« Red County/OC Blog News Roundup -- November 22, 2006 | Main | Harry Sidhu To Run In The 33rd Senate District »

November 22, 2006

Comments

Jon Fleischman

I have been told that Anaheim Councilman Harry Sidhu is seriously considering a run in the SD 33 Primary. While he name ID and, I understand, personal money to potentially self-fund a race -- he would have an uphill battle against Walters.

Norby may or may not run, but I was very pleased to see the Supervisors pull Measure N(orby) off of the ballot. I like Chris Norby, and the State Legislature could use more property-rights advocates to be certain. But two-term limits for Supervisors is plenty. In a County like Orange, with so many strong conservatives, it is good to let others serve after a period of time.

I know that I will oppose any efforts to relax our two-term limit.

Allan Bartlett

I would like to see some other candidates jump in the race to spice it up a little bit. I believe a good debate in the GOP primary would be good for the voters. I don't like coronations. Besides Mimi will be made stronger if she has to fight for this seat. It will also give the local blogosphere more fodder to chew on :)

Powder Blue Report

One Who Knows

Jubal:

What a wonderful Thanksgiving present. Your insightful analysis of the SD33 race is evidence of how valuable this blog is and how important it can be. Great Job!

Did Mimi's unremarkable chairmanship of the Prop 90 campaign hurt her in any way? First, the measure itself was poorly written and opposed by virtually everyone who actually took the time to sit down and read it. Secondly, the campaign itself was a disaster. It went from the high 70% favorable to under 50% in record time. She was unable to impress anyone to contribute to its passage and the opposition list was a who's who of newspapers and elected officials throughout the state. This has to hurt Mimi in some way, doesn't it?

That being said, I agree that she would be a wonderful Senator from Orange County but I doubt that she will get a free ride.

union leader

In a very practical way it really doesn't matter which Republican represents the district. Unfortunately the majority of Orange County legislators have been so conservative they have alienated themselves from the rest of the legislature.

The conservative idealology has been so strident that in fact it has left Orange County taxpayers holding the economic bag. One needs to look no farther than the fact that Orange County is a donor County. While conservatives can pound their chests and exercise significant power within the geographic confines of Orange County; outside the OC their influence is very limited and in fact seriuosly detrimental to the taxpayers "donor County" wallets.

Jubal

You're right, Nick: we should become liberal Democrats and elect a liberal Democrat delegation so we too can gorge ourselves on the taxpayers' collective carcass.

union leader

Jubal, the point is that becuase of the ineffective conservative OC delegation the citizens of every other County in the state are gorging themselves on OUR money!!

Jubal

Nick:

Would you have our legislators disregard their political principles and vote against their consciences?

We are a wealthy red county in a state with a very blue legislature. I suppose we could make ourselves less of a donor county if our legislators sold themselves on budget votes, but then they would be in office for very long.

Jubal

Nick:

Would you have our legislators disregard their political principles and vote against their consciences?

We are a wealthy red county in a state with a very blue legislature. That's just the way it is. I suppose we could make ourselves less of a donor county if our legislators sold themselves on budget votes, but then they would be in office for very long.

union leader

Jubal,
You make a strong argument about the blue legislature. No doubt under the best of circumstances it creates a difficult atmosphere for any republican; however more strategic thinking and less idealogy would result in significant dollars for the middle class working guys back home.

OC_Spock

I am sure that the fact that 26 assembly districts touch LA county has nothing to do with it, UL.

But hey, there is nothing to say that the benevolent Dem legislature can't vote a raise just for the hard working, oppressed union members in OC. UL, you make the deal, we will take the $$. Earmark it, send it to your union direct, who cares, just as long as money is taken from those who have and it is given to those you represnt.

Arnie will sign it, so make it happen, prove your power, use the force, whatever. Impress us...

union leader

Spock....

There is no question that the number of LA members has a lot to do with the allocation but many other Counties have far fewer members than Orange County and they are doing much, much better. Our legislative delegation has been marginalized because of its inability to navigate an effective course. It may be tough to accept or admit but OC citizens have lost billions of dollars because our delegation has not been able to cope with the political realities in which they govern.

redperegrine

UL, what are you going on about? OC is relatively well-off compared to other counties. We are supposed to be a donor county. That's how income re-distribution policies and state run education systems work. Your boohooing is completely disingenuous.

Back to the main thread: the 33rd includes most of Fullerton, connected by the narrowest of fillaments to the rest of the district. It was gerrymandered this way so that the current incumbent could retain his historic Sunny Hills stomping grounds. It also includes the residence of Chris Norby who will be termed out in 2010 and could have a mid-term run at it.

OC_Spock

UL, are you saying that vindictive Dem legislators are taking money AWAY from the hard working union members of OC as a way to punish some Rep legislators?

Maybe you can be specific here. What bill did DeVore mess up on in committee that made Nunez take $$ from OC union members? Did Walters not pay homage to someone in the SF delegation, thereby moving $$ from OC to Toulare?

Why would your Dem union brothers use their powers to punish your OWN UNION MEMBERS as a way of getting back at Tom Harmon?

Maybe this is better in your post: "Our legislative delegation has been marginalized because of its inability to navigate an effective course"

What the heck does that mean?????

Alan Bartlett raises an interesting question. How should Mimi Walter's performance be evaluated relative to the vote on Prop. 90, which she championed? Prop. 90 lost by 52% - 48% and one could well conclude that only Mimi's heroic efforts made a contest of it.

The measure won in the majority of counties, but was defeated by the overwhelming "NO" vote in the northern California liberal coastal strongholds. For example, the vote in San Francisco County was 29%-71% as contrasted with a vote of 59%-41% in OC. The measure was, in fact, artfully drafted to make it prospective to avoid the costly blunder experienced in Oregon where past exercises of eminent domain were eligible for compensation. However, the "NO" campaign blatantly misrepresented this key issue.

As political fund raisers are well aware, grassroots fund raising is only really productive where individuals feel imminently threatened. For example, Prop. 13 affected all homeowners and the El Toro airport issue affected many tens of thousand households under the proposed flight paths. But, how many really believed their homes would be taken by the exercise of eminent domain to motivate contributions? Thus, the fund raising was limited to special interest groups and that comprised mainly those who seek to profit from redevelopment and eminent domain. Small wonder the opposition raised $14 million vs. $4 million for the proponents. Finally, the Governor's last minute opposition as well as his stated reasons for the opposition was a major disappointment, but I will leave the speculation on his motives to others.

Submitted by "Barlite"

redperegrine

"The measure was, in fact, artfully drafted to make it prospective to avoid the costly blunder experienced in Oregon where past exercises of eminent domain were eligible for compensation. However, the "NO" campaign blatantly misrepresented this key issue."

"Barlite," the measure was not artfully drafted. The inclusion of the "downzoning +" language left the door open for all the vitriol poured on 90 from people like the Gov, Ackerman, the CRA, Chambers of Commerce, etc. It was only one sentence in the entire proposition, but it was enough. Had 90 simply addressed itself to Kelo-like abuse it would have passed big-time, even in SF.

Redperegrine is probably right that Prop. 90 would have passed if the “downzoning” provisions had not been included. But, without those provisions, Prop. 90 would have accomplished little or nothing. True eminent domain reform (as opposed to a quick “Kilo fix”) MUST include a regulatory takings protection to prevent local governments from down zoning and forcing sale at lower prices. Prop. 90 did not proscribe downzoning; it merely required just compensation for such heavy handed actions. Downzoning without just compensation is simply a mechanism for stealing property. It also would have curbed some of the outlandish abuses of authority engaged in by the Coastal Commission.

Redperegrine cites the CRA (which one?), the Governor, and Chambers of Commerce as attacking the measure because of “downzoning”. Let’s look at the facts here. The CRA (California Republican Assembly) in fact, endorsed Prop. 90; while the CRA (California Redevelopment Agency) of course opposed it as they are interested only in redevelopment. Marty Wilson, a member of the Governor’s staff was paid by the “NO” on 90 side and the Governor’s brother-in-law. Bobby Shriver, is chief advocate for the Coastal Commission. And, Chambers of Commerce were pressured by the League of Cities whose number one mission in the past election was to kill Prop. 90.

One need look only at the signatories of the Ballot arguments to understand that private property rights were again defeated by the California liberal establishment. These included the presidents of the League of Women Voters, the League of California Homeowners; and the Fire Chiefs Association. The sophistication of the Orange County voters and the effectiveness of Mimi Walter’s leadership on private property rights issues is reflected in the 59% - 41% OC vote in favor of the measure.

"Barlite"

union leader

Spock,
No argument that the Dems as well as some state union officals have not done much for OC. The problem is that the OC delegation who have been elected by the citizens for the purpose of accompishing things have not done much for them either. While folks may like to simply dismiss the donor County status; essentially throwing up their hands saying "what do you expect it is a democratic controlled legislature" Orange County citizens are losing billions.....a circumstance that many citizens don't know about. I wonder how many citizens today care about the democrats or the republicans or do they care more about the fact citizens throughout the state are using their money. I bet they care more about their money and in this climate if it meant electing democrats (who are in the majority in the legislature) to get their money back to OC some just might do it. Or do you think that in today's world there is some great party loyalty to either side of the aisle? If you do you better have a stiff drink before you read the analysis regarding this past election.

The comments to this entry are closed.


Categories