Monday. She'll undoubtedly deal with offices and prop's other than
what I've collected and sent you and has a couple of informed guests.
ed
From: David Fertig
To: Ed Pearl
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 10:38 AM
Subject: Re: California Propositions 20 and 27
Ed, re: props 20/27, my chief concern is accountability. I'm leaning
towards voting against the commission, thus no on 20 and yes on 27. Why?
The so-called Citizen Redistricting Commission is appointed by a
three-person panel in turn appointed by the State Auditor. Does anyone know
who that is? Who the panel is? Who the commisioners are? How are they -
any of them - accountable? I grant you elected officals regularly escape
accountability, but at least there is a mechanism (voting) in place for
them, but not for the commission.
http://www.wedrawthelines.ca.gov/
Seeing the orgs that support the commission (fer #20, agin #27), I am
hesitant to conclude it's a bad idea, but it smells, to me. Of course the
real solution is campaign financing reform, I don't see how the commission
is a worthy workaround.
Why should I trust appointed comissioners more than elected officials?
Many voters do, ironically, and I am a fan of NAACP, California Common
Cause, Cal. League of Women Voters, which appear to support the commission
model. Unsurprisingly, the ballot arguments are pretty simplistic on both
sides.
So I looked at the rules and structures of the process, and at bottom, the
commission model to me looks like yet another potential morass of influence
peddling by - and of - obscure, arguably unaccountable, insiders. We
already have an electoral process for accountability, broken as it may be,
we should use it and fix it, not parse it out.
I'm still thinkin' on it, though.
***
----- Original Message -----
From: Marcy Winograd
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 4:43 AM
Subject: Fwd: CORRECTIONS/Additions: Voting for Judges
Dorothy Reik
PDSMM
818-226-6100 work
310-291-1300 mobile
Hello All...
I took a little more time...(so busy right now) to further research 4
candidates...and changed my position on Office 28. I Found more info to
support positions on two other candidates.
Judge of Superior Court Office 28 ..SUPPORT Mark AMELI .(not Hammock).
Both Dems, Both well qualified.
But we must choose. I am a progressive and want the most socially conscious
judges.
NO on Hammock: He is supported by the conservative sites as "leaning right".
His website stresses punishment ."First and foremost, I believe strongly in
Law and Order in our society. Persons convicted of serious crimes should do
serious time. However, even in our efforts to reduce crime and to make our
community safer, we must never fail to recognize that everyone is entitled
to a fair trial and to certain fundamental rights. These rights, though,
must be carefully balanced against the rights of victims, witnesses and even
the jurors who decide these cases."
I question this thinking...that people only want to be heard. I think they
want justice Quote from his website: "."I have learned many important
things about being a judicial officer, including the fact that people simply
want to be heard – they want their "day in court." Attorneys, as well as the
parties themselves, are willing to accept the decisions a judge makes (even
if that decision is adverse to them) if they believe that the judge actually
listened to them and actually understood their position."
Hammock's pro bono work was legal work for the National Coalition of
Motorcyclists.
YES Mark Ameli is rejected by the conservative sites /blogs as "too liberal"
Nothing egregious for my values on his website. . His background is in
mediation and negotiation, especially cross cultural communication. Ameli's
pro bono work is with Prevention of Gang Violence.
Court of Appeal
NO on Paul COFFEE ...Republican Wilson appointee with concerns from
environmental groups.
http://www.law.com/regionals/ca/judges/2district/coffee.htm 11/98 "Coffee's
confirmation to the court of appeal was somewhat controversial, as
confirmations go. Two environmental groups, including the Conejo Group
Sierra Club, complained to the Commission on Judicial Appointments about
Coffee's handling of land use cases as a temporary judge on the Second
District. The chairwoman of the Sierra Club branch called Coffee a "hanging
judge on land use issues" and protested his nomination "in the strongest
terms."
YES Robert MALLANO....
Justice Mallano started out as the Deputy District Attorney in Los Angeles
County. He was appointed to the South Bar Municipal Court by then-Governor
Brown. Mallano was named to the Court of Appeal by then-Gov. Gray Davis in
August 2000
Be Well,
Maureen Cruise
***
From: MartyHitt@aol.com
Subject: additional endorsements
Here is the list of LA Fed of Labor endorsements for lower offices
Los Angeles County Assessor
John Noguez
Superior Court #28
Mark Ameli - also endorsed by the California Federation of Teachers
City of Inglewood – Mayor
Daniel Tabor
City of Santa Monica – City Council
Kevin McKeown*
Pam O'Connor*
Ted Winterer
Terry O'Day (2 year seat)
City of Pomona – City Council
Timothy Saunders
Freddy Rodriguez*
Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District
Laurie Lieberman
Patrick Cady
Oscar De La Torre*
Ralph Mechur*
San Gabriel Valley Water District – Division 5
Raul Romero
Upper San Gabriel Valley Water District – Division 5
Bryan Urias
Water Replenishment District of Southern California – Division 3
Lillian Kawaski*
Water Replenishment District of Southern California – Division 4
No Recommendation
City of Long Beach
NO on Measure GG
City of Santa Monica
YES on Measure Y
YES on Measure YY
YES on Measure RR
City of Carson
YES on Measure H
City of Bellflower
YES on A Measure
Lynwood Unified School District
YES on Measure L
***
From: Marcy Winograd
To: pdla@svpal.org
Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2010 11:32 AM
Subject: [PDLA] Fwd: Foning 4 Feingold, Phighting in Phoenix
From activist John Seeley ...
Here are two important battles you can get involved in to save two
progressive pillars under siege from the Tea Party/Karl Rove/corporate Axis
of Ignorance:
Russ Feingold, Conscience of the Senate, the one no vote on the "PATRIOT"
Act, a battler for real health care reform, a strong opponent of military
adventures in the Paul Wellstone tradition, A Tea Partyish, cut-down-gov't
plastics tycoon wants his seat.What a demoralizing blow losing Feingold
would be.
and .Raul Grijalva, the Co-Chair of the House Progressive Caucus, whose
Phoenix-to-Tucson district is awash in right-wing cash, attacking him
because he stood up strongly against Arizona's racially profiling
anti-immigrant laws.A loss here would be a green light for anti-immigrant
hysteria in the next Congress: Goodbye DREAM Act, Hello, mass deportations.
And the loss of a 100% progressive on the war, health care, etc.
BOTH these races are close and both are set up with virtual phone banks so
you can call their voters from here with a fairly simple system on
VoteBuilder.com All you need is the Internet and a phone.
To get set up, please call the campaigns and they'll give you a quick
orientation session and send you a code and password.
For Feingold, (Jan Goodman & I are already hooked in) call Dan Stein in
Milwaukee at 414-727-5682 or 414-763-3035.
To back Grijalva and beat the xenophobes, call Brissia Perez in AZ ,
520-358-8736
Today's the best day to help,
but it ain't over til it's Tuesday night.
Thanks,
John Seeley, SoCal ADA Election Mobilization Coordinator, 310-435-7696 .
PDLA mailing list
PDLA@svpal.org
http://mailman.svpal.org/mailman/listinfo/pdla
No comments:
Post a Comment