Government for the People
Below are our
recommendations for the November 4th Ballot Measures and Los
Angeles County Judicial Candidates.
We have
incorporated all the
L. A. County Superior Court:
Office No. 72: Hilleri Grossman Merritt
(Well Qualified)
Office No. 82: Thomas Rubinson
(Well Qualified)
Office No. 84: Pat
Connolly (Not
Qualified, all in this race rated at this level)
Office No. 94: Michael J. O'Gara
(Well Qualified)
Office No. 154: Michael V. Jesic
(Well Qualified)
In general, Government for the People opposes bond measures
that do not have a means of paying for themselves. We are in a State and
National Financial Crisis and out of control borrowing needs to be stopped.
In this regards, please watch this skit from ‘Saturday Night Live’ (SNL) which illustrates quite well the
housing problem and bailout better than any of the news shows or politicians
that I have seen, http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/c-span-bailout/727521/
. (Note: SNL was pressured to cut out
part of the skit where Barney Frank was thanked for covering for the Sandlers
(real people), go hear to see unedited version http://www.snlbailout.cx/ )
No on
Proposition 1A: Safe, Reliable High-Speed
Passenger Train Bond Act.
No on
Proposition 2: Standards for Confining Farm
Animals. Initiative Statute.
No on
Proposition 3: Children’s Hospital Bond Act.
Grant Program. Initiative Statute.
Yes on
Proposition 4: Waiting Period and Parental
Notification Before Termination of Minor’s Pregnancy. Initiative Constitutional
Amendment.
No on
Proposition 5: Nonviolent Drug Offenses.
Sentencing, Parole and Rehabilitation. Initiative Statute.
Yes on
Proposition 6: Police and Law Enforcement
Funding. Criminal Penalties and Laws. Initiative Statute.
No on
Proposition 7: Renewable Energy Generation.
Initiative Statute.
Yes on
Proposition 8: Eliminates Right of Same-Sex
Couples to Marry. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
Yes on
Proposition 9: Criminal Justice System.
Victims’ Rights. Parole. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.
No on
Proposition 10: Alternative Fuel Vehicles and
Renewable Energy. Bonds. Initiative Statute.
No on
Proposition 11: Redistricting. Initiative
Constitutional Amendment and Statute.
Yes on
Proposition 12: Veterans’ Bond Act of 2008.
No on Measure R: Traffic
Relief. Rail Extensions. Reduce Foreign Oil Dependence.
No on Measure G:
No on Measure I:
Write up for the
2008 General Election
L. A. County Superior Court:
An interesting note is a group of
prosecutors got together and cross promoting each other in the primary.
This was a very smart idea, and all of the candidates were the best choices in
their respective races. Of those that were helping each other in the
primary, one won outright, four will be in the November runoff, and two were
narrowly defeated. We have met each of the candidates that we are
recommending, except for Pat Connolly.
Office No. 72: Hilleri
Grossman Merritt (Well Qualified)
Ms. Merritt is part of the
prosecutor team running for Los Angeles Superior Court. Her endorsements
show screening for judicial restraint compared to her opponents. Steven
A. Simons was rated qualified
by the LACBA, but is not the best choice in this race. Mr. Simons
has little support and the supporters that he does have are extremely
troubling. Mr. Simons failed to respond to our questionnaire for the
primary. We see absolutely no reason to change our recommendation and
expect Ms. Merritt to be a fine Jurist.
Office
No. 82: Thomas Rubinson (Well Qualified)
Mr.
Rubinson is the most qualified candidate for this race.
Rubinson is also one of the prosecutor team running for judicial seats this
year. My sources (including personal acquaintances of Mr. Rubinson) and
his own endorsements show him to be a great choice.
Cynthia
Loo seems to be a competent commissioner, but also seems to lean towards
judicial activism. Loo is rated qualified by the LACBA. Some of
Loo’s endorsements are troubling and it is reported that her nick name is Cindy
Boo Hoo, not a good sign for a judicial candidate.
Office
No. 84: Pat Connolly (Not Qualified)
Note: All candidates in this race were rated Not
Qualified by the LACBA.
Pat Connolly, made it through the primary
based on newspaper endorsements. Mr. Connolly was our second choice in the
Primary and he is the best candidate remaining. We hope that he is
elected.
Lori
Jones failed to respond to our questionnaire even
after replying to our email “I
look forward to participating in your review process. That brings up the question of why she failed to participate and what she
has to hide. Ms. Jones has run before and all indications are that she
will be a judicial activist.
Office
No. 94: Michael J. O'Gara (Well Qualified)
All the candidates responded for this race,
but Michael J. O’Gara has the edge over them
all. This is yet another member of the Prosecutor Team that is running
for Los Angeles County Superior Court Judicial positions.
C. Edward Mack may be a good candidate, but we are
troubled by his past and continued association with people that support
judicial activism. Mack has benefited from many dual endorsements in this
race which you would think these people would be a little more selective.
Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca endorsed all three
candidates in the primary race. I was at a meeting where he was speaking,
and he was questioned by someone I know about making multiple endorsements. He
said he did not make multiple endorsements in the same races, yet this race is
another example of him doing just that.
Office No. 154: Michael V. Jesic (Well
Qualified)
Michael
V. Jesic is yet another member of the Team of Prosecutors that are
running for Los Angeles Superior Court. Jesic is the most qualified. As
evidence that our organization is having an impact on the judicial races, in his
email to our group he stated “I've
heard nothing but great things about your organization.”
Rocky
L. Crabb is rated well qualified and obviously knows his stuff, but
fails our judicial activism criteria. Some of Crabb’s endorsements are
troubling. Jesic is the best choice.
No on Proposition
1A: Safe, Reliable High-Speed
Passenger Train Bond Act.
We are already
in financial distress dealing with continuous budget deficits. We do not
need another bond measure that has to be serviced from the general fund.
The legislature can put this on the ballot latter, if they ever get their act
together on
No on Proposition
2: Standards for Confining Farm
Animals. Initiative Statute.
This is an
unnecessary feel good bill. Proposition 2 will ultimately result in increased
costs to consumers when they are already facing steep price inflation on food
products. Farms and Ranches have an incentive to maximize production and
mistreating their animals is likely to reduce production.
Go to www.safecaliforniafood.org
for more information.
No on Proposition
3: Children’s Hospital Bond Act.
Grant Program. Initiative Statute.
We are already
in financial distress dealing with continuous budget deficits. We do not
need another bond measure that has to be serviced from the general fund.
Children’s Hospitals should work on private donations and on cost reductions in
other areas to support expansion. There is still ~ 350 Million remaining
from the 2004 measure that borrowed money for this. We should not be doing this in the first
place. Also, we can no longer afford massive illegal immigration and this is
just one more indication. If we start working on enforcing immigration laws, we
would have enough facilities for American Children,
Yes on Proposition
4: Waiting Period and Parental
Notification Before Termination of Minor’s Pregnancy. Initiative Constitutional
Amendment.
This is a
modest measure to restore some parental rights and to better protect our
daughters from sexual predators and irresponsible abortion providers such as
Planned Parenthood. This proposition does provide for those who might also be
victims of incest and domestic violence. Go to www.YESon4.net for more
information. Click on the video tab to view and listen to Planned
Parenthood’s deplorable behavior as exposed by UCLA student Lila Rose.
No on Proposition 5: Nonviolent Drug Offenses. Sentencing,
Parole and Rehabilitation. Initiative Statute.
If you want
more drug dealers and treatment centers in your neighborhood, then vote
yes. Otherwise, if you do not want to create another huge bureaucracy
then vote no. We would be better served reducing the severely
bloated payrolls and pensions of the prison system thanks to the prison guard
union (remember the pay for play days of Governor Gray Davis). We could
also reduce inmate population by enforcing immigration laws. We need to
stop paying for imported criminals.
Go to www.noonproposition5.com
for more information.
Yes on Proposition
6: Police and Law Enforcement
Funding. Criminal Penalties and Laws. Initiative Statute.
This is a tuff
call; it forces mandatory minimum spending on law enforcement. Creates new
bureaucracy The Office of Public Safety Education and Information, we would
normally oppose the expansion of government. If we thought the
legislature had the public interest in mind and was not more concerned with supporting
their trial lawyer donors, we would likely oppose this. Since the
legislature cannot be trusted, the citizens need to support this measure to
protect themselves and to be informed.
Go to www.safeneighborhoodsact.com
for more information.
No on Proposition
7: Renewable Energy Generation.
Initiative Statute.
Proposition 7
is another government energy disaster waiting to happen. Remember the
black outs and the gaming of the system by out of state energy providers.
This bill will result in increased energy costs and will all but eliminate some
safe alternatives that are currently available and needed to meet our energy
needs.
Go to www.noprop7.com
for more information.
Yes on Proposition
8: Eliminates Right of Same-Sex
Couples to Marry. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
Do not let four
San Francisco-based judges overturn the will of the voters who overwhelmingly
passed Proposition 22 in 2000 and thousands of years of human
civilization. This overturning has been carefully crafted because they
cannot win at the ballot box. No tactic is below advancing their agenda
which includes indoctrinating school children as young as
kindergarteners. Protect the cornerstone of our society, our children and
families by protecting traditional marriage.
Go to www.protectmarriage.com
for more information.
Yes on Proposition
9: Criminal Justice System.
Victims’ Rights. Parole. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.
Reduces number
of parole hearings at cost saving to taxpayers. Ensures victim’s rights
are better protected. Criminals are already protected (we would say
overly so), time to balance the law to protect victims, witnesses, and their
families.
Go to www.friendsofmarsyslaw.org
for more information.
No on Proposition
10: Alternative Fuel Vehicles and
Renewable Energy. Bonds. Initiative Statute.
Pickens, a
billionaire, and his business acquaintances will profit handsomely by
generating business through the California Ballot Measure process. It is
a brilliant ploy and sounds good, but do not be fooled. No more bonds, we
need to support pay as you go to prevent a complete financial collapse of
Go to www.noonproposition10.org
for more information.
No on Proposition
11: Redistricting. Initiative
Constitutional Amendment and Statute.
We do need
redistricting reform, but this measure falls far short of what we need.
We have the 2010 election to get something better and we should not settle for
a half measure which will make it harder to correct the problems with this
bill. We personally know the effects of the gerrymandering. This measure
gives the illusion of fixing the problem, but it still leaves the politicians
deeply rooted in the system, including drawing districts for their pals in
congress and possibly for themselves when they run for congress. We have
had problems with some of the folks behind the scenes on the yes campaign and
they are not to be trusted. Although the no on 11 campaign cannot be
trusted either; we must support something better in 2010.
Go to www.noonprop11.org
for more information.
Yes on Proposition
12: Veterans’ Bond Act of 2008.
From our research, this appears to be a
well run system that pays for itself and only needs
No on Measure R: Traffic
Relief. Rail Extensions. Reduce Foreign Oil Dependence.
Since it appears that we are entering a recession and
almost every level of government in the state is in financial trouble, now is
not the time to be increasing taxes. Anyone near a neighboring county can
just start buying items outside of
No on Measure G:
No on Measure I:
Government for the People
CA FPPC# 1264355
Donations are not tax
deductible
The information
on this website is the opinion and analysis of the staff of “Government for the
People”. We believe that all the information is true and correct.
The information is provided to you in order to assist in making an informed
choice on Election Day.
