Category: Politics

Today, Ken Barnes—a Republican that I have known for many years—had a piece published in the Sacramento Bee that deserves comment for many reasons. The letter is his farewell to the Republican Party. Barnes left much unsaid in his letter. I would like to fill in a few details that he left unstated and analyze his argument in the piece.

I was one of those rare species: a black Republican, the guy willing to spit into the wind of conventional thought, who was often showcased on camera at party events to prove inclusiveness.

But as a proud black man, I can no longer be a member of the Republican Party.

Being a Republican has long been a part of my personal and professional identities, so leaving the party is a difficult and emotional decision.

In 1998, as a young man searching for what I believed were shared values, I cut ties with the Democratic Party and became a Republican. Democrats, in my view, had become unwelcoming to those holding center-right views not in lockstep with the party, and it was my belief that through hard work, the Republican Party could be utilized as a vehicle for improving our community.

For the next 13 years, I dedicated myself to growing the conservative base of the Republican Party, and in the process bound myself in emotion and deed.

During that time, I worked on behalf of Republican candidates at all levels, from presidential and gubernatorial campaigns, on down to local elections.

I have had the pleasure of serving as president of the Sacramento Republican Assembly, a term as a member of the California Republican Party executive committee, and most recently as treasurer of the Sacramento County Republican Party.

Like Ken, I was once a member of the Sacramento Republican Assembly. When we attempted to form a CRA chapter in southern Sacramento County, Ken was one of many that opposed the move. I have occasionally been a delegate to the California Republican Party convention; however, unlike Ken I have never served on the Executive Committee of the State Party. I suspect that it would be a colossal frustration to be part of that group.
Lastly, Ken and I both have served on the Sacramento County Republican Party (aka Central Committee). Ken was one of four Treasurers to serve in the last term. Once it was clear that he took the job seriously, he was thrown under the proverbial bus like many others that pledged themselves to Chair Sue Blake. They literally would not let him speak to the financial condition of the County Party and ignored any recommendations that he tried to make to help the group stay financially solvent. When the new committee was seated, he wasn’t even allowed to give a final financial report to the group even though he was present at the meeting with multiple copies of the report ready for distribution.

If memory serves correctly, when the Obama cartoon of the watermelon patch at the White House was posted on the old Sacramento County Party website, Ken was the first one to complain and get it taken down.
Barnes also was the person that applied to run for the Los Rios Community College District that went to court when Deborah Ortiz was allowed on the ballot even though she did not file for the office until after the filing deadline. I know that Barnes spent over $15,000 in legal fees to fight this and lost even though he was clearly in the right. He got little support from any of his fellow Republicans. Much of the 400 hours mentioned below was probably related to the legal fight and campaign activity.

Last year alone, I donated more than 400 hours of my time to the Republican Party and made financial contributions to a number of Republican candidates.

As of late, however, when I look at myself in the mirror there is one question which perplexes me: Can I, in good conscience, remain affiliated with an organization whose message purveyors of racism and bigotry find attractive?

Generally speaking, Republicans are decent people, and naturally, many of my closest friends vote Republican. As with any large organization or group, there will always be people at the fringes who hold views that are not representative of the body.

An organization cannot control the behavior of each individual actor, but it can control its response to abhorrent conduct.

The latest incident in a string of tawdry, race-based actions was the promotion of a racist cartoon by elected Orange County Republican Party Central Committee member Marilyn Davenport. The cartoon depicted President Barack Obama and his parents as chimpanzees, while simultaneously implying that the president is not a legitimate American, but rather an African-born interloper.

While the Orange County GOP chairman and a number of other committee members were quick to condemn the image and Davenport, what’s disturbing is the incredible number of people who continue to defend Davenport’s actions as well as the cartoon itself.

Had this been an isolated event, it could be set aside as a mere aberration. However, when placed in the context of similar offenses by the same self-identified tea party-conservative Republicans, there emerges a disturbing pattern of extreme intolerance.

Ken, my point in using the two photos that I included in this post is that much worse was done to George W Bush and there was never any attempt on the Democrat side of the isle to reign-in these folks. You are holding us to a standard that does not even exist—let alone constrain—the other guys. If you don’t believe me Google “George W Bush monkey” and click on images.

Using the same reasoning applied here, I next expect you to renounce Christianity because there are hypocrites in the Church and some folks have done wrong in the name of the Church.

Ken also mixes the Tea Party and the Republican Party. While many folks may overlap both groups, the Tea Party encompasses folks that would never identify themselves with either the Democrats or Republicans. I have been to many Tea Party functions and never seen anything racist. Opposition to the current President is due to his policies not his race.

Over the past two years, we have seen Republicans use long-held racist imagery in portrayals of Obama. The president has been depicted as a communist witch doctor, a man inclined to plant watermelons on the White House lawn, and we watched in disbelief as his face was placed on an “Obama Buck Food Stamp” along with stereotyped pictures of fried chicken, barbecue ribs, Kool-Aid and the obligatory watermelon.

Again, go on Google and you will see many of these things with George W Bush. Some of these things listed by Barnes in the paragraph above are not racial references. Since the first George Bush introduced “voodoo economics” into the political lexicon before Ken was probably born and Obama has as much hope as a witchdoctor of making his policies work I could see someone trying to make that work; especially with the birth certificate non-sense in the mix. I think it would be in poor taste but does that mean it has to be racist? I’m not sure. Yeah, I already mentioned the watermelon cartoon. As for Obama Buck Food Stamp, I remember Bill Clinton being on the three dollar bill and the million dollar one also. With Obama in charge, more people are on food stamps now than at any time since the program began, this is definitely fair game and absolutely true. While I am conceding that watermelon, fried chicken and ribs are stereotypical foods for blacks, Kool-Aid is not. This again harkens back even further than “voodoo economics” to Jim Jones and the mass suicide. It is a fact that many support Obama solely because of irrational reasons such as his race. It can be argued that blindly following this lightweight regardless of his policies is “drinking to Kool-Aid”.

What does any of this have to do with public policy or conservative values? Here is a man who excelled academically at the finest schools in the world, has a wonderful in-tact family, worked hard and rose to become president of the United States. Yet in spite of his accomplishments, the president is still labeled an illegitimate, socialist, African witch doctor and has his face superimposed on a chimpanzee.

With all due respect, Obama has never released his academic records so the claim of Obama excelling is an assertion without any basis in fact. How hard he worked to become president is a debatable proposition. He was in the second year of his first term in the US Senate when he decided to run. Obama clearly is lacking in real world experience when it comes to economic policies and most other aspects of the job. He is at the very least a socialist, while communist or fascist seem closer to the mark. It really comes down to who owns the means of production, the government or industry controlled by the State. Clearly whatever he is, capitalist is not one of the descriptions.

If this can be done to a black man who is the leader of the free world, how long will it be before fellow Republicans insert my face on a chimpanzee?

Ken, it was done to a white president first. I don’t believe in Darwin so the thought of doing such a thing is not in my personality. We are the party that freed the slaves and gave blacks the voting rights act and a score of other civil rights reforms so your accusation is without merit.

These behaviors also raise larger issues for African Americans and other minority groups within the GOP. How can I look my parents in the eye and tell them I’m a Republican in spite of these offenses? If he were still living, could my Latino father-in-law be proud that his daughter supports the GOP, in spite of the constant anti-Latino rhetoric that comes from the party? Can gay family members reconcile my support of a party that seeks to strip them of their basic human rights?

Ken, Republicans—at least the conservative ones that I hang-out with—do not see people as groups and categories. Those folks are in the other party. I don’t care about your race or gender, just do you have ideas to help the country or hurt it. On the whole republicans are better on the issues that make this country great. Republicans are not anti-Latino. We are in favor of folks following the rules to get here. Yes, the immigration system is broken but that is a federal issue which they are unwilling to fix. The problem is that immigrants to our country are no longer assimilated into the culture because the unifying portions of that culture are under attack. You know this because we have spoken about this before. As for gays, they are stripping me of what it means to be married. They are the ones destroying the culture both on marriage and on the life issue. To say sexual perversion is wrong is not a denial of “basic human rights” it is a fact. Gays are under God’s judgment and need repentance not affirmation. I believe in family values not an Orwellian attempt to redefine “marriage” and “family” to be more inclusive. Again, if you have so much trouble with the Scriptures then perhaps you need to abandon Christianity as well because now your problem is with God not the Republican Party.

These are not issues which pit moderate against conservative views, but rather consequential matters which transcend political positioning and speak to universal human values.

There are a number of Republicans (and Democrats) who will view my switch to “decline to state” as a net gain for the Democratic Party. However, I reject the theory of zero-sum politics which claim we live in a binary world of Democrats and Republicans, where a lack of support for one side works only to empower the other.

Having now been active in both major political parties, I’ve discovered the common prohibited activity is critical thinking.

President Ronald Reagan once famously said, “I did not leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me,” and I can now say that I have been abandoned by both Democrats and Republicans.

In order to stay true to myself, my family and values, the only rational, responsible option is independence.

The first thing I read in Ken’s conclusion is that he is without hope. Yeah, it’s discouraging to be a Republican now. Since Ken wrote this it has gotten worse too. Look at the new maps released by the redistricting group. The California Republican Party dies in November of next year if things stay like they are. God has called me to work in the Republican Party and the good news is that the results are up to Him not me. I just have to be faithful to do my part. My job is to obey. The fact that Ken is quitting saddens me, but I was glad I knew him when he thought he could make a difference.

Occasionally unintended moments of humor do arise in the political world. During the Rush Limbaugh show on KFBK this morning I heard an independent expenditure ad on behalf of Assembly Candidate Beth Gaines that caused me to get a good laugh.

The Paskenta Band of Nomlaki Indians has the casino on Interstate 5 near Corning. They are running political ads on behalf of Gaines. Prior to the ad running, there is the required legal disclaimer that normally runs at the beginning or end of such ads. The wording is something like this: the content of the ad is not endorsed by any candidate and the ad is paid for by the Nomlaki Indian tribe. Then the ad espouses the virtues of Gaines and ends with the tag that “she is one of us.”

When I heard that tag line I laughed out loud. I have walked precincts with Beth and her Senator husband and I can assure you that she is as lily white as I am. The thought that an Indian tribe would run an ad with the theme that she is “one of us” is hysterically funny.

I hope she wins the special election tomorrow and then we can all find out what the tribe meant.

Two rumors have been circulating lately about the process of drawing new lines for California districts for Congress, Senate and Assembly.

First, one consultant on the short list of possible vendors to help the citizen’s commission draw the new lines is directly affiliated with the guy that drew the lines last time Jerry Brown was governor.  This group claims to be non-partisan but they are just a front for Democrats.

Second, the new lines for Sacramento County will include two self contained congressional seats. By self-contained I mean that the districts will likely be wholly within the county. The western district will run from Natomas thru Sacramento to Elk Grove. This will be the new safe seat for Doris Matsui and the other district would be the more competitive home of Dan Lungren.

Let’s see if these two rumors come to pass.

Thanks to Congressman Tom McClintock, the California Republican Party was delivered from the destructive course of action advocated by outgoing chair, Ron Nehring. In the eleventh hour, McClintock lent his name to the proposal by Mike Spence to move to a vote by mail caucus beginning in 2014. While not perfect, the Spence plan will allow a primary election to be conducted via mail and allow any interested registered Republicans to participate. Despite three years to plan for it, the Party decided that they did not have the time to implement the system for the 2012 election cycle and opted for a “do no harm” approach to this series of elections.

Spence’s proposal is a positive development but it opens a series of new questions that should be addressed at the next convention.

My peer group has talked it over and we think that using snail mail for anything is costly and if the CRP had any visionary folks they would get the primary set-up as an online voting system. This would be a perfect opportunity for any aspiring tech company to field test their voting system under actual conditions without the repercussions of screwing-up an election for a government entity. After all California is the home of Silicon Valley and such a system is a logical extension of technology.

In addition, the CRP has no clue how to pay for the primary. In the past this exercise has always been paid for by taxpayers. Now that it will become privately funded we are entering uncharted territory.

The one office not addressed by this proposal is the election of Central Committee members. Should this be the only partisan election still paid by taxpayers? How does this affect McCain-Feingold campaign finance laws? Are Central Committees still needed or are they relics of a bygone era?

Allowing registered voters to continue to participate is good but trusting the CRP to get it right is a slightly more dubious proposition.

Two more days until Jerry Brown’s deadline for a ballot measure to be approved by the legislature so voters can raise their own taxes in June. Will Republicans hold fast or will Jerry find replacements for Roger Neillo and Abel Maldonado?

Oops. I just got word that the California Republican Party neglected to send Form 1099s to their campaign workers. The forms were legally required to be sent by January 31st. Their position is it is a matter of conscience whether you wish to report the income. They reported it to the FEC as services rendered. I guess they missed the part about getting a corporate ID number or needing to report the workers paid over $600.

Did they learn nothing from all the BS Meg Whitman went thru with her maid?

The Sacramento County Republican Party met Thursday night (Feb 10) for their monthly general meeting. The two main pieces of business that were discussed were the crab feed that was held the following night and the adoption of the two year budget.

Here is a brief summary of the crab feed.
The crab feed was held in Elk Grove at the SES hall. Like much that the Central Committee has done lately it was the things missing that were most noteworthy. Neither Republican group based in Elk Grove was contacted prior to the event being planned and asked for help or input. Neither club was asked for volunteers in exchange for part of the ticket sales. At the event, there was no formal program. It is the first event that I have attended since the “Christian Conservatives” took over the committee three years ago that did not include a Flag Salute, opening prayer—including grace before the meal—and a headliner or guest speaker. Only wine was available during the meal. No water or soda was offered or available for purchase once serving began. The only person formally introduced was chair Sue Blake. After about 25 percent of the folks had gone home, the drawing for the raffle was begun. The desert promised in the flyer advertising the event was never served.

The other item of business was the two year budget.  The budget was put together by political consultant Duane Dichiara who was appointed head of the Finance Committee. It was presented to the Executive Board—however; notice to the general membership for this meeting was ever given. The budget was not given to members of the committee prior to the meeting. I first saw it when I arrived at the Thursday night meeting. Amazingly enough, this budget was over one million dollars!

The 2011 budget is $150,000 and the 2012 budget is $975,000. That’s $1,125,000 for you and me. $750,000 of this is allotted for pass-through of funds to various campaigns.

As is now the practice, what we weren’t told is where my interest is focused. We had a two year budget for 2009 & 2010, logically; one would like to know how we did on that one before approving another. Since the committee went thru four treasurers in the last term, this might require some work by the new treasurer—the fifth since Blake rose to the Chair in 2009.

This budget coupled with the current bylaws is a formula for malfeasance. There are no checks and balances from here on out as the executive committee proceeds to spend like drunken congressmen. As long as they stay in “the black” nothing will happen to the committee. The real question is how liability will be apportioned to the membership if this group ends up in debt? The irony that such a group (lead by lawyers) has such contempt for the rule of law is a marvel to behold.

Unfortunately, two features that dominate the committee leadership are that they are government employees and none have any children. Thus private sector experience and affordability of events are lacking as important values in the current group.

As I watch this group, my mind keeps harkening back to book that Gary North wrote about the confrontation of Moses and Pharaoh. In the book Moses and Pharaoh: Dominion Religion versus Power Religion, North discusses that Pharaoh was all about “power religion”—to him the State was all powerful and he was its god. The SCRP seems to have embraced power as the quick path to success. The notion of serving those who elected the committee members is a very foreign concept to the current leadership. This will no doubt end badly but the full extent of the carnage will be somewhere in the future.

Every time I go to a meeting like last night, I’m reminded of a statement that someone once made to me about moving on from the central committee and getting involved in meaningful politics. Anyway, the bulk of the meeting was predetermined prior to last night. Having been on the planning end of such meetings, I know ‘em when I see ‘em.

After the opening ceremonies of the meeting, county elections officials administered the oath of office and then the business portion of the meeting began.

The center of contention was not the slate of candidates because those were a foregone conclusion, but the bylaws. As was predicted to me several weeks ago, the ruling majority from last time lead by Sue Blake and Terry Mast under the tutelage of Duane Dichiara implemented much of the bylaws from San Diego County.

Minutes prior to the meeting, one of my friends did manage to negotiate a few minor concessions from Terry Mast; however, two major points that we objected to survive motions to remain in the document that was adopted.

First, a provision was added to require mandatory dues of $100. This provision reads:

Section 6.  Annual Dues.  Annual dues for Members, Alternates, and Associates shall be $100 per year, payable no later than the regular March Central Committee meeting. These dues shall qualify Members, Alternates, and Associates for membership in the Century Club. Those individuals who can demonstrate financial hardship to the Chairman may be allowed to “pay dues” at a rate of $10 per hour “volunteering” at the Republican Headquarters or Central Committee events, as approved by the Chairman, for a maximum of six and one half (6.5) hours.  Members must pay a minimum of $35 cash.  Members who have not paid dues or arranged to work off their dues will have their voting rights suspended until such dues have been paid.

The second provision that survived last night’s voting requires any new business to go to the Executive Board or it cannot be brought up at the regular meeting of the Central Committee without a 2/3 vote of members. Reluctantly we did get them to agree to strike the portion that a majority vote was required by the Executive Committee to bring something to the committee.

Section 1.  All resolutions, bylaws amendments, or other business of the Central Committee shall be first brought to the previous meeting of the Executive Board. A majority vote will bring this business to the full Central Committee. In the alternative, business may be brought before the full Central Committee for placement on the agenda, and will require a two-thirds vote of the Central Committee to be considered.

Jeff Allen was nominated as First Vice-chair. Carl Brickey was nominated also. A motion was then made and passed to close nominations. After this was done Mr. Allen informed the chair that he had not taken the oath of office. The chair administered the oath on the spot and then proceeded with the vote. After several motions about whether the vote should be voice, roll call or standing, the vote was held and Allen was resoundingly elected.

Today a friend reminded me that Jeff Allen had won election to the Placer County Republican Central Committee in June 2010 for the term beginning this month. He said that Jeff was not at their organizational meeting this week but his alternate—Tom Hudson—was. He also told me that Jeff had turned in his voter registration card for Sacramento County yesterday just hours before the meeting. Both Sue Blake and Tom Hudson are members of the California State Bar.

No other offices were contested. The Composition of the Executive Board is five elected members and six members appointed by the chairman. We did get them to agree that these appointments should receive the consent of the full committee.

In the new business portion of the meeting the chair announced the crab feed that was scheduled in February. Most of the way thru her presentation she was asked if the Committee needed to authorize funds for the Event. Sue was bewildered. After being reminded that no budget yet existed for the committee and that per her bylaws any expense over $1,000 needed authorization, she finally agreed to request funds up to $5,000 be spent on the event.

Today a friend spoke at length with the Executive Director of the Committee. He was told that the actual cost of the crab feed was far in excess of the $5,000 that was authorized. He inquired why only this amount was requested. He learned that the money was spent in December. The reasoning was that since this was under the old committee, no one needed be informed of this information. He then pointed out that no funds were authorized by the previous committee. The ED just shrugged.

As the expense issue was winding down, the chair then remembered that it would be a good idea to actually appoint her Events chair and get the consent of the group. That went so well she also announced her Finance chair. Now that she was really warmed-up she decided to do the rest of her slate in one vote.

Thinking that the meeting was over she asked if there were any other issues, I raised my hand and when called upon (after all, my wife is a teacher) I asked what was going on with the Executive Director? We were told that he was part time during January. The follow-up question is how much is part time? We were told $1,700. The chair was then reminded that she needed this expense to be authorized also. The motion was made to authorize the Executive Board to spend up to $5,000 for the Executive Director. Others on the committee questioned the number and said shouldn’t we authorized something more like $2,500. The makers of the motion were firm that $5,000 was the correct figure. After a few grumbles, the question was called and passed.

After puzzling this over last night the epiphany occurred what was really going on. If half is $1,700 and full time is $3,400 this is suspiciously close to $5,000. They have him on half salary this month and plan to go up to full salary in February without coming back to the body. Sure enough he confirmed this when my friend talked to him today. This was the plan all along.

This group is amazingly tone-deaf to the electorate and many of their own members. It costs nothing to file to run for county central committee, we appear on the ballot and are either directly elected or represent candidates that are but now we must pay a $100 fee to vote on behalf of the people that elected us? This is both illegal and contrary to our republican form of government. We even must take the same oath of office as the Governor of our state!

Furthermore these same people now assert that this elected body is private and can exclude members of the public at will. Imagine that, you can vote for us on the ballot but have no right to know what we do or how we conduct our business on your behalf. This is the Soviet style of governing not the model of American Democracy. Refusing to publicize their meetings and invite the public just makes the group more insular and less accountable.

The irony is that the same people that just tripled the dues and made them mandatory are the same folks that said it was illegal to charge any dues just four short years ago. Now like their former benefactor Roger Neillo, they think the solution is to triple the dues in the midst of an economic slowdown.

The Republican Party is in decline in California. Less transparency and more barriers to participation are not the way to grow the party. It is doubling down on a suicide pact. With the changes coming in the next election cycle, behavior like this can only hasten the decline of the party.

The Democrat Party in California did something the national party could not do; they ran a unified campaign for the entire state. The themes of the Democrat campaign was attack Republican opponents and avoid their own records. Unlike most campaigns however, they did not rest with attacking their Republican opponents, they actually attacked the Republican base. Democrats employed focus group results, push polls and targeted mailing.

The Democrats employed a “campaign in a box” strategy. Republican candidates were classified into categories and then attacked by the same accusations that were used on the neighboring Republican candidate. It was literally a form letter “insert name here” approach. For example, Jack Sieglock and Abram Wilson were attached with the same accusation with the exact same wording in several flyers mailed into their districts. The only difference was the color scheme of the flyer. By centralizing printing operations and using “cookie cutter” mailers, not only did they save lots of money but they were able to use tested materials to maximize the damage inflicted on Republicans.

In their mailers Democrats divided the electorate into three groups. They tried to increase their own base, sway the fickle Decline to State voters and depress Republican turn-out. Many mailers appeared with subtle variations to micro-target various sub-groups of voters. Many districts saw 30 to 40 different mailers with different distributions.

In addition, high propensity Republican voters were targeted with “push polls” to try to reduce their support of Republicans and if possible discourage them from voting. “Push polls” disguise gossip and distortion into a Dr. Seuss style litany. They ask questions similar to these: If you knew your candidate was an axe murderer would you still support him? If you knew he beat his wife and liked the New York Yankees would you still support him? If you knew Sarah Palin sent him an email would you still voter for him? The voters are subjected to psychological warfare to separate them from their candidates.

By waiting for the month before the election, they caught the Republicans flatfooted again. Republicans knew that the Dems would “go negative” but by running decentralized campaigns with no coordination they had no idea what hit them. What I wrote in this blog is known only to a few outsiders to the Democrat campaign machine. The beauty of this strategy is that it uses the strength of the Republicans against themselves. Democrats divide and conquer by uniting.