What Do You Mean 'We," Paleface?

I just love it when non-Orange County political operatives pretend to be experts on Orange County politics.

Today's Martin Wisckol piece on the 35th SD special election is a case in point:

"We all know why the hardcore conservative Republicans are behind Harkey," said Allan Hoffenblum, whose Target Book handicaps elections in the state. "It's all about the past, nothing about now."

What do you mean "we", paleface?

Allan is speaking, of course, of the circumstances of Tom Harman's original election to the legislature in 2000, in which he took advantage of the blanket primary rules and a center-left Republicanism (courtesy of $300,000 in union IEs).

Allan's analysis is also uninformed, lazy and conceited. He took the easy quote.

No OC conservative activist that I know of wants Tom Harman in the legislature for eight more years. But the problem is no longer how Harman was elected, but what his legislative/political record as an Assemblyman has been, and the fact that he's still a center-left Republican.

Allan Hoffenblum has it precisely backwards: this is about the future -- the next eight years -- which would undoubtedly resemble the past six years.

Hoffenblum's conventional wisdom-mongering supports the premise of Martin's article: that there isn't any real difference between Tom Harman and Diane Harkey.

That's true from a simplistic legislative score card view point. But such scorecards don't take good account of Harman's environment-uber-alles philosophy: his hostility to property rights as a member of Amigos De Bolsa Chica, and his intellectually dishonest opposition to completion of the Foothill-South toll road.

In this political day and age, when staunch support for property rights has vanished from the Democratic Party and lost ground within the Republican Party, GOPers shouldn't nominate a standard-bearer who's believes environmental interests (as defined by the Environmental Left) trump the traditional functions of American government such as building infrastructure and securing our property rights.

It's also important to consider that Tom Harman hasn't lifted a finger to help Orange County Republicans since 2000. If he was more savvy or politically mature  (or both), he would have let bygones be bygones and spent the last three terms mending fences. If he had done so, then maybe he'd have the endorsement of more than just a single OC Republican legislator. And if he was as conservative as he claims he is, the fence mending would have been very difficult.

Harman's decision to remain an OC political wallflower aside, I think Martin's article is wrong. There are indeed stark distinctions between Tom Harman and Diane Harkey in some vital areas. Some things are more important than other. And the quality of those distinctions -- the principles they turn on -- outweigh that they may not be great in quantity.

Comments

[Alex B-Z]

For more on those 'stark differences' of which Jubal speaks, particularly (even exclusively) the 241 toll road, check out blogs.ocweekly.com/blotter

I'd argue that protecting our environment is another traditional function of American government. And then I'd curl into a fetal position with my hands protecting the back of my neck, in anticipation of responses...

[Bladerunner]

Hey Jubal, pretty sneaky throwing in the property rights bomb at the Democrats in your broadside against Harmon Wiskol and Hoffenblum. Their State Party at least has supported efforts to respond to the Kelo decision by restricting eminent domain from being used to benefit private interests.

[Martin Wisckol]

I appreciate the polite tone of the criticism of this story, but predictably disagree with the criticism itself. My story and the accompanying components made virtually all of the points Harman is attacked for by Jubal -- the Bolsa Chica effort, the toll road, the lack of integration with GOP establishment, etc. From the right side of the political spectrum, some see these things as huge and overriding -- especially when they have become committed supporters of Harkey. Indeed, these are things that differentiate the candidates. But when I take in the range of the political spectrum in this state -- or even just compare their positions to the Democratic candidate's -- I see Harman and Harkey standing not too radically far apart.

[Movie Time]

Coming to your local theatre: Diane Harkey playing herself in DEAD CANDIDATE WALKING.

[Practical Math]

If Tom Harman fills a bit more than two years of John Campbell's Senate term and terms are four years long, it cannot yield "the next eight years"---it's time to repeat practical math.

[Allan Bartlett]

I'm just happy that for once I'm not the Allan that Jubal is cracking back on, LOL.

Powder Blue Report

[Jubal]

Their State Party at least has supported efforts to respond to the Kelo decision by restricting eminent domain from being used to benefit private interests.

You're not talking about the Democrats, are you?

[Jubal]

But when I take in the range of the political spectrum in this state -- or even just compare their positions to the Democratic candidate's -- I see Harman and Harkey standing not too radically far apart.

Ah, but the political spectrum in question is the 35th SD, not the entire state.

[Jubal]

If Tom Harman fills a bit more than two years of John Campbell's Senate term and terms are four years long, it cannot yield "the next eight years"---it's time to repeat practical math.

That's an excellent point -- it would be more like six-and-a-half years. Which is still six-and-a-half years too many.

[Curious]

Electronic reports with Secretary of State show Harkey has contributed $670,000 to her campaign as of 4/7. $100,000 of that is designated as a "loan," the max allowed under Prop. 34. Because political contributions aren't tax deductible, it would take $1 million in cash put on the table in a rich person's tax bracket to get $670,000 in after tax political contributions.

Prevailing wisdom would say that SD 35 is even more liberal on environmental issues than the rest of the state, being a coastal area and all.
And those conservative activists make up what percentage of voters in an open Special Election like this one? Maybe 0.5% to 1% at the most.

[Art Pedroza]

I would venture to say that the differences between Lupe Moreno and Lynn Daucher are far more stark than the differences between Tom Harman and Diane Harkey...and yet the hypocrites in the OC GOP machine still think it is OK to support Daucher while opposing her ideological twin Harman. Doublespeak anyone?

[Jubal]

Art:

Do you really want to go around accusing people of being inconsistent?

[=)]

Tom Harman has been a naughty naughty boy. He defeated Scott Baugh's buddy Jim Righeimer for starters. But the OC Republican Machine was willing to let Harman have a free pass for senate provided he would tell his wife Dianne Harman not to run for assembly. After all, that is supposed to be a coronation for Jim Silva.

But he did not tell Dianne to drop out, so now it's payback time and they will spend over a million dollars to see to it that he is DEFEATED. The grudge is so intense that they care more about Harman LOSING than Harkey winning.

So now that Mike McGill is also going to syphon a lot of votes from Silva and likely win in this three way race, how much will be spent to trash his name and defeat him?

[Bladerunner]

Yes, Jubal, there is a Santa Claus. And the Democratic Party DID pass a resolution that supports efforts to prevent local governments from abusing eminent domain to benefit private interests and uses instead of public uses. That makes them simpatico with McClintock on the issue. Now idf they can just get their legislative leadership in line we might get something done.

[Kelo Sucks]

Back the truck up there partner. The current ED mess has been exacerbated by the Kelo decision from the Supreme Court. Which casual observation tells me has been packed with conservative appointees.

Blaming Dems is revisionist history at best.

[Art Pedroza]

Jubal,

Don't make this about me - but if you need this explained in kindergarten terms, try this:

1. Make a list of the four GOP candidates for the 34th and 35th State Senate Districts.
2. Write down what each candidate stands for.
3. Match each candidate with the candidate that more closely reflects their beliefs and records.

Intersting isn't it? No matter how you slice it, Daucher and Harman end up on the left and Moreno and Harkey end up on the right. So doesn't it make sense to back the candidates on the left or the right, depending on your beliefs?

I don't want to hear about electability. Van Tran was quite electable, but Ackerman ran him off the road. So what, we now reward Ackerman by embracing his pet RINO? I think not...

[garzastrip]

Hello Pedroza, why not. You want Democrats to reward Perata by emracing his pet DINO.

[Art Pedroza]

Garzastrip,

I don't really care what the Dems do. Umberg is a creep, but Correa is not as moderate as you Dems like to think. I prefer Moreno in the 34th.

[Jubal]

Back the truck up there partner. The current ED mess has been exacerbated by the Kelo decision from the Supreme Court. Which casual observation tells me has been packed with conservative appointees.

Blaming Dems is revisionist history at best.

1) SCOTUS is not pack with conservatives. In terms of SCOTUS' composition at the time of the decision, you had three bona fide conservatives (Scalia, Thomas, Rehnquist), two kinda-sorta conservative swing votes (O'Connor, Kennedy), and four liberals (Ginsberg, Souter, Breyer, Steves)

In Kelo, the three conservatives and O'Connor dissented from the majority of the four liberals and Kennedy.

2) I did not blame the Democrats for eminent domain abuse. My point was the the Democratic Party as a whole does not hold property rights in high regard -- and certainly not with the same sacredness they ascribe to environmental preservation. And when those two come into real or perceived conflict, Democrats a more likely to support environemtnal preservation over property rights.

[Jubal]

...but Correa is not as moderate as you Dems like to think.

And yet, you have promised to start Republicans for Correa is he wins and Daucher is the nominee.

[Bladerunner]

Jubal--I suspect Art will be backpeddling on this one given he is running for GOP central committee.

As for eminent domain, property rights and the Democrats, I think the Dems HAVE come around on the property rights issue and as I posted above their State Party endorsed a plan similar to McClintocks. But you're probably right about when property rights come into conflict with environmental protection. Dems tend to go green. To be fair, Republicans don't hold property rights with the same sacredness as business preservation and support and if there is a conflict, business preservation and support usually wins(Just ask Mr. McGill in Cypress). One benefit of Kelo was to raise everyone's consciousness in both party's about the importance of property rights(conceded that more raising needed in the Dems then the Reps).
What's unfortunate about the current state of things on eminent domain was described recently in a column by Dan Weintraub where he described how instread of getting a "pure" eminent domain ballot measure on which would pass 75-25 if not more, certain interests have decided to fund a broader measure that may run roughshod over environmental protections(or at least that is how it will be played) and we run the risk of an expensive, divisive ballot measure when we could have had a simple, easy and substantive win.

[redperegrine]

"To be fair, Republicans don't hold property rights with the same sacredness as business preservation and support"

This statement is accurate if you mean by it that a lot of local elected Republicans confuse the idea of subsidizing developers and corporations through write-downs and land grants as being "pro-business."

On close inspection you generally find that city councils are littered with characters of both political parties that are too intellectually and philosophically bereft or lazy to take a principled stand. Instead they rely on the pronuciamentos of their City Managers and Redevelopment Directors who bamboozle them into sales tax get rich quick schemes, all the while forgetting that these same bureaucrats are the chief beneficiaries of increased General Funds, if any are, in fact, ever realized.

True conservatives know that Redevelopment subsidies of any kind are fundamentally anti-competitive because they give a select minority of businesses unfair advantage over the others in the marketplace. Any system so characterized must, of necessity, also be described as "anti-business."