---

This just in.... please come and support Senator Boxer!

Come join Senator Barbara Boxer as she outlines her plan for small businesses and the need for continual protection of our coastal economy.

Who: Senator Barbara Boxer

Where: Back on the Beach

445 Pacific Coast Highway

Santa Monica, CA 90402 (Please park in the Annenberg Community Beach House parking lot)

When: August 25, 2010, 9:30 AM

To RSVP please call: (323) 836-0820 and ask for Drue

Note: While the event is free, parking costs $4.00.

---

---

Please join

The Santa Monica Democratic Club

and other local Democratic organizations

for a reception honoring

Senator Barbara Boxer

Thursday, August 12

Doors open at 5:00 p.m., program begins at 5:30 p.m.

The Home of Jan Goodman and Jerry Manpearl

939 San Vicente Blvd.

Santa Monica, CA 90402

Contribution: $50

Santa Monica City Councilmember Kevin McKeown

will be the Master of Ceremonies for the evening.

Please RSVP by Wednesday at noon to

Jonathan Troen at (310) 560-4317 or jonathan©troen.net

Contributions or gifts to Friends of Barbara Boxer are not tax deductible for income tax purposes.

An individual may contribute up to $2,400 for the general election.

A multi-candidate pac may contribute up to $5,000 for the general election.

Individual contributions must be made from the donor’s own funds.

Federal law requires us to use our best efforts to collect and report the name, mailing address,

occupation, and name of employer of individuals whose contributions exceed $200 in an election cycle.

th

---

           

The Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Dinner, hosted by the LA County Democratic Party and honoring Democrats of the Year, will be on Sunday, August 22, 2010, from 6:00 PM to 10:00 PMT.

One of this year's very deserving Democrats of the Year is Santa Monica's own Councilmember Kevin McKeown.

Please join and support the Councilmember and fellow Democrats at the dinner or if you can not attend, consider putting words of congratulations in the program.

For more information and reservations, go to: http://lacdp.org/roosevelt_dinner/

Please reserve your tickets directly with the County Party, and then, if you would like to sit with other Santa Monica Democratic Club members, please e-mail Julie Dad (juliedadsocal@gmail.com) so we can arrange to sit together.

Thank you, and congratulations Kevin!

-Jonathan

---

Without directly revealing their involvement, major industries and organizations play key roles in legislative contests.

By Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles Times
July 11, 2010 | 8:59 p.m.

Reporting from Sacramento — The issues and the special interests that pursued them in last month's primary election are familiar: Big oil, tobacco and insurance companies seeking armor against litigation and taxes; trial lawyers looking for more opportunities to sue; the state Chamber of Commerce working against proposals its members deem costly.

But even battle-hardened veterans of special-interest wars were alarmed by how some of California's most influential groups flooded a few small campaigns with money in an effort to achieve their goals.

Under innocuous umbrella names such as the California Alliance and Put California Back to Work, they poured more than $1 million into each of three contests for rank-and-file legislative seats — races that merely determined who would advance to the general election.

That's far more than legislative candidates normally spend on their own campaigns; in 2008, aspiring state lawmakers' campaign outlays averaged $405,000, according to the nonpartisan National Institute on Money and State Politics.

In one of the three, a state Senate district stretching through Riverside and San Diego counties, the interest groups set a record for a legislative primary by spending $2.9 million on a race between two Democrats. That sum was more than double what the two candidates shelled out.

The groups' spending "makes a mockery of the rules designed to create a level playing field," said Dan Schnur, chairman of the state Fair Political Practices Commission.

That's because their money didn't go directly to the candidates they favored, because such contributions are subject to strict limits. Instead, the cash went to outside political committees that are free to raise limitless sums as long as the candidates they support are not involved in the groups' efforts.

In districts where elections are close enough that an infusion of cash can sway the outcome, and where there are candidates aligned with the special interests' legislative agenda, the groups "feel it's worth pushing them over the top," said Tracy Westen, chief executive of the Center for Governmental Studies in Los Angeles. "It's an investment."

Voters may not have been aware that insurance companies, lawyers and other interests were calling most of the shots in the three campaigns.

The California Senior Advocates League, which paid for attack ads in two of the three contests, received money from JobsPAC, which is affiliated with the Chamber of Commerce, and Put California Back to Work, a committee sponsored by the Civil Justice Assn. of California. Both groups' members and contributors are mostly big corporations.

Doug Heller, executive director of the Santa Monica nonprofit Consumer Watchdog, said the league's name gives the impression that the candidates' support is coming from "an authentic campaign by seniors."

The league's money went to help candidates who included Juan Vargas, who battled Assemblywoman Mary Salas in the Democratic primary for the Senate seat in Riverside and San Diego counties.

Business executives might not normally back Democrats because of the perception that they cannot be counted on to hold the line against more taxes — and Vargas may not. But the demographics of the district suggest that a Democrat will win in November, and Vargas is an insurance company executive and former assemblyman who worked with the industry during his last stint at the Capitol to thwart what they considered excessive regulation.

Moreover, the business groups were determined to drive Salas, a liberal, out of the Legislature. She voted for two bills dubbed "climate change taxes" by the Chamber of Commerce. She also voted in favor of a measure allowing patients to sue health insurance firms that rescind coverage in certain ways.

Interest groups "track your votes, and if they don't like your voting record there is this threat that they are going to run this campaign against you," Salas said.

Vargas is leading the race; certification of the vote count is expected by Thursday.

Most of the $2.9 million that the interest groups spent on the contest went to oppose Salas and support Vargas. The contributing committees included Californians for Balance & Fairness in the Civil Justice System, another group created and controlled by the Civil Justice Assn. of California.

The association lobbies the Legislature against bills they believe would allow unreasonable lawsuits against its members, which include oil companies BP, ExxonMobil and Chevron; insurance firms AIG, Allstate, Farmers and State Farm; pharmaceutical giants Bristol-Myers Squibb and Bayer; and the tobacco firm Altria, which owns Philip Morris USA.

"Our political activity is aimed, as it has always been, at helping elect legislators who will bring more balance and fairness to the civil justice system," said John H. Sullivan, president of the Civil Justice Assn. of California.

Salas was bolstered by the arch-nemesis of Sullivan's group, the Consumer Attorneys of California, which represents trial lawyers who often sue big corporations. The organization contributed heavily to the California Alliance, which campaigned in support of the assemblywoman. The California Nurses Assn. was another big contributor to the alliance.

"Mary has a history of standing up to the insurance industry," said Lea Ann Tratten, political director for the consumer attorney's group.

In addition to the Salas-Vargas contest, special interests swamped a Senate race on the Central Coast and an Assembly contest in Los Angeles County, bankrolling a barrage of attack mail and broadcast ads that the candidates could not afford financially or politically.

"If the voters understood clearly that it was tobacco, insurance and oil companies that were trying to influence their vote, it would have a completely different impact," said John Laird, a former Democratic assemblyman who placed a distant second in the Central Coast race.

Laird was competing in a special election to fill the Senate seat vacated by Abel Maldonado, whom the governor appointed as lieutenant governor. Business groups spent $1.3 million in the contest to benefit Republican Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee of San Luis Obispo, who placed first. Blakeslee and Laird will compete again in a runoff in the fall.

Complaints against the association have been voiced by the campaign of Betsy Butler, a former fundraiser for the Consumer Attorneys of California who won an Assembly primary in a district that includes Los Angeles, Redondo Beach and Torrance. Her affiliation with the trial lawyers made her a target for big business.

About $666,000 was spent independently to oppose her by five groups funded by business interests, including committees sponsored by the Civil Justice Assn.

patrick.mcgreevy@latimes.com

Link:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-special-interests-20100712,0,6660645.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+latimes%2Fmostviewed+%28L.A.+Times+-+Most+Viewed+Stories%29

---

July 14, 2010
DOWNTOWN —

That's because the City Council on Tuesday voted unanimously to place on the November ballot a half-cent sales tax increase, with half of the proceeds most likely headed to the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District.

The increase is expected to generate $12 million annually, money city officials said will help off-set future budget deficits that could lead to significant cuts in essential city services, such as police, fire, after school programs and community maintenance. The projected deficits are the result of the worst economic recession since the Great Depression, with the state taking over $40 million from City Hall over the last six years, city officials said.

If approved by a simple majority of Santa Monica voters, the increase would push the city's transaction and use tax to 10.25 percent, one of the highest in the state. The tax would not apply to food, medication and other items exempt from the current sales tax. The measure does not include an expiration date.

Not only will voters be asked to approve the tax, the council also placed on the ballot an advisory measure that would ask voters if they believe half of the estimated $12 million generated by the tax should be shared with the school district.

Education advocates, which included members of the business community, overwhelmingly supported the council's decision, expressing an even greater need for funding following millions in cuts from the state and the failure of a local parcel tax, Measure A, which would have charged property owners $198 per parcel per year to generate $5.7 million annually for public schools. Property owners already pay $346 per year per parcel to help fund schools.

Measure A, which needed a two-thirds majority to pass, failed in May mainly because of a lack of support in Malibu, which ironically would benefit from the potential increase in school funding the sales tax measure could provide without having to give anything in return. The tax would not apply to Malibu, which partners with Santa Monica to run the district.

With more than 66 percent of Santa Monica voters coming in on the side of the schools, it is believed City Hall's quest for cash will be easier this November as the tax measure requires a lower threshold for passage than the parcel tax, and it will receive the strong backing of the education community, which is sure to benefit from a yes vote. How much of a benefit is uncertain.

The council, which already gives the school district over $7 million annually as part of a joint-use agreement, would not be legally obligated to give the school district any money if the ballot measures are approved. City officials said the advisory measure will only gauge the community's interest, allowing them to voice their spending priorities, and is not binding. If the sales tax measure set aside money specifically for schools or any other cause, that would trigger the two-thirds threshold for passage.

Councilwoman Gleam Davis, an active education advocate before sitting on the dais, felt it was imperative to put both measures before the voters because she feels the financial mess in Sacramento will not get better anytime soon, and could in fact get worse, putting pressure on local governments to do more with less while creating financial uncertainty.

"This community will not tolerate any significant cuts in services," Davis said. "Santa Monica has such a tremendous tradition of providing high-quality public services. We can't cost cut our way out of this problem. We certainly need to do some cost cutting, but the fact is you can only cut so much until you get to an unexceptable level of services."

Members of the education community said the school board will not place on the November ballot a competing parcel tax measure to fund schools and will instead link its fate to City Hall's. They pledged to use their resources to help pass the measure.

"This tax would make more sense and be easier to pass than a parcel tax," said Neil Carrey, who heads the district's parcel tax feasibility committee.

Mayor Bobby Shriver, who voted against placing the sales tax measure on the ballot two weeks ago, but changed his mind Tuesday, said he still believes that the school district would be better off going for its own tax and with a stronger campaign in Malibu the district could get the two-thirds vote it needs for approval. He said the district was "missing a chance," to control its own destiny.

Shriver also said he does not want to see the campaign for the sales tax increase use scare tactics to intimidate voters. Shriver said City Hall is "rich" when compared to other municipalities that are being forced to make drastic cuts and lay off employees. The measure is meant to shore up future budget deficits that may arise from a struggling economy.

"The city is not broke," he said. "When people vote they should have a clear view … . The schools are in a very different situation than the city. … I hope that the campaigns for this are straight forward about that."

Shriver originally was opposed to the tax increase because he felt more could be done on the cost cutting side to bring about balanced budgets. He changed his vote because he agreed with his council colleagues that it should be left up to the voters to decide if the extra money is needed.

Shriver had support from Heal the Bay director Mark Gold, who has championed past tax measures that fund water treatment initiatives. Gold said he favored the school district going for another parcel tax because schools are in need. He didn't feel the same way about City Hall.

"I really think this is not a very good idea at this time to go forward with a flat tax in this manner," Gold said. "I have yet to see with all the things going on within the city of Santa Monica the urgent need for the city itself for this fee."

Whether or not the tax increase will receive the support of the business community remains to be seen. The Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce is expected to meet with members, including car dealerships, to gauge their interest in an endorsement. Several high-ranking members have signaled their support for the measure as a way to protect public safety and education.

Former chamber chair and current member Tom Larmore, a land-use attorney and education advocate, said the advisory measure was important for him.

"That's key for me, but I'm not in a business that will have to [pay much more because of the tax,]" he said. "For me, education is critical, but a lot of members don't have a direct connection to the schools. People agree that good schools are good for business, but when it hits them in their pocket book, sometimes they don't see it quite the same way."

In a meeting with chamber leadership earlier this week, City Manager Rod Gould said research has shown that slight increases in the sales tax has little to no effect on spending habits.

He also tried to clarify a misconception that everyone who buys a car in Santa Monica would be subject to the tax. Gould said only those who register their new cars in Santa Monica would be subject to the tax. Those who register outside the city would not pay the increase. Also, large appliances and construction materials would be subject to the tax only if they are delivered to a location in Santa Monica.

While some feel that the tax could negatively impact consumer spending, Carrey said that the opposite could be true with more people willing to pay the extra tax to help the city's schools.

kevinh@smdp.com

---

 
http://thesummerconference.eventbrite.com/The Summer Conference
Saturday, July 17, 2010 from 8:00 AM - 9:00 PM
 
Sponsored by
PNHP California
In collaboration with the State Strategy Group, California OneCare, California School Employees Association, Single Payer Now!, California Nurses Association, Progressive Democrats of America, The Single Payer Labor Task Force, California Alliance for Retired Americans, and many more!
 
 
REGISTER TODAY: $10 for non-physicians!
LOCATION:   UCLA Faculty Center, Los Angeles, CA (Directions)
 
REGISTRATION FEE INCLUDES:
Exciting guest speakers including Senators, legislative experts, and advocacy entrepreneurs
Training materials and expert training in health reform advocacy skills
Networking with health professionals, colleagues and allies from all over California
Morning coffee, catered lunch, gala dinner
And More!
 
GOALS OF THE DAY:
You will learn about the benefits of California single payer in the context of national reform with the most up-to-date information from legislative experts.
You’ll be prepared to present the facts and key concepts in the face of organized political opposition to meaningful healthcare reform.
You will emerge from this event as an advocate who is able to do outreach and head advocacy in your community to promote support for single payer healthcare among your colleagues, at your academic institution, and in your local network and community.
 
CONFERENCE PROGRAMMING
DAYTIME Education and Training: 8am-5pm
8:00 - 9:00  Registration and Coffee (included in Registration Fee)
 
9:00 - 9:15   Welcome; PNHP California.
9:15 - 10:00  The Evidence for Single Payer; Margaret Flowers, PNHP Congressional Fellow
10:15 - 11:00  2010 California Single Payer Primer; Sara Rogers, Chief Health Policy Consultant to Senators Leno and Kuehl.
11:00 - 12:00   Transitioning to State Single Payer: the financial and legislative challenges; Michael Lighty, Director of Public Policy for the California Nurses Association.
12:00 - 1:00    Catered Lunch with Speakers Panel and additional Q&A; Andrew McGuire, Executive Director, California OneCare; Lenny Potash, Chair, Labor Task Force for Universal Healthcare; Dr. Bill Honigman, State Coordinator, Progressive Democrats of America; Dr. Don McCanne, PNHP Senior Health Policy Fellow; Dr Bill Skeen, Executive Director, PNHP California.
 
1:00   -  2:15   Breakout Session I
2:15   -  2:30   Break
2:30   -  3:45   Breakout Session II
3:45   -  4:00   Break
4:00   -  5:15   Breakout Session III
 
Breakout Sessions will focus on three key areas: Education and Outreach to the Public and Press; Legislative Advocacy and Influencing the Political Debate; Building the Infrastructure for Local Coalition Activism.
 
EVENING RECEPTION: 5:30-9pm
5:30  -   6:30   Cocktail Reception (cash bar, not included in registation fee)
 
6:30  -   9:00   Gala Dinner with Honorary Speakers; Honorable Mark Leno, California State Senator and current Champion of SB 810; Honorable Sheila Kuehl, former California State Senator and constant champion of single payer.
 
REGISTRATION FEE:
All this for the low fee of only $10 for non physicians; NO REFUNDS; speakers contingent upon availability.   Limited scholarships available. If you need financial assistance, please contact info@PNHPCalifornia.org with the following information: name, reason for need and amount you are able to pay.
 
PARKING: Available at Parking Lot 2; not included in registration fee.
Questions? Contact the planning team for this conference at info@PNHPCalifornia.org

---

  WRITTEN BY ASSOCIATED PRESS       MONDAY, 28 JUNE 2010 08:28(AP) — The Supreme Court has rejected a business-led challenge to San Francisco's universal health care program that has enrolled more than 53,000 people who lacked health insurance.  The justices on Monday denied an appeal from the Golden Gate Restaurant Association of an appeals court ruling that upheld the program's requirement that employers help pay the bill or give their workers health coverage.The association said the city cannot require employers to pay the fee because a federal law generally prohibits state and local interference in the area of benefits that are offered to employees. Healthy San Francisco was created in 2006 to provide health care for residents who lack private insurance but are not eligible for other public programs. The city says the program has resulted in a drop of almost 70 percent in emergency room visits at San Francisco General Hospital, and also insists it will remain important even with the passage of a national health care law.

Read the rest ...

---

Based on the membership voting at the meeting (no quorum present), the Executive Board recommends voting for:

County Assessor
John Noguez

Superior Court Judge - Office 28
Mark K. Ameli

Superior Court Judge - Office 35
Soussan (Suzanne) Bruguera

Supeior Courth Judge - Office 73
No Recommendation (no Democrats are running)

Superior Court Judge - Office 107
R. Stephen Bolinger

Superior Court Judge - Office 117
Alan Schneider

Superior Court Judge - Office 131
Maren Elizabeth Nelson

State Board of Equalization
No Recommendation

County Supervisor
Zev Yaroslovsky

County Sheriff
No Recommendation

Los Angeles County Democratic Central Committee, Assembly District 41

Delores M. Press
Julie Lopez Dad
Cecile S. Bendavid
Agi Kessler
Leah K. Herzberg
Margie Murray
Ralph H. Erickson

---