EDITOR’S NOTE: Here’s a chance to stop being a victim. Get angry enough to work for change. Pass this on to your email lists and write the LA City Ethics Commission (ethics.commission@lacity.org) and demand major reforms in campaign finance laws for the 2013 city elections.
At 9:30 a.m. Thursday in Room 1060 at City Hall, the Ethics Commission is considering a long series of changes give ordinary citizens a fighting chance to win election to the City Council over the political machines hand-picked candidates. (AGENDA Item 10).
For the elections next March, those candidates are mostly recycled state legislators who have proven themselves worthy by their repeated failure to solve the people’s problems and Council staff members who have demonstrated their loyalty and obedience like well-trained dogs.
Give real people a chance and show up for tomorrow’s commission meeting or fire off a letter immediately (ethics.commission@lacity.org) for inclusion in the file supporting the efforts of Common Cause to end the corruption by bringing clean government to Los Angeles. Here’s a draft letter from Common Cause that you can use as a model for your own personal message.(LA City Campaign Finance Reform Letter Apr 5th)
The key to making Council races competitive for honest candidates who want to be public servants, not self-servers, is money.
What we need to seek is immediate change to the rules for campaign finance, some of them already under Ethics Commission consideration, some that only a display of citizen power will get approved.
Start with increasing the matching funds provided candidates to $3 for every dollar they raise instead of the one to one match we now have. The maximum amount available to any individual would remain $150,000 so it would not cost our fiscally irresponsible City Hall any more of its precious dollars.
If you are squeamish about public financing, get over it.
The current system is citizen candidates scrounge for every nickel and dime while the machine’s crooks hit robo-dial and come up with hundreds of thousands of dollars from developers, unions and various special interests from here to Timbuktu so they wind up with something like a 15 to 1 spending advantage with independent expenditure committees ready to spend more if necessary.
This change would give candidates $75,000 in public money the moment they reach $25,000 in contributions and $150,000 more when they reach $50,000. It may not be a level playing, but a candidate would stand a chance even if they didn’t raise another cent.
More importantly, Common Cause wants to see the money that qualifies a candidate for matching come from contributors in their district and within the city.
The way it works now your Councilman or Councilwoman in the case of Jan Perry’s district get only 13 percent of their funding from people within their districts and more than half from people who don’t even live in LA.
It shouldn’t take a neuro-scientist to understand that apart from a few friends and family, outsiders are investing in the expectation they will get a handsome return on their investment.
The proposal that the commission wants to put off until 2015 would require that to get matching funds candidates would have to get 20 percent of their qualifying funding from within their districts and 100 percent of it from within the city limits.
This is crucial. It may not level the playing field but it means little contributors of $50 or $100 are vitally important. It means those nickels and dimes available to citizen candidates are going to be hard to match for the big shot incumbents and high-and-mighty state legislators.
If we don’t start to turn around LA in the next election, it won’t matter. It will be too late.
Okay. I havn’t read about it yet so will have to find out if I can help. Now I will
send it on. Teddy
OK. I read it. We need to try and help our city because the unions (public service –
major part of the problem spending our money like it is going out of style), the commissions, the council districts, the neighborhood councils and all else who
are supposed to stay within budgets simply ignore their existence. I intend to question everything I learn about and send copies to Englander (Mitch) until
they acknowledge that they are doing us in. May I ask that you all do the same
thing. And Ron, I know you will help by keeping us informed. Thank you.
The latest was reading about all the gasoline stolen for public servants personal
automobiles. (Daily News last week).
Mr. Marvin Moon has it right. Supporing candidates with tax money is totally wrong.
He feels, as do I, that tax money is to pay bills. Today the ethics commission
is meeting. They are acting for us. Do not let them forget that. Not for cronies
nor the city council nor the mayor. Otherwise, we will handle matters with our votes.
This city is in the wrong (call it evil, not just mistaken) hands. People, REBEL,
we need to stick up for ourselves. The unions are looking out for themselves, not
for their members who are citizens and liable for all bills.
Sorry people to curb your enthusiasm so to speak but these reforms (if they even get implemented – and it’s a big if) won’t make a difference. A well financed crook will still have enough dough to put lies and propaganda on TV so enough of the gullible, uninformed and naive idiots (typical LA voters, not union or special interest hacks) will vote for them. Your problem is that very few bother to vote and it’s easy to win elections – the crooks only need to get “their” base plus a few thousand maybe (out of millions of eligible voters ).
The 2013 election will have a predictable result – another thief and special interest whore will prevail. Prove me wrong but I don’t see who and how can beat the “machine”.
You are cynical. The “GANG” hav been having their own way for much too long.
So I understand. Please say a little prayer that THIS time we will succeed.
Without banning those PAC ads–or any tv, billboard, mailers—it will not accomplish much. All forms of campaign financing need to be eliminated. Then, those matching funds could be the only money used to cover costs of debates, etc.
Absolutely ban mailers. What a colossal waste of good trees!
Who reads them? Anyone with half a mind knows they’re all lies put out by the best spinners. Mine go straight from mailbox to circular file. I thought I was beating the system by going ‘undeclared,’ but all the did was get me more crap political ads. Now both parties bombard my mailbox.
If it t’wern’t’ for junk mail, I’d get hardly no mail a’tall, which would suit me just fine!
Another reason why the “machine” always wins is because your city (and the state) effectively created a one-party system. It made it relatively easy and straightforward for the various special interests to control the outcome of elections.
You are the sheeple for your party and you always fall in line so the party doesn’t even need to pretend that they listen to you. An recent example is the 30-day impound rule – you all huffed and puffed so??? The new rule will be in effect whether you like or not. And the chief proponent of this rule change, mayor Villar, is enjoying himself traveling all over the country. And if he runs for senate, I bet you will all be good obedient voters and vote the way your party tells you how.
I need some proof that Non Partisan is the cause of our problems. I have never seen any evidence that the City’s being Non Partisan has caused a single problem.
Almost no one votes because of the party to which a candidate belongs — although a few do. When I was gathering signatures during the last city council election for a candidate to qualify, I ran into a few people who refused to sign the petition without knowing the person’s party. The problem was that I did not know his party — it was either Democrat or Independent — I did not care and had never asked Twenty ort thirty years ago, he could have been a GOP.
What’s scary is some people actually vote based on the most familiar face–mailers and television, like it’s a guessing game or a multiple choice question on an exam that they never studied for. I know some folks that do this. I tell them we’d be better off if they just didn’t vote.
I never vote for someone unless I know them. I cannot udnerstand why people vote for judges — when they’ve never heard of the man or woman. Some of the judges are the worst people in the the entire state — truly wretchedly horrid people. Most judges become judges because some craven politician appointed them and then they are just re-elected forever no matter how vile they may be.
The MACHINE seems worried about something if they’d let this farce of a reform go this far! Maybe it sees the future when in August/September those DWP Summer bills hit the mailboxes with all those new fees and ratehikes. 40% increases in one year tend to piss off the already-pissed off even more. Even the Liberal braindead fools will notice it. Too bad Vahedi isn’t running against the Bag-Ban Man Koretz this time around–he’d slip in (after figuring all the deceased/non-resident/illegals/double voter/Pet-votes into the vote tally of course.) The new CD5 will have the whole of Encino in it and more of the traffic-oppressed Mulholland-Benedict Canyon bloc of wholly-pissed voters. If an ID was required to vote, 1/2 of the elected officials we have would be unemployed. Get rid of “absentee voting” too—make em’ show up with ID in hand and vote ALLTOGETHER ON ELECTION DAY! No more of this scam with mailing in bloc votes! If someone wants to vote by mail—then get the damn DOCTOR’S LETTER showing the DISABILITY OR PHYSICAL ISSUES that PREVENT a trip to the polls.
Then we have the LAUGH OF 2013—KEVIN JAMES FOR MAYOR??? He STILL is RUNNING THE FINANCES THROUGH SOME GUY IN LONG BEACH!!!!! His fools handed out fliers at Tues’ Valley Republican meeting showing JOHN THOMAS as a “coordinator” with some address in SHERMAN OAKS. BUT…wayyyyyy at the bottom of the flier–there’s the LONG BEACH, CA. address of the money managers!
HOW THE HELL DO YOU RUN FOR MAYOR OF LOS ANGELES BUT TAKE CAMPAIGN DONATIONS OUT of LOS ANGELES to PAY A FUCKING GUY IN LONG BEACH to run for MAYOR OF LOS ANGELES???? What’s next for Kevin?
SENDING THE PRINTING JOBS TO CHINA? HA HA HA!!! And everyone got so INDIGNANT about me pointing out this ass-clown MISTAKE. That’s why Angelinos are totally SCREWED in these elections. Either a good guy can’t raise the money to win, or the good guy gets HANDLED by the HANDLERS and becomes a useless FOOL.
I also suggest that each District has three councilmembers at they are all elected At Large within their district. Then there would be no one Lord of Fiefdom as we have.
When each councilperson is the Lord of his fiefdom, they all agree to let each Lord/Lady do whatever theyw ant within their District/Fiefdom. That’s why they vote together 99% of the time. If there were 3 councilmembers per district, then each one would be vbying for votes at the next election and thus they would be in competition with the other two within their district.
So we would either have 45 councilmembers (3 x 15 districts) or we could enlarge the size of the districts and have only 10 District but 30 councilmembers.
And Yes we need to brak teh link between cash and service — but I do not know how to do that without the court throwing it out. I do know how to change the charter for that each district has 3 councilmembers all elected At Large.
Do not base your vote on your political party affiliation, your earlier voting habits, or your family’s voting tradition. Years ago, these may have been trustworthy ways to determine whom to vote for, but today they are not reliable. You need to look at each candidate as an individual. This means that you may end up casting votes for candidates from more than one party.
Do not cast your vote based on candidates’ appearance, personality, or “media savvy.” Some attractive, engaging, and “sound-bite-capable” candidates endorse intrinsic unsound proposals and so should be opposed, while other candidates, who may be plain-looking, uninspiring, and ill at ease in front of cameras, endorse legislation in accord with basic common sense principles.
Do not choose among candidates based on “What’s in it for me?” Make your decision based on which candidates seem most likely to promote the common good, even if you will not benefit directly or immediately from the legislation they propose.
Do not reward with your vote candidates who are right on lesser issues but who are wrong on other key issues
Be sure to vote your conscience and not be swayed by money and empty promises.
No candidate should be able to buy his office with money.
Current elected officials are not qualified to be the next Mayor of LA!
Who is qualified to be the next mayor of Los Angeles 2013?
The current elected officials at LA City Hall who are running, do not qualify to be the Mayor of LA. Their past poor performance and their contribution to the current state of affairs are reprehensible. They do not deserve to be elected again for any position in LA City Hall and especially to the position of Mayor of LA.
I hope and trust that the people of LA are not as gullible as the current elected officials presume.
It is time for the voters of LA to elect a person who cares about the people of this great city of Los Angeles, a city with a population of about 4 million people and 281 square miles. The current elected officials at city hall have abused their position; they have failed the people of Los Angeles.
The current elected officials at LA city hall should get a verbal lynching for their performance. The City of Los Angeles is in its worst condition in this century. The cause of this despicable condition is the product of the current administration.
It is time to elect officials who truly care about the people and the city of LA. Officials who exercise their elected position for the good of the people of LA, not what is in it for them?
When we support current elected officials in their quest to become the Mayor of Los Angeles, we consent to their poor performance and induce them to continue to destroy our city.
We must change the status quo of business as usual; the current administration has abused its position and trust. Otherwise we as the people of LA will pay a heavy price for such negligence.
This is the message we should be sending to people who seek public office. A candidate must have honesty and integrity as a primary character trait and above all the public’s trust.
YJ Draiman
PS.
A question to the people of Los Angeles
Do you have confidence in your current elected officials in Los Angeles City Hall?
Are they doing a good job?
No, why?
Yes, why?
Who is qualified to be the mayor of Los Angeles 2013?
Where there is discord, the mayor will bring harmony. Where there is error, the mayor will bring truth. Where there is doubt, the mayor will bring faith. And where there is despair, the mayor will bring hope. The mayor will unite the city and promote economic prosperity successfully. A person who can do these things is the one qualified to be the mayor of Los Angeles in 2013.
http://www.yjdraimanformayor.org