Thanks to Marie Lakin for sending in this flyer that Hannah-Beth Jackson has been using. Thanks for reading and leaving comments.
Hannah-Beth Jackson has endorsed Proposition 11, the redistricting measure on this year's budget.
Click here for a summary on a news website I discovered called Ballotpedia. It has arguments and information about both sides.
Click here for the campaign website in favor of proposition 11.
Click here for the campaign website against proposition 11. I don't see a website against the initiative. If you see a website please leave a link.
I seem to remember a story that Tony Strickland is also in favor of Proposition 11. If you have a link to his comments about his support leave a comments and a link.
Hannah-Beth Jackson endorses Proposition 11 to establish independent citizen's commission to oversee state reapportionment
Former State Assemblymember and State Senate candidate Hannah-Beth Jackson today endorsed Proposition 11 on the November ballot. Proposition 11 would create a 14 member Independent Citizen's Commission to conduct the state's post-census political reapportionment.
"Politicians should not be drawing their own districts, it is an obvious and inherent conflict of interest," Jackson stated. "As a member of the State Assembly I supported efforts, such as those by State Senator Alan Lowenthal, to reform the state's redistricting process. But partisan wrangling always strangled comprehensive reform. Proposition 11 is not perfect, but it is much better than accepting another decade of excessive partisanship and legislative gridlock."
Proposition 11 is supported by a broad bipartisan coalition including Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, former Governor Gray Davis, the League of Women Voters, Common Cause and the California Chamber of Commerce.
Hannah-Beth-Jackson is running in what observers say is the only competitive State Senate District in the entire state this year. Senate District 19 was drawn in 2001 as part of a back-room "incumbent protection plan" that was specifically designed to give a "safe district" to every incumbent of both parties who sought reelection. Senate District 19 is only competitive this year because of a substantial and unanticipated shift in the makeup of the district's voter registration.
"Competitive elections are the lifeblood of democracy," Jackson added. "The public interest is lost when incumbent politicians cannot lose. We need elected leaders who are responsive and not afraid to test their ideas in the political marketplace. I was elected to the Assembly from a competitive seat and expect to be elected to the Senate from one as well."
The California Association of Political Centrists (CAPC) has also endorsed Prop. 11.
Man, she's a cutie, ain't she?
She is right on this although some - incumbents and power brokers - in both parties will not like this.
Over the decades, both parties have chosen to opt for a "to the victor go the spoils" approach to redistricting and this has resulted in legislative districts that have guaranteed reelection for incumbents simply based on party and not performance.
If that were not the case, there would have been a rational and workable compromise on the current State budget which by law should have been approved by the July 1 fiscal. But since no one - on either side - can really be held accountable for their arrogance, this crisis continues in its third month.
We demand to know what Tony Strickland's environmental policies are.
He has no environmental policies, unless supporting expansion of the WM landfill is considered an "environmental" stance of sorts.
Of course she supports it and of course Tony opposes it. It is self-serving for both of them to do so. It will level the playing field for both parties. Incumbents from both parties do not want that and Democrat in a Republican district obviously will. No big news here I'm afraid.
I read Strickland also supported Prop. 11. No? The Chamber of Commerce is supporting it.
http://www.independent.com/news/2008/aug/31/hannah-beth-jackson-and-tony-strickland-endorse-re/
I stand corrected Marie.
Just received Strickland's latest bamboozle: a beautiful, glossy three page collection of cynicism, paid for by the 3 Sluts...Gambling, Tobacco & Alcahol.
In it, Strickland brags about his lawsuit against Davis' deals to cap electricity costs at $70/mwh for 20 years. What Strickland doesn't mention is that Davis' deal would have provided CA with the cheapest electricity in the Nation and allowed us to keep jobs, reduce the state's deficit and attract new businesses to the best place on Earth.
Once again, Strickland pulled a stupid move that's cost CA a lot of money!
Yet Strickland claims to CREATE JOBS (in fact he helps lose them every time a CA business moves out of state due to the high costs of power), PROTECT TAXPAYERS (truth is he's helped add thousands to their annual cost of living expenses & govt services so that they can subsidize the cost of rich folks' yachts & jets) and ELIMINATE WASTEFUL GOVT SPENDING (where he's actually contributed to a ballooning state debt by forcing CA to beg, borrow and steal from its working families and their children's futures).
Don't be fooled by Strickland's lies. Talk to your friends & neighbors about WHY they're paying more and more while Strickland rakes in more and more.
PS: Yes, Brian! I'll hold on to this flier for you.
GS,
Are you perhaps referring to Gray Davis's infamous deal with the electricity companies that was one of the primary reasons for him being recalled as Governor? You mean that "deal?"
Yep! The deal meant to cap prices at less than 2/3 what they are now and probably less than 1/3 of what they will be during the next couple of years.
And why was it "infamous"? That was because Strickland's colleagues were helping the power industry to raise their costs of electricity from $30/mwh to over $100/mwh within one year after their plans to deregulate the industry. Those prices continued to skyrocket and prices of $200-$250/mwh were being projected.
Davis's deal, done through the vested power of the governor's office and yet challenged by Strickland on the phony belief that the negotiations should be open to the public (although his own deals with power company lobbyists were kept secret) would have made California a mecca for new businesses fleeing high prices.
Strickland, his lawsuit and the spin from the power lobby's PR firms made the deal "infamous". because of that California homeowners are paying tens of billions of $$ more for power.
Yeah right, GS. That's your story and you're sticking to it, huh? I guess the voters must have really bought that when they recalled Davis by a landslide.
Bwah-hah-hah-hah-hah!!!
No. Its the story that's been covered in depth by news groups since it was happening. If you had the balls or the evidence to back up your opinion you'd have posted that instead of the weak-assed response you're trying to get away with.
I'm hard pressed to believe Tony Strickland supports redistricting since he was intimately involved in drawing up the current "safe" districts. But then now that his wife is termed out, maybe he doesn't care.
As am I - but that doesn't mean who won't support it (and alterantivce energy) for NOW.
Sure, GS, covered in such depth that it allowed Davis to avert being recalled. Boy, I keep giving you that additional length of rope to hang yourself with.
Keep taking the bait though, I sure am enjoying it. Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha.....