Government for the People
Government for the People’s recommendations for the November 2, 2010 Ballot Measures, California Supreme Court Justices, California Appellate Court 2nd District, and Los Angeles County Judicial Candidates are below.
Note: Los Angeles County Bar Association’s (LACBA) ratings are indicated in (Red).
YES on Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye
Yes on Ming W. Chin
No on Carlos R. Moreno
California Appellate Court 2nd District
Presiding Justice Division 1:
Neutral on Robert M. Mallano
Presiding Justice Division 8:
YES on Tricia A. Bigelow
Associative Justice Division 1:
YES on Victoria G. Chaney
NO on Jeffrey W. Johnson
Associative Justice Division 2:
NO on Judith M. Ashmann
Associative Justice Division 3:
Neutral on Walter Croskey
Associative Justice Division 4:
YES on Steven Suzukawa
Associative Justice Division 5:
YES on Orville "Jack" Armstrong
Associative Justice Division 6:
YES on Paul H. Coffee
NO on Steven Z. Perren
Associative Justice Division 7:
NO on Laurie D. Zelon
YES on Frank Y. Jackson
Associative Justice Division 8:
YES on Elizabeth Annette Grimes
L. A. County Superior Court
Office No. 28: Mark Ameli (Qualified)
Office No. 117: Alan Schneider (Well Qualified)
California Ballot Measures
No on Proposition 19: LEGALIZES MARIJUANA UNDER CALIFORNIA BUT NOT FEDERAL LAW. PERMITS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO REGULATE AND TAX COMMERCIAL PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION, AND SALE OF MARIJUANA. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Yes on Proposition 20: REDISTRICTING OF CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS.INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
No on Proposition 21: ESTABLISHES $18 ANNUAL VEHICLE LICENSE SURCHARGE TO HELP FUND STATE PARKS AND WILDLIFE PROGRAMS. GRANTS SURCHARGED VEHICLES FREE ADMISSION TO ALL STATE PARKS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
NO on Proposition 22: PROHIBITS THE STATE FROM BORROWING OR TAKING FUNDS USED FOR TRANSPORTATION, REDEVELOPMENT, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROJECTS AND SERVICES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Yes on Proposition 23: SUSPENDS IMPLEMENTATION OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL LAW (AB 32) REQUIRING MAJOR SOURCES OF EMISSIONS TO REPORT AND REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS THAT CAUSE GLOBAL WARMING, UNTIL UNEMPLOYMENT DROPS TO 5.5 PERCENT OR LESS FOR FULL YEAR. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
NO on Proposition 24: REPEALS RECENT LEGISLATION THAT WOULD ALLOW BUSINESSES TO LOWER THEIR TAX LIABILITY. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
NO on Proposition 25: CHANGES LEGISLATIVE VOTE REQUIREMENT TO PASS BUDGET AND BUDGET-RELATED LEGISLATION FROM TWO-THIRDS TO A SIMPLE MAJORITY. RETAINS TWO-THIRDS VOTE REQUIREMENT FOR TAXES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
YES on Proposition 26: REQUIRES THAT CERTAIN STATE AND LOCAL FEES BE APPROVED BY TWO-THIRDS VOTE. FEES INCLUDE THOSE THAT ADDRESS ADVERSE IMPACTS ON SOCIETY OR THE ENVIRONMENT CAUSED BY THE FEE-PAYER’S BUSINESS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
NO on Proposition 27: ELIMINATES STATE COMMISSION ON REDISTRICTING. CONSOLIDATES AUTHORITY FOR REDISTRICTING WITH ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.
Write up for the 2010 General Election
California Supreme Court
In California, we have the unique ability to remove Supreme Court Justices during the Gubernatorial Election years. By voting no, the Justice is removed and a new one is nominated by the Governor. The Nominee is then confirmed by The Commission on Judicial Appointments. The commission has three members: the Chief Justice, the Attorney General, and the state's senior presiding justice of the Courts of Appeal.
While we may not get any better replacement in the short run, it is an opportunity to show our disapproval of nominee and the way that the Judiciary is being used to either make up law from the bench or kill laws that were voted on by the people.
YES on Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye
I cannot find any significant criticism for Justice Cantil-Sakauye, and given the potential bad picks out there, we probably have the best that we should hope for.
Yes on Ming W. Chin
Justice Chin has an amazing biography and is the best we can hope for in California at this time. Pro-Life groups did go after Chin in 1998 for his vote to overturn a parental consent for minors’ abortions. Since we cannot even get a Parental Notification Law passed in California now, parental consent is not an issue to fight for at this point in California.
No on Carlos R. Moreno
Justice Moreno is a classic “liberal activist” and needs to be removed from the court. The write up on Wikipedia says it all “On the state's highest court, he has the opportunity to "really address critical cutting-edge issues involving social policy," and his service allows him to contribute to "decisions about what direction the law is going to take." The legislature is where this cutting edge stuff is supposed to occur, not the judiciary. Moreno was appointed by Bill Clinton to the Federal Court in 1998 and to the California Supreme Court by Gray Davis.
The most recent battle over Proposition 8 and Marriage shows that he will be as radical in his activism. The law passed by voters that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California” was on the books and Proposition 8, which would put this in the constitution was well, was on its way to the ballot and would be voted on. In a non-judicial activist state, they would have waited until the people decided. When the Moreno and crew made their pre-emptive strike they also allowed “marriages” to take place to put a roadblock to the final implementation of Proposition 8. These “marriages” should have been overturned once Proposition 8 passed, but Moreno and crew determined that the law was not retroactive even though it was law of the land at the time and the constitutional amendment was clear that no other marriage other than between a man and a woman was valid or recognized in California. The lawsuit to overturn the will of the voters only had one activist ready to oppose the new constitutional amendment, Moreno. The law, the people, and the constitution are just barriers to Moreno’s judicial activism. Moreno is a barrier to a Constitutional Republic and must be removed.
If you are concerned about illegal immigration, based on Moreno’s history, you do want him on the court for any cases regarding this subject. Moreno is the son of Mexican immigrant parents who arrived in the country with few skills. He grew up in a home where Spanish was the first language and where no family member had an education beyond high school. Based on this, his mother was an illegal immigrant, making Moreno an anchor baby if reports of his birth in Los Angeles are correct. Moreno is unlikely to recuse himself and we do not want him to be able to decide on any case regarding illegal immigration or its impacts upon California.
Moreno was also on the short list for the U.S. Supreme Court, if the voters remove him from the California Supreme Court, we can derail him from damaging the country as a whole.
California Appellate Court 2nd District
All these positions were based on a lot of subjective evidence. There is a dearth of information on Appellate Court Justices since most of them entered the Judicial System before the internet and most groups do not spend much time reviewing Justices at this level. We used what data was available; where support was coming from, associations, and available rulings. If there is conflicting are insufficient information, we stay Neutral.
L. A. County Superior Court
Office No. 28 Mark Ameli (Qualified)
Mark Ameli has lots of support, money, and is running as the first Iranian American Candidate according to the Met News. We expect Mr. Ameli to do less damage that his opponent would to the strict adherence to the constitution and applicable law.
Randy Hammock was on track to receive our support as we were not overly thrilled in our evaluations into this race. Hammock has gone to great lengths to acquire judicial experience by acting as a Superior Court Referee in the seat that he is running for. He is also endorsed by the retiring judge that holds the seat he is filling in for. With this additional experience, it was a moderate surprise that LACBA reduced his 2006 Well Qualified Rating to Qualified. We gained additional insight when he included his questionnaire from the Lesbian and Gay Lawyers Association of Los Angeles (LGLA). This LGLA questionnaire indicated one of two things to us, he will be an activist judge or that he was dishonestly pandering, either way we cannot support him for this office.
Sheriff Baca Watch: in this race he has endorsed Mark Ameli and Randy Hammock before the primary.
Office No. 117: Alan Schneider (Well Qualified)
Alan Schneider was praised in glowing terms by sources on the Los Angeles Superior Court that I respect. Schneider is the most qualified candidate in this group. Schneider had some interesting perspectives on the Constitution, but will defer to the appropriate body to make law, the Legislature.
Tom Griego well connected politically, but not the makings of a good judge as attested to by his Not Qualified rating by the LACBA.
Propositions
No on Proposition 19: LEGALIZES MARIJUANA UNDER CALIFORNIA BUT NOT FEDERAL LAW. PERMITS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO REGULATE AND TAX COMMERCIAL PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION, AND SALE OF MARIJUANA. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
There are so many problems transitioning from something that is currently illegal and potentially very dangerous in a modern society. This ballot measure does not even come close to addressing the problems that this transition will cause. One of the legalize marijuana talking points that it is funding the Mexican drug cartels is true as far at they go, but the answer to this point is to build the congressionally passed fence on the Mexican boarder and crack down on illegal immigration. Open borders and non-enforcement of immigration laws are providing the rode and people to the Mexican drug cartels.
Go to www.NoOnProposition19.com for more information.
Yes on Proposition 20: REDISTRICTING OF CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS.INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Having dealt with politicians and running for office, you have to remove the power to pick voters from the politicians. With modern technology politicians no longer have to respond to the will of the people, which is how a Republic is supposed to function, but instead they pick those they agree with, those they can fool, or those who cannot even vote, to make up their districts. Although the current system leaves something to be desired, it is better than the political establishment in Sacramento.
Proposition 20 expands the role of the voter approved Citizens Redistricting Commission under Proposition 11.
Go to www.yesprop20.org for more information.
No on Proposition 21: ESTABLISHES $18 ANNUAL VEHICLE LICENSE SURCHARGE TO HELP FUND STATE PARKS AND WILDLIFE PROGRAMS. GRANTS SURCHARGED VEHICLES FREE ADMISSION TO ALL STATE PARKS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
This is what politicians do, they threaten the things that people want; police, fire, teachers, and parks while funding their pet projects and insider deals. Proposition 21 will just add to the unpopular Car Tax and the existing funding that currently goes to the State Parks will be re-directed for the Sacramento insiders.
Go to www.voteno21.com for more information.
NO on Proposition 22: PROHIBITS THE STATE FROM BORROWING OR TAKING FUNDS USED FOR TRANSPORTATION, REDEVELOPMENT, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROJECTS AND SERVICES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
While we are all in favor of taking money and power away from Sacramento, this is not the Proposition to do it. If they had not included “Redevelopment”, we may have supported it. “Redevelopment” empowers the local corrupt politicians and speculators with tax money and the ability to take peoples property via eminent domain. We need to eliminate the Redevelopment agencies, not put then in the California Constitution. This is one of the few times that we will agree on a Proposition with the Democrat Party and the “liberal” led unions, such as the California Nurses Association and the California Teachers Association.
Go to www.votenoprop22.com for more information.
Yes on Proposition 23: SUSPENDS IMPLEMENTATION OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL LAW (AB 32) REQUIRING MAJOR SOURCES OF EMISSIONS TO REPORT AND REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS THAT CAUSE GLOBAL WARMING, UNTIL UNEMPLOYMENT DROPS TO 5.5 PERCENT OR LESS FOR FULL YEAR. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Even if you believe the discredited (East Anglia data) and unproven “Man Made Global Warming” Theory, you should vote for this Proposition to suspend this job killing legislation. With California in the top 3 for unemployment, now is not the time to kill the economy by adding expensive and largely ineffective regulations. If you don’t like people and want to make it more difficult for them, then go ahead and vote no. If and when California’s economy recovers, then we may be able to afford costing ourselves money and jobs latter.
Go to www.yeson23.com for more information.
NO on Proposition 24: REPEALS RECENT LEGISLATION THAT WOULD ALLOW BUSINESSES TO LOWER THEIR TAX LIABILITY. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
California cannot continue to shake down businesses to fund the “public” employee unions. Recent studies have shown that the public employee unions are paid twice as much for a similar private sector employee with an almost lifetime job. With private sector businesses able to locate out of state or even out of the country, we can no longer afford to tax them into oblivion.
Go to www.StopProp24.com for more information.
NO on Proposition 25: CHANGES LEGISLATIVE VOTE REQUIREMENT TO PASS BUDGET AND BUDGET-RELATED LEGISLATION FROM TWO-THIRDS TO A SIMPLE MAJORITY. RETAINS TWO-THIRDS VOTE REQUIREMENT FOR TAXES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Proposition 25 is yet another attack on the rights of the artificial minority which are protecting Californians from complete destruction by Sacramento. As Thomas Paine wrote in his American Revolution inspiring pamphlet, Common Sense, “Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one”. The Democrat Majority could have easily passed a budget in June if they would compromise, but they only talk about compromise when it is someone else that has to give up their positions, compromise is not for them. One reason that they have not passed a budget is to use it as a campaign tool to pass this Proposition. Please do not allow corruption and cynicism rule, vote no on Proposition 25.
The Democrats have an artificially larger majority than they otherwise should because of the large populous of illegal immigrants and their children. That is why center-right ballot measures still pass in California, illegal aliens do not vote in large numbers yet. When I ran for office in 2006, I came in second in my district, but received many more votes than the winner in 16 other districts, including the outgoing Assembly Speaker at the time, Fabian Nunnes. If this passes, it will no longer be Americans that control their government, but the people in Sacramento that control the system.
Go to www.no25yes26.com for more information.
YES on Proposition 26: REQUIRES THAT CERTAIN STATE AND LOCAL FEES BE APPROVED BY TWO-THIRDS VOTE. FEES INCLUDE THOSE THAT ADDRESS ADVERSE IMPACTS ON SOCIETY OR THE ENVIRONMENTCAUSED BY THE FEE-PAYER’S BUSINESS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
California needs to close the loop hole that politicians are exploiting by calling taxes fees. It will also overturn a recently passed legislation that shifted costs from the general fund to the transportation fund resulting in less money to maintain our infrastructure. This Proposition will limit the amount that Sacramento politicians can game the system.
Go to www.no25yes26.com for more information
NO on Proposition 27: ELIMINATES STATE COMMISSION ON REDISTRICTING. CONSOLIDATES AUTHORITY FOR REDISTRICTING WITH ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.
Sacramento politicians want to overturn the will of the people that voted for taking redistricting out of their hands. This is the corrupt politicians (Democrat and Republican) last chance to overturn the will of the voters before districts are drawn following the 2010 census. Please vote no on Proposition 27 and see if an “independent commission” will do a better job, if you look at some of the current districts drawn by the so-called elected representatives, it would be nearly impossible to do worse.
Go to www.noprop27.org for more information.
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.
