[Ed. note] The following is a ballot recommendation op-ed submitted by Dennis Smith, an active community member and former columnist, and does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Long Beach Post. You can find differing recommendations from columnist Greggory Moore in this article.
10:30am | Long Beach Post Executive Editor Ryan ZumMallen has asked me to provide my choices for Measures, Propositions and Candidates in Tuesday’s elections. Realizing that my opinions will not cause most people to change their minds, especially party faithful, I offer my opinions to those who are still undecided. For those who know me the choices below are not a big surprise, but perhaps my arguments for why I am making my choices will make some sense to you even if you disagree.
Here goes a rather lengthy post due to the many choices we have in this election:
Measure D: Each level of government loves to see what level of government below them they can raid to pad their own treasury and alleviate their fiscal mismanagement. Hence the City of Long Beach looking to raid the Port of Long Beach by taking from the Port’s gross instead of its net profit. The Port is the most consistent economic engine for employment (besides local government), Prop D hinders that economic engine.
My vote: NO on Measure D
Measure GG: Like most bureaucracies in the State the City of Long Beach’s is bloated. Measure GG would reduce some of the bloat by eliminating the Civil Service Commission and department. It would merge two City Departments and eliminate redundancy and put all personnel issues under the City Manager’s office. Oh, and save $400,000 right off the bat. This will improve efficiency and save money.
My vote: YES on Measure GG
Measure B: I am against the legalization of marijuana in the California, and against the medical marijuana shops in Long Beach and the state operating as they do (I feel they should only be licensed through health departments, hospitals and other similar facilities). But if it is legal the best way to minimize it is to tax the hell out of it—like what happens to legitimate businesses. So if Prop 19 passes then the City of Long Beach should have special pot taxes.
My vote: YES on Measure B
Measure C: I am against preferential treatment based on race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion and shoe size. Measure C if would give bonus points to disabled Veterans on their civil service exams. To qualify the Vet must have at least 10% of his/her disability due to his/her service in the military. In service to our country to defend our liberties and freedoms they have been disabled, yes they deserve some preference in hiring from our City.
My vote: YES on Measure C
The statewide slate is generally a hold-my-nose-and-vote, as it usually is. Because of gerrymandering there is no need to opine on Assembly and Senate races, those are pretty much already decided, especially in L.A. County where Democrats have a 2-1 registration advantage over Republicans. The race of interest will be the special election primary to fill Jenny Oropeza’s seat since even though deceased she will win the election. Who from Long Beach’s Democrats will run to win this seat?
Note: I realize there are many candidates on the ballot who are not Republican or Democrat, I see no chance for any of them to win any seats and a vote for them as a legitimate protest or “No” vote; hence they are not among my choices.
Governor: Attorney General Jerry Brown/Retired eBay Founder Meg Whitman
It is a foregone conclusion that the Democrats will maintain majorities in the Assembly and the Senate. A majority that has passed, with collusion from Governor Schwarzenegger, budget after budget after budget that has raided local treasuries, raided school districts, rewarded public workers and wasted resources. The only hope to control the Legislative Branch is with an Executive who may use the power of the veto. I see little chance of Jerry Brown controlling the liberal legislative agenda of the Legislative majority, from driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants to higher fees (not taxes but ìfeesî) throughout the state that will continue the economic decline of California. Further as Attorney General Jerry Brown has not fulfilled the duties of his office and expanded the scope of power by venturing far into environmental policies and enforcement that have hurt businesses and job growth. Those who know me and followed my prior record on the Long Beach Post know that I am an ardent supporter of gay marriage. But I also support upholding the laws of our state, something the Attorney General is supposed to do. By failing to file an appeal on behalf of the People of California following a judicial decision to strike down Prop 8, Attorney General Jerry Brown chose to enforce laws he agreed with and not laws voted on by the electorate. (As an aside, I feel failing to appeal the decision and let it run through the courts to the Supreme Court has hurt the gay marriage movement.) How can we have as the leader of our state an individual refuses to uphold the law as Attorney General?
While there are many aspects of Meg Whitman with which I am not comfortable and disagree, there are far fewer of these disagreements from her than from Brown. The main reason I am hopeful Whitman wins is that at least with her we have a chance she will use the power of the veto and stop the Legislature from having no checks or balances. Our gerrymandered districts ensure the most liberal Democrats and most conservative Republicans are elected, because of this whichever party has the majority in the Legislature I want someone from the other party in the Governor’s Mansion.
My vote for Governor: Meg Whitman
Lieutenant Governor: San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom/State Senator Abel Maldonado
I hate this choice. On the one hand we have a Mayor who openly allowed federal and state laws to be broken in his city, between his singlehandedly deciding gay marriages could be performed to creating a “sanctuary city” for illegal immigrants to almost non-existent policing of marijuana laws. San Francisco is a beautiful city that is filled with either very, very, very rich or very, very, very poor citizens. It has become the capital of homelessness and panhandling and Newsom’s roll in expanding lawlessness in the city is consequential. As with Brown I have a difficult time putting someone in the number two slot in the state who has shown a history of ignoring the state and federal constitutions.
Abel Maldonado helped pass the greatest tax increase ever with the 2009 budget in Sacramento. Crossing the aisle to be one of the deciding votes that raised taxes, Maldonado did so for personal reasons—to be appointed to fill the Lieutenant Governor’s office by Schwarzenegger and confirmed by the Democratic controlled Senate. He sold out California citizens and businesses.
In this race we have two typical egomaniacs vying for a pretty much useless office in hopes of running for Governor or Senator next cycle as Lieutenant Governor. I go with the one who did not blatantly defy state and federal laws while in an executive leadership position.
My vote for Lt Governor: Abel “Sell Out” Maldonado over Gavin “Lawless” Newsom and then wash my hands.
Secretary of State: Incumbent Debra Bowen/Business Owner Damon Dunn
I have no issues with Bowen, I really am ignorant of how much impact the Secretary of State has on my daily life. In a race that generates very little recognition the Democrat will probably win due to the voter registration advantage. With anti-incumbency fever in the rest of the country I do not think it exists in California as much as elsewhere making Dunn’s chances difficult. Going for the fellow small business owner as that point of view is much needed in government.
My vote for Secretary of State: Damon Dunn
Controller: Incumbent John Chiang/State Senator Tony Strickland
Chiang refused to enact Schwarzenegger’s furloughs and paycuts, a judge had to force Chiang to do his job. Chiang receives almost all his funding from public employee unions, hence his refusal to do his job as Controller and reduce their paychecks.
My vote: Tony Strickland
Treasurer: Incumbent Bill Lockyer/Businesswoman Mimi Walters
Lockyer is a good guy and I’m sure he means well but he has been at the wheel of the Treasury as our state finances collapse into bankruptcy. Are we bankrupt? Well, we owe more than we have and we spend more than we make. Lockyer has sat idly by as a budget is passed on wishful revenues and hopes for federal bailouts. Another official on this ballot who has not fulfilled the duties of his office.
My vote for Treasurer: Mimi Walters
Attorney General: City/County of San Francisco DA Kamala Harris/LA DA Steve Cooley
My hope for this race was that law professor John Eastman would be on the ballot against Harris but name recognition put Cooley through the GOP Primary. In this race we have two candidates who have not completely fulfilled the duties of their office as DA’s and now are looking to be the top cop in California. Given the legislation that will likely be flowing out of Sacramento with a Democrat legislature and likely a Democrat as Governor I want one more opportunity for some semblance of checks and balance. Harris’ almost outright refusal to prosecute death penalty cases and aiding and abetting Newsome’s sanctuary city and non-enforcement of federal and state drug laws puts her at a disadvantage.
My vote for Attorney General: Steve Cooley
Prop 19: This is a fairly typical state proposition in which the emotional component outweighs the real life consequences. See propositions that have funded billions and billions in bonds that cut hundreds of millions out of the state budget for trains, embryonic research, delta reconstruction, and other projects that have done nothing but cost precious resources. Prop 19 proponents like to talk about all the tax money our state will get from legalizing pot. They ignore the tremendous costs Prop 19 will cost in enforcing the legal cultivation, distribution, sale and use of pot. If enacted U.S. Attorney General Holder is on record that the federal government will enforce U.S. drug laws in California, that means it is illegal. How much will that cost the state? I fail to see the benefits of Prop 19.
My vote: NO on Prop 19
Prop 20: This proposition takes away the drawing of Congressional Districts from the Legislature and puts it into the hands of the citizens of California, it emulates a similar proposition passed for the redistricting of Assembly and State Senate districts. Prop 20 eliminates the gerrymandering of Congressional districts into safe seats that eliminate political competition.
My vote: YES on Prop 20
Prop 21: Another tax under the name of a ìfeeî to bailout the Legislature for its fiscal policies. Combine the tax, er “fee,” with the feel good voting for funding state parks and wildlife programs and chances are the majority of California voters will not think about any consequences. I see the immediate consequence to be similar to what happened to the lottery money for schools. Whatever funds the lottery brings in the legislature can off-set with reductions in prior funding; same with the parks car tax. Instead of budgeting for our parks and wildlife the legislature can redirect funds for expanding the government, or not having to do the hard work that is necessary to reduce the budget and state payrolls. And don’t think once enacted the legislature in the future won’t raid the fund to pay for something else. Prop 21 is a cop out for legislators who don’t want to do their job and pass responsible and balanced budgets.
My vote: NO on Prop 21
Prop 22: The State has balanced the budget the past several years in part by raiding the treasuries of county and local governments and redevelopment agencies. Prop 22 would prohibit such raids. Because Sacramento has zero fiscal responsibility and continues to pass budget after budget after budget that puts each succeeding year further into debt and deficit the State has stolen funds, I’m sorry ìborrowedî or ìrequisitioned,î from local budgets creating deficits at the local level. Prop 22 stops this practice and makes the legislature do their jobs and pass responsible and balanced budgets.
My vote: YES on Prop 22
Prop 23: Opponents of Prop 23 have a single focal point for voting no: Texas oil companies. They ignore the million jobs that will be lost if Prop 23 is defeated. Prop 23 suspends AB32 that requires drastic, and deleterious, reductions in carbon emissions by businesses in the state. AB32 is guaranteed to close thousands of businesses in the state, create black markets for many industries, and see unemployment in California rise dramatically. Ignorant of the bogus science perpetuated worldwide as evidenced in the Climategate e-mails exposed last year, California Democrats and Schwarzenegger passed AB32 as a ìsolutionî to global warming. Claiming the ìgreen jobsî that will be created, they ignore the perhaps 100-1 loss of jobs to those created as a result of AB32. Are Texas oil companies for Prop 23? You bet, so are California dry cleaners, and heating and air conditioning repair companies, and courier service companies, and virtually any business that needs a car, truck, stove or needs any energy to run its office or facility. Haven’t we lost enough jobs in California with over-reaching regulations and fees and taxes from Sacramento?
My vote: YES YES! On Prop 23
Prop 24: Pandering to the rampant anti-business mentality on the state, Prop 24 would repeal legislation recently passed that allows California businesses to reduce the tax liability. Another job killer from the folks in Sacramento, first to pass the legislation to reduce the taxes and then they put the proposition on the ballot to take it away thereby undoing their agreement that allowed the budget to pass.
My Vote: NO on Prop 24
Prop 25: The sales job on Prop 25 is that legislatures would not get paid until a budget is passed, oh and it eliminates the two-thirds majority required to pass the budget. Essentially this Proposition gives a blank check to the Democratic controlled legislature to pass whatever budgets they want—if this Proposition passes and Brown is elected look out. The two-thirds majority contains an overzealous legislature that is comprised of ideological extremists due to gerrymandered districts. Passage of Prop 25 is very dangerous for the fiscal future of our state. Even with the two-thirds requirement they have bankrupted our state, what happens when there is no need for any compromise?
My vote: NO on Prop 25
Prop 26: This is an important Proposition to stop the legislature from nickel and diming, or I should say hundred and thousanding, us with fee and tax increases. Currently the legislature needs only a majority to pass a fee hike, many of the ìfeesî passed are actually taxes. Prop 26 requires a two thirds majority to pass many fee hikes that are routinely passed so cuts don’t have to be made.
My vote: YES on Prop 26
Prop 27: Scared of losing their seats, the legislature puts Prop 27 on the ballot to eliminate the State Commission on Redistricting that was established by the voters of California to eliminate gerrymandered districts and make politicians compete in their elections. Prop 27 would return the districting to the legislature and guarantee the extremist, uncompetitive and same old politicians we have today. Stop the power grab and do not allow redistricting to return the Sacramento.
My vote: NO on Prop 27
U.S. Senator: Incumbent Barbara Boxer/Business Executive Carly Fiorina
Boxer is the most liberal Senator in Washington. She personifies the elitist ruling class mentality inside the Washington Beltway, as perfectly exemplified by her arrogant “don’t call me ma’am, call me Senator” comment to a general in the military. She has done nothing legislatively in her career as a Senator. She voted for the “stimulus” bill that added almost $1 trillion that has gone almost exclusively to public entities and employment, she voted for Obamacare that will do more harm to her state than any other by pushing over 3 million Californians into the financially insolvent Medicaid system. When the enrollees begin hitting the Medicaid rolls watch the impact on the state budget and further cuts to schools, universities, and infrastructure.
Fiorina saved Hewlett Packard from going out of business. Recognizing the measures that needed to take place to save the company and allow it to grow she cut jobs, reorganized entire units, merged with Compaq and put HP in a place to be a global force in the IT industry. Fiorina recognized her obligation was to the entire company and its stockholders to turn the company around. She has the same recognition for her duties as U.S. Senator and the work that needs to occur to stop the growth in employment for federal jobs and instead create and enact legislation for growth in private sector jobs, in California especially. I had the opportunity to participate in a round table with Fiorina several months ago and her knowledge of the needs and workings of small businesses in several industries was impressive. Her grasp of business operations is sorely lacking in the U.S. Senate. As for her opponent, Boxer is completely ignorant of how American businesses, small and large, operate.
My vote for U.S. Senator: Carly Fiorina, let’s call Boxer ìMa’amî again.
37th Congressional District: Incumbent Laura Richardson/Speaker-Author-Non-Profit Founder Star Parker
Richardson joins Boxer in the elitist ruling class mentality. She feels she is above paying her mortgages and bills, when rightfully called before the Ethics Committee she labeled it a race based investigation, she requisitions helicopters for tens of thousands of dollars to let her staff see the ports, and relies on public employee PACs for political donations. Richardson takes no responsibility for her actions and so far the voters in my district have not held her accountable. As for her legislative record, Richardson now touts pork she has brought to the district in front of her run for re-election, but refuses to run a campaign on her votes in Congress that have helped put our federal debt to $13.5 trillion and current deficit to over $1.3 trillion for the second year in a row. Rather than vote to extend tax cuts for any or all Americans, Richardson voted to adjourn the House until after the elections. Thanks to this vote, everyone can expect their take home pay to be considerably smaller starting January 1st, everyone – even those making minimum wage.
Star Parker admits to her failures in her past, admits to being on welfare and uses her personal experience to teach and train others on personal responsibility and accountability. We cannot find a greater opposite in terms of character to Richardson than we can from Parker. Eschewing government dependency and entitlement mentality, Parker has become a national figure promoting self-reliance as the primary resource for success. In a district that is 60% Democrat in registration Parker faces an extremely uphill battle against Richardson but has raised more money, with most of it coming from personal donations. She has a slim chance in this year of the anti-incumbent combined with a candidate known for using her gender and race as political tools—tools effectively neutralized by Parker.
If you want to be selfish for the District and California then Parker is the smart vote. Why? Because Richardson will be in the minority when the 112th Congress convenes in January. She will lose any positions of power on any committees she is on since the Democrats will lose significant numbers of seats across the country, perhaps as many as 60 to 65. Richardson will have zero juice in the next Congress as her party will be drastically outnumbered. Parker, on the other hand, will be a national figure. As a black Republican Congresswoman, Parker will be very unique, I believe historic. Already an accomplished public speaker and nationally known due to her contributions to talk shows, as a member of Congress she will be given choice assignments and positions that our district and state can benefit from. Re-electing Richardson relegates the 37th to the back bench of Congress, electing Parker puts the 37th front and center.
My vote for U.S. Congress: Star Parker.
Realizing I will probably end up on the losing side of many of these votes, if I had to pick my top three to win they would be the GOP Women: Carly Fiorina, Star Parker and Meg Whitman. Boxer and Richardson personify what is wrong with Congress and I don’t trust Jerry Brown to put an checks and balances on the Legislature.
Love ‘em or hate ‘em those are my choices on Tuesday, thanks Ryan for asking.