I posted this article two weeks ago and am reposting it now that folks are voting early. I have also updated some of my picks, for example I finally decided who to endorse for the third open seat on the SAUSD School Board.
Well, we are just over a week from Election Day, so here are my picks for this election, including local and legislative races in Santa Ana, as well as the State and Local Propositions and Ballot Measures:
President – If Obama needed my vote to win California, he would have it. But he doesn’t so I am voting for the Libertarian ticket of Bob Barr and Wayne Root.
U.S. Congress, 47th District – Loretta Sanchez. This one is a no-brainer. No way I can vote for the Mexican hating gay basher Rosie Avila.
State Senate, 33rd District – Gary Pritchard. Again an easy choice. Pritchard’s opponent, Mimi Walters, joined the Mexican bashing Hall of Fame during her primary campaign against Harry Sidhu. No thanks. Pritchard is a teacher, a father and a gentleman. He has my full support.
State Assembly, 69th District – Cam Mangels. No way I can vote for Jose Solorio, the incumbent. He is backing Team Pulido and Rob Richardson. That is a no-go for me. Vote no on Solorio and send him a message – stop hacking for Pulido and company!
Orange County Races
Superior Court, County of Orange, Office 12 – Debra Carillo. She showed up to the recent ECCO dinner. Kermit Marsh didn’t. End of story. She has my vote.
Trustee, Rancho Santiago Community College District, Area 1 – Lynette Verino. You can vote for up to three candidates. I am NOT voting for ANY of the incumbents. They were asleep at the wheel when the fire sprinklers were allowed to break down at Santa Ana College – and no one was fired when this was discovered by student reporters. And I don’t have a clue who this Nam Pham guy is, so my only vote will be for Verino.
Trustee, Rancho Santiago Community College District, Area 3 – Dr. Art Lomeli. He truly cares about the community and about education. The incumbent, Lisa Woolery, has been there too long. See my comments above re the fire sprinkler fiasco at Santa Ana College. All incumbents must get the boot!
Local Races in Santa Ana
SAUSD School Board – I have endorsed three candidates for the three open seats, Irene Ibarra, Valerie Amezcua and Gloria Alvarado. Some of the rest are OK. The best of the lot are Gloria Alvarado and, well that’s it. Mayor Miguel Pulido is supporting Jose Hernandez, Gregory Barraza, Rob Richardson and Mike Gonzalez, so I can’t support them. No way will I support anyone that Pulido supports, period. Some folks like Roman Reyna – but as a City Commissioner he has missed over 60% of the Santa Ana Housing and Redevelopment Commission meetings, so no, I won’t be voting for him either. I wish he had decided to take on Claudia Alvarez again for the Santa Ana City Council. I wonder why he didn’t?
Santa Ana Mayor – I am co-endorsing Michele Martinez and George Collins. Take your pick. Either one is an improvement over Miguel Pulido.
Santa Ana City Council, Ward One – Jim Walker. The incumbent, Vince Sarmiento, is a slick lawyer who is being groomed to take over for Miguel Pulido or Jose Solorio. No thanks. Walker cares about the community and he has my vote.
Santa Ana City Council, Ward Three – Me! But if you have a problem with me please do not vote for the incumbent, Carlos Bustamante, or Steve Rocco. If you cannot bring yourself to vote for me at least vote for Ana Rebecca Valencia-Verdin instead of those other two.
Santa Ana City Council, Ward Five – Lisann Martinez. NO WAY I would ever vote for the incumbent, Claudia Alvarez, who has gone out of her way to slander Michele Martinez during recent City Council candidates forum. Basta con Claudia! Vote for Lisann.
State Propositions
Prop. 1 – NO. High Speed Train Bond. I never vote for any bonds. They are a waste of taxpayer money.
Prop. 2 – NO. Treatment of Farm Animals. I feel bad for the animals but this will only increase food costs for the poor. Food costs have already risen drastically in the past two years. No thanks.
Prop. 3 – NO. Children’s Hospital Bond Act. Again, I never vote for bonds – they have to be repaid and we end up wasting millions on interest. Our state is BROKE. We just can’t afford to fund these bonds, no matter how good they might sound.
Prop. 4 – NO. This one has to do with parental notification when a teen gets pregnant and is considering an abortion. Here is the problem. What if your mom is Rosie Avila? You really think you will be able to speak to her about this? Really? I don’t think so. And studies show that 79% of teens already talk to their parents about this in advance. The rest of them can’t – so why force them too? Parents should maintain good relations with their kids – government mandates cannot do that for them.
Prop. 5 – YES. Nonviolent offenders, Sentencing, Parole and Rehabilitation – The State Prison Guard opposes this measure because they have a vested interest in keeping people in jail. But this measure actually will CUT state costs! We will save a billion a year in jail costs and up to 2.5 billion a year in new jail construction costs that we can avoid by voting for this measure. Those savings are achieved by spending money on treatment instead of incarceration. Makes sense to me!
Prop. 6 – NO . The “Safe Neighborhoods Act” — another enticing, hollow title — would stick us with at least a $600-million tab every year, like clockwork, for what are supposed to be anti-gang measures, without raising the money to pay for it (from the L.A. Times). What part of “we’re broke” do folks not understand?
Prop 7 – NO. This green measure sets a new standard for dumb propositions. It is opposed by both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. That should tell you something. “Local publicly owned utilities already have green goals established, and they are working. The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power already has a 20 percent renewable energy target for 2010. It’s in the best interests of every one in California to have cleaner energy. But this proposition won’t get us there.” (From the L.A. Daily News).
Prop. 8 – NO. What a shame that the proponents of this anti-gay measure have forced us to spend so much money fighting it. Really folks, hate is wrong. The real threat to marriage isn’t gays – it is cheap and easy divorce. You want to save the sanctity of marriage? Then ban divorces – but leave our friends in the gay community alone. They don’t deserve to be stripped of their rights.
Prop. 9 – NO. “Proposition 9, “Marsy’s Law,” takes some of the rules from the 1982 Victims’ Bill of Rights and enshrines them as constitutional amendments. Marsy was murdered 25 years ago. She was the sister of Orange County high-tech billionaire Henry T. Nicholas III (now under indictment on conspiracy, fraud and drug charges). He’s bankrolling 9 and Proposition 6, which I’ll get to presently.” (From the L.A. Times). Nicholas supports this measure? No thanks. He is an indicted creep and I will not back anything he is connected too.
Prop. 10 – NO. Another dumb green proposition. This one is designed to make gazillionaire T. Boone Pickens even richer. “The proposition would offer $3.4 billion in rebates to fund the development of renewable energy and help consumers purchase alternative-fuel vehicles, such as those powered by the natural gas Pickens sells.” (From the L.A. Daily News). Naturally Pickens is bankrolling this selfish measure. No thanks.
Prop. 11 – YES. Finally a proposition that will solve our political mess in Sacramento by undoing the gerrymandering of our legislative districts. They will be redistricted by a non-partisan commission. “Advocates say they have more than 1,800 organizations and elected politicians endorsing the measure, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, the California and Los Angeles chambers of commerce, and the California Taxpayers Association.” (From the L.A. Daily News). This one is a no-brainer! Vote Yes and let’s undo the gridlock in Sacramento – and get rid of some awful incumbents in the process.
Prop. 12 – NO. Veteran’s Bond Act. It is a bond act. The State of California is BROKE. Do not add to the fire folks. Vote no on all bond measures. YES. A friend of mine asked me to look at this one again – and I found this nugget in the L.A. Times, “a key selling point is that the bonds are repaid by the veterans through mortgage payments.” So there you go – this might be the ONLY bond ever that we the taxpayers don’t get hosed on. So by all means please do vote for this measure and let’s help our veteran’s buy homes when they complete their service to our country.
Local Ballot Measures
Measure J – YES. Hard to go against this measure, which would allow voters to approve future pension spikes for County employees. I think that this is what we elect Supervisors to do, but we tend to elect idiotic Supervisors from time to time. A gaggle of them voted for pension spikes a few years ago that may yet bankrupt our County in the future. How’s this – don’t vote for machine Republican Supervisors unless they PROMISE to oppose such actions?
The OCSD union needs to be dissolved as a threat to public safety. With just a high school education and few weeks training, a new officer is guaranteed $74k plus benefits. Most OCSD deputies make over $100k the first year and every year there after. Two, 19 year olds, made approximately $300k in just one year in overtime out at “the farm” as prison guards. I just worth $40k a year at the maximum. This Sheriff’s UNION is raping the public, no other word for it!
Most of the OCSD currently make well over $140k a year. The former undersheriff, with just GED, retired at about $200k a year, with full benefits, at the age of 53!
A GED! What other profession, beside a fireman (Can’t call them firefighters) can you retire at 100% of your salary with full benefits at around 50 years old (3% at 50 is outrageous)?
Really, think about that, just a GED and is able to retire at $200K, and full benefits, for the rest of her life. Now, consider – ALL OCSD sheriffs have that “lottery money” sized retirement – and WE are paying for it – get ready again to pay for it – our homeowner taxes are coming due again, in about 2 months.
Are middle class working homeowners stupid to pay these unrealistic taxes in Orange County? A homeowner revolution occurred about 30 years ago – Howard Jarvis understood the problem of being middle class and being overtaxed. Maybe it is time again, for another Howard Jarvis, to save the working class of Orange County.
Yes, I am jealous that I can’t ratite at $200k a year for life with just a GED, but I am also outraged by how ridiculous the situation has become. I am jealous of lottery winners too, but they will not be costing me thousands of my hard earned dollars every year. Also, when I do play the lottery at least I have a chance at the prize.
No wonder all retired OCSD can carry concealed weapons when they retire at barely 50 – they are richer than 95% of the honest hard working people in OC paying for their lottery size retirements.
DON”T use the argument they deserve it because their jobs are dangerous- that is an out and out LIE – look up the statistics on Google. Besides, if that is the rationale, then the men and women, serving our country in this war deserves that money more these “public servants” that are damaging our futures.
Moorlach said in January that the plan could save the county’s cash-strapped retirement fund $187 million. He says the increased pension — a formula that allows for 3 percent of final pay times years of service after the age of 50 — has contributed to the retirement system’s unfunded liability. Moorlach was right – only he did not see the pension funded losing Billions in the stock market collapse. We heave to raise taxes – we promised – so this our version of government bail-out except we will be paying ours in directly to Chriss Street twice a year for the rest of our lives.
The county’s retirement system was more than 100 percent funded in 2001. But based on erroneous assumptions about retirement patterns, the unfunded liability grew by some $200 million by January – well with the stock market in the tank – that figure is grown by Hundreds of Millions, possibly Billions more – we will be saddled with even more taxes that none of us can afford.
If I only knew that a $200,000 education (that I paid for) was worth less than a GED in the OCSD. We have been betrayed and cheated – what do they want – does they want us to lose our homes because we can’s pay these stupidly high taxes. If you say yes – then you either don’t have a home or a family to feed.
Please don’t waste my time telling valuable the police and fire department are – that is just wrong – volunteers can do both jobs easily and actually do in many parts of this country. So skip the special skills and training garbage – those classes are lightweight and most of them are practically worthless.
Well – have fun and keep worrying about how you are going to keep “making ends meet”.
ART, ONCE AGAIN I AM SHOCKED. YOU NOT ONLY HAVE LEFT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, YOU HAVE LEFT YOUR CHURCH’S TEACHINGS. I CAN’T BELIEVE YOU ARE OPPOSED TO THE MORAL ISSUES OF PROPS 4 AND 8 ….EACH OF WHICH I REMEMBER YOU HAVING HAD THE ABSOLUTE OPPOSITE VIEWPOINT JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.
Bonnie,
I go to a Methodist Church and sometimes to a Baptist Church. In both cases the ministers don’t waste time preaching hate.
Ask yourself Bonnie, what would Jesus do? He surely wouldn’t be the judgmental monster that most right-winger Talibani Reeps are…
Yes, I have grown up and changed a lot of my former positions. Having an open mind is a good thing Bonnie, not a bad thing.
Lastly, I just got endorsed by Planned Parenthood…how about that? I also have been endorsed by the Libertarian Party of Orange County. I appreciate all their support!
The main cause of this appalling pension situation is the ability of public employee unions to make campaign donations (bribes) to the elected officials who determine their exhorbidant salaries and bloated pensions.
The bribery works like this. Give me my pay and pension and you will get your campaign bribe. If you do give me my pay and pension we will contribute a bribe to the scum politician who is opposing you for election.
It is as simple as that. The solution is to not allow public employee unions to bribe elected officials.
Thanks for sharing your opinions and your reasoning behind the people and issues of this election, Art.
I’ve printed it out and we’ll be looking at it more closely when we fill out our ballots.
“Lastly, I just got endorsed by Planned Parenthood…how about that?”
I would not be proud of receiving an endorsement from the baby killing factory.
anonymous 8:45 PM,
I totally agree and I would take it a step farther in that all unions should be banned from political donations be it labor, facilites or money. If they wish to form PACs that members can voluntarily join then that would be OK, but taking all member’s money and clout and using it for the advancement of managements goals when some members are in opposition is wrong morally and should be legally.
CO – Public employees should not be able to form PACs which are controlled in any way by public employee unions.
It is a conflict of interest for elected officials to accept campaign contributions from the public employees for whom they determine wages and benefits, including pensions.
Art,
Yours look pretty much like my choices too.
anonymous 10:31 PM,
Agreed, I wasn’t thinking of them when I said it, I was thinking of other unions like AFL-CIO etc. I have friends that are IBEW members and are totally opposed to the use of their mandatory (extorted) dues money or whatever they call it, being used for political uses that they have no control over. I hope that sort of clears that one up. I don’t think public employees should be unionized anyway.
I agree with all your ballot assessments except for yours on proposition 7. I am not inclined to trust any utility company that professes they are doing enough already and that we should not pressure them further. I am distrustful of political parties that tend to support or oppose anything so long as there is money behind it. In the case of any proposition I read the ballot arguments and weigh my decision mostly upon what they say. In this case more clean energy makes sense to me.
Since when are Newspapers energy experts? Your stance on Prop Seven is wholeheartedly misinformed. These utilities will NEVER go renewable unless there is a mandate to do so. The state legislature, who couldn’t even pass a budget, will never pass any serious renewable energy bills! See SB Four Elevent. Edison, who was fined One Hundred and Forty Six mil for falsifying safety data and forging customer satisfaction, Sempra, and PG and E have put together Thirty million to defeat Prop 7 because prop 7 protects the consumer with a three percent cap on how much the utilities can raise our rates. Forty Eight percent of LA county’s energy comes from coal and the coal lobby is the most powerful lobby in the US. Prop 7 is backed by Nobel Laureates in Physics, Chemistry and by David Freeman who RAN the LADWP, SMUD, and cleaned up the LA Port
I agree with you that it is in the best interests of every one in California to have cleaner energy. And this proposition WILL get us there. We can not count on the greedy energy companies to do it alone if they are not being held accountable. Prop. 7 will require that by 2025 50% of all the electricity in the state comes from renewable sources like solar and wind. This is clean energy. Prop. 7 does not raise taxes or issue any bonds and includes a consumer protection clause that ensures your bill will never go up more than 3% by 2025. Prop. 7 will also create 370,000 high wage construction jobs right here in California. Over 40% of global warming pollution comes from electricity generation and by voting Yes on Prop. 7 we can do something real about global warming by requiring the Big Utility Companies to use more clean renewable energy.
Rage on, rage on, against the lying of the right, Labor is rampant, libertAryans on the run. I love the fact based blather-300,00 to 19 yr olds? OC geezers must hate the idea of standing to hail our new chief, Mr. O!
Art, you sick little puppy. You know people very well. What you don’t know
about propositions…could fill the Library in Constantinoble! Prop. #5 is so
REHAB Housing intense…..you wouldn’t believe it. It will fill residential neighborhoods with felony dopers and whackos! If you want to come down to beautiful Newport Beach…we can show you what they want to do other places.
We won’t burden you with the others…and we do agree with Prop. #11…YES.
Really can’t believe you are buying off on Measure “J”…Stands for Big John
Moorlachs…run away from making Supy decisions……How much study do you
want those little old ladies in Santa Ana to do….to decide whether OC Fire personnel should get a raise or not? What are the Supy’s doing again
I think you mean Constantinople…and the library burned long ago and its remains finally sacked by the 4th crusades.
As to Measure J
I don’t care what the reason is, if the sups need the backbone of the peoples vote to stop the pension hemorrhages so be it, sure beats the hell out of nothing!
Ron and Anna,
So they are going to put people in rehab in Newport Beach? That’s great! I am definitely voting YES on Prop. 5!
And I agree with Carl. We need to vote YES on J – our Supes are too dumb, generally, to do the right thing. Let the people decide instead!
I haven’t seen anyone mention this, so I thought this would be the best place. I just sent in my absentee ballot and there was little notice on an insert indicating that due to the number of contests in this election, the envelope required two stamps. It wasn’t printed on the envelope itself.
I thought this was a surprising oversight and wonder how many ballots will be sent without adequate postage????
The opposition’s claims that their self interests are not being met are just selfish. They have no right to impose their moral views on our children. ESPECIALLY without our consent. It’s more than just “love” at stake here. I think it’s important to recognize the human rights of the children involved. France rejected same sex marriage because it trampled the rights that children have to a mother and a father. Their pursuit of self interest at all costs is selfish. Making our children be exposed to same sex marriage ideas corrupts their impressionable minds.
MONTREAL, March 20, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In late January, a 30 member parliamentary commission of the French National Assembly published a 453 page Report on the Family and the rights of Children, which rejected same-sex marriage.
DeSerres, told LifeSiteNews.com “Referring to the rights of children as a human rights issue, the report argued that children ‘now have rights and to systematically give preference to adult aspirations over respect for these rights is not possible any more.’”
In the report, the commission says that “the child represents the future of society.” The commission asks legislators to make sure that “children, confronted with mutations in family models, be fully taken into account and not suffer from situations imposed upon them by adults.” It adds: “The interest of the child must take precedence over adults’ exercise of their freedom (…) including with regards to parents’ lifestyle choices.”
The opposition’s claims that their self interests are not being met are just selfish. They have no right to impose their moral views on our children.
I don’t know about you, but my moral view is that all people are equal and that children can grow up to be whatever they choose. I guess I’ve been wrong all this time then! *gasp*
SMS
#18 Longboobs, I didnt see that about the two stamps. Glad I dropped my mail ballot off at one of the early voting places, that way I knew it would get to the Registrars office. By the way, thanks and praise without limit to the people who volunteer to work polling places and early voting places. I appreciate all of you so much. Thank you , thank you , thank you!
Longboobs, 215,179 mail-in ballots of been returned as of yesterday. So far,it appears, the postage thing has not been an issue.
Rick and Anonyms,
Thanks for your comments. It appears it varies among areas – Vern called the registrar in OC and it didn’t require 2. Here in Sacto I guess there were extra items on the ballot.
Glad it’s not turning out to be an issue! Just wanted to mention it because I thought it was strange …
Art,
I agree with all your original suggestions and I’m proud to be supporting you in your City Council race. I haven’t changed my mind about 12, but I get your point.
Your positions reflect the centrist, independent, common sense that voters are starving for, but don’t get out of the current primary system. I’ve done kind of a spreadsheet, and here’s some scores of how we rate on agreement with newspapers and political parties:
Agreement with Libertarian Party:
Vern 100%
Ron St. John 89%
Art 78%
Ron Winship 14%
Agreement with Orange County Register:
Ron St. John 92%
Art 83%
Vern 82%
Ron Winship 27%
Agreement with Los Angeles Times:
Art 83%
Ron St. John 75%
Vern 64%
Ron Winship 45%
Agreement with California Republican Party:
Art 55%
Vern 50%
Ron St. John 45%
Ron Winship 40%
Agreement with California Democratic Party:
Art 64%
Vern 60%
Ron St. John 54%
Ron Winship 40%
If you don’t pass Ron W.’s Constantinople test, at least you’re in good company, because the newspapers and political parties are contributing to the same library.
Is there a party for those of us who are socially conservative and economically moderately liberal?
Yeah, down the street at the Elks Lodge.
100% Libertarian huh? This is probably from something I wrote a month ago before studying these closely. Right now I’m favoring 2, 5 and 11. I think 2 is new for me. I gotta write up my official post…
Vern,
If you flip-flop on 2 and 11, and go yes on 5, you’ll be at 80% libertarian, 92% with the OC Register, 75% with the LA Times, 36% with the GOP, and 64% with the Dems.
I was always for 11. But those percentages do sound better.
I think I will write posts about 2 and 5.
Let me make a couple corrections. I’ve got Vern in 78% agreement with the Libertarian party, not 80%. I misread my notes and forgot that the LP wimped out and had no position on three of the props.
Plus I forgot Larry as part of our scorecards. Larry gets a perfect 100% agreement with the GOP, 58% agreement with the OC Register, 56% agreement with the Libertarians, 50% agreement with the LA Times, and 17% agreement with the Democrats.
Larry is our only pure Republican. Ron W. is more of a compassionate conservative of the Huckabee/George W. persuasion, and I’m too liberal on social issues. I’ll try to amend my earlier comment.
Larry 100% with his Party. Who woulda thunk it.