Posts
1St Grade Reading
Posted Dec 01, 2011 8:44pm
by Unknown user
Comments (0)
Rick Jacobs's Blog
Issues that relate to progressives in California.
(Closing speech I delivered at Camp Courage Sacramento at 4:45PM today. Camp Courage Sacramento burst forth with warmth, embrace and power. What great folks!)
This past Monday morning, I found an envelope in my front yard. It was addressed to “Courage Campaign.”
A year ago, in the wake of Prop. 8, I was afraid to open some of those envelopes, not sure if they’d contain hate mail or something worse.
People on the other side were unhappy that we had called them to account for their lies during the campaign.
But this note was very different. Let me read it to you:
“Courage Campaign,
I just turned 3 and I told my friends that I didn’t want any presents. Instead, I asked them to make a contribution to you. My Dad tells me that you give a voice to those people that don’t have one and what you do changes the world. I hope that more of my friends contributed on line. Love, Libby.” Read More »
This past Monday morning, I found an envelope in my front yard. It was addressed to “Courage Campaign.”
A year ago, in the wake of Prop. 8, I was afraid to open some of those envelopes, not sure if they’d contain hate mail or something worse.
People on the other side were unhappy that we had called them to account for their lies during the campaign.
But this note was very different. Let me read it to you:
“Courage Campaign,
I just turned 3 and I told my friends that I didn’t want any presents. Instead, I asked them to make a contribution to you. My Dad tells me that you give a voice to those people that don’t have one and what you do changes the world. I hope that more of my friends contributed on line. Love, Libby.” Read More »
As I write this, we are beginning to hear results from Maine’s version of Prop. 8 and will soon enough hear about right wing attempts to quash freedom in Kalamazoo, Michigan and Washington state. How well we all remember election night here in California last year, that flash of impossible joy and elation at the election of Barack Obama juxtaposed with the horror of the loss of equal rights. How could both be true? How could we elect Barack Obama and simultaneously watch our fellow Californians vote away our rights?
A year later, regardless of the outcome of these elections tonight, the progressive movement is much broader, more determined and smarter. We know what must be done to change the way people think. We know that multiple tactics, ranging from court fights to ballot box battles to marches to push for federal legislation all must happen simultaneously. We also know that those who invest in repression, in damaging families and in singling out LGBT people (or other minorities) for discrimination must be called on their actions and their investments. Read More »
A year later, regardless of the outcome of these elections tonight, the progressive movement is much broader, more determined and smarter. We know what must be done to change the way people think. We know that multiple tactics, ranging from court fights to ballot box battles to marches to push for federal legislation all must happen simultaneously. We also know that those who invest in repression, in damaging families and in singling out LGBT people (or other minorities) for discrimination must be called on their actions and their investments. Read More »
I'm at a beautiful retreat house on a hilltop in the mountains north of San Luis Obispo as thirty volunteers led by Courage's brilliant field team learn the skills to be community organizers. The spirit and energy in the room outshine the magnificent California countryside. Read More »
On the heels of the national equality march and the momentous changes in our movement so evident from this weekend in Washington, DC, we want to share with you an update on our work around marriage equality in California. Read More »
I'm in the Danceboutique at 2009 8th Street, NW in Washington, DC. Yes, the bar is open even though it's only 2:30 in the afternoon. But no one is drinking. No one is dancing. There's no music, no thump of house music banging away. In fact, you can hear a pin drop, and even my the noise from my typing. It's Camp Courage DC. Read More »
From: Rick Jacobs, Chair, Courage Campaign and the staff of the Courage Campaign
To: Our friends, allies and partners in the marriage equality movement
Subject: 2010: It's time to make a decision
I write to you today with urgency and seriousness. After months of discussion and debate, the time has come to make the tough decision.
In May, 83% of Courage Campaign members said that our organization should work with our partners to place a marriage equality initiative on the ballot in 2010. If the Courage Campaign and our allies in the movement want to initiate the repeal of Prop 8 in 2010, we must make that decision very soon.
Frankly, too much attention has been placed on the political consequences of running an election in 2010 or 2012. The bottom line is that we must begin now to convince the people of California that civil marriage rights should be made available to all people, period. None of us should have to wait one more day to achieve equality at any level.
And while I say that, I also don’t want to lose this critical battle. Going to the ballot in 2010 is a decision that obviously comes with potential consequences.
Our members told us to help build the movement, so over the last several months, the Courage Campaign has mobilized 44 grassroots Equality Teams in 23 counties across California. And we’ve held five Camp Courage trainings in communities from the coast to the Central Valley to train people to be successful organizers. Last weekend alone, 279 activists gathered in East L.A. at the most diverse Camp Courage yet, with tremendous support from the Latino and Asian Pacific Islander communities.
We've also been working with some of the smartest, most experienced campaign professionals in America -- people who ran Barack Obama’s campaign, who know California and who can help our movement chart a course to victory. They've given us tough love, great advice and helped us outline the steps necessary to a successful outcome. This team isn't telling us when to initiate the repeal of Prop 8, but they are telling us we need to start now with a persuasion campaign designed to win the hearts and minds of California voters -- no matter which election year we wage the battle.
The Courage Campaign will support a repeal of Prop 8 in 2010 if our members -- together with other major stakeholders involved in this movement -- make a strong commitment to this campaign.
I want to be clear that no one organization can dominate what will need to be an independent, but accountable campaign operation. The Courage Campaign will aggressively support the effort, not run it. A small governing structure should oversee the day-to-day operations -- giving an experienced campaign manager the latitude necessary to make smart, strategic and timely decisions. If a campaign for 2010 materializes, the governing structure should include those who did not necessarily support going to the ballot in 2010, but are necessary and fundamental partners to any campaign to win back marriage equality.
To win, we will need to run a smarter, stronger and more disciplined campaign. The first step in running a winning campaign is to ensure we use the most effective initiative language that a majority of California voters will support. This takes research – expert polling and focus group work that will help us gain the best understanding of the California electorate. And we must begin that research immediately.
Along with our allies, we need to raise $200,000 to conduct this research -- and we don't have much time to raise it. If the Courage Campaign can raise $100,000 and our partners and allies in the movement can raise another $100,000 -- for a total of $200,000 -- we can put the research effort in place and meet the late September deadline recommended by the Secretary of State for filing an initiative for 2010.
We are prepared to ask our members to raise $100,000 to meet our commitment to this goal. We are willing to ask the Courage Campaign community to make this commitment because they expressed their support for going to the ballot in 2010 by such an overwhelming margin.
If we can make this community fundraising goal, we can move forward. If we can't make this community fundraising goal, then we will have to accept that the movement is not ready to produce the funding and resources necessary to support a campaign to repeal Prop 8 in 2010. And we will have to wait until 2012 to bring marriage equality to the ballot again.
Our people-powered organization is ready to win, but we are faced with the reality of these deadlines. If we want to convince a majority of our fellow Californians to support full civil marriage rights in 2010, the marriage equality movement has to stand up and commit to the cause now.
Together.
To: Our friends, allies and partners in the marriage equality movement
Subject: 2010: It's time to make a decision
I write to you today with urgency and seriousness. After months of discussion and debate, the time has come to make the tough decision.
In May, 83% of Courage Campaign members said that our organization should work with our partners to place a marriage equality initiative on the ballot in 2010. If the Courage Campaign and our allies in the movement want to initiate the repeal of Prop 8 in 2010, we must make that decision very soon.
Frankly, too much attention has been placed on the political consequences of running an election in 2010 or 2012. The bottom line is that we must begin now to convince the people of California that civil marriage rights should be made available to all people, period. None of us should have to wait one more day to achieve equality at any level.
And while I say that, I also don’t want to lose this critical battle. Going to the ballot in 2010 is a decision that obviously comes with potential consequences.
Our members told us to help build the movement, so over the last several months, the Courage Campaign has mobilized 44 grassroots Equality Teams in 23 counties across California. And we’ve held five Camp Courage trainings in communities from the coast to the Central Valley to train people to be successful organizers. Last weekend alone, 279 activists gathered in East L.A. at the most diverse Camp Courage yet, with tremendous support from the Latino and Asian Pacific Islander communities.
We've also been working with some of the smartest, most experienced campaign professionals in America -- people who ran Barack Obama’s campaign, who know California and who can help our movement chart a course to victory. They've given us tough love, great advice and helped us outline the steps necessary to a successful outcome. This team isn't telling us when to initiate the repeal of Prop 8, but they are telling us we need to start now with a persuasion campaign designed to win the hearts and minds of California voters -- no matter which election year we wage the battle.
The Courage Campaign will support a repeal of Prop 8 in 2010 if our members -- together with other major stakeholders involved in this movement -- make a strong commitment to this campaign.
I want to be clear that no one organization can dominate what will need to be an independent, but accountable campaign operation. The Courage Campaign will aggressively support the effort, not run it. A small governing structure should oversee the day-to-day operations -- giving an experienced campaign manager the latitude necessary to make smart, strategic and timely decisions. If a campaign for 2010 materializes, the governing structure should include those who did not necessarily support going to the ballot in 2010, but are necessary and fundamental partners to any campaign to win back marriage equality.
To win, we will need to run a smarter, stronger and more disciplined campaign. The first step in running a winning campaign is to ensure we use the most effective initiative language that a majority of California voters will support. This takes research – expert polling and focus group work that will help us gain the best understanding of the California electorate. And we must begin that research immediately.
Along with our allies, we need to raise $200,000 to conduct this research -- and we don't have much time to raise it. If the Courage Campaign can raise $100,000 and our partners and allies in the movement can raise another $100,000 -- for a total of $200,000 -- we can put the research effort in place and meet the late September deadline recommended by the Secretary of State for filing an initiative for 2010.
We are prepared to ask our members to raise $100,000 to meet our commitment to this goal. We are willing to ask the Courage Campaign community to make this commitment because they expressed their support for going to the ballot in 2010 by such an overwhelming margin.
If we can make this community fundraising goal, we can move forward. If we can't make this community fundraising goal, then we will have to accept that the movement is not ready to produce the funding and resources necessary to support a campaign to repeal Prop 8 in 2010. And we will have to wait until 2012 to bring marriage equality to the ballot again.
Our people-powered organization is ready to win, but we are faced with the reality of these deadlines. If we want to convince a majority of our fellow Californians to support full civil marriage rights in 2010, the marriage equality movement has to stand up and commit to the cause now.
Together.
Camp Courage Day Two. It's Sunday at about 1030 and the room here at the Gloria Molina Community Center is electric. After the Courage Lounge hosted by Javier Angulo and his colleagues at HonorPAC last night, I joined my partner Shaun for dinner with an out of town friend. At 11:30 or so, Lt. Choi arrived at our house, which is sort of his house now, too. Read More »
I'm sitting in the Gloria Molina Community Center in East LA with 250+ Camp Courage campers. Sixty two people here are monolingual Spanish speakers. We're brown and black and white and Asian and gay and straight and lesbian and bisexual and transgendered. Forty or so people here self-identified as knowing no one else in the room. They just showed up to learn, to experience, to experiment. Read More »
I wrote earlier this week that the 3 million "Decline-to-State" (DTS) voters -- as independents are called here in California -- can change the outcome of the presidential primary here on Tuesday, just as they have in other states. But, as Jennifer Steinhauer reported in the New York Times, it's difficult for these DTS voters to actually vote for president.
Here's the deal: If you are a DTS voter -- and you want to vote for President -- you need to ask for a "Democratic Party ballot" from your poll worker. If you don't, you will be handed a DTS ballot that has a blank where the names of the presidential candidates would otherwise appear. Only the Democrats allow DTS voters to vote in the presidential primary; the Republicans cling to their idea of exclusivity, allowing only registered Republicans to vote. Read More »
Here's the deal: If you are a DTS voter -- and you want to vote for President -- you need to ask for a "Democratic Party ballot" from your poll worker. If you don't, you will be handed a DTS ballot that has a blank where the names of the presidential candidates would otherwise appear. Only the Democrats allow DTS voters to vote in the presidential primary; the Republicans cling to their idea of exclusivity, allowing only registered Republicans to vote. Read More »
Cross-posted from Huffington Post.
Last year at this time, CNN ran a piece about the Courage Campaign's petition drive to move the California presidential primary forward from June to February 5th. Many doubted that our premise would be born out, namely that by having California competitive in the presidential primary, we might actually have a say in policy formulation and make long term political alliances that would benefit the state, not just export money to finance campaigns in other states.
Put simply, we were right. After the tumult of Iowa and New Hampshire and Michigan, followed Saturday by a first-ever caucus in Nevada and then an election in South Carolina, California has become a key "battleground" state for all of the leading candidates. While no one, least of all the pollsters, has a clue what will happen, the people of California have already won.
I remember four years ago, when as the Chair of the Dean Campaign in California, we could but sit and watch as Iowa and New Hampshire and then Arizona and New Mexico, decided that John Kerry would be the nominee. Not this year. Read More »
Last year at this time, CNN ran a piece about the Courage Campaign's petition drive to move the California presidential primary forward from June to February 5th. Many doubted that our premise would be born out, namely that by having California competitive in the presidential primary, we might actually have a say in policy formulation and make long term political alliances that would benefit the state, not just export money to finance campaigns in other states.
Put simply, we were right. After the tumult of Iowa and New Hampshire and Michigan, followed Saturday by a first-ever caucus in Nevada and then an election in South Carolina, California has become a key "battleground" state for all of the leading candidates. While no one, least of all the pollsters, has a clue what will happen, the people of California have already won.
I remember four years ago, when as the Chair of the Dean Campaign in California, we could but sit and watch as Iowa and New Hampshire and then Arizona and New Mexico, decided that John Kerry would be the nominee. Not this year. Read More »
The people's effort to censure Senator Feinstein was killed with a few objections in a crowded committee room tonight, just a stone's throw from Disneyland. The destiny of the censure resolution was clear from the outset. Because the resolution had been submitted within ten days of today's meeting, it was on the agenda of the resolutions committee as a "late" resolution, along with sixteen or so others.
After four hours of deliberations on about 60 resolutions, the late resolutions were read out by title. The rules state that if any one member of the rules committee objects to a specific resolution, that resolution is dead; it is not heard, not voted upon and not considered in any way.
When finally the resolution to censure Senator Feinstein was brought up, the Party's chief political strategist, Bob Mulholland, stood and shouted from the side of the room, "object, and object!" There were other shouts from the room as committee members joined in. First, Committee Co-Chair John Hanna objected and then others objected and then, as if to make sure that we got the point, everyone who wanted to join the chorus of objections demanded that their objections be counted, too. It was a sort of pile on moment, in which one veto simply would not do. It all happened within about a minute.
Senator Feinstein's best friend and her campaign chair, Roz Wyman, had sat in the room all day, just a few feet from me. When all of the objecting was over, Bob Mulholland came over to her for a quick chat, Roz stood and said, "I'm going home," she patted a few people on the back and off she went. Mission accomplished. Read More »
After four hours of deliberations on about 60 resolutions, the late resolutions were read out by title. The rules state that if any one member of the rules committee objects to a specific resolution, that resolution is dead; it is not heard, not voted upon and not considered in any way.
When finally the resolution to censure Senator Feinstein was brought up, the Party's chief political strategist, Bob Mulholland, stood and shouted from the side of the room, "object, and object!" There were other shouts from the room as committee members joined in. First, Committee Co-Chair John Hanna objected and then others objected and then, as if to make sure that we got the point, everyone who wanted to join the chorus of objections demanded that their objections be counted, too. It was a sort of pile on moment, in which one veto simply would not do. It all happened within about a minute.
Senator Feinstein's best friend and her campaign chair, Roz Wyman, had sat in the room all day, just a few feet from me. When all of the objecting was over, Bob Mulholland came over to her for a quick chat, Roz stood and said, "I'm going home," she patted a few people on the back and off she went. Mission accomplished. Read More »
Posted August 7, 2007 | 10:06 PM (EST) (Cross Posted From Huffington Post)
Over the weekend, California Secretary of State Debra Bowen took the courageous step of decertifying Diebold Hart and Sequoia electronic voting machines. She did this after an exhaustive study by the University of California that demonstrated clearly the violability of such machines. In short, she acted to assure when we vote for president beginning with the primary on February 5 and then finally in November of next year, we'll know that our votes are counted.
Read More »
Over the weekend, California Secretary of State Debra Bowen took the courageous step of decertifying Diebold Hart and Sequoia electronic voting machines. She did this after an exhaustive study by the University of California that demonstrated clearly the violability of such machines. In short, she acted to assure when we vote for president beginning with the primary on February 5 and then finally in November of next year, we'll know that our votes are counted.
Read More »
FROM THE HUFFINGTON POST
Link
03.15.2007
Schwarzenegger to California: You Too Can Vote for President (20 comments )
READ MORE: Iowa
As expected, Governor Schwarzenegger today signed the legislation moving California's presidential primary forward to 5 February 2008, a move we at Courage Campaign championed. While this was hardly news, seeing the Austrian imprint makes it all official: California will have a decisive voice in who gets the nominations for president.
The move was not without controversy. Many in the blogosphere and the political soothsaying world determined that moving California's primary from June -- when it could not possibly matter at all -- to February, when it will be in the sights of every contender, would somehow eviscerate the absurd primary schedule that they think is some version of excellence. While I respect the idealists who dream of democratic perfection, we live in the world we have, not the one we wish we had. So now that Californians will have the chance to vote and be counted, what can we expect?
Candidates will pay attention to California's issues, which are the nation's issues. Already, John McCain, John Edwards and Rudy Giuliani have spent considerable time in California and not just at fundraising events. Edwards was recently in Fresno actually talking and listening to people (just like they do in Iowa). Our issues include education, immigration, port security, the environment, agriculture, access to good jobs and the ability to own a home. It's nice that candidates have to learn about ethanol and pork subsidies in order to pass the local test in Iowa, but I'd like to hear these folks tell us how they'd deal with the diversity of seventh largest economy in the world.
People will organize at the grassroots to support their candidates, thus increasing turn out and participation. This will build democracy. Already last week, a couple of Obama "Meet Ups" allegedly gathered five hundred people just to plan the candidate's visit for later this month. That energy can be channeled into other issues and ultimately to invigorating the California Democratic Party.
Our leading politicians are actually courted by the candidates. This may sound cynical, but it's much better bet for California than just having the candidates suck up to the rich folks who can raise millions or write $2,300 checks. When candidates meet with politicians to ask for their support, I can promise you that some transaction occurs. And that's a good thing, because unlike the rich fundraising base that attracts candidates who then flee the state with their wealth, the politicians ask for commitments for specific projects in our state. I'd much rather have a candidate beholden to Mayor Villaraigosa or Speaker Nunez than to the fundraising elite. We elected those folks to high office; they'll extract benefits for our cities and states, not just for their pet causes.
The absurd nature of the primary season this year that will essentially end in February may force the party pooh bahs to imagine a national primary with regional elections for the next cycle.
I see only good from this move. Our job now is to hold the candidates' feet to the fire. We at Courage Campaign have set up ATM Watch, where you can help us track the candidates and ask them the questions you want them to answer. Let's make the candidates tell us why they deserve our support, not just take the money and run.
Send to a friendPost a CommentPrint PostRead all posts by Rick Jacobs
Related News Stories
Obama Covers Become Best-Selling '06 Issues For Time, Newsweek
US Citizens Excluded From Medicaid As Anti-Illegal Immigrant Law Backfires
Immigration Raids Leave Children Stranded Without Parents
Related Blog Posts
Chuck Lippstreu: Chuck Hagel's Adventures in Presidential Never-Never Land
David Mixner: The Clintons: The Times They Are a Changing
David Sirota: The Anti-Escalation Campaign
Ads by Google
Anti "W" sticker
answer those little black squares bumper stickers sweat shirts
Link
Hillary Clinton in 2008?
Do you think Hillary Clinton would be a good choice for US President?
www.PollingPoint.com
Richardson for President
Act Now and Support Bill Richardson For President in 2008.
Link />
Comments :
what it really menas is that money matters more than anything else, more than ever before. american democracy continues its hasty death.
By: ramadinights on March 15, 2007 at 09:46pm
Flag: [abusive]
california sounds like a good place to move to
By: leaftones on March 15, 2007 at 10:14pm
Flag: [abusive]
Amen (I mean that in the most secular way possible). As a life long California resident, maybe now my Presidential Primary vote will count.
By: Quaoar on March 15, 2007 at 10:15pm
Flag: [abusive]
This move is long overdue. I feel sorry for anyone who lives in a small state and thinks they are going to be ignored, but California is by itself the sixth biggest economy in the world and deserves to have a say in who wins the primaries. Take heart though, you still have two senators and they have just as much influence as our two senators.
All primaries should be held on the same day, period, end of discussion.
By: sonofabastard on March 15, 2007 at 10:44pm
Flag: [abusive]
I should have read the entire blog before I jumped in here. California is now the seventh largest economy in the world. We still deserve to have our voice heard as much as New Hampshire and Iowa. Let's have one national primary day and push it back to California's traditional June date.
By: sonofabastard on March 15, 2007 at 10:51pm
Flag: [abusive]
Sounds like the death knell for any reasonable campaign schedule. Perhaps good for Californians, bad for the rest of us.
By: TAFL on March 15, 2007 at 10:57pm
Flag: [abusive]
Thanks for the ad, but perhaps those promoting this scheme should point out the main reason the Legislature pushed it through: the proposition that will help people like FabianNunez avoid being termed out.
By: TuffPosh on March 15, 2007 at 11:49pm
Flag: [abusive]
About damn time.
As the single largest block of electoral votes, California should have a voice in who we get to choose from in November. Coming in at the end of the primary cycle, the deed was always done before we got to have our say.
By: lm945 on March 15, 2007 at 11:52pm
Flag: [abusive]
okay..so Aurnie says that "cauliforney will get the respect it deserves". Sorry that whine holds no water. Poor California and poor Arnie. Want to control. Big rippin deal. CA like any other state has its good spots and its bad spots..even terrible ones. Do we give them their way just because they are a long narrow state with too many people. Blah Blah Blah. Aurnie sounds like a spoiled boy. (he has done some good..when will the constitution be changed so he can run for prez..I am sure that is what he is aiming for...mr ambition.)
By: springsm on March 16, 2007 at 12:07am
Flag: [abusive]
Sounds like the death knell for any reasonable campaign schedule. Perhaps good for Californians, bad for the rest of us.
By: TAFL on March 15, 2007 at 10:57pm
TAFL...it's not a death knell..California is NOT just Los Angeles and San Francisco..it represents everyone from farmers (YOUR breadbasket I might add) to lumberjacks(not a very "liberal bunch", Orange County..very republican... it is a mirror of the nation...and should carry the political power commensurate with its population and diversity and yes...economic standing.
and Awwnold is not shooting for the presidency..that amendment is NOT going to happen...you can breath again..(they tried it sort of with Henry Kissinger and thank GOD it never took hold).
By: halsey on March 16, 2007 at 08:04am
Flag: [abusive]
As long as there is NO REAL REFORM OF A COMPREHENSIVE NATURE to the whole electoral process, these "band aids" will continue to fail to stop the bleeding. The continued use of the abomination that is the "electoral college system" alone makes this discussion a pointless exercise in intellectual masturbation which proves absolutly nothing except that "the more things "change" the more they stay the same."
By: oldgringo on March 16, 2007 at 08:13am
Flag: [abusive]
IMHO, this is just more pathetic political posturing. If my new car gets to the gala ball first, it will matter most & get the most press?
If we, as a country, really gave a crap about fairness & equal campaign/issues opportunity, all the states would have their primaries on the same day, or over a two-day period.
By: blueworld on March 16, 2007 at 08:19am
Flag: [abusive]
As a Californian, I think moving the primary is half of a great idea. The other half involves particpation and involvment that Mr Jacobs sees as a foregone conclusion. I myself think it will take a near miralcle to get the people of California to make use of the earlier primary.
So my hope is that California will take this seriously, take some time to participate, get involved. Otherwise, it is just a change of dates. While Californians are always glad to say CA is the 6th or 7th largest economy in the world, they should be looking at the fact that it is close to number one in citizen malasie and disconnect. Take a look at the homeless problem in Los Angeles, then take a look at the affluent neighborhoods, and that says much more about the nature of the CA voter than does the size of the economy. CA economy bigger than Germany's! So where is the healthcare, the high speed rail, the uncongested autobahn? Is bigger better, or does it just mean bigger? How's the smog today?
Yeah, we are big and rich. If we are also indifferent, distracted and over burdened then the wealth is of little impact.
I'd say the pride in the state's economy should be mitigated in the minds of realistic people by the massive problems in the state that go unaddressed for decades. Traffic, lack of public trasportation, astronomical housing costs that will do more harm than good. Dependance on an unrepresented servant class, yes. I've seen LA burn twice in my lifetime from civil unrest and the causes have not been addressed. Twice.
So a one bedroom one bath house is 800K, but they can not manage light rail or to pay a maid according to the law, or learn to make a society just enought that riots are not more predictable than earthquakes...makes me think the priorities are a bit skewed and the early primary will only be what the people of CA dare to make of it.
By: cuthbertallgood on March 16, 2007 at 09:36am
Flag: [abusive]
Doesn't really matter. More and more of us are opting out of the two party system and registering as independent. Our votes won't count, whether in June or February.
By: tzadtednitz on March 16, 2007 at 09:56am
Flag: [abusive]
Hell, why not have all states hold thier primary on the same day? Just like election day!
The candidates would have to campagn on national issues rather than local or regional concerns.
By: Grizzly on March 16, 2007 at 10:01am
Flag: [abusive]
I'm not sure if this is so good for democracy - sure, California's massive, but it's much easier for an insurgent candidate to gain traction in a smaller state like Iowa or NH where s/he can cover most of the state with public meetings/neighborhood have-your-friends-over, general meet & greets and doesn't have to rely on hugely costly advertising.
By: oxfpete on March 16, 2007 at 10:02am
Flag: [abusive]
Change from this is about as likely as being able to change a federal law through your so-called right to referendum. You don't have rights, cops have rights. The whole thing is phony,give up.
By: abbiehoffman on March 16, 2007 at 10:21am
Flag: [abusive]
Actually, the most important item about the change is being underreported. The CA primary will go from "winner take all" to roughly proportional distribution of delegates. This makes it more likely that the conventions will actually be something other than commercials (when was the last open convention? Carter? Humphrey?).
By: tzadtednitz on March 16, 2007 at 11:37am
Flag: [abusive]
This is both good and bad. The good part is maybe the views of western voters
will be more reflected by the candidates. The bad part is this election
becomes more about who has deep pockets. I still think the system is
broken. We need a nationwide series of incremental elections (with
monotonically increasing fractional votes) with the early elections biased
towards those that only use publicly provided free campaign resources.
By: sculptor on March 16, 2007 at 04:30pm
Flag: [abusive]
Unless you have expierienced a national election from a California couch you can't begin to appreciate how left out of the process you feel. I completely agree that primaries should be held on the same day. But barring that happening anytime soon, I am delighted with the change that the Governor has initiated. California should be at least as active a voice in the election process as Iowa. It may even spark more interest in the election from potential California voters who have had every right to say "my vote doesn't count so why bother" Belive me I
know how they feel. Lets face it, it does not matter what time the poles close in California because the decision has been made in Illinois and Iowa hours before, at least now we can have our voice heard at some significant point in the process. Bravo Arnold ! It's about time.
By: WhiteCanary on March 16, 2007 at 04:36pm
Flag: [abusive]
Send to a friendPost a CommentPrint PostRead all posts by Rick Jacobs
Chris Kelly: Tom DeLay: Tome of the Unsoldier
David Roberts: A Long Rant About Facts, Persuasion, and Global Warming
E. A. Hanks: Hillary the Heartbreaker
White House Backtracks: "Hazy Memories" On Attorney Scandal
Trump: Bush Is "Probably The Worst President In The History Of The United States"
Walter Reed VIP Ward May Be Run At Expense Of Enlisted Casualties
Bush Pledges GOP '08 Victories: "You've Got To Know Something About Your President: I Am Some Kind Of Optimistic"
Defiant Ahmadinejad To Travel To UN: "These Threats Won't Have One Iota Of Effect"
Breaking News
Agence France-Press
Associated Press
Dow Jones
Itar-Tass
Kyodo
Reuters
UPI
Xinhua
U.S. Newspapers
Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Boston Globe
Chicago Sun-Times
Chicago Tribune
The Christian Science Monitor
Chronicle of Higher Education
Denver Post
Los Angeles Times
Miami Herald
New York Daily News
New York Times
San Francisco Chronicle
Seattle Post-Intelligencer
St. Petersburg Times
USA Today
Wall Street Journal
Washington Post
Intl. Newspapers
Daily Standard (UK)
Financial Times (UK)
The Globe and Mail (Canada)
Guardian (UK)
Hindustan Times (India)
Independent (UK)
International Herald Tribune
Irish Times
The Scotsman
Telegraph (UK)
Times (UK)
Times of India
Television News
ABC
CBS
CNN
C-SPAN
FOX
PBS NewsHour
MSNBC
Intl. News Networks
ABC (Australia)
Al Jazeera
BBC
CBC (Canada)
Deutsche Welle (EU)
Sky News (UK)
News Search Engines
AOL
AltaVista
Google
Newsbot
Topix
Yahoo!
Full Blogroll
Home The News The Blog Eat The Press Becoming Fearless
Login to Huffington Post | Make Huff Post your Home Page | RSS/XML | Sitemap | Jobs | Contact Us
Copyright 2007 © HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. | User Agreement | Privacy | Comment Policy | Powered by MovableType
Link
03.15.2007
Schwarzenegger to California: You Too Can Vote for President (20 comments )
READ MORE: Iowa
As expected, Governor Schwarzenegger today signed the legislation moving California's presidential primary forward to 5 February 2008, a move we at Courage Campaign championed. While this was hardly news, seeing the Austrian imprint makes it all official: California will have a decisive voice in who gets the nominations for president.
The move was not without controversy. Many in the blogosphere and the political soothsaying world determined that moving California's primary from June -- when it could not possibly matter at all -- to February, when it will be in the sights of every contender, would somehow eviscerate the absurd primary schedule that they think is some version of excellence. While I respect the idealists who dream of democratic perfection, we live in the world we have, not the one we wish we had. So now that Californians will have the chance to vote and be counted, what can we expect?
Candidates will pay attention to California's issues, which are the nation's issues. Already, John McCain, John Edwards and Rudy Giuliani have spent considerable time in California and not just at fundraising events. Edwards was recently in Fresno actually talking and listening to people (just like they do in Iowa). Our issues include education, immigration, port security, the environment, agriculture, access to good jobs and the ability to own a home. It's nice that candidates have to learn about ethanol and pork subsidies in order to pass the local test in Iowa, but I'd like to hear these folks tell us how they'd deal with the diversity of seventh largest economy in the world.
People will organize at the grassroots to support their candidates, thus increasing turn out and participation. This will build democracy. Already last week, a couple of Obama "Meet Ups" allegedly gathered five hundred people just to plan the candidate's visit for later this month. That energy can be channeled into other issues and ultimately to invigorating the California Democratic Party.
Our leading politicians are actually courted by the candidates. This may sound cynical, but it's much better bet for California than just having the candidates suck up to the rich folks who can raise millions or write $2,300 checks. When candidates meet with politicians to ask for their support, I can promise you that some transaction occurs. And that's a good thing, because unlike the rich fundraising base that attracts candidates who then flee the state with their wealth, the politicians ask for commitments for specific projects in our state. I'd much rather have a candidate beholden to Mayor Villaraigosa or Speaker Nunez than to the fundraising elite. We elected those folks to high office; they'll extract benefits for our cities and states, not just for their pet causes.
The absurd nature of the primary season this year that will essentially end in February may force the party pooh bahs to imagine a national primary with regional elections for the next cycle.
I see only good from this move. Our job now is to hold the candidates' feet to the fire. We at Courage Campaign have set up ATM Watch, where you can help us track the candidates and ask them the questions you want them to answer. Let's make the candidates tell us why they deserve our support, not just take the money and run.
Send to a friendPost a CommentPrint PostRead all posts by Rick Jacobs
Related News Stories
Obama Covers Become Best-Selling '06 Issues For Time, Newsweek
US Citizens Excluded From Medicaid As Anti-Illegal Immigrant Law Backfires
Immigration Raids Leave Children Stranded Without Parents
Related Blog Posts
Chuck Lippstreu: Chuck Hagel's Adventures in Presidential Never-Never Land
David Mixner: The Clintons: The Times They Are a Changing
David Sirota: The Anti-Escalation Campaign
Ads by Google
Anti "W" sticker
answer those little black squares bumper stickers sweat shirts
Link
Hillary Clinton in 2008?
Do you think Hillary Clinton would be a good choice for US President?
www.PollingPoint.com
Richardson for President
Act Now and Support Bill Richardson For President in 2008.
Link />
Comments :
what it really menas is that money matters more than anything else, more than ever before. american democracy continues its hasty death.
By: ramadinights on March 15, 2007 at 09:46pm
Flag: [abusive]
california sounds like a good place to move to
By: leaftones on March 15, 2007 at 10:14pm
Flag: [abusive]
Amen (I mean that in the most secular way possible). As a life long California resident, maybe now my Presidential Primary vote will count.
By: Quaoar on March 15, 2007 at 10:15pm
Flag: [abusive]
This move is long overdue. I feel sorry for anyone who lives in a small state and thinks they are going to be ignored, but California is by itself the sixth biggest economy in the world and deserves to have a say in who wins the primaries. Take heart though, you still have two senators and they have just as much influence as our two senators.
All primaries should be held on the same day, period, end of discussion.
By: sonofabastard on March 15, 2007 at 10:44pm
Flag: [abusive]
I should have read the entire blog before I jumped in here. California is now the seventh largest economy in the world. We still deserve to have our voice heard as much as New Hampshire and Iowa. Let's have one national primary day and push it back to California's traditional June date.
By: sonofabastard on March 15, 2007 at 10:51pm
Flag: [abusive]
Sounds like the death knell for any reasonable campaign schedule. Perhaps good for Californians, bad for the rest of us.
By: TAFL on March 15, 2007 at 10:57pm
Flag: [abusive]
Thanks for the ad, but perhaps those promoting this scheme should point out the main reason the Legislature pushed it through: the proposition that will help people like FabianNunez avoid being termed out.
By: TuffPosh on March 15, 2007 at 11:49pm
Flag: [abusive]
About damn time.
As the single largest block of electoral votes, California should have a voice in who we get to choose from in November. Coming in at the end of the primary cycle, the deed was always done before we got to have our say.
By: lm945 on March 15, 2007 at 11:52pm
Flag: [abusive]
okay..so Aurnie says that "cauliforney will get the respect it deserves". Sorry that whine holds no water. Poor California and poor Arnie. Want to control. Big rippin deal. CA like any other state has its good spots and its bad spots..even terrible ones. Do we give them their way just because they are a long narrow state with too many people. Blah Blah Blah. Aurnie sounds like a spoiled boy. (he has done some good..when will the constitution be changed so he can run for prez..I am sure that is what he is aiming for...mr ambition.)
By: springsm on March 16, 2007 at 12:07am
Flag: [abusive]
Sounds like the death knell for any reasonable campaign schedule. Perhaps good for Californians, bad for the rest of us.
By: TAFL on March 15, 2007 at 10:57pm
TAFL...it's not a death knell..California is NOT just Los Angeles and San Francisco..it represents everyone from farmers (YOUR breadbasket I might add) to lumberjacks(not a very "liberal bunch", Orange County..very republican... it is a mirror of the nation...and should carry the political power commensurate with its population and diversity and yes...economic standing.
and Awwnold is not shooting for the presidency..that amendment is NOT going to happen...you can breath again..(they tried it sort of with Henry Kissinger and thank GOD it never took hold).
By: halsey on March 16, 2007 at 08:04am
Flag: [abusive]
As long as there is NO REAL REFORM OF A COMPREHENSIVE NATURE to the whole electoral process, these "band aids" will continue to fail to stop the bleeding. The continued use of the abomination that is the "electoral college system" alone makes this discussion a pointless exercise in intellectual masturbation which proves absolutly nothing except that "the more things "change" the more they stay the same."
By: oldgringo on March 16, 2007 at 08:13am
Flag: [abusive]
IMHO, this is just more pathetic political posturing. If my new car gets to the gala ball first, it will matter most & get the most press?
If we, as a country, really gave a crap about fairness & equal campaign/issues opportunity, all the states would have their primaries on the same day, or over a two-day period.
By: blueworld on March 16, 2007 at 08:19am
Flag: [abusive]
As a Californian, I think moving the primary is half of a great idea. The other half involves particpation and involvment that Mr Jacobs sees as a foregone conclusion. I myself think it will take a near miralcle to get the people of California to make use of the earlier primary.
So my hope is that California will take this seriously, take some time to participate, get involved. Otherwise, it is just a change of dates. While Californians are always glad to say CA is the 6th or 7th largest economy in the world, they should be looking at the fact that it is close to number one in citizen malasie and disconnect. Take a look at the homeless problem in Los Angeles, then take a look at the affluent neighborhoods, and that says much more about the nature of the CA voter than does the size of the economy. CA economy bigger than Germany's! So where is the healthcare, the high speed rail, the uncongested autobahn? Is bigger better, or does it just mean bigger? How's the smog today?
Yeah, we are big and rich. If we are also indifferent, distracted and over burdened then the wealth is of little impact.
I'd say the pride in the state's economy should be mitigated in the minds of realistic people by the massive problems in the state that go unaddressed for decades. Traffic, lack of public trasportation, astronomical housing costs that will do more harm than good. Dependance on an unrepresented servant class, yes. I've seen LA burn twice in my lifetime from civil unrest and the causes have not been addressed. Twice.
So a one bedroom one bath house is 800K, but they can not manage light rail or to pay a maid according to the law, or learn to make a society just enought that riots are not more predictable than earthquakes...makes me think the priorities are a bit skewed and the early primary will only be what the people of CA dare to make of it.
By: cuthbertallgood on March 16, 2007 at 09:36am
Flag: [abusive]
Doesn't really matter. More and more of us are opting out of the two party system and registering as independent. Our votes won't count, whether in June or February.
By: tzadtednitz on March 16, 2007 at 09:56am
Flag: [abusive]
Hell, why not have all states hold thier primary on the same day? Just like election day!
The candidates would have to campagn on national issues rather than local or regional concerns.
By: Grizzly on March 16, 2007 at 10:01am
Flag: [abusive]
I'm not sure if this is so good for democracy - sure, California's massive, but it's much easier for an insurgent candidate to gain traction in a smaller state like Iowa or NH where s/he can cover most of the state with public meetings/neighborhood have-your-friends-over, general meet & greets and doesn't have to rely on hugely costly advertising.
By: oxfpete on March 16, 2007 at 10:02am
Flag: [abusive]
Change from this is about as likely as being able to change a federal law through your so-called right to referendum. You don't have rights, cops have rights. The whole thing is phony,give up.
By: abbiehoffman on March 16, 2007 at 10:21am
Flag: [abusive]
Actually, the most important item about the change is being underreported. The CA primary will go from "winner take all" to roughly proportional distribution of delegates. This makes it more likely that the conventions will actually be something other than commercials (when was the last open convention? Carter? Humphrey?).
By: tzadtednitz on March 16, 2007 at 11:37am
Flag: [abusive]
This is both good and bad. The good part is maybe the views of western voters
will be more reflected by the candidates. The bad part is this election
becomes more about who has deep pockets. I still think the system is
broken. We need a nationwide series of incremental elections (with
monotonically increasing fractional votes) with the early elections biased
towards those that only use publicly provided free campaign resources.
By: sculptor on March 16, 2007 at 04:30pm
Flag: [abusive]
Unless you have expierienced a national election from a California couch you can't begin to appreciate how left out of the process you feel. I completely agree that primaries should be held on the same day. But barring that happening anytime soon, I am delighted with the change that the Governor has initiated. California should be at least as active a voice in the election process as Iowa. It may even spark more interest in the election from potential California voters who have had every right to say "my vote doesn't count so why bother" Belive me I
know how they feel. Lets face it, it does not matter what time the poles close in California because the decision has been made in Illinois and Iowa hours before, at least now we can have our voice heard at some significant point in the process. Bravo Arnold ! It's about time.
By: WhiteCanary on March 16, 2007 at 04:36pm
Flag: [abusive]
Send to a friendPost a CommentPrint PostRead all posts by Rick Jacobs
Chris Kelly: Tom DeLay: Tome of the Unsoldier
David Roberts: A Long Rant About Facts, Persuasion, and Global Warming
E. A. Hanks: Hillary the Heartbreaker
White House Backtracks: "Hazy Memories" On Attorney Scandal
Trump: Bush Is "Probably The Worst President In The History Of The United States"
Walter Reed VIP Ward May Be Run At Expense Of Enlisted Casualties
Bush Pledges GOP '08 Victories: "You've Got To Know Something About Your President: I Am Some Kind Of Optimistic"
Defiant Ahmadinejad To Travel To UN: "These Threats Won't Have One Iota Of Effect"
Breaking News
Agence France-Press
Associated Press
Dow Jones
Itar-Tass
Kyodo
Reuters
UPI
Xinhua
U.S. Newspapers
Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Boston Globe
Chicago Sun-Times
Chicago Tribune
The Christian Science Monitor
Chronicle of Higher Education
Denver Post
Los Angeles Times
Miami Herald
New York Daily News
New York Times
San Francisco Chronicle
Seattle Post-Intelligencer
St. Petersburg Times
USA Today
Wall Street Journal
Washington Post
Intl. Newspapers
Daily Standard (UK)
Financial Times (UK)
The Globe and Mail (Canada)
Guardian (UK)
Hindustan Times (India)
Independent (UK)
International Herald Tribune
Irish Times
The Scotsman
Telegraph (UK)
Times (UK)
Times of India
Television News
ABC
CBS
CNN
C-SPAN
FOX
PBS NewsHour
MSNBC
Intl. News Networks
ABC (Australia)
Al Jazeera
BBC
CBC (Canada)
Deutsche Welle (EU)
Sky News (UK)
News Search Engines
AOL
AltaVista
Newsbot
Topix
Yahoo!
Full Blogroll
Home The News The Blog Eat The Press Becoming Fearless
Login to Huffington Post | Make Huff Post your Home Page | RSS/XML | Sitemap | Jobs | Contact Us
Copyright 2007 © HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. | User Agreement | Privacy | Comment Policy | Powered by MovableType
Community Posts
Read More >
Recent Comments
Blog Roll
Calitics
The Bayne of Blog
California Progress Report
California Majority Report
D-Day
DailyKos Down With Tyranny
Fog City Journal
High Speed Rail Blog
Left in SF
The Liberal OC
Living in the O
Michigan Liberal
MyDD
OB Rag
San Diego Politico
Square State
Surf Putah
Sweet Melissa
Unite the Fight