district with the exception of Proposition 8 which passed by a large margin.
This is an open seat due to incumbent Assemblyman Jose Solorio being termed out for this office. With the amount of challengers in this race and labor coming in heavy for their chosen candidate it could be a race with a lot of money spent.
The candidates include:
Francisco “Paco” Barragan an Accountant/Businessman/Auditor who is running as a Democrat.
Tom Daly the Orange County Clerk-Recorder who is running as a Democrat.
Michele Martinez a Santa Ana Councilwoman who is running as a Democrat.
Julio Perez a Non-Proft Workforce Director who is running as a Democrat
Jose “Joe” Moreno an Orange County Eligibility Technician who is running as a Republican.
The factors at play- All but one candidate is Latino which will heavily split the ethnic vote thus helping Tom Daly. The party affiliation vote is split amongst 4 Democrats which benefits Jose Moreno more than anybody else.
In the end I think the factors at play make this a pretty easy one to call for me, however, this will possibly change after all of the candidates start running a real campaign.
Ranking the candidate in order of who I personally would rather have in the Assembly based on how they would vote:
1. Jose Moreno
2. Francisco Barragan
3. Tom Daly
4. Michele Martinez
5. Julio Perez
Looking at all the factors at play in this district I believe that the 2 candidates advancing to November will be:
Tom Daly & Jose Moreno
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Francisco Barragan, Jose Moreno, Julio Perez, Michele Martinez, Tom Daly | 3 Comments »
Posted by Brenda Higgins on April 15, 2012
The Lincoln Club Gala, celebrating it’s 50th birthday was held Saturday night, April 14, 2012 at the Balboa Bay Club. There were nearly 500 in attendance, including a variety of elected officials and candidates. In attendance were, Villa Park Councilwoman, Debra Pauly, Candidate for the Third Supervisorial District Todd Spitzer, U.S. Representative Ed Royce, State Senator Bob Huff, Vice Chair of the Board of Education Michelle Steel, State Senator Mimi Walters, Placentia Mayor Jeremy Yamaguchi, Mayor of Orange Carolyn Caveche, Mayor Pro-Tem Dennis Bilodeau, Central Committee Chair Scott Baugh, Honorable Judge David Belz, this list is by no means exhaustive. Karl Rove was the keynote speaker of the evening.
There was a series of video interviews with elected officials. Which included, a rendition of the history of the Lincoln Club from it’s inception in 1962 with the defeat of Richard Nixon by Pat Brown for the Governor of California, as well as some historic photos and audio interviews. Buck Johns had some remarks and was as entertaining as always. Doy Henley was recognized for his achievement and contribution.
Karl Rove was engaging and personable. He approached our table, shook hands and introduced himself, which I thought was kind and impressive. Connecting with people may be more of a gift than a learned skill, whichever it is Mr. Rove has it. He is natural and articulate, did not miss a beat when there was a commotion at one corner of the room, spoke without notes or teleprompter. The talk was immensely fact intensive on the costs of PPACA, the net effect of the Buffet tax on revenue, Social Security and Medicare shortfalls, and the inconsistency of the Obama administration in sticking to campaign promises. He concluded with a remark that the policies of the current administration, if allowed to play out for another four years, are likely to fundamentally change our country in a very harmful way. He also encouraged a focus on the history of the Lincoln Club to bolster faith in our collective power to have an effect upon the upcoming elections, and not to give too much credit to the media reports and statistics that show the president performing favorably.
A worthy celebration of the esteemed Lincoln Club. Happy Birthday.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Karl Rove, Lincoln Club | Leave a Comment »
Posted by The Master Cylinder on April 3, 2012
That might as well be the name of a pro-Proposition 29 campaign committee (OK, this isn’t an OC-only issue, but the November election is coming faster than we think). Prop. 29, which will be on the November 2012 ballot, would impose a 5-cent tax on each cigarette sold, or about a $1.00 a pack. The revenue, as it always does, goes toward one of those causes that no one can be against: cancer research. If approved by voters, it will amount to about a $1 billion tax hit on all those poor saps that are hooked on cigarettes. Prop. 29 creates a special commission that will dole out this these millions to whomever and wherever it sees fit – even out of the state or the country. In the best progressive tradition, the unshakable assumption is latest tobacco tax would be doled out by a special un-elected “commission” created by the initiative, on the naïve assumption that bunch of appoint “experts” can efficiently allocate these funds for the elimination of cancer and the betterment of mankind.
Who can argue with that?
Certainly not those social elements that make their money selling cigarettes on the black market. Any new law or tax that increases the price of cigarettes is like free marketing for them, creating customers who want to get more cigarettes for their money.
As Michael D. LaFaive, Director of Fiscal Policy at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy wrote in a recent op-ed, “While cigarette tax hikes usually generate additional revenue for different units of government, they bring with them illicit activities, including smuggling by individuals and organized crime groups, violence against people and police and brazen thefts, too.”
Ultimately, LaFaive writes, “politicians don’t consider all of the costs of reaching ever deeper into consumer pockets…By hiking cigarette taxes so dramatically politicians are effectively expanding — if not creating — a highly profitable illegal market in which thieves and other people of violence can thrive at the great expense to consumers and job providers alike.”
Even with a cigarette tax below the national average, California has already started seeing the effects of increased smuggling. According to former Board of Equalization member Michelle Steel , “Cigarette-related crime is rising across the U.S. In California, 1.4 billion packs were estimated to have been consumed in fiscal year 2005-06. And 209 million packs were estimated to have been sold tax-free, resulting in a $182 million revenue loss for the state.”
This is a story as old as history. When government taxation of a service or product reaches a certain level, the incentive to evade, and to profit from evasion, becomes irresistible. This kind of taxation is always imposed in the name of a noble cause, and just as invariably turns citizens into criminals, diminishing respect for the law and ordinary government authority and habituating citizens to tax evasion. Prop. 29 will exacerbate that problem, in addition to the usual sins of raising taxes, empowering special interests and spending money on duplicative programs.
I don’t know about you, but I have about had it with funding every do-gooder program by piling yet another tax onto the backs of smokers. There is no more blood left to be squeezed out of that turnip.
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
Posted by Brenda Higgins on April 3, 2012
In the wake of the recent oral arguments to the Supreme Court, politicians with stakes on both sides of the issue have exercised their liberty to open their mouths about it. With matters that are complex enough to necessitate Supreme Court intervention, politicians would have been well served to exercise restraint. As the saying goes, better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt.
POTUS seemed to lob the first grenade in this nonsensical war of words with the following disposition of his genius.
“I am confident the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically-elected congress” Gee, I don’t know Barry, but maybe a clue exists in the cases of Marbury v. Madison, McCullough v. Maryland, Gibbons v. Ogden. In all of these cases the high court determined that Congressional or State Legislature actions were either appropriate or inappropriate under the powers granted to them by the Constitution. Judicial review? Ever heard of it? Just because the majority of a democratically elected Congress voted that we should all covert to Buddahism, does not mean that the court is going to allow such a law to stand.
I believe that Barry attended and graduated from Harvard Law School, even though I have not seen any official transcripts, BUT, my question would be whether or not he passed Constitutional Law after a comment like that. The popularity of the law, or the strength of the majority on the vote have no bearing on the grant, or lack thereof, of power to Congress, in the Constitution. I get that he is confused when he is losing on an issue, and is not very good on his feet, but these recent comments sound much like, “Oh yeah, I know I am but what are you?!” Genius. Articulate. Our POTUS.
Then, we have Mitt Romney being questioned about the comments of the President and we get this gem.
“So judicial activism is not following the Constitution. Judicial activism is departing from the Constitution”
Giving Mitt one tiny break, you can not impart a meaningful explanation of the concept of “judicial activism” in a one liner. When we have Obama jumping up and down crying “judicial activism” you can’t merely say, “judicial activism is not following the Constitution”. He could have said, the court will do what it has always done, and strike down laws that are not constitutional. That is their job, it is what we want them to do. He seems stunned by the question and ill prepared to address it. His retort sounds as childish as the comments from Barry and is tantamount to “Yeah, well come over here and say that!”.
Mitt, I understand, also received a Juris Doctor from Harvard, and I’m pretty sure it’s not one of those online law schools.
Judicial activism, is not like super-twins-powers-activate!, that you get all power and unsuspected, otherwise humanly impossible victory for your team whenever it is invoked or granted to your side. It is a criticism of the judiciary that they are allegedly utilizing and relying upon their own personal biases and politics when they are interpreting an issue of First Impression, which is that it has never been addressed before. Judicial activism then, is the battle cry of the whiners on losing side. Not unlike complaining about how blind the Umpire was at your kids Little League game.
When it comes to the Supreme Court, somebody is always unhappy, somebody leaves the building a loser, and somebody cries “injustice”, and yes, someone raves”judicial activism”. It just ain’t fair. It is the way the system works, and works pretty effectively. This utter lack of reverence and political demonizing of this branch is something that should be offensive to us all.
I have seen several comments questioning that if the court can be “activist” on Roe v. Wade, then why not be “activist” on overturning the PPACA (Aka Obamacare). THIS is the most illiterate and incomprehensible of all the dumb comments so far.
Roe, whether you like it or not, is a case protecting fundamental rights of individuals, primarily under the 14th Amendment. The focus is the individual and the protection afforded to all of us within the 14th Amendment. The PPACA case involves the POWER of Congress to do what it has done. This legislation is so breathtakingly broad, it is difficult to even start to describe the plethora of overstepping the powers of Congress that has gone on here. Just on its face, it compels businesses to provide health insurance coverage for employees, compels individuals to purchase health care coverage, and compels the same insurance companies to provide insurance to those whom they might otherwise not wish to have as clients. I don’t care at all about how “human” Obama wants to characterize this, Congress can not go around dictating who will do business and contract with whom, and dictating what we will purchase. While we get mired in whether Congress had the POWER to do ANY of this, we don’t even get to the question of the First Amendment Rights to Association that my be impacted by the various “mandates”. Breathtakingly broad. There is no other way to describe this abomination. In both cases, the court is the last vestige of defense and the one thing that protects the individual by curtailing the government.
Congress has overstepped and abused its powers. It is really that simple, and that complicated. It likely goes down, but Barry is obviously nervous, and he is the consummate campaigner. Sorry, the Supremes don’t work that way and their lifetime tenure make them generally immune (hopefully) from such public relations games by the Great Campaigner. As officers of the court, as elected officials, do these politicians not have the job to instill CONFIDENCE in the court? Please, all of you verbose campaigners, stop scapegoating the most distinguished branch or our government with your sore loser rhetoric. An ounce of respect and dignity for the branch that is literally our last defense against this kind of government infringement, socialism and tyranny, and all sorts of invasions of our rights and privacies.
Obamacare will likely be overturned because it is bad law, and it is the JOB of the Supreme Court, to overturn bad laws that violate the constitution.
Mitt, you can use that next time someone asks you.
Posted in National, Uncategorized | Tagged: Judicial Activism, Obamacare, PPACA, U.S. Supreme Court | 14 Comments »
OC Political 