Month: September 2002

In the best news the Simon campaign has had since winning the primary, the Judge Overturns Verdict Against Simon’s Firm

A judge today threw out a politically damaging $78 million civil fraud verdict against GOP gubernatorial candidate Bill Simon’s family investment firm, ruling that William E. Simon & Sons and other investors were the fraud victims.

Of course, Davis is paying protestors to say the jury got it right and the judge is a stooge of Gov. Wilson, who appointed him to the Muni Court years ago.

Bill McBride is making toast of Janet Reno in Florida (September 10, 2002 Primary Election).

Cynthia McKinney’s dad, Billy (J-E-W-S) McKinney has officially lost the seat in the Georgia state legislature he’s held for 30 years.

John Sunnunu has kicked Bob Smith’s butt in New Hampshire.

It’s going to be Dole vs. Bowles in the North Carolina Senate race.

Crazy Anthony Williams has won the DC mayor’s primary with a write-in campaign (you reading, Riordan?).

The race to see who opposes the evil Connie Morella hasn’t been decided yet, but she could face a Kennedy. While Morella is a nominal Republican, she needs to lose.

In Wisconsin, conservative black preacher Ron Greer, who was fired from the fire department for speaking out against a lesbian affirmative action appointment, won the right to face off with out lesbian Tammy Baldwin in November.

The most outrageous measure to pass out of the California Legislature this year is Senate Bill 1828 by Burton, a bill that would allow Native Americans to exercise veto power over mining operations or other development within 20 miles of their land. Here’s a story from the LA Times (Tribes Flex Power on Sacred Sites):

SACRAMENTO — A formidable Capitol coalition of local governments, builders and landowners is feeling the power of California’s Native American lobby in a fight over a bill created to safeguard sacred sites.

Senate Bill 1828 would compel government agencies to notify a Native American tribe of any proposed development within 20 miles of its reservation and could require developers to reduce the effects of such a project.

According to business groups and other opponents, if it is signed into law, the reality could be an avalanche of lawsuits and endless development delays. They say economic growth and development in California are at stake.

The key issue is a vague and overly broad definition of “sacred site” which essentially applies to any piece of land. The effect of this is to allow tribes to extort huge fees from developers who don’t want their projects blocked. So all that’s happening here is money using the legislature to make itself richer.

Here’s the definition of “sacred site”:

“Native American sacred site” means a specific area that is identified by a federally recognized Indian tribe, Rancheria or Mission Band of Indians, or by the Native American Heritage Commission, as sacred by virtue of its established historical or cultural significance to, or ceremonial use by, a Native American group, including, but not limited to, any area containing a prayer circle, shrine, petroglyph, or spirit break, or a path or area linking the circle, shrine, petroglyph, or spirit break with another circle, shrine, petroglyph, or spirit break.

In other words, it’s any area a tribe claims is sacred.

The Mercury News ran an interesting story on California’s new child support collection system Sunday, highlighting the kinder, gentler tone:

There’s a new deal for about 15,000 Santa Clara County dads who have lost their driving privileges because they failed to pay child support: Make one month’s payment and drive away with your license.

The county will make that offer in December during a 25-day amnesty for non-custodial parents to get back their licenses, no matter how much child support they owe.

“It’s an olive branch to people who think that all we want to do is put them in jail, when all we really want them to do is pay their child support,” said Peter Dever, who started last month as Santa Clara County’s first child support services director.

The kinder approach comes as Santa Clara County joins the rest of the state in shifting the burden of collecting child support from the district attorney’s office to California’s Department of Child Support Services. The new agency is increasingly changing gears, from hounding “deadbeat” dads to working with “dead-broke” ones.

Even groups of fathers are beginning to voice approval. “The attitude when it was in the DA’s office was, that’s your problem,” said Steve Ashley of the Santa Cruz-based Divorced Father’s Network, which has 800 area members. “Now it’s, let’s see what we can do.”

Bottom line of the story was that dads like the new system, and moms hate it. This is kind of silly, all in all, because it skirts the real issue. Child support is awarded in each state by a unique state-wide formula that’s enshrined in law. California’s formula demands more of middle- and low-income parents (“obligors”) than the formulas of 45 other states. As long as this formula remains in effect, the system that collects money from the parents who spend somewhat less time with their children than their former partners will be fundamentally unjust and ineffective. The management of the new collections department knows the formula is excessive, and the actual needs of children can be met just fine by collecting less than the statutory amount.

This annoys a vocal minority of mothers, those who’ve become used to the state acting as a weapon with which they can cudgel their exes. Tough break, that.

The Chronicle has a story on the Riordan write-in campaign (Riordan write-in candidacy urged / Some think Simon may drop out of race)

But, “the guys who know Simon best say that he’s not the type of personality to get out of the race,” he said.

And Simon would be even less likely to bow out if Riordan was the person to get in. The former mayor encouraged Simon to run for governor — then jumped into the GOP primary himself. When Simon began overhauling Riordan’s fading campaign in the days before the March election, Riordan went on a personal attack, calling Simon a liar and a “sanctimonious hypocrite.”

“Simon is not going to get out of the way for Dick Riordan,” Spillane said. “The party’s conservatives would not let him get out of the way.”

Somebody needs to have a heart-to-heart talk with Simon.

One the prime beneficiaries of the California budget crisis is a museum complex in Riverside (Budget leaves state in deep hole / ‘It was a get-out-alive deal more than solving any problems’):

And Assemblyman Dave Kelly, R-Idyllwild, received permission to continue spending on a swimming pool in San Jacinto and for the Western Center for Archaeology and Paleontology, both in his district.

While the budget deficit is bad for most government-supported institutions, the payoff for Republican support keeps the Western Center in business. Classic.

The latest Field Poll on the California governor’s race shows some interesting and bizarre things. Undecided voters have increased from 16 to 22 percent since July. This number usually decreases as election day approaches and voters get to know the candidates and develop a preference. That’s not happening in this race, where voters get to know the candidates and don’t like either one of them.

Field asked a question that many of us have been wondering about ever since Gray Davis duped Republicans of Principle into nominating Simon over Riordan, to wit:

The Field Poll tested the latent support for the two losing candidates in the GOP primary ? Riordan and California Secretary of State Bill Jones ? in hypothetical scenarios of each being the GOP nominee against Davis instead of Simon.

The results show that if Riordan were the GOP nominee, the former Los Angeles Mayor would be leading Davis by a wide fifteen-point margin ? 49% to 34%.

A large proportion (31%) of Democrats supports Riordan over Davis in the current survey. Riordan also gets huge support (72%) from Republican voters when paired against Davis. Among voters who currently prefer Davis over Simon, nearly one in four (23%) would leave Davis and support Riordan if the latter were on the ballot.

So there you have it, folks — a lackluster campaign by two lackluster candidates, made possible by the Republican Death Wish that nominated Simon.

One way to jazz it up is with a Riordan write-in campaign, another prospect Field surveyed:

The Field Poll attempted to measure the impact that a write-in campaign for either Riordan or Jones would have on the election outcome. The results show that when Riordan is the suggested write-in candidate he gets 24%, while Simon, the official ballot-listed GOP candidate, would get 19%. Davis still leads the field, but his total vote (36%) is seven points less than the combined Republican candidate vote of 43%.

So the margin between Riordan and Davis isn’t all that much, especially if the Green candiate, Peter Camejo, were to siphon off more than the 3% he’s polling today. Camejo has kicked his campaign into high gear with some juicy attacks on Davis:

In a Sacramento Press Club appearance that smacked of his firebrand days as a college activist, Camejo spared little time before targeting Davis.

“How do you get Gray Davis to change 180 degrees in two seconds?” Camejo asked. “Tell him the check bounced.”

If Camejo could get to 10%, and Riordan were to enter the race as a write-in, we’d have some action; if Simon were to drop out, we’d have a new governor. Bill, dude, think it over and do the right thing.

The Chronicle has an interesting little story on low-income and no-income fathers and child support today (Father grows up / From deadbeat dads to role models — program has 100 grads) focusing on a soon-to-be-eliminated Richmond program that’s been successful at collecting child support. One of the model cases is Gerald Slaughter, a dad who earns nearly $35,000 and turns a healthy chunk over to mom each month:

Slaughter now pays nearly $1,000 a month for both children, with the payments taken directly from his paycheck. In addition, he has joint custody of his youngest daughter and helps care for her and her sister part of the week.

Let’s do the math: Slaughter gets no EITC or dependent exemptions, so his take-home pay is around $2500 per month. He has the same child-related expenses as mom, as both children spend significant time with him – one half time, the other nearly half-time. Nonetheless. 40% of his income goes to mom, and not to direct spending on the kids.

Now, class, tell us who’s the deadbeat in this picture?