Get free daily email updates

Syndicate this site - RSS

Recent Posts

Blogger Menu

Click here to blog

FlashReport Weblog on California Politics

- Or -
Search blog archive

Jon Fleischman

Recall back on? Perata transfers $110k into Recall Denham Committee

This time of the political season, we are all following the late-contribution reports to see where the money is flowing — and a lot of it has been moving around — millions.

Nary lost amongst the other activity was this transfer of $110,000 from "Leadership California" (Lame-Duck Senate President Don Perata’s PAC) to the "We Deserve Better; Yes on the Recall of Jeff Denham" PAC.

Given Perata’s public pronouncements recently that he was pulling the plug on any attempt to recall Denham, this transfer raises serious questions. In addition, the pro-recall committee still has yet to return several six figure contributions sent in by labor unions in recent days.

So it begs the question – is the recall back on?

Senator Denham, of course, hasn’t let up from campaigning against this petty political recall instigated by Perata in one of his frequent "I am four years old"… Read More

Jon Fleischman

Today’s Commentary: Republicans Who Voted For The “Big Government” Farm Bill Want The GOP To Stay In The Minority

We have some big challenges facing the Republican Party in Congress right now. The GOP lost our majority 2006 in a large part because our party became that which we opposed – the party of big spending. When the 2006 elections were over, the Club for Growth conducted surveys in 15 competitive House seats (where neither candidate was tainted with scandal) and guess what they found out? The GOP had completely lost its fiscal conservative branding. The most startling results was when those polled asked which political party in Washington was “The Party of Big Government” – the results? Republicans 39.3% and Democrats 27.9% – shocking, and sad. (Read more about the CfG survey here).

Yesterday, the lead editorial in the Wall Street Journal was all about how the Republicans, now in the minority in Congress, still don’t get it (in terms of the need for fiscal restraint).Read More

Jon Fleischman

Republicans Who Voted For The “Big Government” Farm Bill Want The GOP To Stay In The Minority

We have some big challenges facing the Republican Party in Congress right now. The GOP lost our majority 2006 in a large part because our party became that which we opposed – the party of big spending. When the 2006 elections were over, the Club for Growth conducted surveys in 15 competitive House seats (where neither candidate was tainted with scandal) and guess what they found out? The GOP had completely lost its fiscal conservative branding. The most startling results was when those polled asked which political party in Washington was “The Party of Big Government” – the results? Republicans 39.3% and Democrats 27.9% – shocking, and sad. (Read more about the CfG survey here).

Yesterday, the lead editorial in the Wall Street Journal was all about how the Republicans, now in the minority in Congress, still don’t get it (in terms of the need for fiscal restraint).Read More

Matt Rexroad

Give us the full menu of choices

I don’t want to hear a bunch of nonsense about a choice between borrowing lottery proceeds and an increase in the state sales tax.

The people of California want the choice between a revenue increase (taxes, bonds, fees, whatever…) and "blowing up boxes" in state government. Let’s blow some boxes up.

If the voters of California actually have to make the decisions for our elected representatives then give us the full menu of choices that includes reductions in state government.

I would chose to completely eliminate the lottery, leave sales tax where it is, and use this opportunity to restructure numerous parts of state government.… Read More

Congressman John Campbell

The Campbell Quiz

I read a lot of political discourse that is pretty tedious and boring. I never want this blog to sink to that level. I understand that there is always a risk of that when I bring up such scintillating topics as international tax policy and mortgage origination regulations. Stop yawning!

Anyway, so here is the very first Campbell Quiz. These are a few questions about current events in Congress and politics. And no, I will not make you wait until next week to find the answers. They are all at the end of each question. Good luck, have fun…….oh yeah and maybe you’ll learn something you didn’t know too!

1) Two weeks ago, Congress passed a "technical corrections bill" that contained hundreds of new transportation earmarks including $90 million to study a "maglev" (magnetic levitation) train. This train would run a route that is currently served by dozens of daily airline flights and at a fare of about $118. If it takes $90 million to study it, imagine what it would take to subsidize it. This train would run between:

a) New York and Washington b) Anaheim and Las… Read More

Ray Haynes

I Hate to Say It

…but I told you so.

In 1998, I was appointed Chair of the Republican Party’s Judicial Evaluation Committee. Specifically, the committe was asked to evaluate the Justices and Judges up for election in 1998. The most public individual up for election that year was Chief Justice Ron George, who, through a set of very ugly legal maneuverings, was able to reverse the decision of the California Supreme Court prohibiting abortions for minors without parental consent. George was not content to allow the decision of the then Lucas Court affirming the law requiring parental consent to stand. In his first act as the Chief Justice, right after the retirement of Chief Justice Lucas, George, abusing his power as the new Chief Justice, went about acting to reverse the decision. He had no scruples about ignoring the tradition of the court, stare decisis, or judicial restraint to promote his own version of how society should be organized.

Then Republican Party Chair MikeSchroederstacked committee to support Chief Justice George (after he appointed me chair), but I made my case to the committee. Iargued that aRead More

Jon Fleischman

Jerry McNerney – Tax Hike King

Apparently freshman Democrat Jerry McNerney is unconcerned about being named one of Roll Call Newspaper’s most vunerable incumbents. Just in from our friends at The Club for Growth…

Jerry McNerney Adds Another Tax Increase to His Record

Washington – As if Jerry McNerney’s tax-and-spend record is not sufficiently hostile to taxpayers, today, the California representative voted for the absurdly named “Patriot Tax” in the war supplemental. The amendment is an unambiguous income tax increase, imposing a 0.5% surcharge on gross income on earnings over $500,000 a year or $1 million for a couple.

Without a doubt, this tax increase will prove harmful to the economy, stifling innovation, productivity, and job growth. To make matters worse, the tax will be especially harmful on small businesses whose owners often file their business income on their individual tax returns. In fact, the Tax Foundation reports that almost 83% of all income tax returns with over $1 million in income are business owners. A tax that is supposedly on the rich will in fact hurt everyone.

“Jerry McNerney’s disregard for taxpayers is… Read More

A tale of two marriages

California’s Supreme Court ruled today that California’s statutory ban on same-sex marriages is unconstitutional. The court also held that the term "domestic partner" creates injury for those who are so labeled in thattheir dignity is presumptively attacked bycarrying such a label.As such, thecourt held that to deny a member of a domestic partnership the legal right to call their union a marriage is also unconstitutional.

Justice Baxter, in crafting his dissent stated:

"I cannot join this exercise in legal jujitsu, by which the Legislature’s own weight is used against it to create a constitutional right from whole cloth, defeat the People’s will, and invalidate a statute otherwise immune from legislative interference. Though the majority insists otherwise, its pronouncement seriously oversteps the judicial power. The majority purports to apply certain fundamental provisions of the state Constitution, but it runs afoul of another just as fundamental — article III, section 3, the separation of powers clause. This clause declares that “[t]he powers of state government are legislative, executive, and judicial,”… Read More