I am currently enjoying a mail piece called the Democrat[ic] Election Education Guide. [Italics and brackets by me] by the Election Education Guide folks of Burbank, a slate mailer group. It has a picture of an owl on the address side, the mailer is a real hoot.
It features every statewide candidate and proposition endorsed by the CA Dem Party, Firefighters, Nurses, Teachers and College Professors. [I love that last part, are Dem voters really turned on to what college professors think politically? really? funny!]
It has the entire slate of statewide Dems from US Senate thru that ‘non-partisan’ Superintendant of Public Indoctri…er Instruction. The laser printed portion that is specific to our area has the Dem’s listed for BOE, Congress, State Senate, [awww, they didn’t pick me] and another funny, for Assembly, "No Democrat in your district" on the ballot. Yeah, I guess it isn’t an unbiased mail piece but an "Education Guide" to get Dems turned out. OK, fair enough.
On the Props, it’s more of the hysteria to get people scared into voting right [left]. They would rather legislators go back to their corrupt redistricting practices by repealing 2008’s Prop 11
before it’s used even once, via their Yes on 27 stance, and of course they are not supporting Prop 20 to add Congressional seats to Prop 11 responsibilities. The best part is how concerned they are about ‘stopping bureaucratic waste’ because of what Prop 11 and 20 would cause and all the millions that could instead go to schools and public safety. From forming a citizens commission on drawing lines fairly each decade? Please!
Prop 21 they claim keeps new parks tax funds from ‘politicians meddling’ [hmm, so would many other Props that these groups have opposed that protect local and transportation funds, etc.
Prop 25, they want so badly to get rid of the 2/3 vote for budgets and taxes, and let the Dems do it all!
Prop 26’s "no" arguments goes to the old well of "protecting polluters" and "costing taxpayers." It’s a simple measure to require bureaucrats and electeds to receive a 2/3 vote by those elected, but the Sky is Falling crowd fails to see that it’s a protection from dollar shifts too, such as a raid on transportation dollars to the General fund. Using the Big Oil, Tobacco and Polluters argument always scares voters they figure…maybe they can borrow Boxer’s time tested "Woman’s Right To Choose" being threatened and toss that in too.
Prop 19’s marijuana legalization would "bring in Billions for public schools and public safety without raising taxes"…[because we don’t like raising taxes…wait, it taxes marijuana users, so confusing] It provides "mandatory jail for providing for minors" [so what you’re saying is it’s OK to provide to minors now…besides I thought jails were overcrowded with drug crime people] Because of passing Prop 19 it "frees police to arrest violent criminals" Wow! Freedom! "Thousands of new jobs" it proclaims in italics. Sure, for attorneys for DUI’s and for workplace lawsuits for employees to sue the boss for expecting employees to be reliable. "Local labor and COPS [which cops?] say Yes on 19."
Prop 23 is a ‘no’ because of the usual Texas oil co. drivel and that it "would cost jobs" [I guess meaning all these new green jobs like they have in Spain, not] and that passing 23 would "increase energy prices" …now that’s a whopper! We all know that the ‘big polluter’ energy is much cheaper because ‘big business’ cares only about ‘big greed’ and making money!
The mailer closes with "Vote Democratic" "Democrats: Turn out the vote in this General Election. Show support for the Democrat[ic] way to change our country." [italics and brackets mine]
So far, many average citizen Dems aren’t convinced about the change. Let’s hope they see through these and other mailer deceptions, and their candidate authors on November 2.
October 24th, 2010 at 12:00 am
There are a lot of assumptions in your column that don’t really stand up to scrutiny. You take the obvious point that a lot of political mail is misleading and use some examples of slate mail that you find misleading to attack the whole genre.
The truth is that slate cards are no more misleading than typical political mail, but by definition, they are clearly an improvement in the process because they encourage candidates to build alliances to get messages out to voters.
Blame the people who chose those specific mailers to be on, not the process of people combining resources to get a message out. The fact is that slate cards are a way to get a message out more cheaply than you pay in the usual campaign. That is why on issues like Props 20 and 27 where one side has virtually no money, they are still able to get a message out to voters for consideration by using the tool of slates. We shall see how much success they have, but when I read things like what Mr. LaMalfa wrote here I wonder if it isn’t a case of someone not wanting voters to hear the other side and to take us back to the days when voters would only get one side of most issues and kingmakers in smoke filled rooms could decide results. Slate cards help give average people a say in political decisions affecting their lives and they are a good thing overall.
October 25th, 2010 at 12:00 am
I somewhat agree with Doug La Malfa, and I produce slate mail. The fellow who produces the Education guide is a well known liberal democrat in the business and is not objective. But he’d sell out to a Rep side with more money. However, Tom Kaptain has the best point, our First Amendment rules and these mailings are very protected speech, regardless of costs.
October 25th, 2010 at 12:00 am
I hate to even make it about the first amendment because that sounds defensive. It’s not a question of having the right to produce a mailer. From my perspective it is that these mailers make it easier for political causes to get a message out. I don’t think most of us in the slate business make our living off of this, but I think in some way we are trying to advance causes we believe in or at least to help candidates get a message out so that voters can have more information to make their own choices.
October 26th, 2010 at 12:00 am
David Krute asked me to copy this using my account because it was taking a while for his own right to post to be approved and he was worried people wouldn’t see his response if he waited for that. In the interest of fairness, I decided to go ahead.
——————————————————————————–
We thank Mr. LaMalfa for letting the citizens of CA know that there is a slate that is truly Democratic and that if anyone who is left of center needs a guide to use when voting, the “ELECTION EDUCATION GUIDE” is the one to use. We are very happy to know that our mail program is attracting attention for the quality of the message. While I understand that a Republican would not care what intelligent, highly educated citizens (College Professors) would think about the propositions it turns out Democratic Voters do. As to Mr. Lacy’s assertion that we would sell out for more money, I would like to remind him that since the its inception the Election Education Guide has carried every Statewide Candidate and Proposition endorsed by the Democratic Party. I would also remind Mr. Lacy that in the Primary the Election Education Guide was the only slate in CA to turn down the check from PG&E in order to carry the Democratic endorsed Statewide Propositions. In this cycle we turned down bigger offers to carry No on 19 and YES on 22 in order to stay true to the Democratic Party and our personal beliefs. I’m disappointed that the flash report has not approved my account so that I had to answer through alternative sources. Thank you Tom for posting this reply on behalf of the Election Education Guide. David Krute, Democratic Consultant/Publisher: Election Education Guide
David Krute
Democratic Political Consultant
Publisher: Election Education Guide
direct line: 818/807-4735
October 26th, 2010 at 12:00 am
I just read Dave’s reply more carefully and I wanted to add that I wouldn’t have posted it if I had the slightest doubt Jon would have allowed him to post. Jon has always encouraged open discussion and debate on this board. I just figured there was a question of timeliness and David took it all a little more seriously than I did, so I wanted to give him a chance to respond.
October 26th, 2010 at 12:00 am
David’s account has been approved. Busy time right now.
I am working on a column on the topic of slates.
October 26th, 2010 at 12:00 am
Thank you for approving my account.At the time that I read and emailed Tom Kaptain my response I had not been approved. Thank you for allowing me to post and respond on your blog site. Jon, feel free to contact me with any questions you might have about the Election Education Guide or slates in general for your article.
October 26th, 2010 at 12:00 am
Thank you for approving my account.At the time that I read and emailed Tom Kaptain my response I had not been approved. Thank you for allowing me to post and respond on your blog site. Jon, feel free to contact me with any questions you might have about the Election Education Guide or slates in general for your article.