GRAPHIC: Demographics of Immigrant Fraction Of United States Has Varied Over Time

This is an interesting graphic which shows the demographics of the non-native population of the United States has varied over time. Axios summarizes the changes over time thusly:

• For most of the 19th and 20th centuries, the vast majority of immigrants came from Western and Northern Europe. The Irish fled famine, the Germans fled political instability, and Italians primarily wanted better economic opportunity.
• The 1965 act ended a program that allowed Mexicans to work on U.S. farms but remain residents of Mexico. That changed the nature of immigration from Mexico and from Central America "to primarily unauthorized," Batalova says.
• In 1986, the U.S. gave legal status to almost 3 million undocumented immigrants — an overwhelming majority of them from Mexico. These new green card holders could then sponsor additional family members.
• There has been a surge of Central American asylum seekers in the U.S. over the past several years as political chaos, poverty and violence have ravaged many of those nations.
• New laws also opened the door to immigration from Asia — initially from India and Taiwan, and later China.
• Following the Vietnam War, there was an influx of Vietnamese people and other citizens of the region who fled to the U.S. as refugees.
• Most recently, there's been a wave of immigration from African countries that began in the 1990s and 2000s for a wide variety of economic, political and humanitarian reasons.

hat/tip: Axios

SATURDAY POLITICS: Trump Approval Shows Disapproval By Everyone (Except Rural Voters)

Hat/tip Axios

SATURDAY POLITICS: Poll Shows Close CA-GOV Race Between Newsom and Villaraigosa

There is a recent PPIC poll on the June 2018 primary in California which demonstrates the current state of play in the race for governor (which is open due to term limits preventing 4-term Governor Jerry Brown from appearing on the ballot again) as well as the race for the United States Senate seat currently held by Diane Feinstein.

As in every public poll that has been released testing the California governor's race, Lieutenant Governor (and former San Francisco Mayor) Gavin Newsom is in the lead, with 23 percentage of respondents expressing a preference for him while former Los Angeles Mayor (and former California Assembly Speaker) Antonio Villaraigosa relatively close behind at 18 and State Treasurer and State Controller John Chiang far behind at 9 tied with the highest Republican contender John Cox. In June 2018 all gubernatorial candidates will appear on one ballot and the Top 2, regardless of party will advance to the November 2018 ballot.

In the Senate race it appears as if Senator Feinstein is well ahead of her challenger, State Senate head Kevin de León since she leads by a massive 45% to 21% with "Don't Know" at 33%.
However, as most political pundits know anytime an incumbent (especially one who has been in office since 1994(!)) is below 50%, they should be nervous. That being said it is very likely that again that the two top candidates will now will be the two top candidates in June and thus these races could last until November 2018. This is one of the main problems with state's Top 2 primary (which was put into place by a ballot measure championed by "centrist Republican" Abel Maldonado during the Schwarzenegger era of California politics in 2004). It's very possible California voters will have a chance to repeal the Top 2 Primary system in a November 2018 ballot measure.

SATURDAY POLITICS: Toni Atkins, 1st LGBT and Female CA Senate Leader

Toni Atkins, former Speaker of the California State Assembly, has been announced as the next leader of the California State Senate when current Senate president pro tem Kevin De Leon steps down in early 2018. When that happens Atkins will become the first woman and openly LGBT person to head the United States' largest state's upper legislative house.

De León, a Los Angeles Democrat who has served as Senate leader for nearly four years, is stepping down from the leadership position as he runs against Sen. Dianne Feinstein in the 2018 election for her seat in the U.S. Senate.

“Four years ago, our caucus elected the first Latino leader in over a century to lead the California state Senate — and, next year, Sen. Atkins will become our first ever woman to be elected Senate leader,” De León said in a statement. 

“Toni is a leader of great experience, achievement and integrity, and I have every confidence that she will lead America's most accomplished legislative chamber to even greater heights,” De León added. 

Atkins, 55, brings leadership experience to the job, having previously served as speaker of the state Assembly. She will be the third person to serve both as Assembly speaker and Senate president pro tem and the first leader of the state Senate who has come out as gay. 

“Today, I am humbled by the trust my colleagues have placed in me, and I intend to earn that trust every day by working tirelessly and inclusively to keep California a place of opportunity for everyone,” Atkins said in a statement.

Congratulations to Toni!

SATURDAY POLITICS: #AD51 California Assembly District Race Heats Up!

I am a homeowner and voter in Northeast Los Angeles and thus the last year has involved participating in numerous elections (five lat last count). Due to the 2016 election which resulted in then-Attorney General Kamala Harris going to the U.S. Senate, my congressperson Xavier Becerra was appointed to replace her and then my Assemblyperson Jimmy Gomez won a special election to replace Becerra in the 34th Congressional District. Now we are just a few weeks away from the Tuesday December 5th election to replace Gomez in the Assembly.

The two candidates for the 51st Assembly district are Luis Lopez and Wendy Carrillo. Lopez has run for this seat before (losing to Gomez in 2012) and lived in the District for decades while Carrillo moved into the district when she ran unsuccessfully in the #CA34 special election.

Interestingly, despite the carpet-bagger concerns Carrillo has been endorsed by several Democratic Party establishment figures, including now-U.S. Rep. Gomez, California Senate Majority leader Kevin De Leon (who represents the area in the California Senate) and Jose Huizar who represents sections of the assembly district in the Los Angeles City Council.

As an openly gay man running for a state legislative seat, Lopez has been endorsed by several LGBT organizations (Equality California, HONOR Pac, the Victory Fund and the California LGBT Legislative Caucus).

Lopez and Carillo have faced off in multiple debates around the district. There doesn't appear to be any public polling in the race. I have already voted for my preferred candidate by mail. The election is Tuesday December 5th.

SATURDAY POLITICS: #AD51 Runoff On 12/05/17 With Wendy Carrillo and Luis Lopez

The special election to replace now-Congressman Jimmy Gomez in the 51st Assembly District happened this Tuesday October 3 and the top 2 finishers were Wendy Carrillo (who had also run against Gomez in the special election in the 34th Congressional District) and Luis López. Carrillo received the most votes (4,771) in a crowded field of 13 candidates while López was second with 4,086 and Mike Fong was close behind with 3,515.

However, only the top 2 finishers advance to a run-off election to be held on Tuesday December 5. López has run for this seat before, way back in 2012 (against Gomez), while Carrillo is something of a perennial candidate in Northeast Los Angeles elections. López is openly gay and is a healthcare executive and was endorsed by various progressive democratic clubs (East Area Progressive Democrats and Stonewall Democrats) while Carrillo used to work for a local affiliate of Service Employees International Union, which ran an independent expenditure campaign that spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to support her.

This is my home district (and I voted) so I am following the race quite closely. It will be interesting to see who (if anyone) Gomez endorses as well as what the other candidates in the race do.

Hat/tip to Los Angeles Times.

SATURDAY POLITICS: Republicans View Things Very Differently Than Democrats and Independents

Of course, for the last week the political world has been buzzing over the march by white supremacists and Nazis in Charlottesville, Virginia and President Trump's widely panned response. However, it should be noted that this negative response to Trump's assigning equal responsibility to white supremacists and those who oppose them for the violence that occurred in Charlottesville (despite the fact that it was an avowed racist who has been arrested and charged with driving the car that killed one of the people protesting the white supremacists) is not universal. 64% of Republicans  agree (with Trump's statements that "both [sides are] equally [to blame]" while 66% of Democrats assign responsibility to the neo-Nazis, anti-semites and white supremacists who marched in Charlottesville.

However, as I have blogged about previously on Saturday Politics Republicans have views about things that are very different from others, such as viewing discrimination against groups differently based on partisan differences as well as which groups suffer more discrimination than others.

Today's blog post is about how Republicans view many institutions (colleges and universities, labor unions, national news media and churches) very differently than others.

SATURDAY POLITICS: Party Affiliation Influences Perceptions of Bias

The topic of how different groups of people view the prevalence and salience of discrimination against various groups is a subject that I have often blogged about here. Five Thirty Eight looks at the polling data from PRRI that I had previously discussed and makes an argument about how in the Trump era notions of "civil rights" and "discrimination" and what the government should do about these issues is going to be very different than what it was in the Obama and Bush administrations.

What we can say already, however, is that in its first 100 days, Trump’s administration has in some ways redefined who the U.S. government views as facing discrimination or marginalization. 

The administration is not proposing less intervention from the federal government, which is the typical Republican approach, but rather it is seeking to wield federal power, just as Obama did. But whereas Obama’s policies focused on protecting African-Americans, Latinos, Muslims, people who are gay or transgender, and other groups that most Americans view as marginalized, Trump and his team are focusing on defending different groups: Christians, police officers, victims of crimes by undocumented immigrants, and people who fear Latino immigrants are taking their jobs or redefining U.S. culture, among others. 

This approach is akin to civil rights for the Trump coalition, a shift in focus away from groups that Democrats (and the data) view as facing more discrimination and toward groups Republicans believe are more often marginalized.

This idea is part of today's discussion of Saturday Politics.

SATURDAY POLITICS: Presidential First-Quarter Approval Rating Comparisons; #CA34 Runoff Between Gomez and Ahn; Gorsuch's 1st Killer Vote

TRUMP'S FIRST-QUARTER APPROVAL RATINGS ARE HISTORICALLY LOW COMPARED TO OTHER FIRST-TERM PRESIDENTS
The Huffington Post reports that Donald Trump is the first post-World War president to have less than majority support from the American populace after the first quarter of his first term.

President Donald Trump received substantially worse ratings for his initial months in office than any other president elected to his first term since World War II, according to Gallup.

Even those presidents who went on to be unpopular generally enjoyed high ratings during their first months in office after their electoral victory. But Trump’s average rating since Inauguration Day is just 41 percent, Gallup finds, making him the only such president in its polling history to fall short of majority approval during his first quarter.

President Bill Clinton, the next-lowest ranked, had an average approval rating of 55 percent for that time period, while Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush enjoyed first-quarter ratings of 63 percent and 58 percent, respectively. 

It should be noted that Trump's approval rating among Republicans (as depicted in the graphic at the top of this post) is 87%, which is well aligned with the political support other presidents have received from people in their same party.

#CA34 JUNE 6 RUN-OFF ELECTION SET BETWEEN JIMMY GOMEZ AND ROBERT LEE AHN
Previously I analyzed the race to replace Xavier Becerra as the United States representative for the 34th Congressional District of California. I also voted in the April 4 election by absentee ballot. The top two finishers were Assemblymember Jimmy Gomez and former Los Angeles City Planning Commissioner Robert Lee Ahn. One of these two will be elected as a Congressmember on June 6, 2017. Ahn, 41, raised the most money but Gomez, 42, received the most votes.

JUSTICE NEIL GORSUCH JOINED THE SUPREME COURT AND HIS FIRST VOTE ALLOWS ARKANSAS TO KILL
Neil Gorsuch is now the newest member of the United States Supreme Court. His very first vote was on Monday night, in the case of McGehee v. Hutchinson, which was in a death penalty case out of Arkansas. In a 5-4 decision, Gorsuch's was the deciding vote which led to the execution of Ledell Lee. This was the first execution in the state of Arkansas in a dozen years. The state had intended to execute 8 men in 11 days but that plan is in doubt now, but they have "successfully" killed at least one man.

SATURDAY POLITICS: Partisan Difference In Views On Discrimination Prevalence

I previously blogged about the difference in attitudes towards LGBT discrimination by various religious denominationt, as reported by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI).

Today I want to discuss how perceptions of the prevalence of discrimination against various groups changes with partisan identification. The PRRI summarizes their findings by discussing how Republicans and Democrats view discro,omayopmthis way:

Discrimination Against Gay and Lesbian, Transgender People
More than six in ten Americans say gay and lesbian people (61%) and transgender people (64%) face a lot of discrimination in the U.S. today. 

However, there are sharp partisan differences on this question. Democrats are roughly twice as likely as Republicans to say gay and lesbian people face a lot of discrimination in the country today (79% vs. 40%, respectively). Notably, a majority (57%) of Republicans do not believe gay and lesbian people face a lot of discrimination. Independents largely reflect the views of the public overall. An identical number (79%) of Democrats believe transgender people face a lot of discrimination, while fewer than half (48%) of Republicans agree. Again, the views of independents generally align with Americans overall. 

Discrimination Against Whites vs. Blacks
Nearly six in ten (58%) Americans say blacks face a lot of discrimination in American society today, while only three in ten (30%) say the same of whites. More Americans now say blacks face a considerable degree of discrimination in U.S. society than in 2013 when slightly more than half (52%) of the public expressed this view.² 

Notably, Republicans are significantly more likely to say that whites, rather than blacks, experience a lot of discrimination in the U.S. today (43% vs. 27%, respectively). Democrats and independents are far more likely to say blacks experience a lot of discrimination than to say the same about whites (82% vs. 19% and 59% vs. 30%, respectively). The partisan gap in perceptions of discrimination against blacks has increased substantially over the last four years, driven primarily by shifts among Democrats. In 2013, about two-thirds (66%) of Democrats compared to roughly one-third (32%) of Republicans expressed the view that discrimination against blacks in the U.S. is common. Notably, white and nonwhite Democrats recorded nearly identical changes in opinion. 

Discrimination Against Christians vs. MuslimsA similar pattern emerges in views of the relative amount of discrimination faced by Muslims and Christians in American society. Americans are twice as likely to say Muslims face a lot of discrimination as to say the same of Christians (66% vs. 33%, respectively). Again, there are sizable differences by party affiliation, religious background, and generation. 

Democrats are more than four times as likely to say Muslims (85%) face a lot of discrimination as to say the same of Christians (21%). Republicans, in contrast, are about equally as likely to say both Christians (48%) and Muslims (45%) experience a lot of discrimination in the US today. Independents’ attitudes mirror those of Americans overall. 

Discrimination Against Immigrants
Nearly two-thirds (64%) of Americans say immigrants face a lot of discrimination in the U.S. today, while one-third (33%) believe they do not. Americans are sharply divided by party and generation. 

Democrats are twice as likely as Republicans to say immigrants face a substantial degree of discrimination in society (82% vs. 41%, respectively). Roughly two-thirds (65%) of independents also believe immigrants confront a great deal of discrimination.

There's a lot more information at the PRRI website. I encourage you to check it out!

SATURDAY POLITICS: Analyzing the #CA34 Special Election for Becerra's Replacement

Jimmy Gomez is my representative in the California Assembly (51st District). Xavier Becerra used to be my representative in the United States Congress (until he became Attorney General of California). I live in the 34th Congressional District of California, so now this is a rare open congressional seat.

The race to replace Becerra has become as crowded as I expected. This is what the actual ballot looks like for the April 4, 2017 special election:

The Top 2 vote getters (as long as no one gets a majority of votes) will face off June 6, 2017. The Los Angeles Times editorial board has endorsed Maria Cabildo but the dozens of mailers I have piling up around the house show that Gomez has garnered the most impressive endorsements:  the Los Angeles County Democratic Party, Xavier Becerra, U.S. Senator Kamala Harris and Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti. However, the person who has raised the most money is Robert Lee Ahn, the only Korean American in a race for a congressional seat which contains Koreatown.

I have already voted (by absentee ballot) but watch this space for the official results in just about 11 days from now!

SATURDAY POLITICS: Obama (2009) versus Obama (2016)

This is how President Obama has aged between his first press conference in 2009 and the one he gave yesterday (which might be his last as President). Gotta wonder how Donald Trump will look in a few years after he has been president for awhile, huh?

Hat/tip Political Wire

SATURDAY POLITICS: President Obama Is OUT Magazine's "Ally of the Year"

These are some awesome pictures that President Obama took as part of an interview he did with Out magazine when he was named their Ally of the Year in the current issue where the Out 100 is also revealed.

SATURDAY POLITICS: Graphic Shows Dramatic Increase In Partisanship Over Time

The above graphic is taken from the scholarly article "The Rise of Partisanship and Super-Cooperators in the U.S. House of Representatives" by Andris et al appearing in PLOS One.

An excerpt from the Discussion section is perfect for today's Saturday Politics post:

The key line is "Our analysis shows that has been increasing exponentially for 60 years, and has had negative effects on Congressional productivity."

Hat/tip to Politico.

SATURDAY POLITICS: Texas Sup Ct Tells Houston "Repeal Equal Rights Measure Or Place On Ballot"

The Texas Supreme Court issued a ruling yesterday handing opponents of Houston's Equal Rights ordinance (HERO) a victory when it said that the City Council must decide by August 24th to either repeal the measure or place it before voters for a vote on the November 2015 municipal ballot. The Houston City Council enacted HERO last summer with openly lesbian Mayor Annise Parker's strong support. This is a shocking ruling because earlier the religious extremists who opposed HERO had turned in double the number of signatures needed to pace the measure on the ballot but more than half of those petitions were deemed invalid by the City Attorney. However the City Secretary had certified that there were enough signatures and it is this certification that the Texas Supreme Court has said must be obeyed. The court suspended the non-discrimination ordinance, and gave the city counvil 30 days to decide to repeal the ordinance or place it before voters.

In response to the Republican-dominated state high court ruling, Mayor Parker issued a statement which said:

"Obviously, I am disappointed and believe the court is in error with this eleventh hour ruling in a case that had already been decided by a judge and jury of citizens. Nonetheless, we will proceed with the steps necessary for City Council to consider the issue. At the same time, we are consulting with our outside counsel on any possible available legal actions. Houston’s Equal Rights Ordinance is similar to measures passed by every other major city in the country and by most local corporations. No matter the color of your skin, your age, gender, physical limitations, or sexual orientation, every Houstonian deserves the right to be treated equally. To do otherwise, hurts Houston’s well-known image as a city that is tolerant, accepting, inclusive and embracing of its diversity. Our citizens fully support and understand this and I have never been afraid to take it to the voters. We will win!"

Of course t's always a bad idea to be forced to vote on the civil rights of other people but if that's what the haters want, we will be ready!

SATURDAY POLITICS: Jeb! Comes Out (In Favor Of Equal LGB Employment Rights) At The State Level

Freedom For All Americans is a new group formed in the mode of Freedom to Marry that is a campaign to "ensure that all LGBT Americans are afforded comprehensive protections from discrimination."

Despite the EEOC ruling this week that existing federal law protects LGB people nationwide from discrimination in employment based on sexual orientation, there are a lot of other areas where LGBT people are still subject to discrimination without a legal recourse.

FFAA got a boost this week when Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush endorsed LGBT-inclusive protections against discrimination at the state level by saying:

“I don’t think you should be discriminated because of your sexual orientation. Period. Over and out.”

It will be interesting to see if his rivals for the GOP nomination will join him or condemn him for taking this stance.

SATURDAY POLITICS: Openly Gay, Latino Ref Rodriguez Elected To Los Angeles School Board

Dr. Ref Rodriguez was just elected this week to fill the District 5 seats on the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) board of education. He defeated incumbent Bennet Kayser by a surprisingly large margin of 7 points (53.5% to 46.5%). Rodriguez was endorsed by the Victory Fund, which supports only LGBT candidates for elected offices around the country.

Rodriguez is well-known for founding the Partnership to Uplift Communities Schools, commonly known as the PUC Schools, which run many charter schools in the state of California. The Rodiguez-Kayser battle was the most expensive of those contested on May 19th, with the California Charter School Association spending millions of dollars to defeat Kayser, who was aligned with the United Teachers Los Angles (UTLA), the teachers' union.

As KPCC put it:

As was the case in the primary, voter turnout was low as predicted: 7.64 percent of registered voters turned out in the school board election and 13.93 percent in City Council District 4. 

In the school board election, the low turnout gave special interests more influence in the results than had voters turned out in decent numbers. California Charter Schools Association Advocates' PACs spent over $2.2 million, primarily to support charter school administrator Ref Rodriguez. The teachers union, UTLA, spent about $1.3 million while calling on its 31,000-plus members to campaign for its favored candidates. 

The District 5 election got so fierce that I had people knocking on my door (twice) for Kayser even though I am not in District 5 (I'm in District 2 currently held by Monica Garcia).

Because of the ill-advised Charter Amendments that passed earlier this year, Rodriguez will serve a 5.5 year term, coming up for election in June 2020.

SATURDAY POLITICS: Poll Shows Marriage Equality Support Above 60%

A new poll from ABC News/Washington Post indicates that support for marriage equality is at an all-time high just as the United States Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a case (Obergefell v. Hodges) that could strike down the remaining state marriage bans next week. There are 37 states that have marriage equality right now, and the latest poll says that 61% of all respondents support marriage equality with only 35% in opposition. More interesting is the fact that intensity of support is with the proponents of marriage equality (40% strongly support marriage equality as opposed to 25% that oppose marriage equality strongly).

The Washington Post analysis of the new poll says:

There are 37 states, plus the District of Columbia, where, through the legislative process or court order, gay couples are allowed to marry. In those place, 64 percent say such unions should be legal. But even in the 13 states where same-sex marriage is not legal, 54 percent say it should be. 

The public’s perspective on whether states may forbid same-sex marriage mirrors overall views on the subject, according to the poll. Sixty-one percent oppose allowing states to prohibit same-sex marriages, and 62 percent support requiring states to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

There are some people who say there will be a popular opinion backlash if the Supreme Court rules in favor of marriage equality but a recent report from the Williams Institute shows the reverse is true. Opening up marriage to same-sex couples in the past has accelerated the rate at which popular support for marriage equality increases.

The report (Trends in Public Support for Marriage for Sa,e-Sex Couples 2004-2014) concludes:

There are 36 states and the District of Columbia presently with a majority (50% or above) in support of same-sex marriage. And, given trends in public opinion on this issue over the last decade, at least an additional five states will join this group by the start of 2016, with six more states very close to that majority point. 

All states are currently experiencing a trend reflecting increasing popular support for marriage for same-sex couples; the rates of change across states averaged 2.6% over the last ten years. For almost all of the states the rate of change of support has accelerated over the last two years. Since 2012, states have increased support by 6.2% on average. 

Hat/tip to Wonder Man

SATURDAY POLITICS: MadProfessah Urges NO Vote On *Both* Los Angeles Charter Amendments

The 2015 municipal primary elections in the City and County of Los Angeles are Tuesday March 3rd and yours truly has been active in the opposition to two duplicitous charter amendments that are on the ballot. The measures' supporters claim that they are intended to increase voter turnout by aligning Los Angeles' city elections with the state and presidential elections by moving the March 2021 primary election to June 2020 and the May 2021 general election to November 2020.  All future Los Angeles elections would be held every two years after that. There are many reasons why voters should reject this attempt to do lasting harm to our local democratic process and vote no on Charter Amendments 1 and 2.

The immediate effect would be to make Los Angeles the largest municipality in the country to have their local elections held in the context of the much more significant statewide elections held in even years. Oh, and for good measure they would give all officials elected in 2015 or 2017 terms of office that last five-and-a-half years instead of four year terms!

Even though the Los Angeles Times half-heartedly recommended a yes vote on these charter amendments, they highlighted the MULTIPLE problematic aspects of the measures:

But although we believe in the idea, we're disappointed in the execution. The City Council chose to align mayoral and citywide elections with gubernatorial elections starting in 2022, and to match the lower-impact council races with the presidential elections starting in 2020. 
If officials wanted the highest possible turnout for the highest-impact elections, they would have paired mayoral elections with presidential elections, which typically draw 70% to 80% turnout in the November runoffs. Also, there are more local races in a mayoral election year, so combining those ballots with the presidential would have meant higher turnout for a greater number of local races. 

 What's more, the city's March mayoral primaries tend to draw more voters than June primaries in gubernatorial years. Since 70% of city races are decided in the primary, some people worry that the city might not see a big boost in turnout by moving the mayoral race to the gubernatorial year. To switch to the new election cycles in 2020 and 2022, the City Council had two choices: either hold special elections in 2019 and 2021 for a shorter-than-usual 18-month term or lengthen the terms of city officials elected this year and in 2017 by 18 months, giving them a one-time, extra-long 51/2-year term. Not surprisingly, the officials chose the second path.  

As a result, voters won't know if they're voting in new City Council members for four years or 51/2 years — and won't find out until they learn whether the amendments have passed. There is also concern that local elections will be overshadowed by the national and state races. Local candidates will appear at the end of a long ballot that could include dozens of high-profile races. Campaigning may become more difficult and expensive as local candidates fight for voter attention and limited airtime. 

 Finally, moving the election won't address the underlying causes of low turnout — the civic malaise that prevents so many Angelenos from becoming engaged in the democratic process and leaves them feeling that local elections don't matter. Charter Amendments 1 and 2 treat a symptom of the disease, but not the disease. It is essential to continue to seek ways to cure that through campaign finance reform, civics education and diverse, engaging political candidates.

And this is what the supporters of the measure say about it to urge you to vote for it! Well, I disagree. We Angelenos deserve better. VOTE NO ON CHARTER AMENDMENTS 1 and 2!

SATURDAY POLITICS: Molina Snags Endorsements By Villaraigosa, Boxer, Cedillo

This week former Los Angeles County Supervisor Gloria Molina announced endorsements of her race for Los Angeles City Council by three prominent Democratic politicians: U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and current Los Angeles City Councilmember Gilbert Cedillo.

The revelation of three big names at once is being viewed (by some political observers) as a misstep by Molina, since typically one unveils big-name endorsements piecemeal in order to get media attention for each one separately. However, even if that is true, it is pretty significant that Molina was able to get the endorsement of a current colleague of her opponent, incumbent City Councilman Jose Huizar. Additionally, Villaraigosa supported Huizar as his replacement back in 2005 when he ran (and won) his race for Mayor. The current Mayor, Eric Garcetti has not yet endorsed in the race.

The Los Angeles County Democratic Party has endorsed Huizar. The primary election will be held March 3, 2015. If the public approves two disingenuous, dubious and dangerous charter amendments in that same election, the winner of that race will get to serve an unprecedented 5-and-a-half year term.

In other interesting political developments, Villaraigosa is making more encouraging noises about running for Boxer's Senate seat in the June 2016 primary, even though Attorney General Kamala Harris made her intentions known earlier this week and most people expected Villaraigosa to be more interested in the 2018 Governor's race, not the 2016 Senate race. Maybe the former Mayor is getting antsy at waiting, or is he afraid that he won't make the top 2 in a crowded field that will likely include Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom, Treasurer John Chiang and many more?