California Faultline

The New York Observer reports that “Los Angeles Clinton bundler” Yashar Hedayat has emailed out a reminder for a Hillary fundraiser on Thursday night in Century City.

With six contests left, Senator Clinton needs the resources to continue competing through June 3rd.

$150 a head. VIP tickets range from $1250 - $2300, which includes a meet and great with Clinton.

A commenter snarks:

Awesome. I totally want my hard-earned money to line the pockets of the $109 million—err $98 million dollar woman as she pays herself back for a job horribly done.

Jason Burns at LA Metblogs piles by giving a news definition to American lexicon:

Hil·la·ry [hil-uh-ree] – noun

1. New York Senator currently running for President

2. A state of denial.

Example: If Britney Spears still thinks she can make a comeback, then she’s in quite a Hillary.

(To which a commenter there touches’: “As long as Hillary doesn’t show her Britney, I’m okay.”)

All 97 senators “not running for president” were asked by The Hill Newspaper, if asked, would they run as Vice President?

Perhaps not knowing that most people responded “no” or ducked the question altogether, Dianne Feinstein answered, “Of course. I think anybody would.”

Barbara Boxer was one of many who deflected the answer by saying, “I’m not the right choice for the Democrats because they’re going to carry California. So they should really look elsewhere. And I can really help them right here in the Senate as chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee.”

(Funniest reply, by the way, came from the Republican senator from Idaho, Larry Craig, who told the Hill, “I would say ‘No, Hillary.’ ”)

From yesterday morning’s Newsconference on KNBC, Mayor V says he’ll back Obama if he’s the nominee but believes that voters in all states still need to be heard, and responds, albeit briefly, to Rush Limbaugh mistaking him as a “shoeshine boy” because of his “pigment.”

Please indulge me as I color outside of California’s borders (and possibly political sanity) and propose for discussion a possible other dream ticket for the 2008 Presidential race:

McCain/Clinton.

Sure, there are countless reasons why this wouldn’t happen, but if The Huffington Post can suggest Republican Chuck Hagel as a potential running mate for Barack Obama based largely on Hagel’s anti-war stance, I think I can suggest that a McCain/Clinton ticket stands far more a chance.

Here’s six reasons you should spread this rumor, and why it isn’t that far fetched:

6. The Obama machine isn’t slowing down, regardless of who he picks as a VP. McCain, on the other hand, needs someone to energize prospective voters and prove he won’t be “another 4 years of Bush.” There isn’t a single Republican prospect who could improve on this (save for Condi Rice).

5. McCain and Clinton aren’t shy to hide their affection for each other, and have brought up their close relationship on countless occasions.

4. They’re already attempting to create policies and a shared platform - such as the summer gas tax cut plan (that California Progress Report believes will cost our state over 23,000 jobs).

3. On more than one occasion, Hillary has said endorsed McCain’s qualifications as President while decrying Obama. In a speech on March 3rd, Clinton said, “I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002.” She added that along with her, McCain had also passed the “commander in chief threshold,” but Obama had not.

2. Independent voters would go koo-koo for coconuts over a bipartisan ticket, as would anyone else feeling disenfranchised or disgusted by the partisan vitriol that has divided the country over the Iraq war.

1. The number of Clinton supporters she’s be able to carry over would far outweigh the Republican voters McCain would lose.

While it would certainly upset both party systems, I think a win would be virtually guaranteed.

Thoughts?

An Associated Press article made a couple clarifications yesterday to recent news TV and film productions moving to New York and elsewhere. For one, an ABC spokeswoman said “no decision had yet been made” regarding “Ugly Betty” moving production to New York. And two, Gov. Schwarzenegger countered claims that he’s done nothing to retain film crews in California:

“I’ve been trying for four years, since I’ve gotten to Sacramento, to convince our lawmakers here that it is extremely important to give tax incentives to Hollywood.”

Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, who is termed out of office next week, along with other LA based politicians claim that they’ve pushed for tax credits since 1998, only to always be shot down by the state senate. He blames the current logjam on the Governor:

“If the governor would propose ways to increase revenue to offset the credit, this would be a blockbuster hit in the Legislature,” Nunez spokesman Steven Maviglio said. “Unfortunately, the governor has never included funding in any of his budgets for the bill and has undermined the bipartisan support the credit has enjoyed by proposing a cuts-only budget.”

As if the Writers Guild strike and potential Screen Actors Guild strike weren’t damaging film and television production in Los Angeles enough, the State of New York is aggressively wooing productions to shoot there instead of California.

Already, new tax breaks by Gov. David Paterson have convinced ABC to move production of “Ugly Betty” to New York after shooting its first two seasons in Los Angeles.

Under the expansion, the percentage of qualified film production costs eligible for a tax credit tripled, from 10% to 30%. The program was also extended, from its original 2011 expiration to 2013. New York City chips in an additional 5% tax break. [Variety]

While I’ve been unable to find any record of if producers sought out a competing deal with California or Los Angeles, Nikke Finke at Deadline Hollywood Daily lays the blame on blockbuster star/governor Schwarzenegger:

It’s always been repugnant to me that, despite his years in Hollywood, Governator Arnold Schwarzenegger has done less than zero to stop runaway production or enact incentives to lure TV shows and films back to California and even Los Angeles. (Then again, very little that this piss poor political parvenu has done in the job deserves praise, period.)

Annika at LA Metblogs writes that an estimated 300 Los Angeles residents will lose their jobs as a result, accounting for crew and vendors.

Surprisingly, in all the talk about budget deficits on both the state and city level, little discussion has centered on how to retain the entertainment industry. Are we taking it for granted?

Remember back when votes in Florida were actually counted, and they actually swayed a national election?

If not, don’t fret - HBO has made a TV movie about the Golden State’s role in the 2000 election, when the final numbers took weeks to determine based on a flawed voting system. If the word “hanging chad” rings any bells, yes, that’s what this movie is about.

“Recount” doesn’t hit the little screen until May 28th, but they’re raffling off free tickets in assorted US cities for advanced screenings. Sure, its no “The Dark Knight” or “Indiana Jones and the Jumping of the Sequel Shark,” but it sure beats “Sex and the City,” the motion picture (which, ironically, is also from HBO).

The film stars Kevin Spacey, Bob Balaban, Ed Begley, Jr., Laura Dern, John Hurt, Denis Leary, Bruce McGill, and Tom Wilkinson, all names that I bring up simply to draw in the search engines (hi Google!).

Anyway, if you live in Los Angeles or San Francisco (or in a handful of other US cities) click here to enter for passes.

…h/t LA Snark…

A California Democratic superdelegate who the New York Post dubbed a “super Latino” says his choice between Clinton or Obama rests on whoever “shows him the money.” $20 million, specifically, in “an ironclad promise to spend that heady amount to register Mexican-American voters and get them to the polls in November.” [from  the Associated Press via MyWayNews]

Steven Ybarra of the DNC Hispanic Caucus also made news in February for sending a email criticizing the Clinton campaign for removing Patti Solis Doyle, a Latina, as campaign manager, saying the decision was “disloyal to Hispanics” and “dumb as a stump.” [New York Post]

Remember when it used to be a badge of shame and a tarnish on one’s character to file for bankruptcy? No?

Yesterday the Vallejo City Council voted unanimously for the city to file Chapter 9.

The city faces a $16 million deficit in the 2008-2009 budget starting July 1 and unsuccessfully negotiated with its police, firefighter and electrical workers unions for contract concessions through 2012. Public safety salaries comprise 74 percent of the city’s general fund budget. [NBC11]

According to “‘ol reliable” (Wikipedia), Councilwoman Stephanie Gomes blamed “exorbitant salaries and benefits for Vallejo firefighters and police officers” that consumed 80% of the city’s budget. “98 firefighters made more than $100,000 and 10 made more than $200,000 including overtime.”

One dissenting voice was John Riley, president of the International Association of Firefighters, who believed the city hadn’t exhausted all options and would now call for an independent state audit

NBC11’s brief history of California’s other local bankruptcies:

Orange County declared bankruptcy in the 1990s after then-Treasurer Robert L. Citron borrowed hundreds of millions of dollars while speculating in high-risk securities investments that depended on low interest rates.The county lost $1.64 billion. Desert Hot Springs also filed for bankruptcy in 2001.

Here’s something I didn’t know: while a newly married woman can easily have her last name legally changed to her husband’s on a drivers license, a man would have to jump through a bunch more hurdles, including:

…a $350 fee, court appearances, a public announcement and mounds of paperwork to make a change on (driving licenses) that are routine for women who marry. [Reuters]

An L.A. resident formerly known as Michael Buday recently challenged California courts on the matter and won. He now carries is wife’s last name, and the 31 year old is now legally known as Michael Bijon.

A subsequent lawsuit led to a new California state law guaranteeing the rights of both married couples and registered domestic partners to choose whichever last name they prefer on their marriage and driving licenses.

I wonder what, if any, ramifications this could have on anyone seeking the same path Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa took, whose own last name is actually a combination of his family birth name Villar, and his now ex-wife’s, Raigosa?