by Jack Lee
OK, for what it’s worth, here’s my personal picks and keep in mind I’m a very conservative republican (just to be upfront about my bias)…
Congressional District 2: Wally Herger. Wally has been around since 1986 and he was last elected in 2006. Wally says providing health care is not a federal responsiblity. He wants all illegals deported and supports a temporary worker program. Project Vote Smart has much more info….for more on Wally’s issues click here.
Congressional District 4: Tom McClintock, most likely to replace John Doolittle. Endorsed by the Sacramento Union, Butte CRA and BCRP. See Project Vote Smart for details. I strongly support Tom McClintock and his issues which seem to be closely aligned to Herger’s. He favors reduced government and reduced goverment spending. See http://www.tommcclintock.com/
(The local Assembly candidates are not featured in Project Vote Smart)
Assembly District 2: Jim Neilson, termed out Assemblyman Doug LaMalfa has endorsed former Senator Jim Nielsen to take his place. Considered tough on crime, no new taxes, good conservative record in Senate.
Assembly District 3: Sue Horne. She has a huge number of endorsements, most notabily local law enforcement. Her issues are too far off from Dan Logue’s, the other candidate. Former Sen. Neilson and Doug LaMalfa have endorsed her and Rick Keene and Sen. Aanested have endorsed her opponent. Logue just received about $185,000 in special interest money. I don’t like the last minute cash coming in. Endorser’s Keene and LaMalfa have excellent records in Assembly for conservative issues.
In the 5th Dist. Supervisor race for Butte County…Kim Yamaguchi. He’s done a consistently good job and he deserves re-election.
In the 4th District… Steve Lambert, no question there. Good business man, rancher and has past experience as Mayor of Paradise. Real nice guy overall and that’s the plus part! Lambert has largest war chest of all those running. He has amassed $57,140. As part of that total, Lambert also has loaned his campaign $15,000.
Other Districts I have no suggestion.
Proposition 98 and 99…I’m going with 98. If Proposition 98 passes, it will place constitutional constraints on local governments trying to take property from one private owner through the process of eminent domain in California and give it to another private owner. The ballot proposition, if successful, would also phase out rent control and repeal other zoning, land use, landlord-tenant, and natural resource regulations. 99 favors rent control.
NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER: My name has been associated in the Assembly race for the 3rd district quite a bit, so I want to explain my position here. I endorsed candidate Sue Horne several months ago after my own raced ended. She’s never offered nor have I asked for anything for my endorsement. I merely took that position because I felt it was right. My name recently appeared in one of her ads where I was critical of a censure against her. Again, I just called it like I saw it and I felt my comments were fair and accurate. I make no appologies for being in the ad. This censure in question did not meet the standards of the state party, that has been clearly established as fact. Nor did it meet my own personal standards for fairness, so I opposed it on that basis and for other reasons, including a failure to show proof of the allegations. I would have done the same for any other republican candidate under similar circumstances.
Next, right after the primary I’m going to work very hard to bring responsible and fair rules to the BRCP when considering a vote for a candidate’s censure, endorsement or opposition. These are public meetings, anyone can attend and the members are either appointed or elected. So we have an obligation to set high standards of conduct. I’m confident that once we look it over, we should not have a problem coming to an equitable agreement on a method, one that will at least meet our state party standards, if not exceed them. I look forward to working with our central committee on this important area. It will be my intent that we (central committee) give all future republican candidates an opportunity for a fair hearing prior to any vote to oppose or censure them. To do that, the new rules must be proposed in such a way that will remove our Executive Board members with a conflict of interest from directing the hearings. It should not impinge on their free speech rights, nor anyone elses.