State Republicans See Light in 2006

November 08, 2002

While the midterm election was a national triumph for the Republican Party, in California it played out as a tragedy. Bill Simon lost the opportunity to defeat one of the most unpopular governors in state history, and the Democrats swept all statewide offices (except in the still too-close-to-call controller's race).

It's important to put the results in perspective. The massive Democratic campaign war chests in California dwarfed those of their Republican opponents. Only the Simon campaign amassed a significant treasury to sustain an effective TV campaign in the final weeks. Consequently, voters were drenched with Democrat ads but just lightly spritzed with Republican spots.

Given that disparity, the narrowness of the Democrat margin in most of the statewide partisan races is astonishing. Only Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer broke 50%.

Gov. Gray Davis himself can take cold comfort from his win. His $70-million campaign netted him just 47% of the vote -- less than he received in 1998 and only five points ahead of Simon. Further, he remains deeply unpopular, a termed-out lame duck who faces a hostile Democratic Legislature and statewide officials with no loyalty to him.

Clearly, the Democratic sweep occurred primarily because of the fund-raising advantage, not the fantasy advanced by liberal pundits that California has morphed into a Democratic bastion. It's also worth noting that, despite being massively outspent, Republicans gained a state Senate seat and two Assembly seats, and they may yet pick up a third.

The usual suspects in the media and the Republican Party are resuscitating an equally false notion that Simon lost because he was "too conservative" for California. It's a variation on the canard that the Republican Party must move left to be viable in California -- a nostrum dispelled by looking at the election results.

For example, take the fates of Bruce McPherson and Tom McClintock, the most liberal and most conservative members, respectively, of the GOP ticket. McPherson perfectly fits the theoretical profile of the ideal GOP statewide candidate: pro-choice, strong moderate credentials, fawning press coverage, a comparably well-funded campaign and a compelling personal story. Yet he lost to gaffe-prone Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante by nine points. In stark contrast, the conservative McClintock, the GOP's nominee for controller, received more votes than any other statewide Republican candidate -- and may yet eke out a victory despite having been vastly outspent by the multimillionaire entrepreneur Steve Westly, whose ads attacking McClintock's pro-life stance had little effect.

Republicans have reason to be hopeful. The relatively strong showing by GOP candidates will lead President Bush to vigorously contest California, and the surprising GOP gains in Congress are a testament to his campaign prowess. Several U.S. representatives who would make attractive candidates are seriously considering challenging U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer in her bid for a third term in 2004, and an active Bush campaign would be a huge boost to whoever wins the nomination. Beyond that, 2006 offers the prospect of the governorship and half the constitutional offices opening up because of term limits.

At the same time, Republicans must mount a credible ground game if they are to prevail. While the Democrats deploy an army of thousands of paid workers every election, Republicans respond with just a few platoons. Fielding a comparable force would be very expensive, but the price is well worth the extra three to five points in the polls it would produce.

Four years is a long time in politics. California Democrats were prostrate in 1994 and triumphant in 1998. The pendulum can easily swing back in the GOP's direction, especially with a popular president giving it a push.

Don't Snicker ... Bill Simon Could Actually Win

September 22, 2002

I predict Bill Simon Jr. will defeat Gray Davis. Such a statement crashes, Scud-like, directly into the bunker of California's chattering-class consensus, and the reader may understandably be tempted to dismiss it as blind partisan cheerleading or just plain contrariness.

But I think Simon will win based on empirical indicators, not just partisan hopes. Granted, the Simon campaign thus far has not been a case study in effectiveness, but the fact that his candidacy has been administered the last rites almost daily for months, while rudely refusing to die, counterintuitively suggests Simon will trump the media prognosticators and win.

Simon has been hammered by a nonstop torrent of negative media coverage and TV attack ads since the spring. Richard Riordan's once-formidable candidacy--also characterized as confused and badly run--imploded under a less severe and sustained pounding. Yet amazingly, in poll after poll, Simon remains well within striking distance of Davis.

A Field Poll survey released in July had Simon down just seven points. Two months later, following Simon's worst month mediawise, he was still seven points behind Davis. This defies the conventional rules of politics and is a tribute to Davis' deep, persistent weakness--a story the media neglect in their obsession with the Simon campaign's real and imagined missteps.

Davis' unpopularity is no mystery. He inherited a booming economy and overflowing state coffers, which he has mismanaged into a sluggish economy and a $24-billion deficit. He failed to deal with the electricity crisis everyone else saw coming, acting when it was too late by signing panicky contracts locking us into historically high electricity rates and burdening us with billions in debt. Policymaking has become a political Ebay for special interests that secure favorable decisions that are not so coincidentally timed to large campaign contributions.

The imperious, intemperate Davis is simply disliked by Californians--Democrats as well as Republicans and independents. Davis is banking on the mountain of campaign cash he has squeezed from every special interest to insulate him from all that and buy him a second term. But in politics, as in life, money isn't everything--a lesson Davis imparted to "Checkbook" Al Checchi and Jane Harman in 1998.

Since spring, Davis has spent millions attacking Simon on television, with relatively little impact on Simon's popularity. He's also spent millions on ads talking about what a great governor he is, and his popularity rating is worse than ever.

Voters want an alternative to Davis. They overwhelmingly believe the state is heading in the wrong direction, and they have no reason to think Davis can or will turn things around.

Meanwhile, events have provided Simon with a fresh start as the campaign enters its critical final phase.

The groundless fraud verdict--which had been hanging over Simon's campaign like a nightmare--has been tossed out, depriving Davis of one of his principal clubs for pummeling Simon.

Simon's campaign has finally made full disclosure of the candidate's tax returns, putting another distraction behind it. These developments, combined with Simon's decision to pour $4 million of his own money into the campaign, will boost fund-raising and ensure that his campaign can fund a sustained ad campaign in the final weeks.

And it is those final weeks, when voters will really begin focusing on the race, that matter most. If Simon can stay on the offensive and relentlessly remind voters of Davis' miserable record and the worsened condition of the state, he will close the gap and win in November.

Many an overconfident incumbent has fumbled away victory to a lean and hungry challenger. Davis knows this from his own experience, having defied the predictions of pundits to beat two vastly better-funded primary opponents and then defeat a much better-funded Dan Lungren. I'm sure the governor is hoping history doesn't repeat itself.

'Same-Day Voting' Makes Hanging Chads Look Quaint

July 29, 2002

If you use your credit card at almost any retailer, you'll be asked for valid ID as a fraud prevention measure. Imagine a cashier's reaction if, instead of a driver's license, you handed over a preprinted bank deposit slip and a pre- approved credit card application you had received in the mail.

While that may not be good enough for Target, backers of the "same-day-voting" initiative on November's ballot think it's more than enough identification in order to register and cast a ballot after walking up to a polling place on election day.

That's right, this "reform" would allow Californians to register on election day and vote after showing "proof" of identity by using one of a laundry list of various items considered to be sufficient proof of residence. They also could register by going to their county registrar's office during the 28 days before an election.

The initiative's proclaimed intent is to increase voter turnout. This seemingly innocuous measure appeals to our desire to maximize participation in our representative system of government. After all, it's easy to imagine something like an untimely relocation causing a person to fall through the cracks and be ineligible to vote.

However, closer examination of the initiative makes it plain that it would become easier to commit voter fraud and harder to investigate such misdeeds and that an already complicated voting system would become even more complex and unwieldy.

Take, for example, what will be considered valid identification if this initiative passes: utility bills, credit card bills, bank statements, preprinted checks or bank deposit slips, a vehicle registration and "mail addressed to the voter at his or her current residence address." About the only thing missing is a note from your mother.

Initiative proponents contend this would actually reduce voter fraud because there currently is no ID requirement that Californians must meet in order to register and vote.

Far more likely would be organized voter fraud by unscrupulous campaigns exploiting this unbelievably permissive list.

Riverside County Registrar Mischelle Townsend says it would be extremely difficult to prevent fraud if this initiative passes. Now, if there's any question about your eligibility, you can cast a "provisional" ballot, which is set aside and counted last, after its validity has been ascertained. The same-day-voting initiative would abolish provisional ballots, thereby eliminating the main avenue for investigating voter fraud even as it multiplies opportunities to commit fraud.

If this initiative passes, you can count on vanloads of warm bodies armed with utility bills rolling up to polling locations in closely contested legislative and congressional districts, where a little fraud can go a long way toward deciding the outcome of a race. The initiative also requires county registrars to station a worker outside polling places. This would mean recruitment, training and pay for thousands of additional workers, an expensive and time-consuming order for officials already hard pressed to scratch up enough workers to discharge their current responsibilities.

Small wonder that the registrars of some of the state's largest counties think the same-day-voting initiative is a bad idea.

The measure's promise to increase voter turnout is also spurious.

Supporters say California voter turnout in November 2000 hit its lowest level since 1964, when our voting laws were certainly less flexible. Since then, we have enacted very liberal absentee voting laws and the "motor voter" program and shortened the registration blackout period to just 14 days before an election. You can even download voter registration forms from the Internet.

Voting has been made successively easier during the last two decades, yet turnout continues to decline. By what magic would this horribly flawed initiative reverse this sad trend? Clearly the cure to voter apathy lies elsewhere.

The right to vote is a precious franchise, but the same-day-voting initiative would only undermine it by creating new pathways to fraud and placing burdensome new mandates on already overwhelmed, underfunded county election officials.

The best way to increase turnout is to give voters candidates they can believe in and elected officials who respond to the will of the people rather than powerful special interests.

Lionesses of the Left Eat Judicial Nominees Alive

May 26, 2002

Bush administration officials are furious and frustrated with Senate Democrats for holding hostage dozens of qualified conservative judicial candidates by refusing to allow floor votes on their nominations. Meanwhile, back in California, Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, both Democrats, are squeezing the administration by threatening to blue-slip all the nominees who don't meet their political agenda. Even worse, they've been allowed to do this through a deal brokered by Republicans that was supposed to smooth the way for President Bush's judicial choices.

This untenable situation can partly be blamed on someone close to Bush: attorney Gerald L. Parsky, Bush's top political operative in California.

Shortly after Bush's inauguration, Parsky, who advises Bush on presidential appointments, convinced the newly installed White House counsel's office to gamble on a system of so-called bipartisan committees to screen judicial nominations.

The idea was to come up with federal district court candidates who were acceptable to both parties and thus ensure speedy confirmation by the nearly evenly divided Senate.

Historically, in a state like California where both U.S. senators are from the opposition party, the judicial selection process falls to senior Republican members of the House delegation.

Parsky's plan usurped that precious prerogative in favor of a bizarre system of committees--half of whose members are appointed by Feinstein and Boxer. Four committees, each made up of six members, evaluate candidates for the federal bench in sessions that are closed to public scrutiny. No judicial candidate is forwarded to the White House unless four of the six members agree, but this gives Feinstein and Boxer de facto veto power over anyone the White House wants to place on the bench.

Not surprisingly, speedy confirmations remain theoretical. The bipartisan panels have proved to be an abysmal failure.

For example, shortly after announcing formation of the panels last year, Bush nominated Rep. Christopher Cox (R-Newport Beach) and Superior Court Judge Carolyn Kuhl to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Boxer, unrestrained by any sense of fairness you would think she might have--given her participation in the bipartisan panels--launched one of her trademark verbal tirades against Cox's nomination, which was withdrawn. Neither Boxer nor Feinstein has assisted Kuhl, whose nomination drifts in limbo as the wait for a hearing drags into its second year.

Feinstein has shown her true colors in two big votes involving judicial candidates from other states who didn't pass her ideological muster.

A couple of months ago, Feinstein, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, voted against allowing the full Senate to vote on Bush's nominee, Judge Charles Pickering. Last week, she did the same against Judge D. Brooks Smith. This is the same Feinstein who recently stated that Bush should not be free to choose his own nominees because of the narrowness of his election.

"There is no mandate, in my view, to skew the courts to the right," she was quoted as saying. "And so I think you're going to see a Judiciary Committee that's really going to be looking for mainstream judges."

"Mainstream judges" is a Democratic code phrase for traditional, big-government, anti-individual-freedom and anti-property-rights jurists. Let's face it, it is virtually guaranteed that no conservative scholars--no matter how highly qualified--can survive the Boxer-Feinstein gantlet.

The bipartisan committee process has been conducted like a modern-day Star Chamber, shrouded in secrecy. The lack of open and recorded hearings makes for great mischief. More than one judicial district judge candidate has told me of being asked to state a position on Roe vs. Wade. One told me he was asked about his involvement in the Catholic Church. These kinds of questions are clearly improper.

The rumblings over judicial selection are getting louder. Even Alberto Gonzalez, a close Bush advisor and White House counsel, expressed somber dissatisfaction last week with the Parsky-designed district committees.

The bipartisan committees are a half-baked idea that has served as a weapon for Boxer and Feinstein to prevent Bush from placing conservative judges on the federal bench. These two lionesses of the left have taken Parsky's naive creation and are using it to eat him--and the president's judicial appointment power--alive.

The only solution is to return to the time-honored tradition of entrusting the selection of federal judge candidates to senior federal elected members of the president's party. It is a proven system that works.



Winning Purple: Here’s How


Antisemitism has no place in the Republican Party
Angry with Your Local School Board? Run for Office.
Boycott Beijing: Biden’s Opportunity to Unite Americans

Black Republicans lead political poll reversal
Steel: ‘Zuckerbucks’ Corrupted the 2020 Election for Big Tech

Steel: Democrats Discriminate Against Asian Americans, Demand Reparations
Coronavirus: US-China Talks Must Go Beyond Trade & Include China’s Biomedical Practices

Resolution Regarding China's Organ Harvesting
Conservative lawyers steal page from progressive playbook

Shawn Steel: California Republicans Must Think Like a Political Insurgency to Survive
California Democrats rewrite the voting rules in their favor
When a 14-point Republican lead disappears
Why California Republicans lost it all, even in Orange County (Hint: It's not Trump)
Utility monopoly demands more corporate welfare
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #13
Democrats Face Their Own Proposition 187 By Discriminating Against Asian Americans
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #12
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #11
Silicon Valley: Disturbing by Design
Dana Rohrabacher’s conservative track record is as consistent as it is long
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #10
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #9
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #8
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #7
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #6
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #5
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #4
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #3
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #2
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #1
The Conservative Movement: Agony, Revolution, and Triumph

Charlottesville and the ongoing threat of the alt-right
California’s high-speed rail promoters should heed the wisdom of rats
My family escaped North Korea - Trump's response was spot on
House Passes Bill on Illegal Immigration, Sanctuary Cities
Orange County’s conservative students under attack

OCC should fire bully professor
Steve Bannon’s Real Crime: Providing Deplorables with News Alternative
Hillary Clinton Would Be America’s First Illegitimate President
California can lead in the fight against government overreach
Obama Legacy Includes Christian Genocide
Put Ivanka in Charge – Only the Damsel Can Save Donald in Distress
US Christians key to ending US inaction on Christian genocide
RNC Resolution

Steel: Conservatives Win with Kevin McCarthy as Speaker
Up-close look at Obama’s foreign policy failures and the al Sisi alternative

Republicans make steady gains with Asian-Americans
CA GOP enlists Asian American candidates
Shawn Steel: Not your granddaddy's California GOP
Report from Chicago
California’s party-switchers miss the vote
Silicon Valley and the GOP: Republicans nurturing false hopes
How about amnesty for legal immigrants?

ACLU shouldn't be lone voice against surveillance
Paradise Lost

Notable & Quotable
Romney must win over Asian voters

RNC Resolution Opposing “National Popular Vote Compact"
Scathing Report Undermines All Credibility in Redistricting Process
RDAs will end … when elephants fly?
When elephants fly: the end of the dreaded RDAs
Electoral College Madness
Brown caught between unions, voters

What Happened to Fresno?
Prop 23 Abandoned by Business
Asian Republican Strategy
Obama appoints "devout" Muslims to Homeland Security
Chairman Steele 'full throated' for O'Donnell
The Brown Implosion
The Shill of Silicon Valley
Jerry's Secret : WSJ & Pajamas Media
Report RNC Summer Meeting
The Ruling Class and Maxine Waters
Steele Supports War, But Not the President\'s Policies
Reader Rebuttal: O.C. supervisor race
Ronald Reagan Day
Blanket primary smothers choice
Corporations: Enemy of the People; Key Supporters for Obamacare
Tom Campbell's strange saga with Sami Al-Arian
Taliban gains foothold in Justice Dept
Who will turn ? Who will save the libs and unions?
Is the OC Sheriff Crazy?
Nancy Pelosi's New Ride
Reflections Of My First Trip To Israel
Michael Steele Wins Again
GOP losers target Michael Steele

The Return of CAL-YAF
Kalifornistan: A Movie Review
Applications to the Redistricting Commission : Prop 11
Darrell Steinberg--next door to you--CAIR and Islamists
CAIR- Spies Everywhere Ask Sen Steinberg
Speaker Bass Rejects CAIR
CAIR, Hamas, Arnold and the Dems
Are John Burton and the CDP Crazy?
Today's Commentary: The Three Judges Who Would Release The Criminals
Republicans come roaring back
Speaker Bass Has To Go!
The Orange Grove: Sell and modernize state to solvency
PIONEER HENRY LUCAS, DDS, mobilized other black conservatives
American Indian Charter School-Libs Need Not Apply
California Focus: State government needs RAW deal
50 Ways to leave your leader -- Mike Villines
Feds Prosecutorial Abuse ...Leave Perata Alone
Opinion: California Republicans need to step up to anti-tax plate
California\'s Upcoming Water Revolt
RNC Election: Steele the Winner! Thank you Ken Blackwell
STEELE -- RNC Chair Winner say California Republicans
RNC Race: Bribes, Lies and Hit Mail
RNC Chairman's race gets ugly
What's the real story with the RNC race?

Merry Christmas to Igancio "Nacho" Ramos & Jose Campion
Dirty Dem Money
How do we forgive RINO's?
Hollywood Blacklist : We are all Mormons
Go to the movies with the Dukes
Jerry Brown on the Warpath
Surveys, Surveys Everywhere -- But Who Is Reliable?
Bernard Parks and The Unions : a David vs. Goliath story
Who wants to win the most?
The Battle for Glendale: Jane vs. the Interloper
Republican Woodstock - - Sarah takes LA
Abandoning Michigan? No way says Sarah
Conservative Resurgence at RNC May Change Party
SEIU: Corruption Runs Deep
What's the rush on the budget?
Who is Abram Wilson?
Obama Swimming In Money -- More Than All Presidential Campaigns Combined
Today's Commentary on the News
UC Cancellations, by Clinton, Waxman and Nunez : Victory for students and conservatives
The worst guy in LA :Part Two - - Mark Ridley-Thomas vs. Parks
The Battle for LA : Parks vs. Ridley-Thomas
America's Grifter : Laura Richardson MC
The worst guy in LA : Mark Ridley-Thomas
SCOC accused Ridley-Thomas of "denigrating Latinos" : The Battle for LA - - Part 2
The Battle for Los Angeles
The Obama we never knew: ACORN
Hillary claims Obama not reaching white voters
Jews and Blacks: Bradley Coalition Breakup
I never liked Rockefeller
Mike Ramirez 2nd Pulitzer
L.A. Grad Rate for H.S. 45.3 %
State GOP Declares War
Useful Idiot : Mike Thompson
Democratic Party's Racial Divide
VIDEO: SFSU College Republicans Take On CODE PINK in Berkeley
The Trojan Horse a simple idea plus media sensation against Prop 93
Dems bow to the Bey of Oakland

Korea moves to the Right
Parsky Commission Fails Rogan
Speaker Makes Best Argument Against Prop 93
College Reps Confront the Left and Terrorism Next Week
The Governor Does Good : Ridley-Thomas gets it on the chin
LA Times goes bonkers or just another day at the office?
Electoral College Reform: Putting California in Play ; Paul Singer vs. Stephen Bing
Muslims Sue FBI in California
SF State College Reps Rip the Left
9/11 Two Anniversaries ...Europe Saved From Muslim Extremists ..324 years ago
Big Changes in LA County - Bernard Parks is running for Supervisor
Day 31 : Korean Christians Held by Taliban
Political Earthquake, Equalizing California Electorial Votes
Gore is Good
Legal Aid Foundation organizing Union : Violates Federal Law
Rescue Dawn - - The best summer movie
Congressman Dana Rohrabacher's July 31st Hearing on Border Guards
Infidel : Summer Reading
Pacific Research trains School Board Members
Dead Bill Walking : SB 801
Blood Sport : Slamming Jerry Lewis
Frank Baxter Ambassador to the Republica Oriental del Uruguay
UCI: The war against the 5th Column
LA Times Smearing Ken Calvert
Bradley Article - Supremely Disappointing
The Death of a Moderate Muslim
Freedom Fighters Invade UCI
Who Really Cares?
Where does the CRP live ?
Packing Heat at the LA Central Com : War at the 37th
Illegals play Capture the Flag
Happy Birthday, California Republican Party!
Times Editorials returns to boredom
Billionaire Broad a Backstabber?
LA councilman fights good jobs
The Remedy: Out Work The Democrats
Should the Republican Party Stay Republican?
Parsky Back in the News
The Wealthy Left Finance CA Politics
LACCD Beachhead
Revolution in the Belly of the Beast
Gasoline on the Pension Fire
CRP 's Future Chess Moves
Viet Power
Liberation in North Korea in LA
GOP registrations for hourly fun
Terminator Care DOA?
The California GOP: $16,000,000 Answers

Presidential Funding
20 Million Questions
Brownback The Only Conservative?
Taxes good for Business
Arnold must steer clear of drift to left
Review: The People's Machine

The Emerging Mcclintock Era
Schwarzenegger's Back
Will Arnold Jump The Shark?
The Governor's Initiatives
Initiatives At Home And Abroad

Not Just Bush Scored A Victory On Nov. 2
Against Prop 62
Vote No on 62
Play The Initiative Card
'Voter Choice': Reform-free Reform
Don't Take the Bayou State Cure
Dem Dominance of State is Dead
A Downright Reaganesque Speech

Arnold's Army
Winners and Losers
The Conservative Question
Governor Croupier
Recall Choice Really Between Tom, Bill, Arnold
Who CAIRs?
People Must Demand Recall
Golden Possibilities

State Republicans See Light in 2006
Don't Snicker ... Bill Simon Could Actually Win
'Same-Day Voting' Makes Hanging Chads Look Quaint
Lionesses of the Left Eat Judicial Nominees Alive

Escape Artist

An Attempt at an End Run on Prop. 209
Don't Force Lawyers to Join the State Bar