Troublemakers Unlisted
Posted by: Mighty Thor | 07/10/2008 9:24 AM
From The San Diego Reader:
Two days before the June 3 election, MaryRose Consiglio and Tom Sherman emailed a group of candidates running for membership on the San Diego County Republican Party's Central Committee. "We are sure you have noticed," wrote the married couple, "the many and various slate mailers that...[list] candidates -- and you were not included." Consiglio's and Sherman's names were not on the slate mailers either, despite their being incumbents on the Central Committee. On Election Day, the pair lost their seats, although they will finish their current terms, which end in December.
In the latest election cycle, five incumbent Republican Central Committee members were defeated after not being listed on the slate mailers sent out in their state assembly districts. "The people who got thrown off were not the deadwood," says Laura Sumrall, who was reelected to the committee from the 66th District. "They were the activists who were doing things, the people with clout, and I'm guessing that the committee chairman was threatened by that." Sumrall says her name appeared on some of the slate mailers in her district, but not all.
Many Republicans and Democrats don't know that they can vote for some of their party's Central Committee members, or even that Central Committees run the Republican and Democratic parties locally. The committees perform a variety of functions, which include recruiting candidates, raising money, helping shape the party platform, registering voters, and supporting rallies for the party's candidates.
Membership on the San Diego County Republican Central Committee is divided into two groups. Ex officio members are appointed by Republican congressional, state assembly, and state senate officeholders or past candidates for the offices. The committee has 17 ex officio members. A second group of members is elected in the general election by registered party members. There are six of them from each of San Diego County's eight state assembly districts. At the start of every two-year term, the committee reconsiders its bylaws and selects an executive board, including the party chairman.
Tony Krvaric is the current chairman of the San Diego County Republican Party. In spring 2007, he succeeded Ron Nehring, who became the California Republican Party chairman. The party's San Diego website says the following: "Born and raised in Sweden, Tony Krvaric was inspired by President Ronald Reagan to come to America....
"After becoming a naturalized citizen in June of 2003, he decided to become politically involved. Having seen, first hand, the devastating effects of socialism in Sweden and the rest of Europe, he was determined to stand up for the traditional, conservative values that helped make America great."
In April, however, the online newspaper Raw Story claimed that Krvaric cofounded Fairlight, "a band of software crackers which later evolved into an international video and software piracy group." After that story appeared, Krvaric circulated an email explanation among Republican leaders. According to Raw Story, the explanation stated, "Apparently there is a hit piece floating around on me, 'exposing' my wild high school teenage years."
Sources I spoke with on the San Diego County Republican Party's Central Committee said they like Krvaric but that he has difficulty tolerating dissent. They suspect the chairman is responsible for placing the lists of Central Committee candidates onto the slate mailers that went out before last month's election. For each of the eight state assembly districts, there were nine or more candidates. But the mailers printed six names, or complete district slates. It's easy to see how the three or more left off the list in each case feel targeted.
Krvaric did not reply to my phone message asking if he were behind the Central Committee lists on the slate mailers. Members of the committee's executive board haven't confessed to anything either, according to Laura Sumrall, who thinks her close association with Steve Francis made them "a little cautious" of targeting her completely. (She opposed the committee on its endorsement of Jerry Sanders over Francis for mayor of San Diego.) "But the discussion of the Central Committee lists happened in a silent meeting the executive board members will all deny," Sumrall tells me. "We have a mole who was sitting in the meeting outraged but kept his mouth shut and told us about it later. And a couple of them have slipped and said, 'But, you know, you can't have people on the committee who cause trouble and aren't willing to work together.' "
Sumrall does not blame the targeting on ideological factions. "But I believe in free dialogue," she says. "And Central Committee members should not be selecting each other."
Camille Cowlishaw agrees, saying the targeting has resulted from a pure power play rather than factional purging. Cowlishaw is another incumbent Central Committee member who was not on the slate in her district. The slate prevailed on June 3.
"There are a few people," according to Cowlishaw, "who would like to control everything, including Tony Krvaric. They want to have no dissent, no confusion about what they want done. They want everybody to get along and have the same idea and be on the same page. I can understand that to a certain degree, but there has to be some discussion. I am vocal in my opinions, though mostly outside of meetings. But I don't think my views were anti anything."
When I asked Cowlishaw how long she's been a committee member, she was unsure. She volunteered at Republican headquarters before being elected for the first time. "I went there for many years without belonging to the committee," she says. "I guess I've been on it now at least six years.
"I was terribly disappointed when my name was not on the list this time, because I felt I have worked really hard for the party," says Cowlishaw. "I've been involved in politics long enough to know that this kind of thing happens, but my biggest disappointment was when I kept getting different mailers [she received six] and they were all the same. And I thought the senders must have talked to somebody in the office who planted those names. It's not good if committee members are not elected by the people but are selected by their representatives instead. Since many people don't know what the Central Committee is but know they have to vote, they use the slates. They're not going to look everybody up; they're just going to take the easy road."
One of the candidates who was on the slate and beat Cowlishaw was a local congressman's 21-year-old daughter. "I'm not as well known as Briana Bilbray," Cowlishaw says with a laugh.
I ask Laura Sumrall how the slate mailers originate. Industrious individuals get together and make big money from them, she tells me. "They will make up a name, file with the state, and get a code so they can do a mailer according to the rules. It's kind of like having a time-share. People can buy in. You get a bunch of people to pay; then you do the mailer and make all the money. When a slate mailer goes out, the candidates and proposition proponents usually have all paid to be on it. Nobody is really endorsed by the party. That's really the scam of it all. It's all legal, but voters will get these slate mailers with the elephant on it and think, 'Oh, this is the Republican Party endorsing these people.' No, it's somebody who put it together and charged people money and mailed it out. Suppose you're a congressional candidate. They might charge you $1000 to be on the mailer; if you want to be an assemblyman, maybe $400 or $500, and, say, $100 for the lowly people."
But things happened a bit differently with the recent mailers. Printed at their bottom, a note stated that an asterisk next to the names of the candidates meant the candidate had paid to be on the slate. All the candidates for the Republican Central Committee had the asterisks. But Sumrall says she didn't pay a dime to appear on any slate. "So I called the number on the mailer that had my name, and I got a recording," she says. "It did not identify a business. It just said to leave my name and number, which I did. I also asked why I was on the slate and who paid for it. Nobody ever returned my call, though I called twice."
Records at the office of the San Diego County Registrar of Voters suggest what happened. Between January 1 and May 17, an organization called Citizens for a Better San Diego County took $18,300 in contributions, including $8300 from Atlas Hotels and $5000 from Thomas Sudberry. (Sudberry is currently petitioning the City of San Diego to build Quarry Falls, a massive condominium development in Mission Valley.) Citizens for a Better San Diego County, whose treasurer is Seventh District candidate for San Diego City Council April Boling, then made payments to five groups for "slate mailers to support SD Co Republican Central Committee candidates." Family, Faith and Freedom Association and California Taxpayer Protection Voter Guide each received $2500. Citizens for Good Government received $2100, California Voter Guide, $2875, and Official Non-Partisan Voter Guide, $3000.
Two days before the June 3 election, MaryRose Consiglio and Tom Sherman emailed a group of candidates running for membership on the San Diego County Republican Party's Central Committee. "We are sure you have noticed," wrote the married couple, "the many and various slate mailers that...[list] candidates -- and you were not included." Consiglio's and Sherman's names were not on the slate mailers either, despite their being incumbents on the Central Committee. On Election Day, the pair lost their seats, although they will finish their current terms, which end in December.
In the latest election cycle, five incumbent Republican Central Committee members were defeated after not being listed on the slate mailers sent out in their state assembly districts. "The people who got thrown off were not the deadwood," says Laura Sumrall, who was reelected to the committee from the 66th District. "They were the activists who were doing things, the people with clout, and I'm guessing that the committee chairman was threatened by that." Sumrall says her name appeared on some of the slate mailers in her district, but not all.
Many Republicans and Democrats don't know that they can vote for some of their party's Central Committee members, or even that Central Committees run the Republican and Democratic parties locally. The committees perform a variety of functions, which include recruiting candidates, raising money, helping shape the party platform, registering voters, and supporting rallies for the party's candidates.
Membership on the San Diego County Republican Central Committee is divided into two groups. Ex officio members are appointed by Republican congressional, state assembly, and state senate officeholders or past candidates for the offices. The committee has 17 ex officio members. A second group of members is elected in the general election by registered party members. There are six of them from each of San Diego County's eight state assembly districts. At the start of every two-year term, the committee reconsiders its bylaws and selects an executive board, including the party chairman.
Tony Krvaric is the current chairman of the San Diego County Republican Party. In spring 2007, he succeeded Ron Nehring, who became the California Republican Party chairman. The party's San Diego website says the following: "Born and raised in Sweden, Tony Krvaric was inspired by President Ronald Reagan to come to America....
"After becoming a naturalized citizen in June of 2003, he decided to become politically involved. Having seen, first hand, the devastating effects of socialism in Sweden and the rest of Europe, he was determined to stand up for the traditional, conservative values that helped make America great."
In April, however, the online newspaper Raw Story claimed that Krvaric cofounded Fairlight, "a band of software crackers which later evolved into an international video and software piracy group." After that story appeared, Krvaric circulated an email explanation among Republican leaders. According to Raw Story, the explanation stated, "Apparently there is a hit piece floating around on me, 'exposing' my wild high school teenage years."
Sources I spoke with on the San Diego County Republican Party's Central Committee said they like Krvaric but that he has difficulty tolerating dissent. They suspect the chairman is responsible for placing the lists of Central Committee candidates onto the slate mailers that went out before last month's election. For each of the eight state assembly districts, there were nine or more candidates. But the mailers printed six names, or complete district slates. It's easy to see how the three or more left off the list in each case feel targeted.
Krvaric did not reply to my phone message asking if he were behind the Central Committee lists on the slate mailers. Members of the committee's executive board haven't confessed to anything either, according to Laura Sumrall, who thinks her close association with Steve Francis made them "a little cautious" of targeting her completely. (She opposed the committee on its endorsement of Jerry Sanders over Francis for mayor of San Diego.) "But the discussion of the Central Committee lists happened in a silent meeting the executive board members will all deny," Sumrall tells me. "We have a mole who was sitting in the meeting outraged but kept his mouth shut and told us about it later. And a couple of them have slipped and said, 'But, you know, you can't have people on the committee who cause trouble and aren't willing to work together.' "
Sumrall does not blame the targeting on ideological factions. "But I believe in free dialogue," she says. "And Central Committee members should not be selecting each other."
Camille Cowlishaw agrees, saying the targeting has resulted from a pure power play rather than factional purging. Cowlishaw is another incumbent Central Committee member who was not on the slate in her district. The slate prevailed on June 3.
"There are a few people," according to Cowlishaw, "who would like to control everything, including Tony Krvaric. They want to have no dissent, no confusion about what they want done. They want everybody to get along and have the same idea and be on the same page. I can understand that to a certain degree, but there has to be some discussion. I am vocal in my opinions, though mostly outside of meetings. But I don't think my views were anti anything."
When I asked Cowlishaw how long she's been a committee member, she was unsure. She volunteered at Republican headquarters before being elected for the first time. "I went there for many years without belonging to the committee," she says. "I guess I've been on it now at least six years.
"I was terribly disappointed when my name was not on the list this time, because I felt I have worked really hard for the party," says Cowlishaw. "I've been involved in politics long enough to know that this kind of thing happens, but my biggest disappointment was when I kept getting different mailers [she received six] and they were all the same. And I thought the senders must have talked to somebody in the office who planted those names. It's not good if committee members are not elected by the people but are selected by their representatives instead. Since many people don't know what the Central Committee is but know they have to vote, they use the slates. They're not going to look everybody up; they're just going to take the easy road."
One of the candidates who was on the slate and beat Cowlishaw was a local congressman's 21-year-old daughter. "I'm not as well known as Briana Bilbray," Cowlishaw says with a laugh.
I ask Laura Sumrall how the slate mailers originate. Industrious individuals get together and make big money from them, she tells me. "They will make up a name, file with the state, and get a code so they can do a mailer according to the rules. It's kind of like having a time-share. People can buy in. You get a bunch of people to pay; then you do the mailer and make all the money. When a slate mailer goes out, the candidates and proposition proponents usually have all paid to be on it. Nobody is really endorsed by the party. That's really the scam of it all. It's all legal, but voters will get these slate mailers with the elephant on it and think, 'Oh, this is the Republican Party endorsing these people.' No, it's somebody who put it together and charged people money and mailed it out. Suppose you're a congressional candidate. They might charge you $1000 to be on the mailer; if you want to be an assemblyman, maybe $400 or $500, and, say, $100 for the lowly people."
But things happened a bit differently with the recent mailers. Printed at their bottom, a note stated that an asterisk next to the names of the candidates meant the candidate had paid to be on the slate. All the candidates for the Republican Central Committee had the asterisks. But Sumrall says she didn't pay a dime to appear on any slate. "So I called the number on the mailer that had my name, and I got a recording," she says. "It did not identify a business. It just said to leave my name and number, which I did. I also asked why I was on the slate and who paid for it. Nobody ever returned my call, though I called twice."
Records at the office of the San Diego County Registrar of Voters suggest what happened. Between January 1 and May 17, an organization called Citizens for a Better San Diego County took $18,300 in contributions, including $8300 from Atlas Hotels and $5000 from Thomas Sudberry. (Sudberry is currently petitioning the City of San Diego to build Quarry Falls, a massive condominium development in Mission Valley.) Citizens for a Better San Diego County, whose treasurer is Seventh District candidate for San Diego City Council April Boling, then made payments to five groups for "slate mailers to support SD Co Republican Central Committee candidates." Family, Faith and Freedom Association and California Taxpayer Protection Voter Guide each received $2500. Citizens for Good Government received $2100, California Voter Guide, $2875, and Official Non-Partisan Voter Guide, $3000.
CATEGORY:
San Diego Politics
love the picture of brianna that accompanies the hardcopy
Laura is mistaken there was no discussion of central committee elections at the executive committee. Not sure why she would need a "mole" in a meeting open to all members?
Laura is mistaken there was no discussion of central committee elections at the executive committee. Not sure why she would need a "mole" in a meeting open to all members?
Please clarify:
1) I get it that some of these offices are appointed and some elected
2) Presumably the elected members run campaigns of some kind
3) So what is the issue with member running campaigns or spending money or whatever it is they do to get elected
4) If they should not campaign for these offices what should the process be? Just put their names on the ballot and see what happens?
Please clarify.
"It's not good if committee members are not elected by the people but are selected by their representatives instead. Since many people don't know what the Central Committee is but know they have to vote, they use the slates. They're not going to look everybody up; they're just going to take the easy road."
OK Im going to echo 'please clarify' this doesnt make one bit of sence. This person is arguing - I think - that the gop group isnt even elected now but selected by represenatives. I dont even know what that means?
And when is the last time you readers 'looked up' the people we vote for for this group. Im not even sure how that COULD happen. CAN you even look them up?
the slates were illegal. the astericks next to the names said they paid to be on the slates. the did not.
so the jist of this is, krvaric hand picked who he wanted on, and who he wanted off. period.
and yes, if these folks choose to pay and run a campaign to get on central, that would have been fine. that was not the case.
most republicans don't even know what central committee is, and I can't imagine anyone paying to run for this "office". except maybe nehring and krvaric.
and to further follow, the meeting laura mentions was not an executive committee meeting. perhaps you're not one of the "players" as it was a separate meeting, that only a select few were at.
I've been reading the comments with some humor. One point though, as someone who has been through the legal issues on similar central committee campaigns: from what the article and the comments say the slates are not "illegal" (that is really not even the term that should be used). It is well settled that the asterick that is placed next to the names is to indicate that either the individual paid for his name on the slate, or that the payment was made from another entity with or without the individuals assent.
First, I think we'd all agree the San Diego Reader is hardly hard journalism any more than Red County is!
Second, who cares if people compete for these races? Or even if other groups help elect candidates? Or even if Krvaric did pick who he wanted or didn't? That's called Democracy, and it is how every other elected office works.
So what is the dif between the old and new members? Is this going to actually change anything or is this just all carping.
At least the GOP is finally working so that people are willing to spend money to run for it.
Jim
I'm back!
ok I get that outside entities may have paid for the campaigns and I think we can probably deduce that they were a faction of some sort within the group. I thought about this for a while and decided that I dont have a problem with one part of the group spending money electing similar members as long as everyone or groups of people can do the same if they want.
That leads me back to question (4) that I put above:
4) If they should not campaign for these offices what should the process be? Just put their names on the ballot and see what happens?
>Krvaric did pick who he wanted or didn't? That's called Democracy
too funny. democracy? does the u.s. president choose the congressman, or assemblyman, or does the public get some input? if this principle is hard for you to understand then that's pretty sad.
and no, the gopbia is not funcioning at any better levels. look at the city beat article on who funded theses slates. special interest. looking for yes man to sit even on central committee.
guess you don't mind special interest calling all the shots. well we all do.
I find it interesting that "Seventh District candidate for City Council April Boling" was the paid treasurer for a campaign committee that received the bulk of their money (and therefore her money) from only two sources and one was Thomas Sudberry. I guess we know how April will vote on his proposed "massive condominium development in Mission Valley."
That picture of Briana is disrespectful. I must defend Briana's honor.
One central committee candidates who was elected had business cards and yard signs. The same guy who works for labor. Why arent we talking about that? Where did his money come from?
Duncan, your going to defend her honor?
Swords or Pistols, sir? To the death!!!
So wait? Someone is running for an office (central committee) and either the candidate pays for their name to be on a mailer or someone who supports the candidate pays for their name to be on a mailer (independent expenditure?), and the people who lost are angry? I'm pretty sure there is a word for that, politics, and I'm also pretty sure that anyone who is running for central committee is at least somewhat familiar with spending money to make sure someone who agrees with them gets into office.
Would anyone here, anyone, object to Mayor Sanders endorsing or donating to a city council race or the city attorney race? No! It is in his best interest to make sure that people get elected who he can work with! There is also a word for an elected official or candidate who makes excuses and throws a hissy-fit anytime they lost because they were out-campaigned, a democrat.
worker-bee at that fine rag said:
"Duncan, your going to defend her honor?
Swords or Pistols, sir? To the death!!!"
With swords of course, I am a Highlander...In the end there can be only one.
Reading your comments you sound ill informed, or at least loose with the facts that you can prove.
* You call the actions taken by this group, or Krvaric, or whoever, illegal. Sounds like they are not.
* You say Krvaric picked the slates "period" but provide no documentation.
* You 'cant imagine' anyone paying to run for central committee. Well, as someone who has been actually on the committee I can attest that yes, people in fact do spend money running
* You make the bizarre arguement that the President or the Governor doesnt get involved in legislative elections (comparing this to Krvarics yet unproved involvement in these elections). Where have you been living? A hole? Of course the President and the Governor get very involved in legislative elections.
* Maybe you are new or not involved, but Ive been involved a long time. Are you serious that the GOP is not stronger than its ever been?
I believe that you should be free to make any reasonable arguement. But please for the love of god take 5 minutes and think about what you write.
I think Im on the record as being critical of, or at least allowing critism of, the Central Committee. However, the idea that for some reason these elections should not be conducted like normal elections is wrong headed. If you dont like the bums running the show stop talking and raise money and toss them out.
You cant be serious. There are people on the Republican Party ruling body who are shocked (SHOCKED!) that there is politics involved?
I sure as hell dont want anyone that niave running the Republican Party.
So let me get this straight. Kvaric was engaged in some interesting hacker-like shinnigans back in the day and still might know some people who continue to do that. I did some basic digging here. As somebody who does not tolerate dissent of any kind within the party ranks. Kvaric probably doesn't like me a whole lot, dispite my long dedication to the cause and utter unabashed hatred for the far left.As somebody who does not like the direction the party is going, I don't feel particularly safe here.
None-the-less I'll offer this deal. I will refrain from posting anything on any political blog in the state of California for one year, as well as engaging in any political activity, beyond voting. In exchange for his cronies to hack into my personal computer and power-level my paladin to level 70 on my World of Warcraft account within 3 weeks.
Glad to see at least the party isn't eating each other alive. I knot that happens to rats on a ship when they run out of food, but not these guys.
RINO
If I give you all the Commodore 64 files Krvaric hacked will you stop posting because you still own a 64 and would be too busy playing the games?
To Duncan McLoud and Worker Bee at the fine Rag:
Pistols at dawn is an American tradition.
Today in history...
1804: Vice President of the United States Aaron Burr kills Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton in a duel
My party: Aaron Burr is one of my favorite historic American figures. Such a complicated man and the rhetoric he and Hamilton flung back and forth in "so-called" newspapers back then was scandalous and rife with libelous attacks. It's good to know not much changes in the political landscape.
there are other things that make the "slates" illegal. the biggest reason is the slates are just a front in the first place:
http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/articles/2006/09/20/government/909ethics.txt
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20060919/news_1m19ethics.html
"Anonymous" I don't mean to be rude but you clearly do not understand the law. The events you cite are quite literally not on point. The law in this area is very clear. You may not agree with what was done by whoever did it, but I would suggest that making incorrect assertions that their activities were "illegal" (again, not the correct term really) only undermines your argument of whether what they did was politically right or wrong.
I was quite heavily involved in the SDGOP a while back. I've volunteered lots of time, contributed and helped raise significant dollars (I would guess close to a million bucks over a period of several years), and generally been supportive of the group. Primarily because of time commitments, I have scaled back my participation over the past few years -- my involvement started to wane around the time Nehring first became leader.
I enjoy forums such as Red County because they encourage debate, which is what democracy is all about. I've met Krvaric a hand full of times and frankly don't know much about the guy. I have never met Camille Cowlishaw and have no idea who she is.
That all being said, it is very discouraging to read quotes like this: "There are a few people," according to Cowlishaw, "who would like to control everything, including Tony Krvaric. They want to have no dissent, no confusion about what they want done. They want everybody to get along and have the same idea and be on the same page. I can understand that to a certain degree, but there has to be some discussion. I am vocal in my opinions, though mostly outside of meetings. But I don't think my views were anti anything."
Our party needs to encourage internal debate and discussion, and then make educated decisions on how we should be moving forward.
I certainly hope that is case.
Ive served on the Central Committee and for all the bickering from people on this website I havent seen that kind of bickering at the meetings, or even outside the meetings. Most people, Camille and Laura and the Shermans included, agree on most everything from what I've seen.
I think its natural in politics, and in a political organization, for people to disagree on candidates to support from time to time. No doubt sometimes the disagreement is heated. But outside of a few people who are generally nasty in any situation I think the vast majority of the committee gets along.
Its not really a real arguement to say that the GOP isnt stronger now than ever. Its pretty clear, at least financially the organization (read the paper) is the biggest player in the county. Id also agree that the precinct system that Mary and Chip worked so hard on needs some serious work - but now that its a presidential year that should be doable.
PS - money being spent on this committee election has gone on as long as I remember going back at least twenty years. Sometimes its outside organizations, sometimes the candidates themselves. Some years more, some years less. In the mid 90's, for instance, conservative and moderate organizations spent small fortunes.
Can we ALL agree on two things. That we ALL want to rid the govenment of liberals, and push as many democrat politicians and opperatives into private sector positions away from government?
It will be interesting to see who does not agree with this.
RINO - I disagree. I don't them in the private sector. The economy is in enough trouble already! Can you imagine the damage they'd do? They'd blow through billions in corporate dollars just as quickly as they do now with our tax dollars. Get them out of government and out of private sector...where that would leave them, I don't know but we'd all be better off for it.
Will someone please explain to me how the local GOP is failing?
I'm thinking back over the past few years and remembering Shirley Horton winning in a Dem seat, Bilbray winning after Cunningham, Faulconer winning in a Dem seat, Sanders defeating Francis, huge wins in cities the party played in like Chula Vista and Oceanside, Demaio a party stalwart winning in the fifth council seat, Boling (surprisingly) coming out on top of Emerald, and Goldsmith. Further, the elected officials actually participate in the party now.
Please explain how we are failing? Be specific.
score card is right we have won most of the big races over the last few years and that really does make a point that the gop is strong, but I think we have neglected other stuff like our precinct captains and registration that could harm us longterm.
I'm completely enjoying this thread.
Seems like a bunch of whiners, loose cannons, and old blue hairs lost an election and want to whine about it.
Next time: step up and try not to get blind sighted by people that should be running the party (those with some political acumen).
Sorry fellas.
In addition. I'm glad to see your desperation manifest itself in your quotes. I'm a bit sadistic. And it's how I get my jollies.
"and no, the gopbia is not funcioning at any better levels"
I'm not sure if this blogger was around in the 1990's, but I was. Are you mad? It used to be a madhouse.
MR MURPHY
Joe Voter
I want liberals in non-union private sector jobs where they will see the effects of high taxes on their bank account.
Scorecard
No doubt that the infrustructure of the SDGOP machine is par-excelance, and we have won victories in democrat areas. However look beneath that and to the long term.
The demographics within this city and county is shifting leftward. The white-collar job market for college grads are bleak here. Many leave out of state where there is better opportunites and lower cost of living. You can own a house in Texas for 1/2 the price where the cost of living is less.
Groups that vote democrat are growing while groups that vote republican are shrinking. Obama is mobilizing blacks. Gay marriage will bring gays in cluding senios who want to retire, from all over the country en mass to this state and they will settle in places where there is a large "community." LA, SF and here. That "community" will spread beyond Hillcrest and Northpark. A pourus border and a growing hispanic population is overtaking whites here according to the 2000 census. How many times do you see at the mall large hispanic families? Contrast that with how many whites that you know in their 20's and 30's with 3 or more children.
The visceral image of a Republican party consisting of majority old white men who look alike is un-cool, and is uninviting to anybody who does not conform to ridgid ideological standards. It is simply not acceptable to be pro-choice and a republican at the same time. For example.
But to quote Al Haig with Nixon. "We still have the military."
I agree with you RHINO - we need to have a gop ideology which is more attuned with 2008 than 1980. One that welcomes new groups of voters and gives us a majority. But ideology isnt really the job of the local party.
The wisdom of an elected chairman of an organization campaigning for his electors aside, I would point out to "anonymous" well above that there is a distinction between Krvaric flat out "picking" members of his group and "campaigning" for members who favor whatever his agenda is.
The is nothing odd about an elected leader "campaigning" for other elected officials who support his or her view.
he didn't campaign. he did it in secret. behind closed doors, with help from three large donors with special projects getting ready to go in front of city council. spin your web of lies. these things aren't decided here. they go to ethics commisions and federal political practices. you're comments, matter not.
RINO - I don't want them on my payroll spending mine and my investors' money like it grows on trees, and using their expense accounts to buy French wines and silk ties. That kind of stuff may fly in places like Fabian Nunez's world where they have no concept of money and in the halls of Congress, but when it starts eating up profits and operating capital, and destroying the viability of companies out here in the real world then I say NO THANKS.
And this is news, why? This is nothing new or illegal. It has been going on for years and will continue. Some people simply need to get a clue. If they don't know how to play the political game, then they have no business serving on the GOP central committee!
I feel like a parent talking to children. Who among you really LIKES dissent? I mean do you go out of your way to find people to hang around that disagree with you? If so you might want to consider hiring a therapist.
If want REALLY know how the slate cards work then simply ask a political consultant. Oh but why would you do that, then your story might not be as inflammatory and inaccurate!
Maybe this website should hire me to comment on the law as people blog!
Simone, neither San Diego Ethics Commission nor the Federal Elections Commission have authority over elections to County Central Committee. Those elections are regulated by the Fair Political Practices Commission.
Further, and I hate to repeat myself over and over: the type of expenditures detailed in the article, under the facts contained therein, are legal.
They would be legal if Mr. Krvaric were involved in public or in private.
They would be legal if all of the contributors had business or no business in front of the city or any other body.
I think it is below the level of this discussion to continue to ignore the actual law in the effort to, I assume, make a political point.
Joe Voter
I'd rather have libs spending their own money on whatever they want, than spend our money on nanny state earmarks and, in power to vote for such things as SB 777. Not to mention set school policy for our kids.
scorecard.
If "ideology isnt really the job of the local party." Then those of right leaning voters living here are screwed. The far-left in power represent everything that we as righties are opposed to. And the local party is therby fated with the task to market and promote a brand that the majority of Californians and San Diegans have been conditioned to find distasteful.
So what are we supposed to do, form a 3rd party, like the conservative party of New York? And not have the infrustructure, and money neccessary to run effective campaigns, granted to us by the RNC, who ironically sees San Diego, and Orange Counties as cash cows. Or adapt our brand of Republicanism to the local venue. Unforutatly the locals will allways identify us negatively with the national party, and any maverick republican will be percieved as a puppet.
A third option is neccessary. Unfortunately dissent and diologue leads to ostricization, and accusations of trechery. In part due to internal power plays, and guilt by association, In extreme, but not infrequent cases blackballing takes place. God only knows how many good ideas were lost from those fearful of being purged, and from those who were purged themselves by the powers-that-be.
I have to leave the office right now but I want to touch on the comments by "Oh My".
I would be very careful in making a criminal accusation against anyone without evidence. I would hope that the editor of this blog would remove your comments.
I understand you are probably not versed with the law, "Oh My" but, again, from what I have read, and I am versed with the law, you do not understand the framework of the law in regard to the facts as displayed.
This is not 'money laundering' under any definition. Again, the Ethics Commission and the FEC have no regulatory authority over Central Committee elections. Everything I have read about this thusfar appears perfectly legal, one way or the other.
I would suggest that readers take a few minutes to make themselves familiar with the applicable law before making wild comments.
Let me see if I understand: April Boling while running for City Council is still working as a treasurer for other campaigns, some of which have no contribution limit. Doesn't this allow a large donor, perhaps one with future projects pending at the City Council, to make a substantial donation to one of April's clients? And wouldn't a percentage of that substantial donation then go directly into April's pocket? Hmmm...
...No, a percentage of that substantial donation would NOT then go directly into April's pocket, because as treasurer she works off a single retainer, not percentage of funds raised. Being the campaign treasurer is not being the consultant or fundraiser who work on a commission/percentage basis. A treasurer doesn't care if he has to process 100 checks at $1 or 100 checks at $1000, he still gets the same pay.
Although many (not all) treasurers work on a fixed retainer, that retainer always increases based on the amount of contributions. It would be beyond naive to think that donors to April's clients are not doing so to help April as much as they are to help the supposed recipient.
"It would be beyond naive to think that donors to April's clients are not doing so to help April as much as they are to help the supposed recipient"
Actually what you are suggesting is pretty unlikely. There are very few candidates without contribution limits. Right off the mark, I cant actually think of any.
Further, the amount that fees are increased is generally very low and based on extra work done (ie costs that are being incurred) so its not like money is going 'straight' to anyone's pocket.
So please either provide concrete examples of your theory, with real numbers and real names, or shut it.
MIGHTY THOR HAS SAID BEFORE THAT THIS BLOG WILL NOT BE A FORUM FOR ACCUSATIONS OF A CRIME OR CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR WITHOUT FIRM EVIDENCE. THE NEXT PERSON WHO MAKES SUCH AN ACCUSATION WILL BE BANNED.
I WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT PEOPLE WHO POST MULTIPLE TIMES WITH DIFFERENT NAMES MAY ALSO BE BANNED.
I SUGGEST THIS LINE OF DISCUSSION HAS WORN ITSELF THIN.
MIGHTY THOR
so mr. thor, in other words you and your political cronies can dish it out but you can't take it. some people are walking on very thin ice. unfortunately, if your annointed candidate is elected she will likely only bring more shame and embarrassment to san diego with her scandalous baggage. hasn't this city suffered enought??????
Apologies Oh Mighty One, but I did not, nor intend to, accuse anyone of a crime or criminal behavior. I simply tried to point out the possibility that the system was used and perhaps abused, albeit legally.
To "Actually": There are no limits on contributions to organizations like the one mentioned in the original article, slate mailers or initiatives.