Workers Memorial Day In Los Angeles

I'm a blogger fellow with Brave New Films on their 16 Deaths Per Day campaign for worker safety. Join us on Facebook.



Today is Workers Memorial Day, the day we remember those who have died on the job. They come from all walks of life, merely trying to get ahead and create a better world for themselves and their families. And yet, each year, thousands of people die from unsafe working conditions or hazardous duty; 16 deaths per day, in fact.



Over the weekend I attended a Workers Memorial Day event in Los Angeles, at the UCLA Labor Center near MacArthur Park. I saw the makeshift memorial to some of the 404 workers who died at their place of employment in California in 2008, adorned with pictures, flowers, and also the tools of work - cleaning supplies, a computer mouse, fruits and vegetables, a surgical mask, and paint rollers. I read about Damien Whipple, 24, who fell off a train into the tracks while working to switch out rail cars. I read about Abdon Felix, 42, who collapsed in 108 degree heat while loading grapes at Sunview Farms in Delano. I read about Carlos Rivera, a 73 year-old dockworker at the Port of Long Beach who was struck by a forklift carrying rolls of sheet metal.

Every year, worker rights and safety advocates, unionists, clergy, and the families of the victims gather in Los Angeles, to honor these workers and bring awareness of the real problem of worker fatalities. They hold a mock funeral procession around the area, to make everyone in the community aware of the issue, and to demonstrate solidarity with the cause. Leaders read names of 40 of the 404 who died, and after every name, the crowd assembled replied "Presente!" in a show of unity.

Representative Laura Richardson (D-CA) of nearby Long Beach spoke at the event. She's a former member of the Machinist's Union, and she talked about her employment history. "I worked at 'The Bomb Shelter,' a restaurant area, when I went to UCLA. I cleaned the toilets and the tables, and I never recall anyone offering me any gloves," Richardson said. "I worked at UPS, and no one offered me steel-toed shoes." She painted a picture of workers often taken advantage of on the job, of a lack of protective gear and supplies, a lack of training, a lack of empathy by forcing workers to show up even when sick or injured, upon threat of termination.

"That's why I support HR 2067, the Protecting America's Workers Act," Richardson announced to the crowd. "Even though our laws in California are better than most, they're not good enough, and the federal laws haven't been improved in 40 years."

In fact, Workers Memorial Day Coincides with the anniversary of the passage of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and Richardson is correct - many of those statutes have not been updated for a changing workplace since their passage. "It's not good enough to put a poster on the wall," Richardson said, "we need supervisors following the law, and if they aren't they should be penalized."

We're seeing with the recent high-profile cases of worker deaths, like with the Gulf of Mexico oil rig explosion, that employers have grown savvy at beating the system and circumventing regulations. That's why they need to be strengthened and given the teeth needed to truly provide for a safe workplace.



And if anything, the recession has deepened that need. We've seen corporate productivity rise as their workforce gets reduced. Basically, most companies are producing more with less. The staffs have increased stress and that can lead to more accidents. Some advocates for hotel workers told me that hotel staff has been slashed across the board even as amenities increase and the workload rises. This can easily lead to preventable accidents.

In a proclamation today on the 40th anniversary of OSHA, President Obama recognized the need for constant vigilance in protecting America's workers:

Although these large-scale tragedies are appalling, most workplace deaths result from tragedies that claim one life at a time through preventable incidents or disabling disease. Every day, 14 workers are killed in on-the-job incidents, while thousands die each year of work-related disease, and millions are injured or contract an illness. Most die far from the spotlight, unrecognized and unnoticed by all but their families, friends, and co-workers -- but they are not forgotten.

The legal right to a safe workplace was won only after countless lives had been lost over decades in workplaces across America, and after a long and bitter fight waged by workers, unions, and public health advocates. Much remains to be done, and my Administration is dedicated to renewing our Nation's commitment to achieve safe working conditions for all American workers.

Providing safer work environments will take the concerted action of government, businesses, employer associations, unions, community organizations, the scientific and public health communities, and individuals. Today, as we mourn those lost mere weeks ago in the Upper Big Branch Mine and other recent disasters, so do we honor all the men and women who have died on the job. In their memory, we rededicate ourselves to preventing such tragedies, and to securing a safer workplace for every American.

Now OSHA merely needs the proper tools to succeed in their mission. And the Protecting America's Workers Act can provide it.

CA Congressional Q1 Reports

So the first quarter of fundraising for the 2010 cycle ended, and this week the reports were filed. Swing State Project has a good roundup. Here's what I found interesting:

• In CA-48, Beth Krom had an unusually strong quarter, considering she entered the race in the middle of it. She raised $63,000 for the quarter, actually beating the incumbent, John Campbell, who raised $55,000. Now, in 2008 candidates like Nick Leibham and Debbie Cook beat their incumbent counterparts in fundraising repeatedly, but had major disadvantages in cash on hand because the incumbents had assembled war chests from prior fundraising. And that's the case here too - Campbell has $300,000 CoH, while Krom has $61,000, a 5-to-1 advantage. But to beat Campbell so early in the cycle shows a lot of potential.

• Debbie Cook, Charlie Brown and Bill Durston basically raised no money in the quarter, dampening any expectation that they will run again in their respective districts. Durston raised $9,000, but that was probably all before he hinted at dropping out due to medical troubles.

• In CA-44, Bill Hedrick may be getting national attention, but he's not raising national numbers, and if he continues to put up $14,000 for a quarter, the D-Trip will either walk away or look for another challenger. I respect the hell out of Hedrick but he's got to do better than that.

• CA-37 is absolutely ripe for a primary challenge. Noted deadbeat Laura Richardson raised a paltry $28,500, as an incumbent, and her $39,000 cash on hand is dwarfed by $363,000 in debt. We deserve better than Laura Richardson in that very blue district.

• Jerry McNerney put up a $275,000 quarter in CA-11.

• His numbers weren't spectacular, but Palm Springs Mayor Steve Pougnet is drawing some attention for his challenge to Mary Bono Mack in CA-45. This is another "Obama Republican" district, and Pougnet, a gay father of two, has an interesting profile for the district and a proven record in the community. This one bears watching.

CA-37: Richardson declared a "public nuisance" to Dems who don't like being constantly embarrassed

Can you believe this?

First Rep. Laura Richardson was having problems making house payments, defaulting six times over eight years.

Then after a bank foreclosed on her Sacramento house and sold it at auction in May, the Long Beach Democrat made such a stink that Washington Mutual, in an unusual move, grabbed it back and returned it to her.

This week, in the latest chapter in the housing saga, the Code Enforcement Department in Sacramento declared her home a "public nuisance."

The city has threatened to fine her as much as $5,000 a month if she doesn't fix it up.

Neighbors in the upper-middle-class neighborhood complain that the sprinklers are never turned on and the grass and plants are dead or dying. The gate is broken, and windows are covered with brown paper.

"I would call it an eyesore," said Peter Thomsen, a retired bank executive who lives nearby.

I think "embarrassing" is the best word for it. Laura Richardson has no need or use for a home in Sacramento anymore, and in her letter to supporters trying to give an alibi for her recent conduct, she says that she isn't rich and doesn't have a second income to afford her lifestyle. Then why the useless home in Sac'to that's become decrepit?

If this was the only thing wrong with Richardson, it'd be enough, frankly. But the fact that she voted to sink the Fourth Amendment and provide amnesty for lawbreaking to the telecoms in the FISA bill means that her votes are as embarrassing as her home upkeep. It's really unacceptable to have her as a representative of this state, honestly.

Deadbeat

Laura Richardson hasn't paid her mortgage bills. She also hasn't paid her car bills, and she used a city-owned vehicle for months without authorization.

In October 2005, her 1999 four-door 740iL BMW had an odd vibration in the front, so she took it to Signal Hill Foreign Auto Service, according to Leo Labreche, the shop owner.

Mechanics there fixed the car and replaced some worn parts, but when Richardson picked up her vehicle, she said she didn't have the money to pay the $735 bill, Labreche said. Because Richardson was a council member, Labreche let her take the car, assuming that she was good for the money, he said.

"She had picked the car up and was going to come back and pay the bill, and she never did," Labreche said.

Labreche said he spent months leaving messages on Richardson's cell phone voice mail, then he got a collection agency involved, but still the bill went unpaid.

"I couldn't get through to her, and then when the collection agency couldn't do anything, I thought, `There's nothing I'm going to be able to do,"' Labreche said.

A month later, she apparently wrecked the front of the car, rendering it undrivable. She then abandoned the car at another auto-body shop.

The Press-Telegram then reports that one day after Richardson abandoned her wrecked BMW, she checked out a city-owned Toyota Prius "for her council business."

She returned the car - 30,000 miles later - after she had left the council.

This story has gotten the attention of the nonpartisan ethics watchdog CREW, who released a statement claiming that Richardson was a "deadbeat congresswoman." Hard to argue with that. And it looks like she's pulling strings to get the Sacramento house back and kick out the new owner.

Real estate investor James York bought Richardson's house in an upper middle-class neighborhood on May 7 for $388,000. He recorded the deed May 19. His crew has painted it, laid tile and landscaped the house, he said.

York said the lender, Washington Mutual, had contacted him to buy back the house and that he gave the bank a price. He said the next thing he knew, the lender filed a letter of rescission of the foreclosure sale June 2 with Sacramento County and asked him for the keys.

"They took the property back, and they didn't even send back the money," York said.

The investor says he plans to file a lawsuit by the end of the week against Washington Mutual and Richardson.

"It's clear what's happening is Ms. Richardson is abusing her political power and using it for her own political needs," he said. "You don't have to be smart to understand what's happening."

I've only gotten to know Sen. Jenny Oropeza after the special election (where Richardson beat her by waging a nasty, divisive campaign), but she's an excellent legislator, and I think her bad vote on the gaming compacts pales in comparison to the embarrassment of Richardson representing Democrats in California.

Richardson's House Follies

This Laura Richardson (CA-37) loan default story is growing. The Hill is reporting that she's had three homes in default and is currently renegotiating with her lender to save one of them. It seems like she's engaging in what amounts to a pyramid scheme - buying new homes with little money down, and at the same time loaning her campaigns for state Assembly and Congress tens of thousands of dollars. So the money that would be used to pay off the loan is paying for her political upward mobility.

A third home that Richardson borrowed heavily to move into in Sacramento was sold at auction earlier this month -- at a $150,000 loss to the bank that issued her the $535,000 loan. ...

Even as that was happening, ethics watchdogs were crying foul over Richardson's personal finances and questioning how she was able to lend her campaign to Congress $77,500 in the midst of multiple home loan defaults. ...

Federal Election Commission (FEC) reports show that Richardson loaned her campaign a total of $77,500 -- in three installments -- between June and July of 2007.

Richardson's year-end FEC filing showed that her campaign still had $331,000 worth of debt but $116,000 cash-on-hand. ...

Meredith McGehee, policy director for the Campaign Legal Center, said it would be reasonable for the FEC to look into the timing of the loan against the timeline of Richardson's home loan defaults.

"In situations like this it's very important for whoever loaned her the money to demonstrate that they treated her equitably, not favorably," McGehee said. "Otherwise, you're getting into a situation of a corporate underwriting of a campaign."

It was pretty clear last year, when Richardson ran a divisive, racially-toned campaign to win the Congressional seat against State Senator Jenny Oropeza, based in part on saying how this was "our" seat (referring to African-Americans), that she was potentially bad news. This confirms it. I won't defend her because these types of financial improprieties are unaceeptable. Getting behind on one loan because it's a fact of life that you need to practically go broke to win a political campaign is one thing. But this to me looks like a series of efforts to possibly use borrowed money and plow it into political activities. And that's wrong. I don't think she's in danger of losing her primary next week, but she should be.

CA-37: How Low Can You Go?

Well, Laura Richardson won her race for Congress and will represent the Long Beach area for, I gather, the next 20 years. There'll be a runoff, but that's just a formality; the Democrats in the race got close to 80% of the vote (not that there was much of a vote; turnout was about 11%, and Richardson will go to Congress with the support, in the primary at least, of 11,000 voters).

What this really shows is that you don't mess with labor. If Jenny Oropeza made a different vote in the State Senate with regard to the tribal gaming compacts, maybe she'd be headed to DC. But what dismays me is how nasty a campaign Richardson ran, and how in the end it didn't matter one bit. She continually claimed that the Congressional seat ought to go to "one of us," a not-so-subtle swipe at Oropeza's Hispanic roots (although both of them have Caucasian mothers, apparently). She also sent a sickening mailer attacking Oropeza for missing votes in the Assembly, at a time when Oropeza had liver cancer.

Ultimately, I don't think these negative attacks mattered; it was the boots on the ground from labor unions that did. But that's the problem; they DIDN'T matter. Richardson didn't pay the price for running an ugly and dishonest campaign. That, combined with the pathetic turnout, should give everyone pause. This is a low-income and low-information district. The progressive movement is nonexistent here. And the same identity politics drove the race, and labor turned a blind eye to it.

And people wonder why it's hard to take back America...

Payment For Services Rendered

I've heard of independent expenditures before, but never one that was bigger than the campaign's own war chest:

In the last two weeks, a Riverside County Indian tribe has independently spent more than $270,000 on behalf of a Democratic candidate in Tuesday's special election to fill a Long Beach area congressional seat.

The expenditures by the Morongo Band of Mission Indians greatly outweigh other donations in the relatively quiet race to replace Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald, who died in April. Since June 14, Morongo has paid for door hangers, newspaper ads, mailers and phone calls to voters on behalf of Jenny Oropeza, a state senator from Long Beach.

The amount spent in the Morongo campaign — by law such expenditures cannot be made in consultation with the candidate — has exceeded the $219,000 Oropeza reported raising in direct donations for the entire campaign as of June 6. It is more than 2 1/2 times the $105,000 that Oropeza's chief competitor, Assemblywoman Laura Richardson (D-Long Beach), reported collecting by the same date.

Oropeza voted for the gaming compacts that would triple the number of slot machines at the Morongo casino, without allowing casino workers full ability to organize and collectively bargain. The compacts would also not offer much in the way of oversight into casino finances, which in a way is the whole point, since the state is supposed to receive 15-25% of the proceeds from the new slot machines, but may not be able to determine what those proceeds are.

But none of this kept Oropeza from breaking a state Senate campaign promise by voting in support of the compacts. And her reward is a quarter of a million dollars in advertising.

Incidentally, Morongo might want to double-check their voter lists.

(her opponent Laura) Richardson said she got two pieces of Morongo-paid mail at her home.

She called the Morongo expenditures "off the charts" but predicted that voters "are going to see through exactly what's going on."

Maybe, maybe not. And my sense is that voters aren't all that interested in the mass of mailers and robocalls, especially in the middle of June in a special election that will likely not garner 15% turnout. Still, it's interesting to see the lengths to which Morongo will go to pay back their supporters. If they really wanted to help Oropeza, however, they would spend money for GOTV machinery instead of ads and calls, to counter the network of labor groups that will be helping Richardson turn out her voters, mainly because of the very Morongo compacts Oropeza signed.

CA-37: GOTV Weekend

The primary election to replace Juanita Millender-McDonald is next Tuesday, June 26. Both main campaigns, State Sen. Jenny Oropeza and Assemblywoman Laura Richardson, have released internal polls showing them in the lead; however, both polls are tight enough to make this a very close race. Oropeza has about twice as much money for the final days.

There's not much of an air war going on, but the mailers are fast and furious. And Richardson continues to engage in not-so-subtle identity politics.

A crowd of nearly 100 people heard State Senator Jenny Oropeza (D., Carson-LB), a polished public speaker with 19 years of elective experience, become audibly emotional, her voice at one point seemingly approaching tears, while retaining her composure to complete her closing statement in emphatic tones. To hear this, click here.

The Senator's reaction came after fellow Democrat candidate George Parmer, Jr. ("I'm a truck driver, a working man, not a politician") said that at a candidate forum a day earlier, someone [not a candidate] suggested that he and other less well funded candidates should drop out of the race in favor of a candidate who could win. Mr. Parmer interpreted this to mean defeating a Hispanic candidate [Sen. Oropeza] to benefit a Black candidate...which he likened to returning to the "road to segregation." To hear his statement, click here.

Following Mr. Parmer and Senator Oropeza, Assemblywoman Laura Richardson (D., Carson-LB) delivered her closing statement, reiterating her stance that the Congressional seat held by the late Congresswoman Juanita Millender-McDonald (D., Carson-LB) should be held by someone from "our community." Assemblywoman Richardson indicated the phrase means someone with a working class background reflective of the district, along with the legislative experience to do the job. "I'm not speaking about race. I'm talking about respect," Assemblywoman Richardson said. To hear this, click here.

I don't know what the outcome will be, but progressive politics suffer when campaigns become a race about "respect" and identity and street cred. And I sense this is all coming from one particular candidate.

CA-37: Two-Day-Late Debateblogging

I hope you guys appreciate me, because I managed to get through the entire 90-minute debate for the June 26 primary in the 37th Congressional District to replace the late Juanita Millender-McDonald held on Thursday night. 11 Democrats were on stage, and because they were all given 2 minute opening statements, the debate really didn't cover much ground. But actually, the fact that the moderator was a clueless local news anchor from LA's ABC7 who had virtually no connection to the district was a good thing, as the persistent issues of race played out in the media in the campaign were fairly nonexistent in the debate.

Let's take a look at each candidate's opening statement:

Ed Wilson: former mayor of Signal Hill, a small city in the district. He immediately went after the whole ethnicity issue, saying "this is not a black seat or a white seat or a Hispanic seat, it's your seat."

Peter Matthews: He's the PDA-endorsed candidate who has run for office many times, including challenging Millender-McDonald in a primary in 2006 (and getting 10,000 votes). Matthews is running on the progressive issues on getting us out of Iraq, closing the inequality divide, providing single-payer universal health care, and restoring tax fairness.

Jenny Oropeza: The state Senator was strong on the war, saying "we need to get out of Iraq now." She talked about the environment, health care, revising NCLB, and needing to "turn around trade agreements" that sacrifice American job (that was cheering). She closed with "You know my record," playing off her experience serving the area.

Laura Richardson: Assemblywoman Richardson is also running on her record. She kind of messed up her move from talking about Iraq to domestic issues, saying "I want to talk about the war in America" and then claiming that Al Qaeda is running rampant (I think she meant in Waziristan, not Long Beach). Didn't seem like much of a public speaker.

Valerie McDonald: The late Congresswoman's daughter talked about her ties to the area, the need to keep families together in the black community, and the importance of education.

Bill Grisolia: He's a longtime employee of Long Beach Memorial Health Center, so universal health care was one of his themes. But he was at his most powerful discussing the war in Iraq, and his desire to cut funding except to bring our troops home. He also tried to blunt the experience argument by saying "What have the electeds done for you?"

Mr. Evans: I forget his first name and it doesn't matter. He's a far-right immigrant-hating loon who somehow was let into the Democratic primary. He proudly namechecked Lou Dobbs in the first sentence of his statement and called himself a closed-borders candidate. There is a sense in the black community that immigrants are in competition with them for low-paying jobs, but this was the most extreme out-and-out black bigot I've seen.

Alicia Ford: Spent her entire statement talking about something she did a decade ago that ABC7 didn't cover, which made her bad. Also actually said "In Compton, they are without... a lot of things." Stirring.

Lee Davis: Her whole statement decried the front-runner assumptions of the media, and said that "if the top three had any self-respect they'd leave this stage right now" to allow for equal access, and then actually WAITED for them to leave the stage. They, er, didn't.

George Parmer: a truck driver from Long Beach, the first to actually call for impeachment and call out the Democratic leadership for their sell-out on capitulation in Iraq.

Jeffrey Price: Talked mainly about lobbying and ethics reform.

Albert Robles: a write-in candidate in a 17-candidate field. Best of luck to you. I mean, if you can't get the papers in on time...

The first question was on Iraq, and pretty much the entire field is committed to getting out now, so on that big issue, there's not a lot of daylight and everyone is on the right side. Peter Matthews went so far as to suggest that there ought to be impeachment investigations into lying us into war, and announced his support for HR 333, the impeachment of Dick Cheney. The moderator actually did the "raise your hands" thing on the impeachment question, and I think 8 or 9 candidates raised their hands, including Jenny Oropeza (it was a wide shot on a postage stamp video window, so I could be wrong). Mr. Evans, of course, kept calling the President the "commander-in-chief" and yelled at everybody for undermining him in a time of war. I think there's a place for him in the Connecticut for Lieberman Party.

On Iran, Jenny Oropeza has sadly bought into the bullshit rhetoric that they are a threat to our national security and that all options have to be on the table regarding their nuclear program. She also said that she thinks diplomacy has failed because this President is incapable of it. Only Alicia Ford understood that Iran is not an imminent threat, but then she went on about how China is a threat to this country and how in Compton they don't have "things."

Transportation and port security was a major topic, with the Port of Long Beach in the district. Most candidates supported efforts to green the ports, including State Sen. Alan Loewenthal's $30 container fee for clean air proposal. Peter Matthews pressed the need for public transit to aid a cleaner environment. Valerie McDonald was good on this issue as well. George Parmer, the trucker, maintained that many truckers own their equipment and can't afford to modernize their trucks, and so some of the funds from the container fee should trickle down to them. I didn't see much difference here.

A big topic was the events at MLK/Harbor Medical Center's ER, which has been in the news lately, as a woman fell dead in the waiting room while the hospital staff did nothing. Most of the candidates believed MLK/Harbor should remain open and would support the $200 million in federal funding that goes into it annually, though Ed Wilson and Valerie McDonald stressed accountability. Laura Richardson said a platitude like "this situation must be dealt with" but didn't explain how. Peter Matthews mentioned that he organized a picket at MLK/Harbor 2 years ago and the only result was that they cut beds in half. Bill Grisolia stressed the need for cooperation in the community, perhaps nurses college training partnerships to get more staff in there. Many stressed the need for universal healthcare so that poor people aren't relying on the ER as their last resort.

On a question about Wal-Mart, Oropeza proudly claimed that she fought against a Wal-Mart in Long Beach, and now there's an Albertson's there! (Does she not read the news about the looming grocery strike and how Albertson's in particular is trying to screw their workers again?) The major candidates were in agreement on this, though only Valerie McDonald mentioned that workers ought to have the right to organize. I take it she'd support the Employee Free Choice Act.

In final thoughts, Oropeza said she wouldn't support the current immigration bill but didn't say why, George Parmer advocated a national paper ballot because "votes are being stolen," and Ed Wilson wanted to stop Congress from raiding Social Security and Medicare funds. Laura Richardson took a cheap shot when she mentioned some local shooting and claimed she was the only candidate there (what, if you run for Congress, you have to know where the shootings are?).

My impression is that the candidates, by and large, are fairly progressive, as befits the district. Oropeza and Richardson are politicians who are playing some political games. Oropeza doesn't seem all that informed on a couple crucial issues, and Richardson is clearly running a "vote for me, I'm one of you" race. I was impressed with Valerie McDonald and Bill Grisolia. Peter Matthews certainly has all of his progressive chops down, and it will be interesting to see if he can leverage the grassroots energy in Southern California from PDA and translate it into votes.

CA-37: Richardson up in Internal Poll, and More Bitterness

I bring you this internal poll from the Laura Richardson campaign showing her with a 9-point lead in her Congressional primary against Jenny Oropeza and 15 other candidates.  Richardson need only beat the other 10 Dems on the ballot to get into a runoff, where the Democrat will be very likely to win in this deep blue district.

Laura Richardson (D) 25%

Jenny Oropeza (D) 16%

Valerie McDonald (D) 7%

John M. Kanaley (R) 5%

Teri Ramirez (R) 2%

Ed Wilson (D) 2%

Other Democrats 4%

Other Republicans 2%

Minor Party Candidates 1%

Undecided 35%

That's a heavy amount of undecideds, so this obviously isn't over.  (UPDATE: As noted in the comments, the margin of error on this poll is 4.9%, which makes this race even closer than I mentioned it probably was considering the number of undecideds.)

It does seem to be getting even more tense, as tempers flared between Richardson and Oropeza after a candidate forum last week. 

Assemblywoman Richardson told the Compton forum:

Assemblywoman Richardson: I'm going to fight for our community...This is about someone who says that no one can take our seat from us without us fighting every bit of the way for it. [applause] This is our community. This is our seat. And let me tell you something: why is it that with redistricting, Compton was removed out of the 55th [Carson-LB Assembly district]? We need people who want Compton, who will represent Compton and who will do everything humanly possible to make sure all of the people in our community are represented and taken care of.

The order of closing speakers had Assemblywoman Richardson speaking after Sen. Oropeza...meaning Oropeza wasn't able to respond on mike to Richardson's closing. But following Assemblywoman Richardson's closing, the two apparently had some words off-mike (inaudible to the audience) which began to careen into a verbal brouhaha until others intervened.

A few minutes later, the two Democrats declined to join hands for a collective photo. When the forum ended, Sen. Oropeza left the room without comment, her jaw set and her eyes focused on the door. Assemblywoman Richardson was surrounded by supporters.

The two will meet again with the other Democratic candidates at a debate on Thursday at Cabrillo High School in Long Beach.  Richardson appears to me to be using the rhetoric of "this race is not about ethnicity" while making the race entirely about ethnicity.  We'll see if this continues Thursday night.

CA-37: Tempers Flare

I know, another post about the open-seat Long Beach-area race that essentially looks at identity politics. But this is pretty interesting. The Congressional Black Caucus will not endorse a candidate in the race, which includes two high-profile black candidates, Assemblywoman Laura Richardson and neophyte politician Valerie McDonald, daughter of the late Juanita Millender-McDonald. Apparently, it got heated within the CBC:

The decision, in part, stems from an internal political feud between two of California's most visible black members of Congress: Rep. Maxine Waters and Rep. Diane Watson, who split over who should get the Caucus' backing in the June 26 special election. In the end, the Caucus declined to endorse either one in the Long Beach-area race. Waters favors Assemblywoman Laura Richardson and Watson supports Valerie McDonald, the daughter of the late congresswoman. The dispute over the endorsement was marked by heated exchanges involving Waters and Watson.

The Congressional Black Caucus' decision was in sharp contrast to the state Legislature's nine-member Black Caucus, which endorsed Richardson.

Diane Watson is one of the few California legislators to back McDonald, and she was enough to get the CBC not to endorse. I still think the California Federation of Labor support for Richardson will ultimately be crucial, but the CBC would have been a nice capper as well.

I'll be covering this race a bit more in my Congressional roundup (look for it next week), but I'd say right now, Richardson has a slight edge over State Sen. Jenny Oropeza because of the labor endorsement and the fact that turnout will be low.

CA-37: Already As Ugly As Can Be

Read Juls. At some point we're going to have to get a grip on this persistent identity politics. If someone has an antipathy to GLBT issues and GLBT legislation, that's fair game in politics. But the whole tenor of this campaign, with it's explicit appeals to racial unity, is really the antithesis of what we should be talking about in 2007 in a Congressional race. I don't think you're going to hear a policy discussion between now and June 26.

(If you don't want to go read, Sheila Kuehl called Laura Richardson homophobic, while the African American community wants Valerie McDonald out of the race so blacks can unite to defeat a Latina. It's unseemly, and it's only a few days into it)

CA Congressional Merry Go-Round

It's behind the firewall, but Republicans in John Doolittle's district are determined to get him out of the 2008 race by threatening to run a primary challenger. I would assume that even the NRCC wouldn't be too keen to mount any resistance to such a challenge. They know well that Charlie Brown is poised to beat Doolittle the second time around, but it would be a more difficult task with a fresh opponent who is less tainted by scandal. My question would be, who could they possibly find up there that has no connection to Doolittle? Even mini-Rush Tom Sullivan, a non-politician, had Doolittle on his show as recently as last week. And the other "vultures" that are circling, to borrow Sullivan's phrase, certainly have some connection to Doolittle as well.

The other report would be a bombshell if true. CMR is reporting that Maxine Waters may retire this weekend to run for a seat on the LA County Board of Supervisors. I would hope this doesn't happen, but retirements like this in favor of elections closer to home are inevitable. Waters' seat is as safe as they come, but any election for it would be a free-for-all.

Speaking of free-for-alls, 19 candidates have filed for the June 26 special election to replace the late Juanita Millender-McDonald. This is pretty much a three-way race between Sen. Jenny Oropeza, Assemblywoman Laura Richardson, and neophyte politician and Rep. Millender-McDonald's daughter, Valerie McDonald.