CA-32: Local Ethnic Political Fault Lines Revealed

A little bird told me that Labor Secretary-designee U.S. Representative Hilda Solis would love to endorse Judy Chu to replace her in Congress representing the 32nd District but the Obama Administration has told her that Cabinet secretaries can not get involved in the political fight to replace them. State Senator Gil Cedillo is the only other declared candidate in the potential special election, after Gloria Romero dropped out of the race, endorsing Cedillo, and announced her intention to run for State Superintendent of Education in 2010. Romero also later endorsed Los Angeles Unified School District Board President Monica Garcia for her 24th District State Senate seat.

Capitol Weekly has an article in the Thursday January 22 edition on Solis' confirmation process that also mentions some intriguing details on the intricate positioning that other politicians are doing to fill in the holes in the Southern California political power structure as one of their own is elevated in Washington.

On Thursday morning, both the Service Employees International Union and and Los Angeles County Federation of Labor endorsed Chu.

There have been tensions between Romero and Maria-Elena Durazo, head of the powerful Los Angeles County Federation of Labor. But Capitol sources say Romero decided to focus on the superintendent’s race after consulting with former Sen. Richard Polanco, among others.

The potential Congressional showdown has also divided the Capitol’s Latino Caucus, of which Cedillo is chair. Cedillo has tangled with Assemblyman John Perez, D-Los Angeles, and has even threatened to challenge Perez for his Assembly seat in 2010.

Perez is the cousin of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, and Villaraigosa is said to be leaning toward endorsing Chu, though his office did not return calls seeking comment.

Cedillo and Villlaraigosa were once close political allies, with Villariagosa using his clout to help Cedillo’s election to the Assembly in a 1997 pecial election. But tensions between the two childhood friends quickly grew, and eventually boiled over after Villaraigosa's failed race for Los Angeles mayor in 2001. Villaraigosa threatened to run against Cedillo for Senate after his 2001 defeat, and the rift has never healed between the two. Cedillo stuck with Hahn when Villarigosa eventually defeated Hahn in 2005.

[...]

If Chu is to win the seat, she will have to earn some Latino support. The 32nd Congressional District is about 62 percent Latino. Asians make up about 20 percent of the district population. Latinos make up about half of the district’s voter registration. Asians comprise about 13 percent of registered voters.

[...]

Chu has already secured the endorsement of Assemblyman Ed Hernandez, D-El Monte, who has his eyes on Romero’s senate seat in 2010. Chu and her husband, Assemblyman Mike Eng, D-Los Angeles, -- two of Hernandez’s top potential rivals -- are said to be backing Hernandez for the Senate seat.

[...]

Romero’s exit from the congressional race sets up a 2010 showdown between Romero and Assemblyman Tom Torlakson, D-Antioch, for state superintendent. The current superintendent, Jack O’Connell is being pushed out by term limits, and has announced his intention to run for governor in 2010.

Got all that? On one side you have John Perez, Antonio Villaraigosa, Ed Hernandez and Los Angeles County Federation of Labor with Chu versus Romero and Polanco with Cedillo in a 62% Latino district. I presume L.A. County Supervisor Gloria Molina (who previously rejected a run for the seat herself) will be on the side of Romero/Polanco/Cedillo, but only time will tell.

MadProfessah elected to California Democratic Party Central Committee!

MadProfessah has been elected to the California Democratic Party central committee! I was running as part of the Democratic Neighborood Activist slate of the 45th Assembly District (DeLeon) :

PAUL AHRENS (Mt. Washington) – IATSE Local 44 Assistant Business Agent and Political Coordinator, Delegate to County Federation of Labor
RON BUCKMIRE* (Montecito Heights) – Occidental College Math Department Professor, Black Gay Activist
FRANCISCO CENDEJAS (City Terrace) – SEIU United Health Care Workers Analyst
JOHN CLEARY* (Lincoln Heights) - Hospital Administrator, Stonewall Dem. Club President
COLLEEN COLSON (Montecito Heights) – County Health Dept. Liaison to the American Indian Community (retired)
MARIANN GATTO (Highland Park) – City of Los Angeles Museum Curator/Educator
JOSELYN GEAGA-ROSENTHAL (Historic Filipinotown) - Clinical Social Worker, Echo Park Neighborhood Council
MARCIA GUZMAN (El Sereno) – Democratic Campaign Activist
CAROL JACQUES (Mt. Washington) –Northeast Dem. Community Headquarters Coordinator, Northeast Dem. Club Vice President, AFSCME Local 685
BILL KYSELLA* (Hollywood) – Deputy City Attorney, Stonewall Dem. Club, SEIU #721
HELEN LEUNG (Elysian Valley) – Council Aide, Community Activist
ANA MASCAREÑAS (City Terrace) – Physicians for Social Responsibility-Los Angeles Membership Coordinato

Also elected was KELLI DUNAWAY who is a UCLA law graduate and Obama super-volunteer and FREDDY CEJA*, openly gay (and HIV+) Latino activist who was not a member of our slate.

The asterisks indicate that the person is openly gay.

CA-32: Romero Drops Out and Endorses Cedillo

Gloria Romero has announced that she is not interested in running for Hilda Solis congressional seat any longer, but is focussing on becoming the next State Superintendent of Public Instruction and has endorsed her State Senate colleague Gil Cedillo for the position.

Previously, State Board of Equalization member Judy Chu has already announced that she is running and MadProfessah hopes that she wins.

CA-32: Chu Makes Her Intention To Run Clear

Judy Chu has made it official: she is running for California's 32nd Congressional district. An article in yesterday's Los Angeles Times carried her annoncement as well as interesting analysis of various politicians chances of winning the seat:

In an interview with The Times on Monday evening, Chu said she made the decision to run Sunday after days of urging from supporters.

"I've decided to heed those calls," she said. "I know this district very, very well and I believe the people of this district know me and know I'm very devoted to the San Gabriel Valley."
[...]

Romero could not be reached Monday afternoon, but said publicly last week that she would pursue the seat. A staunch labor supporter, Romero was elected to her state Senate seat in 2001, replacing Solis. She had previously served in the Assembly and said she represented the district at the state level for 10 years.

She would have an important leg up on Chu, according to political consultants.

"Most people believe a Latino would be favored," said Allan Hoffenblum, publisher of the California Target Book, a nonpartisan publication that analyzes and handicaps legislative races.

He said about 48% of the district's voters are Latino. Asians are the second-largest group, making up 13% of the vote.

But if several Latino candidates split the Latino vote, he said, a strong Asian candidate could put together Asian and white voters and take a majority.

Perhaps an even larger factor, said Democratic political strategist Steve Maviglio, is who the Los Angeles Federation of Labor backs, and how strongly.

"They have the most horses in the county. They have the most money. If they put all their firepower behind one candidate, it's pretty much over," he said.

That's partly because most special elections have turnouts below 20%, which he said favor grass-roots, get-out-the vote campaigns that are labor's strength.

Another interesting aspect of the race is that apparently there is not a residency requirement for the special election, so theoretically any big name Latino politician could consider running for the seat. Fabian Nunez, anyone? Then again he's a bit busy right now keeping his son out of jail!

CA-32: Romero and Chu Eye Solis' U.S. House Seat

State Senator Gloria Romero

It's all about MadProfessah's hood! Previously, I blogged about a scramble among prominent Latino politicians in Los Angeles that had started when word leaked that MadProfessah's congressman, U.S. Rep. Xavier Becerra (CA-31) had been offered a position in President Obama's cabinet as U.S. Trade Representative. Becerra turned the position down, deciding to stay in the House as the #5 Democrat in that chamber and wait his chance to become to the first Latino Speaker of the House. This will not be the last time we hear the name Xavier Becerra.

Now imagine the maneuverings are going on now that U.S. Rep. Hilda Solis (CA-32) has accepted Obama's nomination as Labor Secretary, giving up a Congressional seat in East Los Angeles that she has held for 5 terms. This time it's my State Senator Gloria Romero who has given an explicit statement of interest in the job. "

"Absoutely I am very interested in this seat. I have represented this district for over 10 years in the California state legislature," she said. "I know this district well, and this district knows me."

Other names that have been discussed for the seat include Assemblyman Ed Hernandez, D-West Covina, Judy Chu, chairwoman of the state Board of Equalization, and her husband Assemblyman Mike Eng, D-El Monte.

Both Chu and Romero would be an amazing congressional respresentative and I would be hard pressed to pick between Romero and Chu, although knowing what I know right now, I would pick Chu. I know very little about Hernandez except that he's in his second term in the Assembly. Both Chu and Romero are strong supporters of LGBT equality and have been endorsed by Equality California when they ran for their current elected positions. Interestingly, Romero replaced Solis as the representative of the 24th State Senate district, will she also replace Solis as the representative of the 32nd Congressional district?

The race is on. May the best woman win!

Fight Over HIV Testing in California Hits LGBT Media

Intrepid lesbian reporter Karen Ocamb has a special report in the latest edition of IN LA Magazine on the fight over what HIV testing procedures should look like in California that Mad Professah blogged about earlier this week.

In the article "Assembly Passes Controversial HIV Testing Bill" Ocamb quotes Mad Professah Ron Buckmire.

The coalition [to Amend AB 682], Buckmire wrote, “would like to amend the bill to ensure that patients receive an information sheet about HIV testing [as is provided for cancer screening], that the provider record in the medical chart whether the patient consented to or declined the test and document delivery of the information sheet, that HIV-positive test results are communicated in person, that non-discrimination protections be put in place to prevent HIV testing to screen out people with HIV/AIDS from routine health care services and that the impact of AB 682 be studied to see if it increases voluntary testing without diminishing patient’s autonomy, privacy and access to health care.”

The response from proponents of the bill was curious (and obnoxious). After quoting the odious Michael Weinstein, head of AIDS Healthcare Foundation, as claiming that the actions of the City of West Hollywood passing a resolution opposing AB 682 and supporting the proposed amendments were "sad" and would "sacrifice" lives. Gee, that's really raising the level of public policy debate! Cute and cuddly he is not.

A lobbyist for AHF was given the last word in the article, which he used to reveal some curious beliefs about HIV testing as well as a cavalier attitude about California public health policy.

“I can only think that [the City Council] misunderstands the intent of the bill. The objective of AB 682 is to remove barriers to health-care providers giving HIV tests to their patients—the only exception being our continued belief that HIV testing should be voluntary, so we’ve included a provision that maintains the patient’s right to decline the offer of a test [emphasis added]," said AHF Public Policy Coordinator Joey Terrill, who is working on the bill.

"Nearly 40,000 Californians are unaware that they are HIV-positive,” says Terrill. “The two biggest barriers to testing are: first, requiring a signature before testing, and second, the requirement of a provider to obtain informed consent. AB 682 removes the requirement of a signature and lessens the burden for obtaining consent. No more, no less. AB 682 does not remove the requirement of obtaining consent nor does it in any way affect laws regarding confidentiality."

Gee, so a Public Policy Coordinator for the largest AIDS service organization in California (and the world) has a "continued belief" that a patient has a right to decline an HIV test? Well, isn't that special. So, if in the future AHF reconsiders this belief ("that HIV testing should be voluntary") does that mean that they would be supporting mandatory HIV testing for all Californians? Because if a patient does not have a right to refuse the offer of an HIV test, how is that not mandatory testing? Also, if there is no documentation anywhere of either acceptance or refusal of an offer of an HIV test and an HIV test occurs what redress does that person who was tested have? That is the crux of the Coalition to Amend AB 682's position on the Full Employment Act for HIV Discrimination Lawyers that the current version of Assemblymember Berg's bill represents. How is a doctor having to make a notation in a medical chart that an HIV test was offered (along with a simple information sheet about the test) and what the patient's response was constitute "a psychological barrier" to testing? A barrier to the doctor or a barrier to the patient? Whose interests should California law be protecting here? Getting an HIV test can be a life-changing decision and should be a "teachable moment" for HIV prevention, at least that has been the position of AIDS educators for the last 20 years.


Note, the Coalition has not stated a position that requires that a patient give a signature before getting an HIV test, so this is simply a straw man being raised by Mr. Terrill. We believe more people should be tested for HIV, but we can not support legislation that "opens the door for coercive testing of all Californians." And neither does the CDC! The latest research shows that the way to reac the 40,000 Californians who are unaware of their HIV status is through targeted testing, not reckless universal testing with diminished patient's rights.

That Mr. Terrill says that AB 682 "lessens the burden for obtaining consent[,] No more, no less" is simply laughable. 1) There is no requirement for documentation of consent, so as any lawyer will tell you, if there's no documentation, it didn't happen. 2) AB 682 doesn't just lessen consent, it eliminates informed consent, which is a longstanding principle in California Health law that is not clear can even be reduced, let alone eliminated due to California appellate court rulings in this area. 3) Somehow Illinois and New York state have managed to start with bills as ill-thought out and frankly dangerous as California's but Illinois' law is one the Coalition to Amend AB 682 would probably endorse and New York's is substantially better than the bill pending before the California State Senate. Hopefully intelligent legislators with longtime experience and political savvy like Gloria Romero, Sheila Kuehl and Carole Migden will be able to fix this legislation before it becomes the law of the land.



Stay Tuned. Comments welcome.