Paying for Elections
The LA Times reported yesterday that "Frustrated by the influence of special-interest money in Los Angeles elections, city Ethics Commission members called Tuesday for full government funding of local political campaigns and pledged to put a measure before voters, if the plan is not adopted by the City Council."Eric Garcetti weighs in on his blog here.
Remember, Rome wasn't built in a day...
Posted by Anonymous @ 10/13/2005 07:05:00 AM
17 Comments:
Too many interest groups donating in IE
Corrupt system
Florida Scandal
Hillard Scandal
Too many too mention
Regardless of IE's, nothing is needed more in the City of Los Angeles than clean money. This is a non partisan issue that the entire city should participate in. I hope all the stakeholders and activists do.
There is no way to control Independent Expenditures.
The Constitution of the United States, something that is rarely recognized by the Los Angeles City Council, controls the right to free expression.
There is only one way to do away with the "influence" of contributions to campaigns; require full and immediate disclosure of any and all contributions on the Internet.
In that way, there is no need to set artifical limits, all of which can easily be circumvented by those sophisticated in the ways of political campaigns.
The only folks caught in the net of the "Ethics" laws are the unwary, unsophisticated amateurs, like Pierce O'Donnell, a top attorney, but one relatively new to the political arena.
So, the only way that the public can be protected is to have 24 or 48 hour requirements for posting all donations, Independent or to a campaign, so that the public, the media and the Internet Bloggers can let us all know about undue influence at work.
I absolutely agree 100%; in fact I would like to see this measure expand to the entire state.
Spending limits for my race are around $1.4 Million, for a job that will pay me just over $200,000.00 for the entire term. Something is clearly wrong there. Every speech I give lately mentions money and its corrupting influence on the political process.
While every candidate hates raising money, once they are incumbents they lose their will to change the system because the deck is now stacked in their favor.
I would love to go on, but I have a fundraiser to get to in an hour.
See my point?
Has anyone noticed that the Mayor Villaraigosa is getting a lot of awards and going to banquets and benefits.
One example came on Sept. 29th of this year when he recieved the Tom Bradley award.
Can anyone say: "Fundraiser for Governor"
He's just WAITING to be "begged" by the party... keep watching, keep alert. He ONLY breaks promises when someone says "PLEASE, break your promise!"
It can be anyone that asks... no big deal.
Arnold kicked off his initiative for the November 2006 election. The initiative is to strengthen the laws and punishment against sex offenders. This initiative will be voted on at the same time he runs for a second term. I guess he thinks he's running against Tony the Liar because hewas the only member of the Assembly to vote against increasing penalties for child molesters, remember those two 79 to 1 votes? Arnold does.
Other problem here -- no way (Constitutionally) to stop a Riordan-type from coming in and bankrolling his or her own race.
David Binder Poll.....
Los Angeles COunty Federation
Sample Size - 595 likely voters
4% margin of error
10/4 - 10/6
Los Angeles Wrong Direction - Right direction
22% wrong
58% right
18% don't know
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa Job approval rating...
Good - 58%
Fair - 24%
Approval - 82%
Disaprove - 7%
No Opinion - 11%
If the election were held today who would vote for.... (rotate names)
Nick Pacheco - 39%
Jose Huizar - 41%
Ruby De Vera - 3%
Brian Heckman - 3%
Jaun Jimenez - 5%
Paul Gonzalez - 6%
Other candidate - 2%
Nick Pacheco Approval rating
Approve - 51%
Unapprove - 38%
No opinion - 10%
Jose Huizar approval rating
Approve 63%
Unapprove 22%
No Opinion 14%
There were more questions, but i think this is the data most of you guys crave.
October 13, 2005 4:52 PM
Anonymous said...
For a copy of the poll you can call the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor
Phone: 213-381-5611
Fax: 213-383-0772
It's a private poll so there are under no obligation to share it with the media or public.
But because it has their candidate in a favorable spot, i suspect they will share it with those relevant people.
Reply to Alger:
Blah blah blah. Same old claptrap from yet another "outsider" who wants to clean up Sacramento. So predictable. His Democratic party drove this state into a ditch. I wonder what his position on driver's licenses for illegal immigrants?
Jose is 15-18 pts behind Nick. The Union poll is fake. David said, "Union member 573, choose Huizar or no overtime! Ok who's next..?"
Jose is 15-18 pts behind Nick. The Union poll is fake. David said, "Union member 573, choose Huizar or no overtime! Ok who's next..?"
Tofu Girl - you wish you knew something about polls and campaigns. You should sit in the back of the class and pay attention to the professionals who know what they're really talkin' about.
Awesome post Tofu Girl. That 8:19 anon poster is an idiot.
No way Huizar is up on the polls, he is far behind.
I JUST WANT TO SAY TO ALL YOU CD14 PEOPLE THAT PLAN TO VOTE IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS THAT PACHECO IS A GOOD PERSON AND WAS AN EXCELLENT COUNCILMEMBER. I WORK FOR THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES AND HAVE EXPOSURE TO A LOT OF POLITICAL DECISIONS AND PRESSURES. I AM AMAZED ON HOW PRO HUIZAR PEOPLE ATTEMPT TO MAKE PACHECO LOOK INCOMPETENT. THE BEST THING TO DO IS LOOK AT HIS RECORD AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS. HE HAD A LOT OF PROJECTS THAT WERE COMLETED AND EVEN DELAYED DUE TO THE FACT THAT HE WAS NO LONGER COUNCILMEMBER BECAUSE HE GOT BEAT BY SOMEONE WHO HAD BETTER CAMPAIGN STRATEGY. I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHAT TYPE OF JOB ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA DID AS COUNCILMMEMBER BUT TWO YEARS IS NOT ENOUGH TIME TO GET ANYTHING ACCOMPLISHED WITH THE CITY'S BEAURACRACY, EVEN FOR COUNCILMEMBERS AND MAYOR. THOSE OF YOU IN CD14 WHO CONTINUE TO BASH PACHECO ARE TRYING TO CONVINCE OTHERS THAT HE'S A BAD AND DECEPTIVE PERSON AND NOT SUITABLE FOR COUNCILMEMBER. HIS RECORD SPEAKS FOR ITSELF AND IF YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW, DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. SPIN ALL YOU WANT ANTI-PACHECO FOLKS BUT THOSE WHO ARE AWARE OF HIS DEDICATION KNOW THE TRUTH. I HOPE HE DOES WIN THIS ELECTION BECAUSE HE WAS A GOOD COUNCILMEMBER WHO APPARENTLY DID NOT HAVE THE RIGHT CAMPAIGN MANAGER TO WIN RE-ELECTION. IT'S ALL IN HOW YOU PLAY THE GAME AND APPARENTLY ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA PLAYED THE GAME BETTER AND WON. NOW HOPEFULLY PACHECO LEARNED FROM THIS EXPERIENCE AND WILL LET HIS REPUTATION AS A CITY COUNCILMEMBER SPEAK FOR ITSELF. THANK YOU
To Anon 3:36 -
God, I am so sick of Riordan types in City Hall. Half of his staff is there now; it's awful. It surely makes AV supporters start to wish maybe Hahn shoulda stayed there.
But as for clean money, if Riordanites came in and funded their own campaign - the whole city would know it. It might work for the first year or two, but after a couple years of clean money and the average voter would see right through that. Usually. In most cases. Okay-the average voter is not that educated about who pays for commercials or lit, nor do they know what an IE is. But soon enough, they would catch on. So we wait.
Clean money would eventually lock out those Riordan, Broad, Perenchio types and normal, average citizens will run. Those ones of course, who know what an IE is and how campaign funding works.
Watch and see how the above named types fight clean money.
4:57
That is a bogus poll. Of course the County Federation... of Labor (the piece that is missing) loves Villaraigosa, they have his butt-buddy heading them in Martin Ludlow and Huizar is in bed with them so within the rank and file those numbers are true but not to CD14 voters.
And tofugirl, Right on with your posts!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home