13
ELECTION 2012
Mountain Views News Saturday, October 6, 2012
ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION
LAUNCHES IN CALIFORNIA
The Office of the Secretary of the State of California announced
it will launch the much anticipated California Online
Voter Registration by noon (PST) Friday. Online Voter
Registration will offer increased accessibility for the 6.4 million
unregistered eligible voters in California; 3 million of
which reside in Los Angeles County.
Dean Logan, Los Angeles County Registrar of Voters, will
be available to provide comment and expert insight into the
impacts of California Online Voter Registration for Los Angeles
County and California voters and elections.
Benefits of Online Voter Registration:
• Paperless online voter registration will save tax payers
money by reducing the need to process paper forms.
• Approximately 80 percent of Californians already use
the internet, making Online Voter Registration a fit for the
Golden State.
• Online Voter Registration will improve the quality and accuracy
of County Voter Files. Less manual data entry means
more quality assurance and time to confirm and process paper
forms.
• The convenience of online voter registration would provide
for more up to date records, which might also reduce
the number of provisional ballots cast.
• Online Voter Registration benefits the environment by reducing
waste.
• Online Voter registration will provide increased registration
security by ensuring instant delivery.
How does Online Voter Registration work?
• The online registration portal can be accessed at www.
lavote.net or at www.sos.ca.gov
• The process uses your California Driver’s License or Identification
number to match your voter registration information
to Department of Motor Vehicles records.
• The Secretary of State obtains the registrants’ signature
image on file from the DMV. This information will then be
provided to the counties and added as the official signature
of record on the voter file. The applicants’ information must
match in order to complete the registration process providing
increased registration security.
• Individuals who do not have a California Driver’s License
or an Identification number can still use the online portal
but will be required to print the form, sign it and mail it
back.
FOR MORE INFORMATION OR TO VOTE ONLINE GO
TO: www.lavote.net
NOVEMBER 2012 LOCAL BALLOT MEASURES
Measure A Appointment of County Assessor -- County of Los Angeles (Advisory Vote Only - Advisory Vote
Only)
Do you support seeking to change the California Constitution and the Los Angeles County Charter to make the
position of Los Angeles County Assessor an appointed position instead of an elected position?
Measure B Safer Sex In the Adult Film Industry Act -- County of Los Angeles (Ordinance - Majority Approval
Required)
Shall an ordinance be adopted requiring producers of adult films to obtain a County public health permit, to require
adult film performers to use condoms while engaged in sex acts, to provide proof of blood borne pathogen
training course, to post permit and notices to performers, and making violations of the ordinance subject to civil
fines and criminal charges?
Measure J Accelerating Traffic Relief, Job Creation -- County of Los Angeles (Continuation of Voter-Approved
Sales Tax Increase - Majority Approval Required)
To advance Los Angeles County’s traffic relief, economic growth/ job creation, by accelerating construction of light
rail/ subway/ airport connections within five years not twenty; funding countywide freeway traffic flow/ safety /
bridge improvements, pothole repair; keeping senior/ student/ disabled fares low; Shall Los Angeles County’s
voter-approved one-half cent traffic relief sales tax continue, without tax rate increase, for another 30 years or until
voters decide to end it, with audits/ keeping funds local?
Measure ALF Density Limit re Assisted Living Facility -- City of Sierra Madre (Ordinance - Majority Approval
Required)
Shall an Ordinance be adopted to amend Sierra Madre Municipal Code Section 17.35.040 (“Core Density Limit”)
of the People’s Empowerment Act (aka Measure V) to permit development of an assisted living facility consistent
with the Kensington Assisted Living Facility Specific Plan not exceeding two stories, thirty feet in height and
seventy-five assisted living suites, for the parcels located at 33 North Hermosa Avenue an 245 West Sierra Madre
Boulevard?
STATEWIDE BALLOT MEASURE
QUICK-REFERENCE GUIDE
30 Temporary Taxes to Fund Education.
Guaranteed Local Public Safety Funding.
Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
31 State Budget. State and Local
Government. Initiative Constitutional
Amendment and Statute.
32 Political Contributions by Payroll
Deduction. Contributions to Candidates.
Initiative Statute.
33 Auto Insurance Companies. Prices
Based on Driver’s History of Insurance Coverage.
Initiative Statute.
34 Death Penalty. Initiative Statute.
35 Human Trafficking. Penalties.
Initiative Statute.
36 Three Strikes Law. Repeat Felony
Offenders. Penalties. Initiative Statute.
37 Genetically Engineered Foods.
Labeling. Initiative Statute.
38 Tax to Fund Education and Early
Childhood Programs. Initiative Statute.
39 Tax Treatment for Multistate
Businesses. Clean Energy and Energy
Efficiency Funding. Initiative Statute.
40 Redistricting. State Senate Districts.
Referendum.
WHO IS ON THE BALLOT?
President/Vice President of the United States
Gary Johnson/James P. Gray, Libertarian
Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan, Republican
Roseanne Barr/Cindy Sheehan, Peace and Freedom
Thomas Hoefling/Robert Ornelas, American Independent
Jill Stein/Cheri Honkala, Green
Barack Obama/Joseph Biden, Democratic
United States Senate
Elizabeth Emken, Republican
Dianne Feinstein, Democratic
US Congress - District 27
Judy Chu, Democratic
Jack Orswell, Republican
California Assembly - District 41
Chris Holden, Democratic
Donna Lowe, Republican
California Senate - District 25
Carol Liu, Democratic
Gilbert V. Gonzales, Republican
District Attorney; County of Los Angeles
Alan Jackson
Jackie Lacey
LEFT TURN/RIGHT TURN
HOWARD Hays As I See It
IT AIN’T OVER TIL THE MORMAN GUY
SINGS
I expected something entirely different in
Wednesday’s presidential debate. I thought
it would be a tie or a slight win for Obama,
and so I decided to focus today’s article on the
sloppy and misleading polling that’s being fed
to the electorate. In light of the actual debate
performance, I think the polling story is a perfect
prelude to analyzing the debate.
On October 13, 1980, a NY Times poll had Carter
up 4%, followed a couple weeks later by a Gallup
poll showing Carter up 8%. At election time,
Reagan won the election by 10 points. This year,
over the last 30 days leading up to the first debate,
there have been 90 polls averaging a 2% lead for
Obama. The media elite have told us Obama
is the clear favorite (that story clearly has to
change). Back in 2004 over the same time period
there were 40 polls averaging a 5% point lead for
Bush, yet the media elites told us the Bush/Kerry
race was “a dead heat”. Why is one president’s
2% lead a clear advantage, and the other’s 5% lead
a dead heat?
Polls will tell you anything you want them to:
the truth or your version of the truth. It depends
on what you want to pay the pollster to do. The
devil is always in the details. Radio talk-show
host, Hugh Hewitt, interviewed the head of the
NY Times polling firm. Mr. Hewitt pointed out
that the Florida poll showed Obama ahead by 9%
and that the poll included 9% more Democrats
than Republicans. The pollster was forced to
admit that it was preposterous to believe the
Democratic advantage in Florida was 9%, but he
nonetheless said he believed his poll’s results. I
guess pollsters have to believe in their own work.
But then there was the debate. It wasn’t just that
Obama was so bad last night. It was that Mitt
Romney was so good. This surprised a lot of
people – Liberals and Conservatives. Romney
hit the President’s record hard, defended his
own policy proposals well and drew a sharp
philosophical distinction between his ideas and
Obama’s ideas. Many of us have believed that
Romney would make a great president, but
worried that he would be a lousy candidate. Mitt
Romney proved that he was not only worthy of
the office, but that he was worthy as a candidate.
So now we have a real election with a real choice of
candidates to match the real choice in directions
for this country.
Obama clearly demonstrated who he is and where
he is right now. His debate performance revealed
what many have called his tremendous hubris. As
president, one must have self confidence, but not
an absolute conviction in their own infallibility
or in their own moral superiority and disdain for
others. Clearly, Obama didn’t prep for the debate
because he didn’t feel his opponent worthy of the
effort. This is the same attitude that allowed him
to publicly berate the Supreme Court Justices at
his State of the Union address and to publicly
ridicule Republican leadership in the deficit
negotiation talks when he told them to attend a
speech on the pretext of offering a compromise.
Lastly, there are the public admissions that
Obama does not consider Romney to even be
competent.
Most tellingly, President Obama’s demeanor and
attitude
in the
debate showed a man
who has run out of ideas
and is flummoxed as
to why he’s in the spot
he’s in. He made few
references to what he
would do for the next
four years and tried to
defend what he has done
for the last four because
the last four have been so
bad, and he has no idea what to do differently for
the next four.
That shouldn’t surprise any of us. Even Vice
President Biden, in a moment of unscripted
honesty, told us all how miserable the last four
years have been. The middle class has been
“buried”, he said, and they’re slipping further
behind. We have more people in poverty now
than in a generation. For every 1 person who
found a job last month, 4 stopped looking. 23
million are struggling to find work. Household
income is down $4,000 since Obama took office,
and the economy continues to slow. Obama’s
proposed solutions include higher energy taxes,
which will bury the energy industry, 20 more
taxes in Obamacare, which will further bury the
middle class, more spending, which will bury
all Americans, and more debt, which will bury
future Americans and anyone foolish enough
to lend us that money in the first place. If I had
that track record and future outlook, I’d be tired,
depressed and detached myself.
Romney, on the other hand, demonstrated who
he is, as noted above, and provided some real
answers to the pressing problems we face. He will
reduce taxes for everyone; he will close loopholes;
he will cut spending; he will get this country
growing again so we can pay down the debt
Obama accumulated; he will replace Obamacare
with real healthcare reform; and he will work
with the opposition, unlike Obama’s approach
which was to freeze the Republicans out of any
meaningful negotiation over healthcare reform.
Mitt Romney also gave us some memorable
lines which helped crystallize the issues for
us. Wasteful green energy expenditures of $90
billion could have been 2 million more teachers,
and in deciding what programs to save he’ll ask
whether it’s worth borrowing more money from
China.
No doubt we will see that the first presidential
debate has changed the public perception of
the candidates and of the election’s trajectory.
Obama showed that he’s out of ideas. Romney
showed he’s up to the job. The whole thing
showed us that our skepticism of the polls has
been well founded. Given the debate’s outcome,
the odds of an October surprise have increased
markedly, but so too has the public’s distrust of
any such event. I doubt any “international crisis”
will allow President Obama to turn the tide back
in his direction. Americans are waking up.
About the author: Gregory J. Welborn is a freelance writer
and has spoken to several civic and religious organizations on
cultural and moral issues. He lives in the Pasadena area with
his wife and 3 children and is active in the community. He can
be reached at gregwelborn2@gmail.com
“An error does not become
truth by reason of multiplied
propagation”
- Mahatma Gandhi
“To be persuasive we must be believable;
to be believable we must
be credible; to be credible we must
be truthful. It is as simple as that.”
- Edward R. Murrow
“Truth is the new hate speech.” - Rush Limbaugh
Rich Johnson’s column last week on the year 1962
inspired me to devote a column of my own on the
subject. I had it all ready to go, but then I watched
the debate - and heard the post-debate pontification.
The hyper-ventilating came from the left, with Chris
Matthews despairing on MSNBC that the President
didn’t follow the advice Robert Kennedy gave brother
Jack on his way to debate Vice President Nixon; to
go out there and “kick his balls.”
Some saw President Obama’s determination to appear
“Presidential”. Others a rope-a-dope set-up for
the upcoming “town hall” encounter. It could be the
president was simply unprepared to deal with a candidate
who, with tens of millions watching, would
unabashedly repeat assertions long-debunked as baloney
(I’d use another term that starts with “b”, but I
don’t think Susan would let me).
Mitt Romney became that upside-down Etch-a-
Sketch shaken right before our eyes. There was
speculation as to how the tea-baggers would react
to witnessing the Nixonian dictum of running to the
right in the primaries, then to the center for the general
election. Here was “their” candidate defending
healthcare reform, Wall Street regulation and preserving
Social Security.
I heard a Garden Grove resident on a day-after radio
call-in show, who recalled experiencing the Kennedy-
Nixon debates on the radio - not on TV. He
said he went with the candidate who seemed most
knowledgeable, with the most facts at hand. He cast
the first presidential vote he was old enough to cast
for Richard Nixon. Fifty-two years later, he said he
again heard the debate on the radio – not seeing it on
TV. And he’ll again vote for the candidate coming
across as most knowledgeable, with the most facts at
hand – and will vote for Barack Obama.
A major topic was taxes, with Obama accusing Romney
of proposing a plan costing $5 trillion over ten
years. Romney’s response was clear; “That’s not my
plan”. FactCheck.org found that indeed Romney had
not proposed a $5 trillion tax cut. They also found
that what he did propose was mathematically impossible
to achieve.
For Medicare, Romney used that $716 billion figure
as an amount Obama wants to “cut” from the program.
What it is, though, is a cut in future growth
in spending, achieved by cutting excess payments to
private insurance companies and payments to hospitals,
which providers agreed to in anticipation of
more folks being insured and fewer having to rely
on emergency room treatment. It’s the same figure
appearing in running mate Paul Ryan’s Medicare
proposal.
Romney claims, “Healthcare costs per family have
gone up by $2,500” under Obama. According to the
Kaiser Family Foundation, healthcare costs rose 8%
a year from 2002 through 2008, and an average 4.3%
a year since Obama’s been in office.
Romeny brings back “death panels”, “an unelected
board that’s going to tell people, ultimately, what
kind of treatments they can have.” The Independent
Payment Advisory Board is prohibited by law from
dealing with rationing, premiums, benefits or eligibility
– and any recommendations it does make have
to go through Congress.
Regarding oil industry subsidies, Romney asserts,
“Actually, this $2.8 billion goes largely to small companies,
to drilling operators and so forth.” Actually,
the amount is more like $4 billion a year, with $2.4
going to the five largest companies – which together
pulled in $137 billion in profits last year.
Romney claims the Dodd-Frank financial regulation
bill gave a “blank check” to the five biggest “too big to
fail” banks, “killing regional and small banks”. What
the bill did was require those banks (thirty-seven,
not five) to prepare “living wills” so that if they went
under, taxpayers wouldn’t be stuck with the bill.
Small bank failures have gone down dramatically
since enactment of the bill.
Romney complained about companies receiving $90
billion in green energy investments, and that “half
of them of the ones that have been invested in, have
gone out of business.” The actual number is three of
28 firms going under, fewer than the number anticipated
when Congress passed the legislation.
On energy, Romney claims, “All the increase in natural
gas and oil has happened on private land, not on
government land.” Nation-wide oil production increased
from 4.9 million barrels a day when Obama
took office to 5.7 million in 2011. Production on federal
lands increased 28% from 2008 to 2010.
Romney mentioned “23 million people out of work
or stopped looking for work”. According to the Bureau
of Labor Statistics, the number is 15.1 million.
Romney stated, “The CBO says up to 20 million
people will lose their insurance as Obamacare goes
into effect next year.” The CBO’s latest estimate is
that 4 million might lose coverage, while 30 million
become newly insured.
Obama complained about tax deductions for “moving
a plant overseas”. Romney responded, “I have no
idea what you’re talking about.” Currently, a company
can deduct expenses for moving overseas just
as they can for moving from one state to another. A
move to eliminate that deduction was killed last year
by Senate Republicans.
Romney says government spending eats up 42% of
our economy. The CBO says it’s 23%.
The statement that stayed with me was when, extolling
free-market healthcare, Romney explained that
if someone is dissatisfied with their current health
insurance, they should simply take their money and
switch to a different carrier.
Whether it’s a disdain for the truth, or not having a
clue what life is like for most Americans, might be
open for debate. But at least now we know where
Mitt Romney stands on Big Bird.
|