CFRW Ballot Recommendations

CFRW Ballot Recommendations

Below are the official California Federation of Republican Women (CFRW) Ballot Recommendations. Once again, it should be noted that our recommendations are just that- recommendations. It is the hope of the CFRW Voting Body that our Republican Women heed our recommendations but ultimately research these propositions on their own as well so that they can better educate other California voters. Every election is just as important as the last!

California Republican Party Endorsements -

◼ Are you ready? Check out the list of CRP endorsements with links to candidate and initiative pages. - CAGOP.ORG

Tom McClintock November Ballot Recommendations

◼ From 4th District Congressman Tom McClintock

Prop 1 – Water Bond: YES. This is a long way from a perfect measure, but it’s as good as it gets in California these days: a $7.5 billion water bond that spends $2.7 billion for new water storage. If that sounds breathtakingly underwhelming, remember that’s $2.7 billion more than the multi-billions of dollars of water bonds that we’ve spent in recent years. Sadly, it doesn’t overhaul the environmental laws that vastly inflate costs and it squanders a great deal more that won’t be used for storage, but it is a step away from the lunacy of the green left (that adamantly opposes it) and this alone merits support.

California Judge Voter Guides

◼ California voters often don't know much about judicial candidates - LA Times

"How many people know anything else about the judicial candidates?" said Jaime Regalado, professor emeritus of political science at Cal State L.A. "How do you know they're doing a good job?"

Most of California's roughly 1,600 Superior Court judges are first appointed by the governor. Those judges appear on the ballot only if they are challenged for a new term. Other judicial elections take place if a judge retires or resigns very close to an election. (Slots on state appeals courts and the Supreme Court are filled solely by appointment.)

Trial judges earn a base salary of $178,789 and serve for six years.

On Tuesday, Los Angeles County voters will weigh in on six judicial races, half of which involve sitting jurists. Strict ethics rules limit what the candidates can say, mostly stripping the races of the sort of controversy that makes voters take notice.

"Judicial races done right should be clean," said San Diego Superior Court Judge David M. Rubin, who's president of the California Judges Assn. "You don't want something that will sully the reputation of the bench."

Judges hold considerable sway over the lives of those in their courtrooms. But the average voter either has no clue how to assess judicial candidates or spends little time doing so.

◼ Our Judge Voter Guide for California’s November 4th General Election will help you cut through the rhetoric, election propaganda and biased media coverage of the campaigns. This guide ranks every aspect of a candidate’s record according to experience, integrity and commitment to community. - Craig Huey/judgevoterguide.com via Tim Donnelly

California Supreme Court– Vote Yes/Nov (refer to the rating scales above for definitions)

Kathryn Mickle Werdegar– 6(JI: 4, Q: 9) YES
Goodwin Liu– 2 (JI: 2, Q: 3) NO
Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar– 2 (JI: 1, Q: 2) NO

HUMBOLDT (to top)

Judicial

Justice, California State Court of Appeal; District 1, Division 1

Jim Humes– 3 (JI: 1, Q: 6) NO
Kathleen M. Banke– 7 (JI: 7, Q: 8) YES
Justice, California State Court of Appeal; District 1, Division 2

Therese M. Stewart– 4 (JI: 0, Q: 9) NO
J. Anthony Kline– 5 (JI: 2, Q: 8) NO
Justice, California State Court of Appeal; District 1, Division 3

Stuart R. Pollak– 4 (JI: 3, Q: 8) NO
Martin J. Jenkins– 8 (JI: 7, Q: 9) YES
Justice, California State Court of Appeal; District 1, Division 4

Ignazio John Ruvolo– 8 (JI: 8, Q: 9) YES
Justice, California State Court of Appeal; District 1, Division 5

Terence L. Bruiniers– 7 (JI: 5, Q: 9) YES
Mark B. Simons– 6 (JI: 5, Q: 8) YES

How important is it for you to vote for the right judges?

Judges sitting on California courts may be incompetent, corrupt or lazy.

Even worse, many are political opportunists with a political agenda. They are “judicial activists.” A judicial activist legislates from the bench. Instead of strictly interpreting California law, these judges make the laws. Instead of applying the law to facts, they impose their own values on us all.

It is the voters of California and the legislatures that are supposed to make laws. Not judges. In fact, these judges ignore the law in favor of their own liberal, left-wing, anti-family agendas.

Legislating from the bench, these judges destroy or weaken constitutional protection, votes by the people, family values, marriage, religious liberty and economic freedom. SEE MORE at the link

◼ California judicial elections, 2014 - Judgepedia

This year, voters have the opportunity to choose whether or not to retain certain justices of the supreme court and the courts of appeal. Such retention elections only occur every four years.

◼ Robyn Nordell's Conservative California Election Website
__________________
◼ CFRW Ballot Recommendations
◼ CAGOP Ballot Recommendations
◼ Tom McClintock Ballot Recommendations
◼ Unofficial Guide to Judges on the Ballot

AFP's 2014 Election Ballot Guide

Americans for Prosperity California - What about the ballot measures? David Spady explains Americans for Prosperity's position on California ballot measures and why Proposition 1 (the water bond) is drowning in environmental pork and does not pass the Common Sense test. Watch the video.
__________________
◼ CFRW Ballot Recommendations
◼ CAGOP Ballot Recommendations
◼ Tom McClintock Ballot Recommendations
◼ Unofficial Guide to Judges on the Ballot

AFP's 2014 Election Ballot Guide

Americans for Prosperity California - What about the ballot measures? David Spady explains Americans for Prosperity's position on California ballot measures and why Proposition 1 (the water bond) is drowning in environmental pork and does not pass the Common Sense test. Watch the video.
__________________
◼ CFRW Ballot Recommendations
◼ CAGOP Ballot Recommendations
◼ Tom McClintock Ballot Recommendations
◼ Unofficial Guide to Judges on the Ballot

Local medical officials call Proposition 46 'bad medicine'

◼ Physicians, nurses say measure would drive doctors out of county, state - Will Houston/Times-Standard

A host of physicians, clinicians and nurse practitioners gathered in front of the Eureka Community Health & Wellness Center on Wednesday to voice their opposition to the statewide Proposition 46, saying it was created to put more money in attorneys' pockets and will drive medical providers out of the state.

"Proposition 46 is bad medicine for California," Humboldt-Del Norte County Medical Society President John Mastroni said during the press conference. "Proposition 46 is really three measures in one. It was carelessly thrown together by trial attorneys with the hopes that adding a sweetener provision would trick voters. Proposition 46's real purpose is to lift the cap on medical malpractice payouts and make it easier and more lucrative for attorneys to file medical malpractice lawsuits, which will increase the health care costs ..."

Retired local dentist Steve Schonfeld said the increase in malpractice insurance for medical providers as well as the government programs would cause an increase in health care costs. He said local governments and taxpayers would be financially burdened with hundreds of millions of dollars and that the average family of four is estimated to see a $1,000 increase in health care costs per year if the proposition passes.

"For many of our neighbors, $1,000 dollars is the difference between health care and groceries," he said. "It's a choice that doesn't have to be made."

Several of the speakers Wednesday said this would raise medical malpractice insurance rates for medical providers throughout the state to the point where they would leave.

McCaffrey said that would greatly impact the number of doctors in Humboldt County, where 50 percent of providers are estimated to retire within the next 20 years.

"This proposition is just gonna make a very tenuous, barely accessible medical system in Humboldt-Del Norte counties," she said. "It's devastating. If you throw one more thing at us, we're going to Oregon. Because we can't afford to take care of our patients. Right now, you can't even afford to open a single practice clinic." Read more

◼ Trial lawyers aren’t behind Prop. 46 simply because they want to prevent the deaths of other children at the hands of drivers intoxicated with alcohol and prescription meds. - Orange County Register Editorial

They are bankrolling the measure because the want to rewrite the state’s Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act, which was enacted by the Legislature in response to well-founded concerns that high malpractice costs would limit the number of doctors practicing medicine in California.
__________________
◼ GET MORE INFO: VOTER GUIDE 2014
__________________
◼ CFRW Ballot Recommendations
◼ CAGOP Ballot Recommendations
◼ Tom McClintock Ballot Recommendations
◼ Unofficial Guide to Judges on the Ballot

Taxing decisions: Humboldt County voters face 5 tax measures

◼ With Election Day on Tuesday, Humboldt County residents are once again being asked to open their wallets for the benefit of the community. - Clay McGlaughlin/Times-Standard

Several measures on the ballot — Q, T, U and V — address financial shortfalls in specific cities as they struggle to make ends meet, and Measure Z seeks to raise additional funds for the county as a whole through a sales tax increase. KEEP READING, click here

CFRW Ballot Recommendations

CFRW Ballot Recommendations

Below are the official CFRW Ballot Recommendations. Once again, it should be noted that our recommendations are just that- recommendations. It is the hope of the CFRW Voting Body that our Republican Women heed our recommendations but ultimately research these propositions on their own as well so that they can better educate other California voters. Every election is just as important as the last!

Time Donnelly: November 2014 Voter Guide

◼ Statewide Ballot Propositions

Prop 1: No. This proposition is better than the one previously passed, but it is so laden with pork and political payoffs to the enviro-extremists that we wind up paying $14.5 Billion (when you include the interest over 40 years) for $2.7 Billion in water storage funding. There’s no guarantee that they will finish Temperance Flats or Sites Reservoir, and there is language that concern some experts about the possibility of the future removal of Klamath River Dam. Wasting money on bike paths in San Diego and sand dune restoration in Pismo Beach has nothing to do with water storage or conveyance, and shouldn’t be stealing scarce dollars from critically needed water infrastructure.

Prop 2: Yes. Anything that restrains or slows down politicians from spending our money, I’m for! Say yes to the rainy day fund.

Prop 45: No! The last thing in the world we need is to put more power in the hands of the Insurance Commissioner. This is a blatant power grab that would give the insurance commissioner sole authority to implement ObamaCare instead of an independent commission.

Prop 46: No. No need to punish good doctors for the behavior of a handful of bad apples. This will increase the cost of healthcare and make trial lawyers even richer.

Prop 47: No. This bill seeks to address prison overcrowding, and while I favor it’s intent, and even some of it’s provisions, instead of sticking with low-level drug offenses, this bill would allow potential rapists (in possession of date-rape drug) and forgers be charged as misdemeanors.

Prop 48: No recommendation

MORE at the link

CFRW President's Message:

I was recently on a RNC conference call with Kellyanne Conway. She stressed how important this election is and she especially emphasized how important it is that all Republicans get out and vote. We have so many outstanding candidates this year! There is too much at stake and no one should sit at home. This is especially important in California where Republicans are a super minority. It is not only difficult but almost impossible for our Republicans to get important legislation passed that can help Californians and our state unless they fight hard and work together. The Prop 1 Water Bond is an example.

CFRW takes positions on the ballot measures as does the CRP and most Republican organizations . We also encourage our members to read the ballot measures and bills coming out of Sacramento for themselves so they can be informed voters. Our CFRW Advocate, Allison Olson, works hard researching bills, propositions and ballot measures and carefully analyzes them. Allison also works together with our Legislative Analyst for Ballot Measures.

CFRW took a Yes position on the Prop 1 Water Bond. Is this a perfect proposition? No, but it is difficult to find a perfect proposition that everyone can agree with 100%. There are some things we do not like in this proposition and the Republicans must also continue to fight to ensure the surface storage projects in this new bond are completed.

We need to keep one very important issue in our minds. Republicans are a SUPER MINORITY in a SUPER MAJORITY STATE so we are not going to have a "perfect water bond” or any “ perfect" bond/proposition until we elect many more Republicans to Sacramento. The Republicans fought hard for a compromise for Prop 1. Language for dam removal projects were removed from this bond and instead money will be allocated to fund two reservoir projects to hopefully help California and especially farmers with much needed water.

YES, this water bond is not perfect and Republicans will have to continue to fight even after the bond is passed to ensure the provisions of the bond are met. Remember we are a super minority and if this bond does not pass, legislators will go back and create another bill which could be an even worse bond without the critical water storage the Republicans fought so hard to include in Prop 1. This might be our only opportunity to help our farmers and California until we stop the super majority and elect a majority of Republican candidates to turn things around in Sacramento. Congressman McClintock is also supporting Prop 1, so we are in good company!

The Republicans are trying hard, even as a minority party, to do what is best for California but unfortunately they cannot produce miracles. That is why it is so important that we get all Republicans voters out to the polls on election Day and we remind absentee voters to send in their ballots early. There is too much at stake !

God Bless America!!

We look forward to seeing you in Bakersfield this weekend at our 2014 Fall CFRW Conference/Board of Directors Meeting!

Thank you, Roseann
Working Together To Make A Difference

__________________
◼ CFRW Ballot Recommendations
◼ CAGOP Ballot Recommendations
◼ Tom McClintock Ballot Recommendations
◼ Unofficial Guide to Judges on the Ballot

California Judge Voter Guides

◼ California voters often don't know much about judicial candidates - LA Times

"How many people know anything else about the judicial candidates?" said Jaime Regalado, professor emeritus of political science at Cal State L.A. "How do you know they're doing a good job?"

Most of California's roughly 1,600 Superior Court judges are first appointed by the governor. Those judges appear on the ballot only if they are challenged for a new term. Other judicial elections take place if a judge retires or resigns very close to an election. (Slots on state appeals courts and the Supreme Court are filled solely by appointment.)

Trial judges earn a base salary of $178,789 and serve for six years.

On Tuesday, Los Angeles County voters will weigh in on six judicial races, half of which involve sitting jurists. Strict ethics rules limit what the candidates can say, mostly stripping the races of the sort of controversy that makes voters take notice.

"Judicial races done right should be clean," said San Diego Superior Court Judge David M. Rubin, who's president of the California Judges Assn. "You don't want something that will sully the reputation of the bench."

Judges hold considerable sway over the lives of those in their courtrooms. But the average voter either has no clue how to assess judicial candidates or spends little time doing so.

◼ Our Judge Voter Guide for California’s November 4th General Election will help you cut through the rhetoric, election propaganda and biased media coverage of the campaigns. This guide ranks every aspect of a candidate’s record according to experience, integrity and commitment to community. - Craig Huey/judgevoterguide.com via Tim Donnelly

How important is it for you to vote for the right judges?

Judges sitting on California courts may be incompetent, corrupt or lazy.

Even worse, many are political opportunists with a political agenda. They are “judicial activists.” A judicial activist legislates from the bench. Instead of strictly interpreting California law, these judges make the laws. Instead of applying the law to facts, they impose their own values on us all.

It is the voters of California and the legislatures that are supposed to make laws. Not judges. In fact, these judges ignore the law in favor of their own liberal, left-wing, anti-family agendas.

Legislating from the bench, these judges destroy or weaken constitutional protection, votes by the people, family values, marriage, religious liberty and economic freedom. SEE MORE at the link

◼ California judicial elections, 2014 - Judgepedia

This year, voters have the opportunity to choose whether or not to retain certain justices of the supreme court and the courts of appeal. Such retention elections only occur every four years.

◼ Robyn Nordell's Conservative California Election Website
__________________
◼ CFRW Ballot Recommendations
◼ CAGOP Ballot Recommendations
◼ Tom McClintock Ballot Recommendations
◼ Unofficial Guide to Judges on the Ballot

Times-Standard Editorial: Fair Wage Act unfair to city — vote no on R

◼ Vote no on R - Times-Standard EDITORIAL

In principle, it's a noble idea. In practice, without additional measures to ensure economic development in the city, it's a time bomb that would turn Eureka into a commercial ghost town ringed by businesses whose proprietors were smart enough to get out while the getting was good.

Coming on the heels of California's July 1 minimum wage hike, Measure R is too high a jump in too short a time, one that threatens to put Eureka — hardly a thriving commercial metropolis — at further disadvantage. Fearful employers are already drafting contingency plans: where to move, how many jobs to cut.

There is no doubt that the working men and women of Eureka deserve a break. But they don't deserve to have the economic health of their community broken, and that's what Measure R would do.
__________________

◼ Measure R Vote NO

__________________
◼ NO ON MEASURE R: Fair Wage Folks” have fooled a lot of people, Measure R was never about a living wage - Jaison Chand, Eureka
◼ Local nonprofits ponder impact of Eureka's Measure R - Clay McGlaughlin/Times-Standard
◼ MORE ON MEASURE R
__________________
◼ CFRW Ballot Recommendations
◼ CAGOP Ballot Recommendations
◼ Tom McClintock Ballot Recommendations
◼ Unofficial Guide to Judges on the Ballot

Eureka City Schools proposes Measure S to modernize, repair buildings

◼ Eureka City Schools District officials say Measure S — a nearly $50 million bond on the November ballot — will fund the repair of school buildings that are falling apart. - Melissa Simon and Will Houston/Times-Standard

Opponents call Measure S too much too soon, pointing to unfinished projects such as a high school gym that were never delivered under a previous bond....Leo Sears, former chairman of the Humboldt Taxpayers League, said Measure S comes too soon after the 2002 bond.

"The bond isn't even paid off yet and now they want more money," Sears said. "The thing is, the money last time was spent on beautification and on things that were nice but not necessary because it didn't benefit the kids or the classrooms."

...Gregg Gardiner, chairman of the Citizens in Support of Eureka City Schools committee, said the bond comes down to one thing: students.

"The conditions of the schools are bad. It doesn't take a scientist to see that," he said. "There are so many issues that need to be taken care of, and our kids deserve better. We need to ask ourselves if these conditions are OK for our own families. The bathrooms at Alice Birney, for instance, are terrible and I believe the superintendent has said that he wouldn't use those bathrooms. How can we expect our kids to use them? It's just not a good learning environment for the kids, and if they don't feel good about going to school, it's like why even be there? These are the formative years, and we want our students to strive to be the best they can be — whether it's a diesel mechanic or a scientist — and we need to improve those classrooms to provide that."
__________________
◼ CFRW Ballot Recommendations
◼ CAGOP Ballot Recommendations
◼ Tom McClintock Ballot Recommendations
◼ Unofficial Guide to Judges on the Ballot

Editorial: Humboldt County's Measure P is more harm than good

◼ Measure P, which would ban "the propagation, cultivation, raising and growing of genetically modified organisms" in Humboldt County, is poorly written, unnecessary regulation that removes choice from local agricultural producers. Don't vote for it. - Times Standard EDITORIAL

...Measure P's enforcement mechanism is complaint-driven, and has the potential to turn neighbor against neighbor. Measure P assumes that the accused is guilty until proven innocent. The county agricultural commissioner would be responsible for enforcing it, requiring extensive and expensive testing at a time when the county doesn't have enough money to keep proven threats to health, safety and property behind bars. Then again, 10 years of a similar ban in Mendocino County produced a grand total of zero offenses. So we get to choose between burdensome or unnecessary?

• Former Humboldt State University president and genetics professor Rollin Richmond has argued that a vote for Measure P is a vote that may outlaw vaccinating your pets. If that sounds ridiculous, it is — but here's the kicker: Richmond's right. Because the text of Measure P bans not only the "cultivation, raising and growing" of GMOs, but also the "propagation," and because vaccines work by introducing a weakened yet very much alive variant of a nasty bug that propagates itself within the body until the immune system can learn to destroy it, and because Measure P's medical exemption applies only to medical care for human patients, Richmond is right. Measure P, as written, does outlaw GMO vaccines for rabies and feline leukemia....KEEP READING...
__________________
◼ CFRW Ballot Recommendations
◼ CAGOP Ballot Recommendations
◼ Tom McClintock Ballot Recommendations
◼ Unofficial Guide to Judges on the Ballot

Siskiyou supervisors weigh in on water bond

◼ At the urging of constituents, the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday joined the opposition to the water bond measure on this year’s ballot, Proposition 1. - Siskiyou Daily

...Members of the public spoke in opposition to the ballot measure, calling it – among other things – a way for water rights to be taken away from agricultural water users and a way to lose local control over groundwater resources.

Representatives from Scott Valley Protect Our Water, the local granges and the Siskiyou County Central Republican Committee urged the board to author a resolution in opposition to the proposition.

Speakers alleged that the measure would increase the power of environmental groups and state agencies to purchase agricultural land, hurting local economies. Speakers also decried the potential for bond funds to be used to remove dams on the Klamath River....
__________________
◼ CFRW Ballot Recommendations
◼ CAGOP Ballot Recommendations
◼ Tom McClintock Ballot Recommendations
◼ Unofficial Guide to Judges on the Ballot

Local nonprofits ponder impact of Eureka's Measure R

◼ Fair Wage Act' comes up for a vote next month - Clay McGlaughlin/Times-Standard

On Nov. 4, voters in Eureka will have a chance to decide whether to approve Measure R, otherwise known as the "Eureka Fair Wage Act."

If the measure passes, it will compel businesses within city limits that employ 25 people or more to raise the minimum wage to $12 per hour after 90 days. The current minimum wage in California is $9 per hour. Nonprofit organizations with 25 or more employees would also be included, though the measure, if passed, gives them a year-and-a-half to phase in the change.

One of the main questions for nonprofits and businesses alike is how the measure would affect compensation for salaried employees — also called "exempt employees," meaning exempt from overtime requirements....

"It's an interesting position for some of the larger nonprofits to be in, because the ones with a social justice mission want to act within their mission, but they also realize the challenge of acting within their budgets," said Amy Jester, program manager at Humboldt Area Foundation. "It's a dilemma, really, because they want to do the right thing but they're always facing budget cuts and working hard at fundraising."

◼ Eureka's Measure R — Fair? No! - Charlie Bean/Times-Standard LETTER TO THE EDITOR

◼ Editorial: Fair Wage Act unfair to city — vote no on R - Times-Standard

Here’s Why You Should Vote Against Measure P, Even If You Hate GMOs UPDATED

Updated: Critics of genetically modified organisms or GMOs claim that they pose health risks to the public. Jimmy (Kimmel) is always interested in people who have strong opinions, so (they) sent a crew to one of (the) local farmers markets to ask people why they avoid GMOs and, more specifically, what the letters GMO stand for.



◼ Even if you are against the use of GMOs (genetically modified organisms), you shouldn’t support Measure P because the wording of the measure is very problematic. - Op-Ed by HSU biology professor Mark Wilson/Lost Coast Outpost

It is so flawed that it would exempt Roundup Ready corn and alfalfa from the ban, even though these are the GMOs most likely to be grown in Humboldt County in the near term. Meanwhile, the measure would ban hundreds of non-GMO varieties, some of which would be difficult for farmers to identify before planting. Farmers who have grown non-GMO varieties may find out mid-season that some of the crops they’ve been growing for years are prohibited.

Most people think of GMOs as being transgenic organisms, that is, organisms in which one or a small number of genes from an unrelated organism have been inserted using a variety of laboratory techniques. However, that is not how Measure P defines it.

...Because the authors of Measure P used the flawed wording that the USDA is in the process of revising, that flawed wording would be codified into county law. Based on the USDA comments, it seems likely that many local farmers are growing crops that somewhere in their history underwent gene doubling, or cell fusion. The farmers who planted these crops are almost certainly unaware of their breeding histories.

What would happen if one of the massive GMO corporations (which have been conspicuously silent), or even just a mischievous student, stepped in, not to challenge the Measure P definitions but to force the county to actually follow the letter of the law? Farmers would have 30 days to destroy crops that they had planted in good faith, and more importantly crops that there is no rational reason to think are somehow dangerous. A major disruption to our local farmers is possible....◼ READ The ENTIRE PIECE, It is well worth your time.

◼ This is a discussion document by a Subcommittee of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB). Discussion documents are posted for public comment, and may later become proposals for full Board consideration. They are not final Board proposals or recommendations, or NOP policy. from links in the op-ed above

◼ READ MEASURE P

◼ If wild anti-GMO claims were anything more than contrived hysteria, that would rock the world - Chad White/Mad River Union

“P” is for Pseudoscience, Poverty, Prejudice, and Prohibition

Something I learned from scientist Kevin Folta is that if his lab had a slight hint that GMOs were dangerous, he would do his best to repeat that study, get a collaborator to repeat it independently, and then publish the data on the covers of Science, Nature and every news outlet that would take it. IT WOULD ROCK THE WORLD, and he would be rich and famous.

Showing that 70-something percent of our food was poisonous? That would be a HUGE story – “we are talking Nobel Prize and free Amy’s Organic Pot Pies for life!” hos.ufl.edu/faculty/kmfolta

◼ Measure P’s fear, prejudice and ideology, part 1 - Chad White/Mad River Union
◼ Anti-GMO tribal conformity and mythology, part 2 - Chad White/Mad River Union

◼ Recent Letters to the Editor regarding GMOs and Measure P - Mad River Union

◼ Mark Wilson: Megacorps and tribal compulsions derail informed decisionmaking about GMOs

We don’t need to be afraid of the future and should reject those who try to scare us in the name of “Fairness, Prosperity and Protection.” KEEP READING

Mark Wilson is a Biology Professor at Humboldt State University, a microbial geneticist with a Ph.D from Cornell University. He has no ties, financial or otherwise, to any agricultural biotechnology company.

◼ Rollin Richmond: Education and knowledge, not fearful ideology, are key to understanding GMOs - Rollin Richmond/Mad River Union

The recent article, “What the GMO Four aren’t Telling you about biotech food,” by Dr. John Schaefer in the Aug. 26 Mad River Union is a classic example of the “fear factor” that unfortunately often affects people who are forced to deal with a new scientific discovery or technical tool and have not been adequately educated about its basis and use....KEEP READING

Evolutionary biologist Rollin R. Richmond is the former president of Humboldt State University. He has no ties, financial or otherwise, to any agricultural biotechnology company.

◼ What's in Measure P's DNA? - Times-Standard
◼ Measure P seeks to ban GMO crops in Humboldt County - Times-Standard

NO ON MEASURE R: Fair Wage Folks” have fooled a lot of people, Measure R was never about a living wage

Measure R has never been about a “Living Wage” or improving the local economy. Measure R has always been about the Occupy movement’s disdain for Walmart. An honest byline would have read “Get Walmart”. If their true intentions are in doubt, look at the early content of their social media pages and consider these questions: Why does this stop at the city limits? Why is it only companies with over 25 employees? Why is there an exemption for unions? Does a union employee not also deserve a “Living Wage”? Does a worker in a small cafe not deserve a “Living Wage”? Does an employee who works in Myrtletown not deserve a “Living Wage”? The Unions and local Occupy Movement have their crosshairs on Walmart, but a lot of good, locally owned Eureka businesses, and many organizations serving the elderly and poor are being caught in the crossfire.

People are struggling, and I’m sympathetic. Early on, I lived in the back room of a body shop in Mckinleyville until I found my footing working multiple jobs. The last four businesses I worked for all closed down when they succumbed to financial pressures. I still have my last paycheck from one of them. It never cleared the bank.

Now I work for a good company. 20 years ago I started with City Ambulance, who operates Humboldt Dial-A-Ride and City Cab, earning $3.35 per hour as a part-time EMT. After paramedic school, nursing school, a bachelor’s degree, and a lot of hard work, I make significantly more. I’ve always had an opportunity to succeed on my efforts, but I see that opportunity disappearing for my kids who are just entering the workforce. I see how companies are responding to the increasing pressures from minimum wage hikes, health insurance, increases workman’s compensation insurance increases, and regulatory changes.

City Ambulance gives a portion of profits to the employees at the end of each year.

5 years ago, we paid over $100,000.00 in performance bonuses. Perfect attendance- $200.00; Accident free- $300.00; No customer complaints $200.00; and the list goes on. Many good employees received a full month’s check or more in the form of a bonus, and we gave away a cruise each year at our company picnic. Last year, that number was down to $25,000.00. The bonus may not even exist this year. So who lost out in favor of wage pressure and excessive regulation? The employee who showed up for work on time with a good attitude and took care of our customers.

In 2007, we had over 100 employees and used local work assistance programs to help the unemployed and disabled re-enter the workforce. We discontinued the program in 2008, after an 18.5% increase in the minimum wage over just two years, and we’ve since cut our staff down to about 90 employees.

Benefits? You can’t find five taxicab companies in all of California like ours that have health insurance, retirement and vacation for their taxicab drivers. All of that is in jeopardy as we look for ways to survive. We could add a surcharge of $1.50 on Eureka taxicab fares, but fares have already doubled over the last five years. How much will the market bear? The fact is we will find some creative way to restructure. There won’t be any winners.

Those benefits that atrophy in favor of wages are all pretax, so we ALL feel the sting when they are reduced. Just 5 years ago, we paid for a very generous health insurance plan for employees. Today, that’s been scaled back to a minimum plan and employees must contribute 5-9% of their wages. Unlike this proposal, the City of Seattle had the good sense to recognize that benefits should be factored into the minimum wage.

Our Dial-A-Ride services? Well, if Measure R passes, the City of Eureka will have a choice. Pay significantly more for service or cut back on transportation for the elderly and disabled. Which do you think will happen? We are not alone in this plight. Senior nutrition programs, childcare services, afterschool programs, parks and recreation, and other transportation programs are caught in the crossfire and many are preparing for cuts to service.

City Ambulance will adapt in a way that will sadly upset some lives. Not because my boss is a greedy corporate fat cat, but because this family business that has supported our little league teams, community non-profits, our employees, and has given back to the community in immeasurable ways for over five decades, is caught in the crossfire. Measure R is what happens when the desire to punish Walmart trumps concern for the community. I trust that voters will see the forest for the trees and vote “NO” on Measure R. One more thing. If you think our taxicab drivers deserve more, I agree. Don’t wait for the inevitable fare increases forced by regulation. Give it to them directly with an extra $1.50 in your tip. I always do.

Jaison Chand, Eureka
__________________
◼ Measure R Vote NO
__________________
◼ Local nonprofits ponder impact of Eureka's Measure R - Clay McGlaughlin/Times-Standard

◼ Times-Standard Editorial: Fair Wage Act unfair to city — vote no on R - Times-Standard EDITORIAL

Another big endorsement! And ANOTHER!The Oakland Tribune Endorses Ashley Swearengin

◼ Oakland Tribune editorial: Ashley Swearengin is best choice for state controller

When it comes to viable candidates for statewide office the California Republican Party has been in decline for the better part of two decades. Simply put, the GOP has nominated candidates who do not appeal widely to the electorate, which explains why California has exactly zero Republicans serving in such offices.

But in this year's election -- the first for statewide races under the state's new primary system -- it appears that dynamic is changing somewhat.

We have already detailed our support for Republican secretary of state candidate Pete Peterson. He is an impressive candidate whom we believe has both the qualifications and the voter appeal to win the job and the skills to flourish in it.

Now comes a similarly impressive candidate for another statewide post. Republican Ashley Swearengin, the current mayor of Fresno, is our choice to be California's next controller. She is a well-informed, straight-talking breath of fresh air.

While controller is one of the least-understood offices in the state, we believe it is one of the most important. The controller essentially is charged with serving as an independent advocate for responsible state finances and financial practice.

Swearengin is well suited to such a task. She not only knows numbers -- and she very much does -- she also knows how those number affect people. She has seen it first hand....
__________________
◼ Ashley Swearengin for state controller - Orange County Register

The race for state controller pits Fresno Mayor Ashley Swearengin, a Republican, against Democrat Betty Yee, a member of the state Board of Equalization. The Press-Enterprise concludes Mayor Swearengin is the better choice for the office.
One of only five “strong” mayors of California’s nearly 500 cities, Ms. Swearengin functions, effectively, as Fresno’s CEO. And, during her tenure, she has transformed a city that was slouching toward bankruptcy into a fiscal success story.

Indeed, only two weeks into her first mayoral term, Ms. Swearengin learned that her city was facing a staggering $120 million deficit. It was the product of a structurally imbalanced budget, which the city addressed by borrowing from itself, leaving a number of city funds with negative balances that had to be paid back.

So dire were the financial straights in which Fresno found itself, Time magazine in 2013 included California’s fifth-largest city on its ignominious “Bankruptcy Watch List.”

Under Ms. Swearengin’s leadership, Fresno instituted a “fiscal sustainability program,” which entailed a painful downsizing in city staff and unavoidable reductions in certain city services.

But the program proved successful. Not only did Fresno avoid the fate of such cities as San Bernardino and Stockton, which plunged into bankruptcy, it also produced a balanced budget for the 2014 fiscal year.

So Ms. Swearengin doesn’t just talk the talk about being a “responsible steward” of the public’s tax dollars – like all too many politicians on the campaign trail – she has actually walked the walk during her tenure as Fresno’s chief executive.... ◼ KEEP READING
__________________
◼ WEB: http://www.ashleyforca.com
◼ FACEBOOK
◼ TWITTER