Kamala Harris Inaugurated As California Attorney General

California Attorney General Kamala Harris (left) with U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein

Kamala Devi Harris was sworn in as the first female, first African-American and first Asian-American state attorney general today.

Harris, 46, was San Francisco's District Attorney from 2004-2011, and is the daughter of a Jamaican father and a Tamil Indian mother. She is unmarried.

Kamala Harris Now Holds Slim Lead Before Absentees Counted

San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris

The latest numbers (100% of precincts counted) from the Secretary of State Debra Bowen (who was re-elected last night) show that San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris has a pretty good chance to become the first female attorney general of California:

Kamala D. Harris    DEM 3,292,836    45.9%
Steve Cooley        REP 3,277,998    45.7%
Timothy J. Hannan   LIB 179,594      2.5%
Peter Allen         GRN 184,841      2.6%
Diane Beall Templin AI 124,841       1.7%
Robert J. Evans     PF 116,690       1.6%

That's a lead of 14,838 votes. There are still absentee ballots and provisional ballots outstanding. Absentee tend to be more conservative than the electorate while provisional can be either liberal or conservative, so basically all we can say is that Harris has done amazingly well in her first statewide race for office. Even if she loses the race, maybe she should consider running for Dianne Feinstein's U.S. Senate seat in 2012?

UPDATE 11/03/2010 4:37PM
The Registrar Recorder/County Clerk of Los Angeles County is reporting that it has some 399,960 votes to be counted. Assuming that Harris maintains her 53%-39% edge in these Los Angeles County ballots, then this should results in at least an increase in Harris' lead of 50,000 votes (assuming a 12-13 point lead for Harris in these ballots). I think we can safely say that Harris has pulled this one out. In the rest of the counties there are probably no more than 800,000-1,200,000 votes to be counted, since Los Angeles generally has about 1/3-1/4 of all votes cast statewide. Cooley would have to win all those non-LA County ballots by a greater margin than 53-47 (or 6 percentage points more than Harris) assuming there are 1.2 million ballots outstanding, and would have to win by a margin greater than 54-46 (or 8 percentage points greater than Harris) if there are only 800,000 non-LA ballots outstanding to be counted. Both scenarios seem to me to give Cooley a very unlikely chance of winning. Of course it's possible, but not very probable, that the outstanding ballots could have an overwhelmingly different character than all other ballots and be very pro-Cooley but that's a very low probability possibility. Congrats to Attorney-General-elect Kamala Harris!

CA-GOV: Poll Shows Whitman and Brown Tied

A February 15th telephone poll of 500 California "likely voters" by Rasmussen has Republican Meg Whitman and former Democratic Governor Jerry Brown tied at 43 percent support each, with a margin of error of 4.5 points. Brown leads the other Republican challenger, Steve Poizner, 46% to 34%.

Brown, who is currently California's Attorney General, has not officially announced his gubernatorial candidacy but he is the only prominent California Democrat left, especially with Senator Dianne Feinstein expressing her desire not to join the race in no uncertain terms.

Feinstein Responds To Health Care Criticism

A spokesperson for Senator Dianne Feinstein responded to questions about the Senator's support for enacting health care reform after several bloggers (including yours truly) noted her unhelpful appearance on television recently.

In her email, the Senator says:

I support:

1) Reducing costs and expanding coverage

2) Prohibiting the denial of insurance because of pre-existing conditions

3) Moving toward either a non-profit model of medical insurance or to one where premium costs can be controlled, either through competition in a public or cooperative model or through a regulated authority.

4) Assuring the financial survival of Medicare, because it is slated to run out of money in 2017.

5) Preventing the transfer of Medicaid costs to states, which could result in billions of dollars of additional loss to the State of California.

6) Establishing means testing for programs like Medicare Part D, which pays for prescription drugs

Clearly, the individual mandate - and how it is funded - is the critical, and as yet unanswered, question.

Jason Rosenbaum over at Calitics.com is not impressed:

Feinstein wants to control costs? The Commonwealth Fund estimates a health reform bill with a public health insurance option will save an extra $2 trillion over 11 years.

Feinstein wants to expand coverage? Jacob Hacker argues [pdf] that the public health insurance option in conjunction with reform is the way to best provide expanded and quality coverage, while preserving choice.

Feinstein wants to stop insurance industry abuses? Then she'll have to help pass a law that mandates these things, because the insurance industry will never voluntarily accept these concessions, as their testimony before Congress made abundantly clear.

And Feinstein wants to save Medicare and Medicaid? Well, the only way to do that is to aggressively control costs, as Budget Director Peter Orszag points out, is to reform health care in a real way.

In short, if Senator Feinstein wants to achieve any of the goals she says she wants to achieve, she's going to need to support robust health reform, including the choice of a public health insurance option.

[...]

So keep calling her office at (202) 224-3841 and sign the petition and ask her to just come out and say it, "I'm with the President and commit to using all my muscle to pass real health care reform this year, including a choice of a public health insurance option, to achieve the goals I've laid out for our health care system."

I'll say it once again: Senator Feinstein can either make history, or stand in the way.

CA-SEN: Feinstein Unsure Obama About Health Care Reform.

This is simply "unhelpful." As DailyKos mentions, why is the Senior Senator from California expressing "grave concern" about health care reform in 2009, when she didn't do so about going to war in Iraq in 2002.



Here's the transcript of the above clip:

KING: Is your president trying to seize this political moment because he has the votes right now and the political capital in the first year in office? And might he as a result potentially do more harm than good if you try to do this all at once?

FEINSTEIN: Well to be candid with you, I don’t know that he has the votes right now. I think there’s a lot of concern in the Democratic caucus. Senator Lugar’s point about the economy, the trillions of dollars that have gone into buttressing the economy, now we’re going to be dealing with regulation of the financial sector. What all of the impact of this is not yet known.

I didn't vote for her in 2006 and will never vote for her for anything ever again. Is it November 2012, yet?

CA-GOV: First Polls Released

Over at the excellent Calitics blog, they have reposted the results of the first polls in next year's California gubernatorial election. The Field poll asked potential voters about races with and without ``California's most popular politician" Senator Dianne Feinstein, colloquially known as DiFi.

Dianne Feinstein: 38%
Jerry Brown: 16%
Antonio Villaraigosa: 16%
Gavin Newsom: 10%
John Garamendi: 4%
Steve Westly: 2%
Bill Lockyer: 1%
Jack O'Connell: 1%
Undecided: 12%

[...]

Without DiFi in the race, it's a packed field. Here's Field's poll:

Jerry Brown: 26%
Antonio Villaraigosa: 22%
Gavin Newsom: 16%
John Garamendi: 8%
Steve Westly: 2%
Bill Lockyer: 2%
Jack O'Connell: 2%
Undecided: 22%

DiFi's votes are, then, basically evenly distributed. Lake's primary poll (they didn't poll with DiFi) was similar:

Jerry Brown: 27%
Antonio Villaraigosa: 20%
Gavin Newsom: 14%
John Garamendi: 8%
Steve Westly: 3%
Jack O'Connell: 1%
Undecided: 27%

Interesting that more than a year out, Jerry Brown is in the lead.

Whitman Getting More Serious About Running For Governor

As MadProfessah reported last week, former E-Bay CEO and billionaire Meg Whitman is considering running for the California Republican Gubernatorial nomination. Sadly, she is a homophobe who supported Proposition 8, unlike her rivals State Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner and former Congressman and Stanford Law professor Tom Campbell.

Tuesday 365gay.com has more information about the moves Whitman is making to prepare herself for her foray into California politics.

The 52-year-old Republican plans to run in 2010 for the seat Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is leaving but is not ready to make a formal announcement, said the person, who was not authorized to talk publicly and spoke Monday on condition of anonymity.

Whitman made the decision while spending time with family over the holidays and will make the announcement official in four to six weeks, he said.

Henry Gomez, a spokesman for Whitman, said she stepped down from the boards of eBay, Procter & Gamble Co. and DreamWorks Animation SKG last week due to “personal reasons and time commitments.” He would not elaborate.

[...]

Whitman retired in March after 10 years at the helm. A billionaire, she retains a 2 percent ownership stake in eBay.

[...]

Whitman has donated money to candidates and causes in the past but was not particularly active in state politics while she led eBay. Little is known about her social views.

Whitman supported Proposition 8, the gay marriage ban that passed in November, according to the person who spoke about her political decision. Campaign finance records do not indicate she contributed money to that campaign.

I am sure the Log Cabin Republicans will wet their pants at the possibility of holding onto the Governorship with Whitman. Interestingly, if Diane Feinstein wins the Democratic nomination and Whitman wins the Republican nomination MadProfessah would vote for NEITHER.

I have no intention of voting for Dianne Feinstein ever again, for any position.

Obama Appears in Latest NO ON PROP 8 Ad

After yesterday's false advertisement by the heterosexual supremacist proponents of Proposition 8 implying that Barack Obama agreed with them, the Obama for America has authorized the NO ON PROP 8 campaign to include the Democratic Presidential candidate in their latest ad, which also features Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Senator Dianne Feinstein.

It's quite strong, and includes the effective music in the background.

In addition, the NO ON PROP 8 campaign has announced that it has indeed raised 3 million dollars in 3 days as of November 1, and according to the Los Angeles Times the opponents of Proposition 8 have raised more money.

I think we're gonna win this thing!

New NO ON PROP 8 Ad Features Voice of Samuel L. Jackson

Samuel L. Jackson narrates the new No on Proposition 8 ad, which puts this constitutional amendment in the context of previous shameful discriminatory actions throughout history. The text of the new No on Proposition 8 ad is below

"It wasn't that long ago that discrimination was legal in California.

"Japanese Americans were confined in internment camps.

"Armenians couldn't buy a house in the Central Valley.

"Latinos and African Americans were told who they could and could not marry.

"It was a sorry time in our history.

"Today the sponsors of Prop 8 want to eliminate fundamental rights.

"We have an obligation to pass along to our children a more tolerant, more decent society.

"Vote No on Prop 8 it's unfair and it's wrong."

The text is good and the visuals are strong but the music is very weak! Bring back the fast "Tubular Bells" soundtrack from the Jack O'Connell and Dianne Feinstein ads. It communicates a sense of urgency that strengthens all of the NO ON PROP 8 ads.

Feinstein Cuts Ad To Defeat Proposition 8

Often called "the most popular person in California politics," U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein has participated in a tough advertisement as part of the campaign to defeat Proposition 8, the constitutional amendment that would eliminate the right to marry for same-sex couples in California if passed by the voters on November 4.

The text of the ad, which is available at http://www.noonprop8.com/feinsteinad is

"In my lifetime, I've seen discrimination. And I see it again in Proposition 8. Proposition 8 would be a terrible mistake for California. It changes our Constitution. Eliminates fundamental rights. And treats people differently under the law.

"Proposition 8 is not about schools or our kids. It's about discrimination and we must always say NO to that.

"No matter how you feel about marriage, vote against discrimination.

"And vote NO on 8."

It's quite an effective piece. Please donate money to the MadProfesssah.com EQUALITY FOR ALL Match by clicking on the thermometer on the right of this page to assure that we can have it run on television as much as possible in the last few days of the campaign.

We are still not at 50% yet of our goal of raising $1000 directly to the NO ON PROP 8 campaign. Can't YOU help with $5 or $10 or $25 today to support equality for all and defeat Proposition 8?

Poizner Announces Run For California Governor

California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, a Silicon Valley businessman who has previously spent vast sums of his private fortune to further his political career, announced the creation of an exploratory committee for the 2010 Gubernatorial Republican primary nomination.

Previously, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom announced his exploratory committee for Governor. Other Democrats expected to run are Antonio Villaraigosa, California Attorney General Jerry Brown, California Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell and possibly U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein

Feinstein Opposes Prop 8 AND (Maybe) Endorses Marriage Equality

The following statement by California's senior United States Senator Dianne Feinstein has just gone out on the Internets...

“Proposition 8 would eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California. I oppose it as a matter of equality and fairness.

The right to marry is fundamental. It provides social stability, economic equality, and the ability to make decisions for a spouse in a time of crisis.

If Proposition 8 were to pass, not only would it eliminate the right to marry for gay and lesbian couples, but it would also create a complicated legal quagmire for those who have exercised this right under the California Constitution, as adjudicated by the Supreme Court of the State.

The views of Californians on this issue have changed over time, and as a State, I believe we should uphold the ability of our friends, neighbors, and co-workers who are gay and lesbian to enter into the contract of marriage.

I urge Californians to oppose Proposition 8.”

There had been a notable lack of comment from the Feinstein camp on the California marriage decision, Proposition 8 and marriage equality in general. It's good to see that she has come out publicly in favor of the good guys, but, I for one will not vote for her again (I didn't vote for her in 2006) not even if she runs for Governor in 2010. I want to see a real progressive champion as Governor, like Gavin Newsom or Antonio Villaraigosa.