Search Results for: 60,000 registered to vote

Over 60,000 registered to vote in both California and Nevada

Yesterday Election Integrity Project CA, along with ten congressional candidates filed a lawsuit demanding an end to fraud and corruption at the polls.  Today they issued a report showing 60,000 people are registered to vote in both California and Nevada—totally illegal.  Worse a number of those folks VOTED in both States.

“More than 60,000 people are currently registered to vote in both California and Nevada, according to Election Integrity Project California (EIPCa). Thousands were mailed ballots by both states for the November 2020 election and more than 3,500 appear to have voted unlawfully in that election.”

What is mystifying is that the California Republican party is responsible to 5 million Republicans and 40 million Californians to fight for honest elections.  Where is their leadership?  Why did it take a private organization to do what the Republican Party is mandated to do?  Leaders Lead—where is the CRP leadership on honest elections?

Over 60,000 registered to vote in both California and Nevada

Nonpartisan watchdog claims thousands voted where they no longer reside and 251 voted in both states in November 2020.

Linda Paine, EIPCa, 1/6/21  www.eip-ca.com

Santa Clarita, Calif. – More than 60,000 people are currently registered to vote in both California and Nevada, according to Election Integrity Project California (EIPCa). Thousands were mailed ballots by both states for the November 2020 election and more than 3,500 appear to have voted unlawfully in that election.

The findings, based on EIPCa’s analysis of California’s official statewide voter database of November 25, 2020 and Nevada’s statewide database of November 24, 2020, matched registrants on first name, middle name (where available), last name and date of birth. This exposed 60,398 high-confidence matches. Of these, 22,810 additionally share the same phone number and/or their California mailing address matches their Nevada registration address. The remaining matches have exceptionally rare names in both states and are therefore unlikely to be coincidences. Because common names are not included in the analysis, EIPCa’s numbers are conservative.

EIPCa’s analysis found 3,544 who– once confirmed as registered in both states– may have voted unlawfully in the November 2020 election. These votes occurred outside the 30-day grace period for voters who move between states:

  • 2,697 voted unlawfully in Nevada despite being subsequently registered to vote in California. The later registration date indicates these voters now reside in California, but they voted in Nevada.
     
  • 596 voted unlawfully in California despite being subsequently registered to vote in Nevada.
     
  •  251 voted in BOTH states. Of these, 141 currently reside in Nevada and 110 reside in California.
     

These findings will be submitted to the California and Nevada Secretaries of State and appropriate U.S. Attorneys. Federal law enforcement will also be alerted.

“Massive numbers of cross-state registrations underscore the chronic voter list maintenance problems plaguing our country, the need to share this data across states, and the dire consequences for election integrity,” said EIPCa President Linda Paine. “We call on the legal system to investigate our findings and prosecute those who voted unlawfully- a felony in federal elections.”

EIPCa is a nonpartisan IRC 501(c)(3) charity. Contributions are tax-deductible.

Failure to Register Voters:  GOP Responsible for Potential Cong. Calvert Loss in November

The new district for long time California GOP Congressman Ken Calvert has gone from plus 7% GOP to an even split.  The Democrats have been registering voters in this district, and area, since November 2020 (not a typo).  The GOP has been talking about voter registration since the same time period.  The good news for Calvert is that Biden is President—the bad news is that the Democrats continue to register voters and the State GOP is still talking about it.

Few around the State are even discussing this race on the GOP side.  Pelosi and her people see it clearly as an opportunity to pick up a seat.  I believe Calvert wins the seat—but it will be hard and in 2024, I will bet he retires and the Dems take the seat.

Inland Rep. Ken Calvert may face tough re-election bid after 30 years in Congress

By JEFF HORSEMAN, The Press-Enterprise, 5/21/22 

.

Boyz II Men’s “End of the Road” topped the charts when Rep. Ken Calvert was first elected to Congress.

Thirty years later, Democrats hope this November marks the end of Calvert’s time on Capitol Hill. But while Democrats make up a plurality of the county’s registered voters and Democratic presidential candidates have carried Riverside County since 2008, Calvert, R-Corona, continues to be re-elected by comfortable margins.

This year, Democrats hope a more competitive district hurts Calvert, the Inland Empire’s longest-serving congressman. He faces two Democrats — environmental engineer Shrina Kurani and former federal prosecutor Will Rollins — Republican John Michael Lucio and independent Anna Nevenic in the June 7 primary for California’s 41st Congressional District.

Calvert almost had to contend with a challenge from his right. State Sen. Melissa Melendez, R-Lake Elsinore, pulled papers to run in the 41st, but did not file by the deadline.

The top two vote-getters in June, regardless of party, advance to the November general election. At stake is a seat representing Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Indian Wells, Lake Elsinore, La Quinta, Menifee, Norco, Palm Desert, Palm Springs, Rancho Mirage and Wildomar along with parts of Corona, Eastvale and Riverside.

Calvert’s past opposition to same-sex marriage could haunt him in the 41st. Palm Springs is home to a large LGBTQ community and Rollins is openly gay.

Political redistricting, which happens every 10 years, created the 41st. Calvert loses reliably GOP cities in Murrieta and Temecula and goes from a district with a 7 percentage point edge in Republican voter registration to one with a near-even split between Republicans and Democrats; about one in five of the 41st’s voters are no party preference.

Donald Trump won Calvert’s old district by 7 percentage points in 2020, but won the 41st by just 1%, according to political forecaster David Wasserman.

“All signs point toward both major parties treating this as a battleground district,” Marcia Godwin, a professor of public administration at the University of La Verne, said via email.

The national political climate could help Calvert. The president’s party tends to lose seats in midterm elections, and nonpartisan forecasters expect Republicans, buoyed by President Joe Biden’s unpopularity and voter angst over inflation, to win control of the House of Representatives and possibly the Senate.

The Cook Political Report and Inside Elections, which study House races, rate the 41st as “Likely Republican.”

Kurani and Rollins think Calvert is vulnerable.

“I think people are ready for change,” Kurani said. “People are tired. They’re looking for someone who’s gonna cut through the nonsense and focus on the facts and can actually get things done.”

Republicans and Democrats in the 41st “want someone who’s gonna work hard for our communities, and Calvert has consistently failed to do that for the last 30 years,” Rollins said. “He’s never had a congressional district as competitive as the new one is … .”

Calvert isn’t worried. “I wouldn’t do this unless … I felt like I would have a good opportunity of winning and I think that’s no different today,” he said.

Nevenic has run for Assembly, state Senate and Palm Springs school board. She’s running for Congress because “I am driven by higher purpose,” she said. “Many (voters), when I say I’m nonpartisan, they say ‘Great.’ Because many of them are disgusted with both parties.”

A Navy veteran who handles construction projects for companies renovating office buildings, Lucio said he decided to run after being unsatisfied with Calvert’s response to the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol insurrection. Calvert voted against certifying Arizona’s and Pennsylvania’s election results.

“It was people in essence trying to overthrow the government … (and) our Constitution and I would have expected him to be vocal about that,” Lucio said. “I’m running as a Republican, but I’m probably more Democrat. My entire image I’m putting out there is purple. If there were Democrats that I thought could beat Calvert, I probably never would have done this.”

A third Democrat, Brandon Mosely, planned to run in the 41st but dropped out in March.

Calvert enters the primary with the most money. His campaign announced it raised almost $600,000 in the first three months of 2022 and had $1.356 million in cash on hand.

Rollins raised $462,000 in the first quarter of this year — a record, his campaign said, for any Calvert opponent — and had $617,000 in the bank as of March 31. Kurani raised $412,000 and had just under $208,000 going into April.

The GOP establishment is firmly behind Calvert, while Rollins’ endorsers include Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Burbank, Rep. Mark Takano, D-Riverside, and former U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer. Kurani’s endorsements include Riverside City Council Members Clarissa Cervantes and Gaby Plascencia, Eastvale City Council Member Jocelyn Yow and Riverside Unified School District board member Angelov Farooq.

Calvert also asked for and received Trump’s endorsement.  “If he was the president today, I would think half the problems we have right now wouldn’t be around,” the congressman said.

Kurani and Rollins hope Trump’s endorsement works in their favor. “The fact that Trump has endorsed Calvert is really showing his true colors,” Kurani said.

When Trump says jump, “Ken Calvert says ‘How high?’ ” Rollins said.

Democrats also hope their voters will be motivated if the Supreme Court, as expected, allows states to ban abortion. Calvert, who is pro-life, doesn’t think abortion will be an issue in the 41st.

“Going back to the states is not denying abortion. It just brings it back to the democratic process … obviously things in California are not going to change,” said Calvert, adding he doesn’t think a GOP-controlled Congress would pursue a nationwide abortion ban.

Congress needs more women and Calvert “refuses to give women the respect and the dignity that we deserve,” Kurani said.

California women “are not safe if Republicans with extreme views take both houses of Congress and people like Ken Calvert get their wish for a national federalized abortion ban,” Rollins said.

On the campaign trail, Kurani and Rollins promote themselves as pragmatic problem solvers focused on everyday concerns.

“As an engineer and as a sustainability scientist, I’ve spent my career working to reduce waste and create quality jobs,” Kurani said. “We need experts who know how to actually act on climate and are focused on solving those problems of (transitioning) large industries in California to renewable energy.”

Rollins said he grew up in a family of Republicans and Democrats “and (I) care deeply about our institutions and bringing Americans together … I want to go to Republican town halls and hear from people in Republican town halls who disagree with me. I want to know when people think I’m wrong.”

If elected, Rollins said he’d fight for lower taxes for working families and “higher taxes on the ultra-wealthy in the United States who have paid far too little for far too long.”

As an independent, Nevenic said she can be more focused on problem solving than partisan politicians who spend their time “dialing for dollars.”

“I am very concerned about many issues — health care inequality, the opioid crisis, mental illness, crime — it’s all connected,” said Nevenic, who favors hotel-like housing with support services for the homeless, tuition-free community college and vocational training and auditing public agencies to get rid of wasteful and redundant spending.

If elected, Lucio said he would focus on helping veterans.

“I would have no problem serving on a January 6th-type committee. I would have no problem standing up for voting rights and women’s rights,” he said. “I think I’m very much a Republican when it comes to the fiscal side of it. But I think it’s got to be a responsible fiscal attitude … (when) the Republicans are in charge … they spend like drunken sailors.”

Voter turnout for the primary “will be critical for party leaders to see where no party preference voters lean,” Godwin said.

“A strong showing by Calvert could lead Democrats to reconsider whether to target the race. All indications are, though, that control of the House is so vital that there will be more high-spending races this year.”

Disney moving 2,000 jobs TO Florida–From California

The Disney Corp. has become a Soviet style corporation—promoting and protecting radical government and crazy policies.  Guv Newsom has offered financial assistance to Florida firms wanting to move to California—so far no company has announced a move.

By with great irony, Disney is shipping 2,000 well paying CALIFORNIA jobs to Florida—even after they had their special tax provisions taken from them—and the ending of a special Disney County.

The Orlando Business Journal reported, “California-based The Walt Disney Co. has had a major presence in Florida since the 1960s when the early stages of Walt Disney World were under development.

“The company should make the move to Lake Nona by late 2024, according to information shared on job postings. The Walt Disney Co. has confirmed it will relocate about 2,000 jobs from its California headquarters to Lake Nona, a master-planned community in southeast Orlando.”

The jobs are moving from California to Florida, and not the other way around. Who knows? Disney may move its headquarters to Florida someday.”

If Disney had its stockholders interests in mind, it would move its HQ to Florida and save over 8% in taxes and allow its employees to live much better without a salary increase.

Disney moving 2,000 jobs TO Florida

Breitbart,  5/17/22

Led by Ron DeSantis, Republicans stood up to Disney, the world’s largest entertainment conglomerate (ABC, ESPN and half of Hollywood are among its holdings). Disney threatened to stop donating to Republicans if they dared pass the Don’t Groom Kids law.

Not only did the party pass the law, which protects kids 4 to 9 from hearing about a teacher’s sex lives, but Florida Republicans stripped Disney World of its special exempt from state laws and a huge tax break.

On top of that, Disney’s approval among customers dropped from 77% a year ago to just 33% today

Pardon me while I laugh. Disney tried to throw its weight around and knocked itself out.

So how is Disney taking this defeat and humiliation? What acts of vengeance has the House of Mouse taken in retaliation to losing its special place in Florida state law and the hearts of the American people.

None.

In fact, instead of pulling jobs from Florida, Disney is adding to its work force in the Sunshine State.

The Orlando Business Journal reported, “California-based The Walt Disney Co. has had a major presence in Florida since the 1960s when the early stages of Walt Disney World were under development.

“The company should make the move to Lake Nona by late 2024, according to information shared on job postings. The Walt Disney Co. has confirmed it will relocate about 2,000 jobs from its California headquarters to Lake Nona, a master-planned community in southeast Orlando.”

The jobs are moving from California to Florida, and not the other way around. Who knows? Disney may move its headquarters to Florida someday.

So much for Ron DeSantis ruining Florida’s business climate.

But Democrat county officials lied about making Disney World play by the rules. The two counties involved said they would raise taxes.

DeSantis stopped that.

The New York Post reported, “Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said he wants the state — and not the counties — to assume control of the Disney-dominated self-governing body that has run the Orlando-area theme parks for more than 50 years.

“The Republican governor, who has won praise from many conservatives for staring down the Mouse House over the state’s “Don’t Say Gay” Don’t Groom Kids law, said it would be fairer for other businesses if the state oversees the Reedy Creek Improvement District.”

DeSantis told reporters, “First of all, it’d be a cash cow for them [Democrat-run counties] if they had Disney. But I’m worried that they would use that as a pretext to raise taxes on people when that’s what they would want to do anyways and then try to blame Reedy Creek, so we’re not going to give them that opportunity.”

In taking on Disney and stripping it of its special status, Florida Republicans ignored the sage, excuse me, saggy advice on National Review, which whined, “Ron DeSantis’s Misguided Attack on Disney’s Legal Status. The governor already won. There is no need for the Republican Party of Florida to salt the earth.”

Nope. You get out that salt shaker and shake, baby, shake because when you reign, you pour. DeSantis made an example of Disney. It worked. CEOs across the land now are too afraid to speak out against the repeal of Roe v. Wade.

Florida is turning redder than a sunburn. DeSantis enjoys double-digit leads as he seeks re-election. What a far cry from 4 years ago when he barely won the governor’s race.

But he governed as if he had a landslide and in November he likely will have one.

Democrats are in a shambles. For the first time ever in the state’s 177-year history, registered Republicans outnumber Democrats. His opponent 4 years ago crashed and burned at a drunken meth party with a bunch of male homosexual hookers. And the next leader of Democrats in Florida’s House just quit his re-election race amid another male homosexual scandal.

The national party is no help to state Democrats.

ADN America reported, “Democrats Surrender Florida: Republican lawmakers slam Biden’s ‘concessions to brutal Cuban dictatorship.’

“Biden administration waves white flag, surrenders Florida by easing Trump era sanctions by risking huge Cuban American vote of millions. State Dept. says changes will help entrepreneurs and democracy groups that were already granted a general license under OFAC.”

This is what happens when you base your hiring on how many Che T-shirts a job applicant owns.

I doubt Disney will do that when it starts hiring 2,000 more employees in Florida in 2024.

And putting Democrats on the run is what happens when you do the job to which you were elected.

Grenell group targets 1.4 million potential California conservatives to register as voters before November

Read this article carefully.  Note there is NO mention of working with the California Republican Party or any of the GOP County committees or volunteer.  In fact, some county committees and many of the volunteer clubs are doing their own voter registration drives without assistance or support from the State GOP.

As we now know, in the past two years the Democrats added 900,000 (not a typo) to their numbers—while the California Republican Party, continuing its no voter registration efforts, added 80,000 (Per the Secretary of State and Politico) to their numbers.

The State GOP has claimed ti has a great data base for the State.  So why didn’t they do the computer work that the Grennell group did to find 1.4 million potential Republicans?

“Of the 1.4 million unregistered potential conservative voters Fix California says it has identified using publicly-available online information, approximately 200,000 of them are in Los Angeles alone. 

Even those voters could make a significant difference in some of the toss-up seats in the Los Angeles area, a California strategist said. 

“If you just look… Los Angeles County, and then you looked at … what competitive congressional district overlaps in LA County, and the margins that … those competitive races are won by, you’re talking about thousands of votes,” the strategist said. 

Maybe the California Republican Party could not afford that data work—since the Chair receives a salary of $250,000 and there are SEVEN staffers that make $150,000 a year or more.  This information was available online—glad to see a private group doing the work meant to be done by the “official” Republican Party.

Grenell group targets 1.4 million potential California conservatives to register as voters before November

Grenell wants to ‘do to California what Stacey Abrams did to Georgia’

Tyler Olson, Fox News, 5/10/22  

Ric Grenell’s nonprofit Fix California aims to register up to 1.4 million potential conservative voters in the state by the midterm elections, as the group aims to mimic the results of Stacey Abram’s Fair Fight organization in Georgia

In an interview with Fox News Digital, Grenell, who is Fix California’s co-chairman, said its mission will take time and won’t be as glamorous as a campaign for office. But, he said, it could permanently change the state. 

“I’ve been clear that I want to do to California what Stacey Abrams did to Georgia,” Grenell, the former acting director of national intelligence, said. “And I know it’s going to take time. It’s not a sexy campaign. We’re not doing the daily fight on social media.”

“But, make no mistake,” Grenell said, “we are digging deep into finding conservatives who are … currently sitting on the sidelines and engaging them.”

Of the 1.4 million unregistered potential conservative voters Fix California says it has identified using publicly-available online information, approximately 200,000 of them are in Los Angeles alone. 

Even those voters could make a significant difference in some of the toss-up seats in the Los Angeles area, a California strategist said. 

“If you just look… Los Angeles County, and then you looked at … what competitive congressional district overlaps in LA County, and the margins that … those competitive races are won by, you’re talking about thousands of votes,” the strategist said. 

At least statewide, however, Fix California faces a massive uphill climb if it aims to change the makeup of the electorate. California is among the most liberal states in the country. There are currently 42 House Democrats from California and just 10 Republicans. The state supported President Biden with more than 60% of the vote in 2020. 

To get its potential conservative voters registered, Fix California is spending $250,000 on a voter drive by the primary registration deadline later this month, it says. That drive will target about 150,000 to 200,000 of its initial 1.4 million potential voters. And the group plans to use the lessons learned from its initial drive to attack the broader 1.4 million cohort ahead of the midterms. 

Grenell also says that the 1.4 million figure is just the “low-hanging fruit,” and that using its digital processes, Fix California could identify many more possible conservative voters going forward. 

Many of those voters, particularly in LA County, Grenell said, are “at just a quick glance… We’re going to find way more… as we dig deep.”

Grenell added: “If you know anything about the digital process, you do a whole bunch of different things to figure out if somebody is registered as a conservative. And then you’ve got to find their IP address. And then you’ve got to get them to give their email address. Like, this is a long process, but it’s what Stacey Abrams did.”

Voters Say State Is On Wrong Track

Californians surveyed cite homelessness, gas prices and housing among top concerns.

Tents from a homeless encampment line a street in downtown Los Angeles on Tuesday, Jan. 26, 2016. Some 7,000 volunteers will fan out as part of a three-night effort to count homeless people in most of Los Angeles County. Naomi Goldman, a spokeswoman of the organizer the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, said the goal is to “paint a picture about the state of homelessness.” (AP Photo/Richard Vogel)

Coronavirus cases are dropping and the state’s unemployment rate is on the decline, but most California voters still say the Golden State is headed in the wrong direction, with high gasoline prices, low housing affordability and persistent homelessness cited as the biggest challenges.

In a new survey on some of the most prominent economic topics, nearly 6 in 10 voters said the state is on the wrong track and more than 70% rated high gasoline prices as a “very serious” or “somewhat serious” problem. The survey of registered voters by UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies was co-sponsored by the Los Angeles Times.

“Californians are giving a negative rating of the direction of the state,” said Mark Di Camillo, director of the Berkeley institute’s poll. “That coincides with how voters are viewing their personal financial situation.”

In response to the pain at the pump, voters said they are likely to cut back on driving.

Few, however, said they expected to switch to public transit. Only 25% said they were likely to take buses or trains more often.

By contrast, 7 in 10 said they were likely to drive less around town or cancel vacations or weekend road trips because of the high prices.

The pain of high gasoline prices, which last month reached a statewide average of $5.73 a gallon — up $1.79 from a year ago, is felt most keenly by lower-income Californians, Black and Latino residents and those under 30, according to the survey.

Among California voters earning less than $40,000 a year, 81% said gasoline prices were a “very serious” or “somewhat serious” problem. At the other end of the income scale, 57% of those earning more than $200,000 said the prices were not a serious problem.

Gasoline prices were described as a “very serious” or “somewhat serious” problem by 79% of Black voters, 85% of Latino voters and 75% of voters under 30, according to the survey.

Lorena Mendez, an airline catering company worker at Los Angeles International Airport, struggles weekly deciding how to fill her tank and buy groceries, among other household expenses. She bought a house in Bakersfield because housing is more affordable there, but her commute to LAX is two hours in each direction. On some days, rather than driving home she stays with her mother, who lives closer to her job, to save on gas.

“Everything has gotten more expensive, gas and groceries,” she said in Spanish. “It’s hard to figure out which bill to pay first.”

Until recently, Mendez said, she earned about $22 an hour, but her bosses have cut her pay to about $18 an hour. She hopes to work extra hours to make up for the pay cut.

“I was barely able to pay my bills, and now with everything getting more expensive, it’s a struggle,” she said.

For many workers like Mendez who have long commutes, public transit isn’t a viable option. The poll asked voters who said they were not likely to take transit more often to choose up to two main reasons. Among the most common responses were that buses or trains were not convenient either to their destinations (45%) or their homes (35%), that transit takes longer than driving (39%) or that service isn’t frequent enough (20%).

A significant number said they don’t feel safe waiting for or riding on a bus or train (34%) or that they worry about catching COVID-19 or some other illness (16%). Safety concerns were more common in Los Angeles and Orange counties than in the San Francisco Bay Area or San Diego. Few voters — 3% statewide — said transit costs too much.

In 2016, Los Angeles County voters showed just how frustrated they were with traffic. They approved a half-cent sales tax that will pump out $120 billion over four decades to further build out a massive rail system that can carry commuters from the foothills to the sea and to make highway improvements.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority has already spent $9.2 billion in the last 10 years on transit projects, including a yet-to-open light rail line running from the Mid-City area to the South Bay, a regional connector line and an extension of a line that connects the Westside to downtown L.A.

The agency projects it will spend an additional $30 billion on rail in the coming decade and will over the next few decades double the length of its interconnected rail system in the hope that it will lure more commuters across the region.

Academics said voter reluctance about riding transit in response to gas prices was not surprising.

“While gas prices have gone up, most roads and parking continue to be free and plentiful, incentivizing their use,” said Jacob Lawrence Wasserman, research project manager at UCLA’s Institute of Transportation Studies. “And, with transit not given the priority and service to get Angelenos to many destinations reliably, many are left stomaching higher gas prices instead.”

At the same time, by 56% to 35%, voters supported the state’s effort to build a high-speed rail system between Los Angeles and San Francisco that is already expected to be more than three times the original cost estimated when voters approved funding in 2008.

Registered Democrats favored the project 73% to 18%, but Republicans opposed it 66% to 25%. Nonpartisan voters supported the project 55% to 35%.

The glum attitude about the state’s direction was shared, to varying degrees, by California voters of nearly every age group, ethnicity and political stripe.

Just over half of Democrats said the state is headed in the wrong direction, and 93% of Republicans agreed with that gloomy assessment.

Only 21% of voters said they were financially better off than they were a year ago, 42% said they were worse off and 34% said there had been no change.

The survey showed voters are pessimistic about the future: Only 21% predicted they will be better off financially in a year, 30% said they would be worse off, and 44% expected no change in their financial situation.

The poll found that voters now rank the coronavirus near the bottom of a list of 15 challenges facing the state, far behind problems such as housing affordability, homelessness, crime, gas prices and climate change.

Over the last week, the state has averaged 2,824 new coronavirus cases, a decrease of 

Click here to read the full article at the LA Times

Voters give San Fran school board members the boot

The San Fran School Board has three members that could be member of the Russian Politburo.  They are crazier than even AOC.  So, it is surprising that Silicon Valley tech folks put up close to $2 million to throw these loons out of office.  Imagine being so radical that Sen. Scott Weiner and SF Mayor Breed both supported the Recall of the School Board.  Better each Member was thrown out with more than 70% of the vote—50% was needed.

“The recall movement first gained steam more than a year ago as San Francisco Unified School District students remained stuck in distance learning, even when state and county officials gave the green light to reopen and while other public education systems were returning to in-person instruction.

Calls grew more intense for the removal of the eligible board members when the board prioritized, while schools were still closed, the renaming of 44 campuses — whose names, such as Abraham Lincoln and Dianne Feinstein, it said, honored figures linked to racism and sexism.”

Voters give San Francisco school board members the boot

Election was fueled by populist outrage and millionaire donations; now, mayor will pick replacements

By Carly Graf, SF Examiner, 2/15/22 

Three members of the San Francisco Unified School District Board of Education were resoundingly recalled Tuesday in a landslide vote. Alison Collins, Gabriela López and Faauuga Moliga, all of whom were up for reelection in November, are expected to be removed from their posts next month.

The Department of Elections reported that more than 70% of voters supported the recall of each board member. Voters cast a ballot for each board member individually. More than 50% of voters are required to support the recall of each candidate for removal to occur.

Of the 128,862 votes counted out of a possible 499,771 registered voters, 78.55 supported the recall of Collins, 74.9% supported the recall of López and 72% supported the recall of Moliga.

All three will be removed as soon as the Board of Supervisors has certified the election results, which is expected to take place March 1, with new board members likely taking office in mid March.

The recall movement first gained steam more than a year ago as San Francisco Unified School District students remained stuck in distance learning, even when state and county officials gave the green light to reopen and while other public education systems were returning to in-person instruction.

Calls grew more intense for the removal of the eligible board members when the board prioritized, while schools were still closed, the renaming of 44 campuses — whose names, such as Abraham Lincoln and Dianne Feinstein, it said, honored figures linked to racism and sexism.

The board then voted to permanently use a lottery system for admission at Lowell High School, one of only two campuses in the district to use a merit-based admissions system. Both decisions were later overturned by lawsuits, though the board extended the general admission lottery for Lowell High School for another year.

“We met so many families who were heartbroken to leave the public schools they loved,” said Autumn Looijen, co-founder of Recall San Francisco School Board, the group of public school parents who helped lead the campaign in support of the recall. “People in San Francisco are overwhelmingly supportive of vibrant public schools and hungry for leadership that works.”

The recall appears to be a galvanizing moment for Asian American voters who have been incensed by the board’s decision to change the admissions process for Lowell High School, the district’s most academically rigorous school, which is 50% Asian.

Mayor Mayor London Breed, who supported the recall, said in a statement Tuesday night, “The voters of this city have delivered a clear message.” The mayor will appoint replacements for the vacant seats. These individuals will serve until the regular election in November. Breed’s office did not respond to comment on who might be on the short list for appointment.

Recall San Francisco School Board organizers said they plan to “screen” candidates and provide a list of potential nominees to Breed who they believe “would do good work.”

“We’re looking for candidates who can get to work fast to solve those crises and also solve the equity gap that has been expanded by this crisis, and who can provide steady leadership that will give families the confidence to stay,” Looijen said.

Joel Engardio, a prolific organizer for the recall campaign and other movements in San Francisco, added that financial and budgeting expertise are essential for replacements. The school district faces a $125 million deficit as well as the need to hire a new superintendent.

“It is vital that we have a rational and competent school board that can hire an equally rational and competent superintendent they can work with,” he said.

National trend

Social media vitriol, fiery rhetoric and even lawsuits have headlined the recall campaign. Yet the recall is not unique to San Francisco. Across the country, school boards have become the latest battle grounds for populist movements and moneyed political interests.

Ballotpedia, an online service that provides explanations of elections and ballot measures for races nationwide, tallied an average of 23 recall efforts against 52 school board members each year between 2006 and 2020. Last year, however, that number jumped to 84 school board recall efforts against 215 board members.

But here in San Francisco, the recall campaign was not centered around debates facing other school districts, such as textbooks, trans student participation in sports or critical race theory. Nearly half of the campaign’s $1.9 million total dollars raised have come from large donations from people who have no clear connection to San Francisco public schools, and much of the funding was sent through a slew of groups with different names and unclear roots.

Take Neighbors for a Better San Francisco, a political action committee based in San Rafael. It is the single largest contributor to the school board recall campaign, providing $488,800 to various arms of the movement. The PAC’s biggest donor is local hedge fund manager William Oberndorf, who gave $600,000 to Neighbors for a Better San Francisco in 2021. (Oberndorf also gave $1 million to Republican Senator Mitch McConnell’s PAC in 2020).

Other donors include technology investor David Sacks, who gave $74,500 directly to the recall campaign, according to San Francisco ethics filings (and also hosted a fundraiser for Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis), and Jessica Livingston, a Palo Alto resident who co-founded a startup incubator and gave $45,000 to the Concerned Parents of San Francisco PAC.

Retired venture capitalist Arthur Rock has also flooded numerous recall campaign groups with dollars. He gave $100,000 to Campaign for Better San Francisco Public Schools, according to filings, as well as $50,000 to Neighbors for a Better San Francisco and $350,000 to the Concerned Parents of San Francisco Committee, according to reporting from the SF Standard.

Another pillar of support for the recall came from the California Association of Realtors. Citing its wish to keep families in The City, the organization gave nearly $85,000 to various recall groups.

The school board recall signals a “strange bedfellows” moment in San Francisco politics — as in “politics makes for strange bedfellows.” Collins, López and Moliga were removed from their seats due to an unlikely alliance of right-of-center millionaires without substantive ties to local public education and a populist coalition of parents outraged that the boa

Looijen and her husband, Siva Raj, set out in the spring and summer of 2021 to collect 51,325 signatures, roughly 10% of the San Francisco electorate, in favor of recalling each of the school board members. The “Recall SF School Board” petition collected north of 70,000 signatures for each school board member.

“When we started this recall, we were told that one out of 10 recalls makes it to the signature gathering stage. Of those, one out of 10 makes it to the ballot. And of those, only one out of 10 passes,” Looijen said. “If even one of our recall measures passes, it will be a small miracle — and we’re confident we will recall all three.”

Of particular ire to recall supporters was Collins, the then-vice president of the school board. A string of controversial tweets written by Collins in December 2016 were unearthed, reportedly by frustrated and upset parents. The tweets accused Asian American students of using “white supremacist thinking” to get ahead and used “house n****r” (including the asterisks) to refer to Asians.

The revelation sparked outrage, bolstered by Collins’ support for peeling back the merit-based admissions system at Lowell High School, where more than half the students are Asian American.

When the Board of Education voted to strip Collins of her vice presidential status and other leadership roles, she filed a lawsuit seeking $87 million in damages. The suit was later dropped.

While Breed and state Sen. Scott Wiener have endorsed recalling the three school board members, the teachers’ union has not. United Educators of San Francisco instead has focused on the dangers of handing the mayor power to appoint three replacements and questioned the intentions of the PACs funding the recall. Union president Cassondra Curiel has suggested the recall could lead to an influx of charter schools in San Francisco, which union members generally oppose.

The Board of Education special election is the first ballot recall of a San Francisco official in nearly 40 years, since then-mayor Feinstein defeated a recall with 81% of the vote. It will cost The City an estimated $3.25 million.

Joshua Spivak, senior fellow at the Hugh L. Carey Institute for Government Reform at Wagner College, has called the San Francisco school board recall the most historically noteworthy effort to remove school officials since 1959 when voters in Little Rock, Ark., recalled three school board members leading to the integration of the city’s high schools.

Leaders of the school board recall movement insist that while the ability to remove an elected official from office before a term expires is an essential democratic tool, they are only to be used in extreme situations.

“Recalls are an emergency escape hatch or crisis situations where an elected leader has failed at their job, and their continued presence would cause real harm,” Looijen said. “Hopefully this recall will send a message that voters care about competence and that will make further recalls unnecessary.”

The question now is: Will the successful school board recall lead to other populist-millionaire strange political bedfellows? Already, similar forces have lined up for and against the recall of San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin scheduled for June 7.

On Tuesday, however, the Board of Supervisors voted 7-4 to send a recall reform measure to the ballot on June 7. Among other things, it would prohibit recall elections within one year (rather than six months) of an official taking office, which would have applied to the school board recall.

Texas election audit identifies nearly 12,000 foreigners suspected of registering to vote

Texas:  224,585 deceased residents were removed from voters rolls after audit

How do you tell the difference between an honest election and a crooked one?  Compare California to Texas.  The former Golden State has 440,000 dead people and those that moved out of State STILL on the voting rolls and the California Republican Party has done nothing to end this corruption.  Texas had 224,585 dead people on their voting rolls and took them off.  The Texas Republican Party did not have to do anything—since they have an honest State government.  Only, Texas is also checking about 12,000 people, not citizens that are registered to vote.  The California Secretary of State is REFUSING to audit the voting rolls to get illegal aliens off!

“An audit of Texas voter rolls identified nearly 12,000 non-citizens suspected of illegally registering to vote and nearly 600 cases in which ballots may have been cast in the name of a dead resident or by a voter who may also have voted in another state.

Texas Secretary of State John Scott released the findings of the first phase of his audit on the last day of 2021, announcing 224,585 deceased residents were removed from state voters rolls as a result of the review.”

California elections are run like a Banana Republic.  Maybe we could get the United Nations to come in and monitor our elections?  LOL

Texas election audit identifies nearly 12,000 foreigners suspected of registering to vote

John Solomon, Juts the News, 1/1/22  

Suspected non-citizen voters have been referred to counties for investigation, and more than 2,000 have already been removed from rolls, Texas Secretary of State John Scott reports.

By John Solomon, Just the News,  1/1/22 https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/texas-election-audit-identifies-nearly-12000-foreigners-suspected

An audit of Texas voter rolls identified nearly 12,000 non-citizens suspected of illegally registering to vote and nearly 600 cases in which ballots may have been cast in the name of a dead resident or by a voter who may also have voted in another state.

Texas Secretary of State John Scott released the findings of the first phase of his audit on the last day of 2021, announcing 224,585 deceased residents were removed from state voters rolls as a result of the review

Statewide, a total of 11,737 potential non-U.S. citizens were identified as being registered to cast ballots, with the lion’s share located in the counties around Texas two largest cities of Houston and Dallas. It is illegal for foreigners to vote in Texas elections.

You can read the full report here.

File

TexasElectionAuditPhase1Report.pdf

Last month Scott described why his office launched its first-of-a-kind audit of elections.

“What we’re trying to do make sure there is a little more confidence in the system, in the election integrity,” Scott told a local TV interviewer. “And I think this is one of the hopes of the audit is, to show folks it is very safe. It is secure. Your vote does count when you cast it.

“And where we find issues, we’re going to address those issues,” he added.

Scott’s report Friday criticized some counties for not acting quick enough to investigate the non-citizen status of voters, saying several counties missed a deadline that will now delay their investigations until spring of 2022.

“While several counties took action promptly to work their potential non-U.S. citizen matches, others did not begin investigating or send notices of examination until mid to late November of 2021,” Scott’s report said.

“As a result, the 30-day window in which the registrant could provide proof of U.S. citizenship fell after the federally-required NVRA moratorium on voter registration cancellations had begun,” it added. “This means that many potential non-U.S. citizens identified through the agreed-upon process would have until, at the latest, May 25, 2022 to respond to a notice of examination before their voter registration is cancelled.”

So far 2,327 of the 11,737 suspected non-citizen registrations have been canceled – more than half in Dallas alone – and the Secretary of State office is now investigating whether those canceled voters illegally cast ballots in prior elections, Scott’s report said.

The audit also found several other small irregularities, including:

  • 509 potential cross-state duplicate votes were cast in the November 2020 General Election, meaning voters may have cast a ballot in both Texas and another state
  • 67 potential votes were cast in November 2020 in the name of deceased people and are under investigation.
  • A sampling of four counties found three had discrepancies between the votes tallied by machines and those later checked by hand. Those discrepancies are due to be further investigated in the second phase of the audit.

Michigan SUED To get Dead People Off Voting Rolls—California Republican Party Allows 440,000 LIVE Ballots go to the Dead and Those Out of State

In Michigan it is difficult for the dead to vote—they have to show up at the polls.  In California it is EASY for the DEAD to vote—they are sent absentee ballots and no one questions who actually voted.  In Michigan there is a lawsuit to end the dead on the voting rolls.

In California, the California Republican Party is doing nothing.  In fact, the Chair of the Party, Jessica Patterson and the General Counsel Ashley Titus, do not believe there is any fraud or corruption in our voting.

I guess to them the dead have a Constitutional right to vote—along with people who moved to Florida, Idaho and Texas years ago.   In 2022 the Michigan GOP is going to win back the govern ship.  In California, at this moment, it will be a landslide for Newsom, thanks to the inaction of the GOP.

“Public Interest Legal Foundation did not allege specific cases of someone using the names of dead residents to cast fraudulent votes in Michigan. 

“This case is about ensuring that deceased registrants are not receiving ballots,” J. Christian Adams, president of Public Interest Legal Foundation, said in a written statement.  

26,000 Dead People Still Registered to Vote in Michigan, Lawsuit Alleges

Fred Lucas, Daily Signal,  11/3/21  

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson isn’t complying with federal law by leaving nearly

Theresa Domasiewicz, a one-time resident still listed as a registered voter in Michigan, would be 108 years old if she were alive today. But she isn’t, having died in May 2000. 

Domasiewicz is among 25,975 dead people who remain on the state’s voting rolls, according to a lawsuit filed Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan. 

Public Interest Legal Foundation, a conservative ethics watchdog, alleges in the lawsuit that Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, has not complied with the 1993 National Voter Registration Act. That federal law says election officials must “conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters.”

The legal group’s analysis of the Michigan voting rolls found another registered voter who would be 100 years old today had she not died in 2000. 

A significant number of voters—3,956 registrants—have been dead for at least 20 years, according to Public Interest Legal Foundation. 

Another 17,479 registered voters still on the rolls died at least a decade ago, while the bulk—23,663—have been dead for five years or more. 

“Michigan’s list maintenance activities have proven unreasonably inadequate to identify many registrants who are deceased, some of which have been deceased for a significant number of years and been published in newspaper death notices,” the legal foundation states in the complaint. “The foundation was able to find copies of death notices and pictures of grave markers for individuals included on the foundation’s list of likely deceased registrants.”

A spokesman for the Michigan Secretary of State’s Office said the office had not seen the lawsuit yet and couldn’t comment on specifics. 

“Michigan maintains its voter registration list in accordance with all state and federal laws, including provisions for deceased voters,” Jake Rollow, the office’s chief of external affairs, told The Daily Signal in an email. “We have not yet seen such a lawsuit and cannot comment.”

Public Interest Legal Foundation did not allege specific cases of someone using the names of dead residents to cast fraudulent votes in Michigan. 

“This case is about ensuring that deceased registrants are not receiving ballots,” J. Christian Adams, president of Public Interest Legal Foundation, said in a written statement.  

“For over a year, we’ve shared specific data with the Michigan Secretary of State’s Office about the alarming problem of deceased registrants on Michigan’s voter rolls,” Adams said, adding:

Secretary Benson has done nothing to resolve the problem and is even refusing to hand over public documents related to these failures. The failure to remove deceased registrants creates an opportunity for fraud and makes Michigan’s elections less secure.

Public Interest Legal Foundation’s lawsuit asserts that Benson and her office failed to remove the names of deceased voters from the registration rolls and failed to provide documents regarding its efforts to remove the names of dead voters from the rolls. 

“The foundation has spent many thousands of dollars reviewing Michigan’s election procedures and documented failures to maintain an accurate and correct voter roll as required by the NVRA,” the complaint says, referring to the National Voter Registration Act. 

“Defendant’s unlawful list maintenance program has forced the foundation to incur substantial costs comparing Michigan’s voter rolls to the Social Security Death Index, various commercial databases, and other sources in order to identify deceased registrants.”

Stein: Absentee Democratic voters to decide if Governor Newsom’s growing gap between the rich and poor is worth keeping

Newsom can easily beat back the Recall—if the Democrats wanted to do that.  It appears that registered Democrats are not interested in saving Gavin Newsom, they have no interest or desire to even vote.  That is why unions are spending millions on a get out the vote effort.  That is why the Secretary of State is pushing a vote at home scam, where you can get your ballot on the internet—and no absentee ballot will be sent.  This is why the Democrat Party has geared up to harvesting of ballots.

The November 2020 election in California had almost 70% of the total vote cast by absentee ballot.  I would suspect that number to be even higher this time.

He is directing the state and to the Hispanic and African American  populations that, by 2035, all new cars and passenger trucks sold in California be zero-emission vehicles. The Governor is oblivious to the EV trends being set by current users.

Automobiles are the survival mechanism for low-income people. If you increase the cost of automobiles and the costs of fuel, you hurt low-income people who are already forced to pay almost $1.00 more per gallon of fuel than the rest of the country. Newsom never discusses that regressive expense on the less fortunate.

High energy costs trickle down to everything in our daily lives, from the cost of food, lumber, and services, and ultimately to the high cost of living and housing in California and perpetuates the rise in homelessness and poverty”

The Newsom problem is simple—minorities are smart.  They see the Newsom/Democrat policies are harming them, their families and job creation.  They are the first victims of Newsoms energy and crime policies.  He supports failing schools.  People of color demand quality schools, which neither the Democrat Party or the unions are willing to provide.

Absentee Democratic voters to decide if Governor Newsom’s growing gap between the rich and poor is worth keeping

With half the state already bearing the burden of regressive costs onto the less fortunate, this is a must-read Op Ed for all Californians before voting

By Ronald Stein, 8/18/21  

Ambassador for Energy & Infrastructure, Irvine, California

Under the leadership of Governor Gavin Newsom, rich and poor Democrats have been watching the financial gap between them getting wider as his inflicts heavy energy costs onto the less fortunate in California. Starting mid-August, in the Democratic registration-controlled state of California, absentee voters get an opportunity to voice their decision in advance of the September 14th recall election date to cast their ballot for Newsom to support the continuation of his policies biased against the poor or reject him for newer blood to lead the state.

The wealthy Democrats can afford energy at any costs, while the Governor supports exorbitant energy costs that have been contributory to the rapid growth of “energy poverty” and makes California’s economic recovery from the pandemic even more challenging for the 18 million that represent the Hispanic and African American  populations of the state

In a state with the highest costs for electricity and fuels in the nation, Newsom continues to do everything possible to further INCREASE the costs for electricity and fuels for its 40 million residents. Those huge regressive costs have not boded well for the bottom half making less than $20 an hour.

The Governor continues biasing systemic racial, health, economic, and environmental injustices that persist against the economic survivability of those that can least afford expensive electricity and fuels, those with low income and those retirees on fixed incomes.  Poverty, not global warming, remains the biggest challengefor California.

Costs for electricity, especially for intermittent electricity generation from breezes and sunshine, have been skyrocketing, inflicting more energy costs onto the less fortunate as an unwanted regressive expense.  The median income for Latino households in 2016 was $56,200, $55,200 for African American households, and $96,400 for white households. According to several studies, as many as 40 percent of all Californians cannot regularly meet basic monthly expenses.

The report from the Energy Information Agency (EIA) shows that California’s electricity policies have contributed to household users paying 50 percent more, and industrial users paying more than 100 percent more than the national average for electricityOnly Hawaii has higher rates. What is being done to reverse the cost of electricity?

Governor Newsom apparently did not read the required reading for the next EV owner: Drawbacks of EV’s, before he announced on September 23, 2020 an executive order to ban the sale of gas-powered vehicles by 2035

 

The governor cannot make that EV declaration on his own, but he can direct his agencies do to it, which they will under their current clean air act waiver, and other laws they believe grant them this authority.  The executive order directs the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to implement rulemaking to ban the sale of the vehicles.

·         To complicate the Governor’s desire for lifestyle changes for Californians, CARB has no authority over vehicle registration. You will still be able to purchase and register a used internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle or one brought in from out of state.

·         CARB also has no authority to set registration fees.

 

He is directing the state and to the Hispanic and African American  populations that, by 2035, all new cars and passenger trucks sold in California be zero-emission vehicles. The Governor is oblivious to the EV trends being set by current users.

Automobiles are the survival mechanism for low-income people. If you increase the cost of automobiles and the costs of fuel, you hurt low-income people who are already forced to pay almost $1.00 more per gallon of fuel than the rest of the country. Newsom never discusses that regressive expense on the less fortunate.

High energy costs trickle down to everything in our daily lives, from the cost of food, lumber, and services, and ultimately to the high cost of living and housing in California and perpetuates the rise in homelessness and poverty.

Under Newsom’s direction (I did not use the word “leadership”) the future “energy costs” looks very bleak for ALL 40 million residents of the state as the economy starts to recover back to near-normal energy demands for the fifth largest economy in the world. The Governor refuses to focus on REDUCING the cost of energy.

The Governor is supportive of creating a national security risk for all of America, as California’s dependency on foreign suppliers for California’s energy needs, as well as the West Coast military operations, has increased imported crude oil from foreign countries from 5 percent in 1992 to 58 percent today of total consumption.

As a result of the Governor’s continuous efforts to decrease in-state oil production, the crude oil imported from countries halfway around the world, representing 58 percent of the states’ needs, costs California more than $60 million dollars a day, yes, every day, being paid to oil-rich foreign countries.

On Earth Day 2021, to gain personal press and another instant gratification act, Newsom ordered an end to fracking in California by 2024, and to work toward phasing out all in-state oil production by 2045, perpetuating continuous cost increases.

Newsom’s’ irresponsible fiscal actions will increase worldwide emissions and require California to increase its monthly imports resulting in expenditures increasing from the current $60 million dollars a day to a whopping $90 million EVERY DAY for foreign countries to support the fifth largest economy in the world. Are the port infrastructures capable of receiving all its energy from foreign countries?

By encouraging oil demands be met from foreign countries halfway around the world, Newsom continues to support greater emissions generated by those foreign countries to meet the states’ energy demands, as they have significantly less stringent environmental regulations than California, if any. Is it ethical to “leak” emission generation to other countries, and dictate that California residents bear the growing costs?

Starting in mid-August, absentee voters can decide in advance of the September 14th Recall Election date, of the hypocritical Governor Newsom and his dysfunctional energy policies that continue to inflict financial harm to most Democrats, and prolificates the growth of poverty and homelessness for those that cannot bear the growing regressive costs upon half the population.  The gap between rich Democrats and the poor is getting wider every day that Newsom remains the Governor. 

State Legislature Votes to Extend Universal Vote-by-Mail Through 2021

Great news for corrupt politicians.  The Democrats, who gave a minimum of 440,000 ballots to dead people and those who have moved out of State, have decided the Recall election should also be filled with holes.

“California voters will continue to receive a ballot in the mail without requesting one, under legislation approved by the State Assembly on Tuesday.

Senate Bill 29, which now heads to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk, would continue the state’s universal vote-by-mail system until the end of the year — encompassing special elections and a potential recall election of Newsom that could take place in the fall.

This bill is JUST to protect Guv Nuisance.  When will the Republican Party sue to stop this?  They should be suing to force the State to get the dead and moved off the rolls, at a minimum.  Then have an audit to get the illegal aliens off the rolls.  Otherwise, it is an uphill battle to defeat Newsom.

State Legislature Votes to Extend Universal Vote-by-Mail Through 2021

Guy Marzorati, KQED,  2/16/21  

California voters will continue to receive a ballot in the mail without requesting one, under legislation approved by the State Assembly on Tuesday.

Senate Bill 29, which now heads to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk, would continue the state’s universal vote-by-mail system until the end of the year — encompassing special elections and a potential recall election of Newsom that could take place in the fall.

A supermajority of legislators in both houses supported the bill, allowing it to take effect immediately after it is signed. Unlike previous advances of vote-by-mail, the bill was uniformly opposed by Republicans.

The vote marks the latest step in California’s transition away from traditional in-person voting. Last fall, election officials mailed every registered voter a ballot in order to prevent the spread of the coronavirus at the polls.

“This bill recognizes that the pandemic has not gone away,” said Assemblyman Marc Berman, D-Menlo Park.

Republicans called the idea of extending universal mail-in voting a bait and switch, arguing that the changes made in 2020 were only meant to be temporary.

“We were told this universal vote-by-mail process was necessary for the 2020 general election for safety reasons during the COVID-19 pandemic,” said Assemblyman Steven Choi, R-Irvine. “However, we know it is possible to administer in-person elections while protecting the public health from COVID-19.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has published guidance for the safe administration of in-person voting, but urges election officials to “consider offering alternatives to in-person voting if allowed.”

Supporters of vote-by-mail have not concealed their hope that the practice remain the default method even after the pandemic is over — arguing that easier access to a ballot will spur greater voter participation.

Under the tenure of former Secretary of State Alex Padilla, the share of Californians voting with a mail-in ballot jumped from 57% in 2016, to 86% last year. Already, more than a dozen counties mail voters a ballot in every election.

Berman, who wrote the bill that expanded vote-by-mail last year, called the 2020 election “a great success,” pointing to historic levels of turnout and no widespread issues with election management.

He has written separate legislation to apply the change to all future elections, an idea backed by Secretary of State Shirley Weber.

Sponsored

On Tuesday, the fate of SB 29 hung in limbo for more than two hours, as the bill remained one vote short of passage after the first roll-call vote.

The decisive 54th vote was finally cast by Assemblywoman Wendy Carrillo, D-Los Angeles, who got to the Assembly floor from Los Angeles after participating in the opening of a new vaccination site in the morning.

The party-line vote on the measure was another indication of the Republican Party’s growing aversion to voting by mail. Less than a year ago, nine Republicans in the Legislature backed the plan to send out ballots to all registered voters.

‘What is shocking to me is at this stage, us even having this debate … I remember being a young-ish Republican activist going out and trying to get more people to vote by mail, because we thought Republicans were going to turn out more.’Assemblyman Chad Mayes, I-Yucca Valley

“What is shocking to me is at this stage, us even having this debate,” said Assemblyman Chad Mayes, I-Yucca Valley, who supported the bill. “I remember being a young-ish Republican activist going out and trying to get more people to vote by mail, because we thought Republicans were going to turn out more.”

If signed by Newsom, SB 29 immediately applies to the special elections scheduled for the 30th Senate District in Los Angeles — which already sends every voter a ballot — and the 79th Assembly District in San Diego.

But the legislation’s greatest impact could be felt in a gubernatorial recall election later this year, if a campaign to replace Newsom gathers enough signatures to put a recall before voters.

The 2003 recall election, when California voters replaced Gov. Gray Davis with Arnold Schwarzenegger, saw the highest levels of turnout of any gubernatorial election between 1986 and 2014. An election in which every voter received a ballot in advance could present both parties with a larger electorate from which to draw votes.

“Once the rules are set [the California Republican Party] must strategize and play this game of politics to win,” tweeted Assemblyman Devon Mathis, R-Visalia, during Tuesday’s vote. “Crying that the other side sets the rules is no way to win. Beat them at their own game.”