Can Young Latino Voters Power Bernie To A Win In California?

CA-34 in Los Angeles is the district next door and to the east and south of mine. I'm there a lot; it's basically down the street. It includes Angelino Heights, Mount Washington, Eagle Rock, Highland Park, City Terrace, Boyle Heights, the Arts District, the Financial District and Koreatown. Long a magnetic for immigrants, it's ranked as among the 20 poorest congressional districts in America, but much of it is rapidly gentrifying and it's one of L.A.'s most energetic and entrepreneurial areas. The district is 64.8% Latino, 19.4% Asian, 10% white and 4% Black. It's basically a Republican-free zone and one of the bluest congressional districts in the country-- Trump only took 10.7% of the vote there and the PVI is R+35.

The congressman is Jimmy Gomez, who was reelected in 2018 with 72.5% of the vote (against a Green; the GOP doesn't run candidates in CA-34). Discounting the freshmen, ProgressivePunch ranks Gomez's voting record as the 14th most progressive in the House-- perfectly in sync with his constituents. A member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, an original co-sponsor of Pramila Jayapal's new-and-improved Medicare-For-All bill, an original co-sponsor of AOC's Green New Deal resolution and an original co-sponsor of Bobby Scott's $15 minimum wage bill, Gomez is unquestionably progressive... but not a radical. He's a union organizer and an immigration activist, not really an outright socialist.

In 2016 Hillary won L.A. County and almost every congressional district. Mine gets counted as a 49.6-49.6% tie, but in reality, Hillary managed to beat Bernie by 67 votes-- 65,975 to 65,908. There was one district that Bernie won though-- CA-34. He took 49,121 (51.3%) votes to her 45,763 (47.7%). Ironically, the only other L.A.-area congressional district Bernie won, is fully in Orange County, CA-46, where Latinos are also a majority. The local congressman, though, Lou Correa, is a co-chair of the reactionary Blue Dog coalition and has a miserable voting record-- rated a solid "F" by ProgressivePunch, beryls much unlike Gomez's solid "A." Bernie beat Hillary there 34,347 (50.4%) to 33,214 (48.8%).

Gomez was first elected in a 2017 special right after Bernie took the district. Polling by Latino Decisions found that 72% of likely primary voters in the district said "a Sanders endorsement would make them more likely to consider voting for a candidate-- the highest mark of any potential endorser... It wasn’t just Sanders name, but many of the themes from his political movement that voters in CA-34 also supported... 51% want a candidate who thinks the Democratic party needs fundamental reform versus 33% who like the idea of candidate who represents the California Democratic establishment. And by a 53% to 34% margin the voters in the district thought Bernie would have defeated Trump last November."

Younger Latino voters (18-30 years old) are among the best-informed and most ideologically progressive voters in California. And they are a strong bulwark for Bernie's campaign. On Saturday Aida Chavez, in a post for The Intercept, Bernie Sanders Is The Most Popular 2020 Candidate Among Hispanic Voters, New Polling Finds, reported that Bernie "is leading every other presidential candidate in support from Hispanic voters, who make up a significant chunk of his base... Sustaining this support will be critical to Sanders’s shot at the Democratic nomination, as Latinx voters will be the largest racial or ethnic minority group in the electorate by 2020, and wield greater influence over the outcome of the nomination than in previous elections due to changes in the primary calendar." She bases her conclusions on a new poll from Morning Consult.

At this point, Bernie has 33% of the Latino vote and even more among Latinos 30 and younger. The only other candidate with strong Latino support is Biden (24%). Beto does well, with 13% of the Hispanic vote. But Julián Castro clocks in at just 4%.

Just six states hold about 71 percent of eligible Hispanic voters, including 7.7 million who live in California, 5.4 million who live in Texas, and 3 million in Florida, all of which are early primary states. Hispanic people overall are on track to account for more than 13 percent of eligible voters-- slightly more than the share of black voters, according to a report from the Pew Research Center. In the 2018 midterms, about 43.5 percent of all Hispanic eligible voters were 18 to 35 years old, compared with 30.6 percent of all eligible voters.

Super Tuesday, which will fall on March 3, 2020, will include California and Texas, two delegate-rich states that also happen to have the largest Latinx populations in the country. (As recently as 2016, California held its presidential primary in June.) Then on March 17, Democratic candidates will face sizable Hispanic populations in Arizona, Florida, and Illinois. In Nevada, where roughly 28 percent of its population is Hispanic, will hold its caucus in late February, will expand in-person early voting to four days next year.

The latest Economist/YouGov poll also found Sanders leading among Hispanic voters, with 56 percent saying that they are considering voting for him in the primary or caucus in their state. Forty-two percent said they are considering voting for Biden, 35 percent for O’Rourke, 29 percent for Harris, and 23 percent for Warren.

Orange County Conservative Lou Correa Still Calls Himself A Democrat For Some Reason

Lou Correa, California's worst Democrat in Congress

Back before the November election, we warned Democrats that the leading "Democratic" candidate. Lou Correa had a long and horrible record from his time in the state legislature as a fake Democrat. Correa's Orange County district-- CA-46: Anaheim, Santa Ana and Orange-- is very blue. Obama beat Romney 61.4% to 36.2% and Hillary did even better against Trump-- 66.3% to 27.9%. She won every Orange County congressional district but CA-46 was the biggest victory. The jungle primary resulted in a D vs D race, conservative Lou Correa and progressive Berniecrat Bao Nguyen. In a contest that reflected ethnic loyalties Correa won 103,475 (69.9%) to 44,652 (30.1%). So a nice blue district with one of the most conservative Democrats from the Republican wing of the party.

Correa is a realtor who took advantage of the mortgage crisis to build up an empire of rental properties all over Orange County-- particularly Anaheim and Santa Ana-- and one of the sleaziest realtor lobbyist groups, the National Association of Realtors Congressional Fund, spent $535,000 on his campaign, trying to make sure they would have another sleazy ally against consumers and homeowners inside the House Democratic caucus. But corporate special interests is a huge part of the Correa brand, another reason he fits in so well with the New Dems and Blue Dogs.

In a majority Latino district, Correa wasn't just keeping it quiet that the joined the New Dems and Blue Dogs, but also that he voted against SB60, which would have made drivers licenses available for all qualified Californians regardless of immigration status. His vote was a complete betrayal of the Hispanic population. Although he's on record of having voted against it, when confronted with the vote he just lies and claims he voted for it. No wonder the Blue Dogs and New Dems love this guy!

Nor is that the only time he voted with the Republicans in the legislature against working families-- far from it. Although Correa claims when he campaigns that he's committed to affordable higher education, that sure isn't what his record in Sacramento shows. When Assembly Speaker John Perez proposed AB 1500 and 1501, the Middle Class Scholarship Act, to provide scholarships covering 60% of fees and tuition at all California State colleges and universities for families with household incomes of under $150,000, Correa crossed the aisle and voted with the GOP again. Perez took the unusual step of going on the record and singling out Correa for killing the bill "because he wanted a $300 million (tax) carve out [for out-of state corporations including his campaign contributor International Paper]. "Today was an opportunity for the State Senate to join the Assembly in approving tax fairness for California businesses and college opportunity for middle class families. Unfortunately, even though most Senate Democrats supported the Middle Class Scholarship Act, we could not reach agreement with Senator Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana) or Senate Republicans that would achieve the two-thirds vote necessary... It is disturbing that Senator Correa and so many Republicans would refuse to stand up for the middle class and instead continue to support a tax giveaway that favors out-of-state companies over our own." In a disturbing pattern that defines Correa's life, he pocketed campaign contributions from International Paper-- which vehemently opposed the bill-- 10 days before he voted against AB 1500, and more loot three weeks after the disgraceful vote.

If killing the Middle Class Scholarship Act wasn't bad enough, Correa also helped kill SB 935 which was an attempt by Democrats in the legislature to raise the minimum wage in 2014. Although 63 of his fellow Democrats were co-sponsors of the bill, he claimed he voted with the Republicans against it because it was too long and he didn't know what it meant. It's almost as though he was already practicing to be a New Dem or Blue Dog!

He also worked with the GOP to restrict women's access to family planning and abortion services and to push the NRA's agenda. Planned Parenthood gave him a big fat ZERO rating and labeled him anti-Choice, the only Senate Democrat who didn't receive a 100% rating in 2009. The DCCC likes this guy; can he really be anti-Choice? You tell me-- this is is record on women's reproductive health in the state legislature:

• voted to prohibit state funding of family planning service providers
• voted to limit state funding for abortion services
• voted to ban ban abortion procedures that he disagrees with (and, no, he's not a doctor)
• voted to require parental consent before a minor can access abortion care
• voted to force women to look at biased and unscientific information before they can access abortion care

This is how patriarchal Republicans vote on Choice issues, not how Democrats vote. Although it certainly works in real well with the Blue Dogs and the rest of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. Ditto on his cozy relationship with the gun nuts in general and the NRA in particular. He has actively supported loopholes to make sure assault-style military weapons would wind up in California neighborhoods. Again, Correa's sick record is not what Orange County Democrats and independents (nor even Republicans) want to protect society from gun massacres.

• voted against banning high capacity ammunition magazines and conversion kits (AB 48)
• voted against making it illegal to knowingly store loaded firearms that are accessible to minors (AB 231)
• voted against extending the waiting period for gun purchases when the background check reveals potential criminal and/or mental health history requiring further investigation to determine eligibility to purchase weapons (AB 500)
• voted against requiring registration of homemade guns and assault rifles, AKA "Ghost Guns" (SB 808)
• voted against restrictions on ownership of Assault Weapons and .50 Caliber Browning Machine Guns (AB 170)
• Correa opposes license requirements for purchase of guns, despite overwhelming public support, even among gun owners and voted against requiring a valid Firearm Safety Certificate in order to purchase a firearm (AB 683)

Since taking his seat in Congress in January, Correa has earned an "F" from ProgressivePunch and has the worst record of any California Democrat-- a crucial vote score of 35.71. Only 3 Democrats have worse records, although none of them are in strong Democratic districts the way Correa is. Friday the Orange County Register spoke with Central Valley Republican Jeff Denham about Correa's propensity to cozy up with Republicans. Denham wishes there were other Democrats as happy to back the Republican agenda as Correa is. "He's certainly a standout. He's getting well known and making a lot of relationships. He is the kind of member you wish they all were. Some people follow (party) leadership. He's one of those people who thinks on his own."

Thinks is maybe the wrong word, but Correa is certainly a knee-jerk voter for most of what Ryan and McCarthy want. Remember, when Correa was in the state Assembly in Sacramento, basically voting with the Republicans on almost everything, he roomed with Assembly GOP Leader Scott Baugh. Martin Wisckol, who wrote this post, has never understood the difference between a "moderate" and a right-wing conservative and always insists on referring to Correa as a "moderate." It's a little language trick. Correa is a Democrat when it comes to issues that directly speak to Latinos as Latinos. otherwise, he's a Republican with a "D" next to his name. "Besides his burgeoning relationships on both sides of the Congressional aisle," wrote cheerleader Wisckol, "this approach manifests itself in his membership in two moderate [note the word "moderate again to describe very corrupt and very conservative groups] Democratic Capitol Hill groups, the Blue Dog Coalition and the New Democratic Coalition. He’s also building a reputation of lending early support to GOP-sponsored bills he agrees with." Yes, indeed. And there is no one challenging him in a primary, at least not so far.

A gaggle of corrupt conservative Democrats snuck in and out of the meeting so no one would know who attended, but no one doubts that Correa was one of the right-wing Blue Dogs sniffing around to see what was in it for them to sell out the party and to sell out working families. Last Monday, Marc Short, the Regime's director of legislative affairs met with 15 of the slimiest Blue Dogs to discuss the Trump legislative agenda to see what it will cost to get them to step in when Freedom Caucus and mainstream Republicans say no to Trump on specific issues. This is exactly the climate a piece of shit like Correa thrives in and why he's involved in politics. Our sources say the attendees were Correa plus the 3 co-chairs (Dan Lipinski, Henry Cuellar and Jim Costa) as well as Kyrsten Sinema, Jim Cooper, Stephanie Miller, Charlie Crist, Tom O'Halleran, Brad Schneider, Kurt Schrader, Josh Gottheimer, Collin Peterson, Sanford Bishop and Vicente González.

The DCCC And Identity Politics

Steve Israel, flanked by Steve Horsford & John Ewing, 2 politicians whose careers he ruined

Last week we talked about the experience recent congressional candidate-- and long-time North Carolina Democratic political operative-- Thomas Mills had when trying to deal with an imperious DCCC. Much of what the DCCC is crying about what went wrong for them this year are the things Mills was running on-- emphasizing rural working class issues; infrastructure, schools, jobs... a Marshall Plan to "connect small towns and counties to economic centers with pavement and rail as well as with fiber and cell towers." DCCC response: not interested. Yesterday Mario Solis-Marich reiterated his own experience trying to solicit help from the DCCC for a Latina candidate in defeating a crackpot Orange County Republican extremist, Bob Dornan. He wrote that the DCCC was dismissive and told him Latinos don't vote; go away. He did go away-- and his candidate beat Dornan while the DCCC sat watching, jaws agape, stunned. Solis-Marich's point, though, was that that is standard DCCC operating procedure and that they never learn-- not even when they have a Latino as the head of the committee! His story, he wrote, "is one that is experienced over and over again by consultants from African American and Latino communities every congressional election campaign cycle."

The current insular state of the DCCC (aka “the building”) should be no surprise to anyone. The nature of any insular organization is to become more so. The one thing that may come as a surprise to those mainstream political consultants who have suddenly found themselves outside the ever tightening DCCC circle this cycle is that it can get worse. The out-in-the-cold consultants only need ask their Latino and African American counterparts if they want an indication of how chilly it can get outside of 433 Capitol St.

Latino and African American Democratic consultants have had the now derided outsider experience for as long as any of us can remember. Just two years ago an independent group, Power Pac, conducted an analysis on the spending patterns at the DCCC and found that the organization that champions affirmative action at the policy level in Congress falls below the standards of vendor diversity met by most big box retailers. Progressives in DC don’t need to fly to the Silicon Valley to find a corporate culture that just can’t seem to find diverse partnerships. They can walk to one from any Capitol Hill office.

The DCCC has continually rejected offers from minority consultants to work with them and innovate the messages and manner they use to reach African American and Latino communities. While the internal excuses are that the vendors fall below the standards of those in their current stable, the committee has done little to nothing to develop minority consultants they are willing to work with.

The organization also suffers from real systemic problems in the bidding process that stymie diversity and are not in line with its own mission. One example is that the bidding process used by the national organization does not consider state-by-state political and economic differences. This lack of adaptability has created a situation where vendors from states with more progressive minimum wage policies are forced to compete without any special consideration against vendors from states with conservative minimum wage policies. The outcome is to penalize vendors who pay better wages to their employees, which is contrary to the basic philosophy of the Democratic party itself.

There is no no doubt that the DCCC must do better. Currently more and more Latinos are choosing to register as voters with no party preference in states where a serious investment of political and real capital could create a path to congressional relevancy by Democrats. This is not a short-term game. It is a mid-term play that if not taken can lead to all Democrats being left out in the cold.

Sinema-- terrible

If you're a regular reader here, you already know that we're not fans of identity politics. We hate everything about what EMILY's List, for example, has turned into but there's little doubt in my mind that if candidates were supported based on the quality of their ideas and strength of their character, at least half the members of Congress would be women-- maybe much more. As for the racial component, the DCCC didn't involve itself in the open seat races in CA-44 or CA-46 this year, CA-46, ironically, being the seat Solis-Marich's story was based on. One of the best candidates elected to Congress from anywhere in the country was a small-town mayor who took on Exxon-Mobil when they tried drilling off her city's beaches and she beat them. That was Nanette Barragan and her opponent was one of the bought-and-sold Exxon state legislators. Nanette's a woman and Nanette's a Latina and I'm sure there were people who voted for her because of those qualities. But it's her character, her vision and her experience that saw her peers elect her first freshman class co-president and then regional Democratic caucus whip for Southen California. Down the road in CA-46, Lou Correa is also Hispanic, but he's too busy on K Street trying to line up a flow of the kinds of bribes he got when he was in Sacramento to be worried about being part of a team to stand up for progressive values the way Nanette is. Correa, who immediately joined the Blue Dogs and New Dems and who is likely to quickly distinguish himself as the worst Democrat in Congress-- as he managed to be in Sacramento when he served in the legislature-- is what happens when identity politics goes awry.

Congress-- and the Democratic Party-- are filled with garbage politicians: men, women, white, black, Hispanic, gay, straight. In fact-- and this is literal-- among Dems, the very best voting record in Congress is held by a gay Democrat, Mark Pocan (98.95) and the very worst one is also held by a gay Democrat, Kyrsten Sinema (36.63).

Solis-Marich is right that the DCCC has been dismissive of the legitimate aspirations of Latino and African American politicians, especially, when notorious racist slime bag Steve Israel was running the show. Now that he's finally gone has he taken his rule of thumb that blacks can't run in white-majority districts with him? Let's hope so and let's hope we see the DCCC backing the best candidates, not the ones based on the identity politics that voters are sick and tired of.

Tomorrow's Notable California Congressional Races-- Some Democrats Aren't Worth Voting For-- And Some Are Fantastic

Tomorrow's the big day here in California. Let me remind you, that all of our endorsements for the 17 statewide propositions are here. There are no Republicans worth voting for anywhere in the state-- not for any office. In the U.S. Senate race, Kamala Harris is a better bet than Blue Dog Loretta Sanchez and in the congressional races, the Democrats I would never consider voting for are corrupt New Dem Ami Bera (who should be in prison instead of his poor fall-guy father), Blue Dog Jim Costa, New Dem Ro Khanna, coked-up New Dem Pete Aguilar, New Dem Isadore Hall, Blue Dog Lou Correa, and New Dem Scott Peters. Blue America has endorsed Ted Lieu, Doug Applegate, Bao Nguyen, Mike Honda, Nanette Barragán, and, of course, Barbara Lee. The rest of the Democrats range from excellent to... well get a clothespin and remember they're not as bad as Correa, Bera, Costa or Hall. It's also worth noting that there are half a dozen Dem vs Dem congressional races in the Greater Los Angeles area tomorrow:

• CA-29- Tony Cardenas vs Richard Alarcon
• CA-32- Grace Napolitano vs Roger Hernandez
• CA-34- Xavier Becerra vs Adrienne Edwards
• CA-37- Karen Bass vs Chris Wiggins
• CA-44- Nanette Barragán vs Isadore Hall
• CA-46- Bao Nguyen vs Lou Correa

And in CA-40 (East L.A., Downey, Paramount, Vernon, Bell, Cudahy, Commerce, Maywood) progressive Democrat Lucille Royball-Allard is opposed by an Independent, Roman Gonzales, who won 27% in the primary. He's likely to earn a smaller percentage than that tomorrow. But in these bizarre races with no Republicans, two are especially important: CA-44 (South Gate, Watts, Lynwood, Willowbrook, Compton, Carson, Rancho Dominguez, North Long Beach and San Pedro) and CA-46 (Anaheim, Orange, Santa Ana, and Garden Grove, easily the bluest congressional district in Orange County). What makes these two races so interesting is that there is a progressive pitted against a notoriously corrupt reactionary in each.

Yesterday when the L.A. Times reiterated their endorsements, they only picked ONE of the two dozen congressional districts in the L.A. area to highlight. That's how stark the difference and important the race is between Nanette Barragán and Sacramento's most corrupt legislator, sold-out conservative Democrat Isadore Hall, already recruited by the Wall Street-owned New Dems. Of course, the entire corrupted Democratic Party establishment has sided with Hall. He is, in every way, one of them. "Barragán," wrote the L.A. Times editors, "has strong environmental credentials. State Sen. Isadore Hall’s environmental record is dismal." They neglected to mention that his sleazy political career has been funded by Big Oil and Gas, tobacco, gambling and every rot-gut issue oriented lobbyist who is generally just welcomed aboard by the worst and most pay-for-play of the Republicans.

Nanette would be a great candidate even if she wasn't running against someone as reprehensible as Hall. Same goes for Garden Grove Mayor Bao Nguyen, whose opponent, Lou Correa, is, incredibly, even worse than Hall! If he wins-- and nearly a million dollars in right-wing SuperPAC money has flooded into his race-- he will surely be California's worst and most corrupt member of Congress. Congratulations, in advance, Orange County! Correa is the poster child for the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. Naturally, he's been endorsed by both the Blue Dogs and the New Dems.



Correa is a realtor who took advantage of the mortgage crisis to build up an empire of rental properties all over Orange County-- particularly Anaheim and Santa Ana-- and one of the sleaziest realtor lobbyist groups, the National Association of Realtors Congressional Fund, spent $535,000 on his campaign so far. trying to make sure they would have an ally against consumers and homeowners inside the House Democratic caucus. But corporate special interests is a huge part of the Correa brand, another reason he fits in so well with the New Dems and Blue Dogs.

In a majority Latino district, Correa isn't just keeping it quiet that the joined the New Dems and Blue Dogs, but also that he voted against SB60, which would have made drivers licenses available for all qualified Californians regardless of immigration status. His vote was a complete betrayal of the Hispanic population. Although he's on record of having voted against it, when confronted with the vote he just lies and claims he voted for it. No wonder the Blue Dogs and New Dems love this guy!

Nor is that the only time he voted with the Republicans against working families-- far from it. Although Correa claims when he campaigns that he's committed to affordable higher education, that sure isn't what his record in Sacramento shows. When Assembly Speaker John Perez proposed AB 1500 and 1501, the Middle Class Scholarship Act, to provide scholarships covering 60% of fees and tuition at all California State colleges and universities for families with household incomes of under $150,000, Correa crossed the aisle and voted with the GOP again. Perez took the unusual step of going on the record and singling out Correa for killing the bill "because he wanted a $300 million (tax) carve out [for out-of state corporations including his campaign contributor International Paper]. "Today was an opportunity for the State Senate to join the Assembly in approving tax fairness for California businesses and college opportunity for middle class families. Unfortunately, even though most Senate Democrats supported the Middle Class Scholarship Act, we could not reach agreement with Senator Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana) or Senate Republicans that would achieve the two-thirds vote necessary... It is disturbing that Senator Correa and so many Republicans would refuse to stand up for the middle class and instead continue to support a tax giveaway that favors out-of-state companies over our own." In a disturbing pattern that defines Correa's life, he pocketed campaign contributions from International Paper-- which vehemently opposed the bill-- 10 days before he voted against AB 1500, and more loot three weeks after the disgraceful vote.

If killing the Middle Class Scholarship Act wasn't bad enough, Correa also helped kill SB 935 which was an attempt by Democrats in the legislature to raise the minimum wage in 2014. Although 63 of his fellow Democrats were co-sponsors of the bill, he claimed he voted with the Republicans against it because it was too long and he didn't know what it meant. It's almost as though he was already practicing to be a New Dem or Blue Dog!

He also worked with the GOP to restrict women's access to family planning and abortion services and to push the NRA's agenda. Planned Parenthood gave him a big fat ZERO rating and labeled him anti-Choice, the only Senate Democrat who didn't receive a 100% rating in 2009. The DCCC likes this guy; can he really be anti-Choice? You tell me-- this is is record on women's reproductive health in the state legislature:

• voted to prohibit state funding of family planning service providers
• voted to limit state funding for abortion services
• voted to ban ban abortion procedures that he disagrees with (and, no, he's not a doctor)
• voted to require parental consent before a minor can access abortion care
• voted to force women to look at biased and unscientific information before they can access abortion care

This is how patriarchal Republicans vote on Choice issues, not how Democrats vote. Although it certainly works in real well with the Blue Dogs and the rest of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. Ditto on his cozy relationship with the gun nuts in general and the NRA in particular. He's actively supported loopholes to make sure assault-style military weapons would wind up in California neighborhoods. Again, Correa's sick record is not what Orange County Democrats and independents (nor even Republicans) want to protect society from gun massacres.

• voted against banning high capacity ammunition magazines and conversion kits (AB 48)
• voted against making it illegal to knowingly store loaded firearms that are accessible to minors (AB 231)
• voted against extending the waiting period for gun purchases when the background check reveals potential criminal and/or mental health history requiring further investigation to determine eligibility to purchase weapons (AB 500)
• voted against requiring registration of homemade guns and assault rifles, AKA “Ghost Guns" (SB 808)
• voted against restrictions on ownership of Assault Weapons and .50 Caliber Browning Machine Guns (AB 170)
• Correa opposes license requirements for purchase of guns, despite overwhelming public support, even among gun owners and voted against requiring a valid Firearm Safety Certificate in order to purchase a firearm (AB 683)

I bet you could guess he's also an environmental disaster, right? You'd be guessing right. California's League of Conservation Voters says he has the worst environmental record of any Democratic elected official in the state. He always sides with special interests to protect corporate polluters, consistently failed to protect the state's water sources from lead and contamination, and voted against ensuring Californians have a right to clean, safe and affordable water. Even though he joined corrupt Republicans to vote against SB 685, the Human Right to Water Act, in 2012, the bill passed, establishing a right to safe, non-toxic and affordable water for human consumption. But Correa voted to hide the source of vended drinking water, whether that water was from a public or private source, and the county from which the water came. AB 301 would have required water sellers to disclose this information: Lou Correa voted to keep such information hidden from the public. Large corporations have been bottling California's public water supply for years. This water is bottled and sold back to the public at an extreme profit. At the same time, the cost of water to the public is rising, and penalties being imposed for overuse. Swiss based Nestle Company has been bottling millions of gallons a year from San Bernardino's forests under a permit that expired over 25 years ago-- a permit with an annual costs of $525.00. Nestle bottles over 700 million gallons of water a year to sell back to the public at a staggering profit. As the public was ordered to cut back on water during the drought, with significant penalties at risk, corporations like Nestle were bottling California's water to sell back to them.

In 2009, the California League of Conservation Voters (CLCV) scored Correa's environmental voting record at 29%, 53 points below average Senate Democrat average. Correa had the lowest environmental rating of any Democrat. The following year they gave him a 30%, 61 points lower than the average Senate Democrat and the lowest rating of any Sacramento Dem. And the following year... same thing-- a 29% rating, 57 points lower than the average Senate Democrat and the lowest of any Dem in the state. The guy is a catastrophe and it's just repulsive that, for the sake of expediency, the Democratic establishment has embraced this garbage candidate who always, always, always puts corporate profits, tax breaks, and special interests over the needs of his constituents, while collecting special interest and PAC money for his next campaign. Is that the California Democratic Party today? It's certainly what Nancy Pelosi's DCCC has turned into. Steny Hoyer gave him the biggest contribution of any of the Democratic candidates of this cycle, $20,000 so far.

The weight of the Democratic Party Establishment is behind both Correa and Hall. If you live in California and you oppose corruption and conservatives, you should ask yourself why.

Meanwhile, one especially odious, brand new and little-known right-wing SuperPAC, Cooperative of American Physicians, which has spent most of it's money helping right-wing Republicans Joe Heck (R-NV), Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), Jeff Denham (R-CA), and Paul Cook (R-CA), has also come to the aid of corrupt conservative California Democrats Pete Aguilar ($22,438), Jim Costa ($31,627), Lou Correa ($35,000) and, worst of all, Isadore Hall ($100,122). Another right-wing SuperPAC created by Big Oil, the misleadingly named California Progress Coalition, has spent $271,411 smearing Nanette and another $63,842 trying to make Hall sound like he's a Democrat.

UPDATE: Can The Dems Win Super-Majorities In Sacramento?

No one disputes that we're going to see a blue wave in California. Democrats are counting on it giving them super-majorities in the Assembly and possible the state Senate that were lost in 2014. Ironically, in San Bernardino, Eloise Reyes beating a corrupt conservative like Cheryl Brown, ostensibly a Democrat but fully owned and operated by whichever lobbyists write the biggest checks, is the first step. And it looks good. If early voting trends are indicative, Eloise is likely to end Brown's miserable career tonight. Beyond that the Democrats need to pick up two red seats to triumph in the Assembly. Also in San Bernardino, Democrat Abigail Medino looks to beat Republican Assemblyman Marc Steinorth (Rancho Cucamonga). Two Dems who went down in 2014, Al Muratsuchi (Torrance) and Sharon Quirk-Silva (Fullerton) are back for re-matches with David Hadley (Manhattan Beach) and Young Kim (Fullerton).

The Senate looks tougher but the Democrats' best shots would be Ling Ling Chang (R-Diamond Bar) losing to Josh Newman) and Scott Wilk (R-Santa Clarita) losing to Jonathan Ervin. Either race would take a massive Latino turnout indicative of a Hillary landslide.

Does Pelosi Really Care About Gun Safety Laws-- Or Is She Just Playing Games With Voters, While Recruiting NRA Shills For Congress?

So who do the hypocrites at the DCCC support and who do they oppose?

You probably heard how the Republicans are absolutely shoveling dark money into the congressional races to try to salvage their majorities in the Senate and House. It may be too late for the Senate, but McConnell's SuperPAC will be spending over $2 million per day between now and November 8-- money from odious characters and modern day robber barons like the Kochs, Adelsons, Paul Singer and the crackpot Mercers from Long Island. And all that money is being focused on just 6 states: Indiana, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Pennsylvania, to save Roy Blunt, Kelly Ayotte, Richard Burr and Pat Toomey-- and to try to drag Todd Young and Joe Heck over the finish line.

And just yesterday the NRCC dumped 16 unimaginative TV attack ads against Jackie Rosen (NV), Joe Garcia (FL), Kim Myers (NY), Stephanie Murphy (FL), Ruben Kihuen (NV), Morgan Carroll (CO), Terri Bonoff (MN), Pete Gallego (TX), Angie Craig (MN), Brad Ashford (NE), Monica Vernon (IA), Colleen Deacon (NY), LuAnn Bennett (VA), Zephyr Teachout (NY), Randy Perkins (FL) and Lon Johnson (MI)-- and that was after dozens of radio ads against Democrats and another batch of TV attack ads in the last week against Steve Santasiero (PA), Ami Bera (CA), Emily Cain (ME), Tom Nelson (WI), and more against Joe Garcia, Morgan Carroll, Monica Vernon, Brad Ashford, Angie Craig, Zephyr Teachout, Lon Johnson, and Martin Babinec (the independent running in the 3-way in NY-22).

Now, true, most of these ads are so juvenile and ineffective that there literally are observers saying that the Democratic candidates and the DCCC should report them to the FEC as in-kind contributions, but the NRCC is counting on spending a load of cash in the next two weeks to brainwash voters with frequency. Even ads this stupid could be effective. (Look at the one they're running against Zephyr Teachout. It's so laughable, it's an insult to the voters in the Hudson Valley and Catskills area of upstate New York.)

Meanwhile, many of the candidates the DCCC is spending most heavily to bolster, particularly Blue Dogs who are far from the Democratic mainstream, are the kinds of candidates progressives and activists are least likely to want to defend. Regardless of how bad the GOP incumbents are-- and they are really a sordid bunch-- who wants to defend Democrats running as NRA heroes against what the vast majority of Americans crave from Congress in terms of gun safety (to pick just one example). The DCCC has dumped a fortune into the campaigns of right-wing NRA-whores Lon Johnson (MI)-- $1,321,129 so far, including $346,634 this week-- and Pete Gallego (TX)-- $2,736,390. Voters-- especially Democrats, but independents and mainstream Republicans as well, want sane gun safety laws. Smart candidates, like Ruben Kihuen (NV) and DuWayne Gregory (NY) are actively campaigning for background checks and passage of a No Fly/No buy law, but the DCCC persists in recruiting and backing right-wing Democrats who stand with the GOP and NRA on their unpopular positions.

And it isn't just the Lon Johnson and Pete Gallego clamoring for NRA love and support. The NRA poster boys for gun-nuttery in California and Florida, respectively Lou Correa and Darren Soto, are also on Pelosi's DCCC's Red to Blue program-- and both in very blue, safe Democratic districts where no one has to pander to the gun nuts if they don't want to. So is the Democratic Party serious about protecting us from gun-crazed lunatics? Or is it just a convenient cudgel to use, opportnistically, against Republicans from time to time? Isn't it time for dishonest career hacks like Pelosi and Hoyer and their leadership team to step down and make way for less jaded Democrats in Congress? The DCCC supports and funds right-wing garbage candidates like Lon Johnson, Darren Soro, Lou Correa and Pete Gallego but disgusting racist slob Steve Israel has prohibited the DCCC from backing DuWayne Gregory who's is in a winnable race in a suburban Long Island district that is all in for Hillary and against Trump. We at Blue America are doing our best... but we don't have the tens of millions of dollars the DCCC and Pelosi are wasting on Blue Dogs and New Dems who are part of the problem, not part of the solution. Please consider chipping in what you can-- directly to the candidates' Get Out the Vote efforts-- by tapping the thermometer on the right.

Does The Democratic Party Still Stand For Working Families? That Depends How You Define "Democratic Party"

Many of us are watching the clock tick down to November 8, election day. But millions of American workers have their eyes set a few weeks further down the calendar to December 1 when a Department of Labor rule kicks in that will double the salary threshold-- from from $23,660 to $47,476-- at which workers get overtime pay for overtime work. Republicans, of course, are up in arms. But so is the Democratic wing of the Republicans Party. Four of the worst Blue Dogs, ringleader Kurt Schrader (OR) and fellow conservatives, Henry Cuellar (TX), Collin Peterson (MN) and Jim Cooper (TN), all of whom are reliable supporters of Paul Ryan's reactionary austerity agenda, introduced a bill, H.R. 5813, to postpone the rule, stretching out the help the bill offers workers until December, 2019. 5 conservative co-sponsors signed on last week, Blue Dog Gwen Graham (FL) and 4 Republicans, Jeff Fortenberry (NE), Tom Emmer (MN), Jeff Miller (FL) and David Jolly (FL).

The bill is now with John Kline's Committee on Education and the Workforce, where we can count on progressive committee members Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Mark Pocan (D-WI), Mark Takano (D-CA) and Mark DeSaulnier (D-CA) to put up a massive fight. But they are outnumbered by 22 extremely anti-worker Republicans who very smoothly align with the Blue Dogs and New Dems. Schrader announced that his opposition to the new rule stems from having "heard from business owners and their employees who are worried about implementing this increase overnight. Without sufficient time to plan for the increase, cuts and demotions will become inevitable, and workers will actually end up making less than they made before. It’s long past time we strengthen overtime pay protections for American workers in a meaningful and effective way." Typical textbook Republican scare tactics that are always puked up any time there's a proposal made to lessen the economic burdens on working families.

According to the Economic Policy Institute, what Big Business and the corporate world like so much about Schrader's approach is that it would eliminate the rule’s indexation of the threshold, which would raise it automatically every three years, as wages for salaried workers rise, reproducing "the very disaster for working people the Department of Labor is seeking to prevent: an inevitable and significant loss of guaranteed overtime coverage due to inflation and wage growth."

Failure to adequately update the salary threshold over 1975–2015 caused the share of the salaried workforce that was guaranteed overtime pay to fall from 49.6 percent to just 9.5 percent in 2015. Had 49.6 percent coverage been maintained, some 26.6 million workers would have been covered, rather than the scant 5.1 million who actually were covered in 2015. Raising the salary threshold to $913 per week in 2015 would have allowed 17.6 million employees to enjoy overtime protection (12.5 million of whom would have newly obtained protection), but it would not restore the level of protection provided in 1975.

...[I]ndexing the salary threshold, as provided by DOL’s new rule, allows the share of salaried workers enjoying overtime protection to remain at or near 32.7 percent. The number of workers protected increases as the salaried workforce grows, rising to 20.5 million by 2035. Without indexation, however, the share of the salaried workforce guaranteed overtime pay would decline each year, falling to 23.1 percent in 2025 and just 16.1 percent by 2035. If Rep. Schrader’s bill were enacted, by 2035 there would be 10.4 million fewer salaried workers covered by overtime protection because of the failure to index the salary threshold. Lack of indexation would cut in half the share of the salaried workforce provided overtime protection, which would fall from 32.7 percent to just 16.1 percent (20.4 million versus 10.1 million).

So who's this Kurt Schrader fellow? The head of the Blue Dogs and a member of the New Dems, we talked about Schrader quite a bit last spring when he was being primaried by Berniecrat Dave McTeague back in Oregon. As we pointed out at the time, Schrader went even further than many Republicans care to go in his zeal to wreck Social Security and Medicare. Back in early 2013, Schrader offered an amendment to accept the Simpson Bowles proposals that do just cut Social Security and Medicare benefits and raise the retirement age. 54 disgraceful excuses for Democrats-- mostly New Dems and Blue Dogs from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party-- went along. Schrader's amendment failed 75-348.

Schrader represents a solidly blue district which Obama won 53-44% in 2008 and 50-47% in 2012. There are 7 counties in the district and in the Oregon primary in May, Bernie won all 7. These were Bernie's wins by county:

• Benton- 61.2%
• Clackamas- 51.5%
• Lincoln- 53.7%
• Marion- 53.0%
• Multnomah- 57.0%
• Polk- 54.5%
• Tillamook- 53.8%

On the same day, Berniecrat Dave McTeague, a former state legislator, went up against Schrader. The huge Bernie support just didn't bother to vote or didn't bother to vote for McTeague. Schrader win 67,124 (72.6%) to 25,289 (27.4%). There's no excuse for that. For a Bernie voter, Kurt Schrader has no saving graces on any level.

By the way, among the supporters of Schrader's amendment to gut Social Security and Medicare were many of the usual scum always looking for chances to lick the asses of the corporate campaign donors, including several Blue Dogs and New Dems up on the ballot in November, like Loretta Sanchez, who's running for California's open Senate seat, Chris Van Hollen, the Democratic candidate for Maryland senator, as well as recently defeated conservaDems trying to weasel their ways back into Congress-- Colleen Hanabusa (HI), Joe Garcia (FL) and Pete Gallego (TX). Electing more of these garbage-Democrats is the last thing we should be doing, but the DCCC and the California Democratic Party are delighted to be backing Lou Correa, a former state legislator who was widely considered the most right-wing Democrat in Sacramento (and one of the most corrupt). The progressive mayor of Garden Grove, Bao Nguyen, also made it through the primary and will be duking it out with Correa in a Dem vs Dem election November 8-- one real progressive Democrat against one from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. A few minutes ago he told us that "These corporate Blue Dog Democrats are eagerly pumping money into my opponent Lou Correa's campaign. We certainly have every reason to expect that my opponent will do the bidding of corporations in Congress if elected, as he has done in the past as a state legislator. What we really need is someone in Congress who will protect the pro-worker agenda that so many of us in the labor and progressive movement have fought so hard to achieve. I've been that champion for working families as Mayor of Garden Grove and as a labor organizer. If the people of the 46th Congressional District elect me in November, one of the first laws I would vote against is anything that would compromise or threaten Obama's overtime rule for salaried workers."

Only 21 Republicans voted for the Blue Dog anti-Social Security amendment, including Pat Meehan from the suburbs outside of Philadelphia. Funny, he doesn't tell the voters in PA-07 that he voted to raise the retirement age and cut their benefits. Mary Ellen Balchunis, the progressive Democrat running against him this year, expected nothing more from Meehan. "I wasn't surprised when Pat Meehan voted to support cuts to Social Security and Medicare because he told us he would do that when he ran as a Tea Party candidate in 2010. Pat Meehan thinks that if he says he is a moderate enough times, the voters will believe it, but votes like this tell the truth. The real Pat Meehan has also voted to cut taxes for the wealthiest of Americans, to cut healthcare and cancer screenings for women, and end Medicare as we know it. If Pat Meehan was a true moderate he would stop prioritizing tax breaks for the rich and start looking out for seniors."

Please help replace Meehan with Mary Ellen and help keep Correa out of Congress-- he did enough damage to working families when he was in Sacramento-- by electing Bao Nguyen instead of him. You'll find them both by tapping the thermometer below:

UPDATE: Certain States...

Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah and Wisconsin are suing the government to stop the overtime rule. What do all these states have in common? No, they weren't all former slave-holding states that started the Civil War-- though most of the former slave-holding states that started the Civil War signed on to the suit. This list is a list of states that have Republican governors. Don't people in these states want to get overtime pay for overtime work?

What Does It Mean To Be A Blue Dog Running For Congress In California In 2016?

The other day, we looked at a list of the sneaky conservative Democrats who applied for endorsements from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party-- the New Dems and the Blue Dogs. Here in a safely blue district in northern Orange County (CA-46)-- including Anaheim, Santa Ana, and Orange, where Obama beat Romney 61-36% and where only 18% of the population is white-- the jungle primary yielded two Democrats, the progressive mayor of Garden Grove, Bao Nguyen (who was endorsed by Blue America), and the very corrupt and very conservative former state legislator Lou Correa. This isn't the kind of district where it makes sense for a Democrat to behave like a Republican. But that's exactly what Correa has done for his entire slimy career.

And in the current race, he slinked off for the Blue Dogs and the New Dems, the two most right-wing "Democratic" groups in Congress, the heart of both congressional corruption and bribery and, of course, the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. When Correa lists the organizations that have endorsed him on his website, he's smart and wily enough to not include either the Blue Dogs or the New Dems. A voter would never know Correa long ago sold his soul to Wall Street-- although they could surmise it from his record. (In contrast, Bao is proud to advertise on his own website that he's been endorsed by progressive and clean govenmernt groups like Progressive Democrats of America, the Sierra Club, the Nurses Union, Blue America, DFA and the Mexican American Bar Association PAC.)

Correa is a realtor who took advantage of the mortgage crisis to build up an empire of rental properties all over Orange County-- particularly Anaheim and Santa Ana-- and one of the sleaziest realtor lobbyist groups, the National Association of Realtors Congressional Fund, spent $535,000 on his campaign so far. trying to make sure they would have an ally against consumers and homeowners inside the House Democratic caucus. But corporate special interests is a huge part of the Correa brand, another reason he fits in so well with the New Dems and Blue Dogs.

In a majority Latino district, Correa isn't just keeping it quiet that the joined the New Dems and Blue Dogs, but also that he voted against SB60, which would have made drivers licenses available for all qualified Californians regardless of immigration status. His vote was a complete betrayal of the Hispanic population. Although he's on record of having voted against it, when confronted with the vote he just lies and claims he voted for it. No wonder the Blue Dogs and New Dems love this guy!

Nor is that the only time he voted with the Republicans against working families-- far from it. Although Correa claims when he campaigns that he's committed to affordable higher education, that sure isn't what his record in Sacramento shows. When Assembly Speaker John Perez proposed AB 1500 and 1501, the Middle Class Scholarship Act, to provide scholarships covering 60% of fees and tuition at all California State colleges and universities for families with household incomes of under $150,000, Correa crossed the aisle and voted with the GOP again. Perez took the unusual step of going on the record and singling out Correa for killing the bill "because he wanted a $300 million (tax) carve out [for out-of state corporations including his campaign contributor International Paper]. "Today was an opportunity for the State Senate to join the Assembly in approving tax fairness for California businesses and college opportunity for middle class families. Unfortunately, even though most Senate Democrats supported the Middle Class Scholarship Act, we could not reach agreement with Senator Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana) or Senate Republicans that would achieve the two-thirds vote necessary... It is disturbing that Senator Correa and so many Republicans would refuse to stand up for the middle class and instead continue to support a tax giveaway that favors out-of-state companies over our own." In a disturbing pattern that defines Correa's life, he pocketed campaign contributions from International Paper-- which vehemently opposed the bill-- 10 days before he voted against AB 1500, and more loot three weeks after the disgraceful vote.

If killing the Middle Class Scholarship Act wasn't bad enough, Correa also helped kill SB 935 which was an attempt by Democrats in the legislature to raise the minimum wage in 2014. Although 63 of his fellow Democrats were co-sponsors of the bill, he claimed he voted with the Republicans against it because it was too long and he didn't know what it meant. It's almost as though he was already practicing to be a New Dem or Blue Dog!

He also worked with the GOP to restrict women's access to family planning and abortion services and to push the NRA's agenda. Planned Parenthood gave him a big fat ZERO rating and labeled him anti-Choice, the only Senate Democrat who didn't receive a 100% rating in 2009. The DCCC likes this guy; can he really be anti-Choice? You tell me-- this is is record on women's reproductive health in the state legislature:

• voted to prohibit state funding of family planning service providers
• voted to limit state funding for abortion services
• voted to ban ban abortion procedures that he disagrees with (and, no, he's not a doctor)
• voted to require parental consent before a minor can access abortion care
• voted to force women to look at biased and unscientific information before they can access abortion care

This is how patriarchal Republicans vote on Choice issues, not how Democrats vote. Although it certainly works in real well with the Blue Dogs and the rest of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. Ditto on his cozy relationship with the gun nuts in general and the NRA in particular. He's actively supported loopholes to make sure assault-style military weapons would wind up in California neighborhoods. Again, Correa's sick record is not what Orange County Democrats and independents (nor even Republicans) want to protect society from gun massacres.

• voted against banning high capacity ammunition magazines and conversion kits (AB 48)
• voted against making it illegal to knowingly store loaded firearms that are accessible to minors (AB 231)
• voted against extending the waiting period for gun purchases when the background check reveals potential criminal and/or mental health history requiring further investigation to determine eligibility to purchase weapons (AB 500)
• voted against requiring registration of homemade guns and assault rifles, AKA “Ghost Guns" (SB 808)
• voted against restrictions on ownership of Assault Weapons and .50 Caliber Browning Machine Guns (AB 170)
• Correa opposes license requirements for purchase of guns, despite overwhelming public support, even among gun owners and voted against requiring a valid Firearm Safety Certificate in order to purchase a firearm (AB 683)

I bet you could guess he's also an environmental disaster, right? You'd be guessing right. California's League of Conservation Voters says he has the worst environmental record of any Democratic elected official in the state. He always sides with special interests to protect corporate polluters, consistently failed to protect the state's water sources from lead and contamination, and voted against ensuring Californians have a right to clean, safe and affordable water. Even though he joined corrupt Republicans to vote against SB 685, the Human Right to Water Act, in 2012, the bill passed, establishing a right to safe, non-toxic and affordable water for human consumption. But Correa voted to hide the source of vended drinking water, whether that water was from a public or private source, and the county from which the water came. AB 301 would have required water sellers to disclose this information: Lou Correa voted to keep such information hidden from the public. Large corporations have been bottling California's public water supply for years. This water is bottled and sold back to the public at an extreme profit. At the same time, the cost of water to the public is rising, and penalties being imposed for overuse. Swiss based Nestle Company has been bottling millions of gallons a year from San Bernardino's forests under a permit that expired over 25 years ago-- a permit with an annual costs of $525.00. Nestle bottles over 700 million gallons of water a year to sell back to the public at a staggering profit. As the public was ordered to cut back on water during the drought, with significant penalties at risk, corporations like Nestle were bottling California's water to sell back to them.

In 2009, the California League of Conservation Voters (CLCV) scored Correa's environmental voting record at 29%, 53 points below average Senate Democrat average. Correa had the lowest environmental rating of any Democrat. The following year they gave him a 30%, 61 points lower than the average Senate Democrat and the lowest rating of any Sacramento Dem. And the following year... same thing-- a 29% rating, 57 points lower than the average Senate Democrat and the lowest of any Dem in the state. The guy is a catastrophe and it's just repulsive that, for the sake of expediency, the Democratic establishment has embraced this garbage candidate who always, always, always puts corporate profits, tax breaks, and special interests over the needs of his constituents, while collecting special interest and PAC money for his next campaign. Is that the California Democratic Party today? It's certainly what Nancy Pelosi's DCCC has turned into. Steny Hoyer gave him the biggest contribution of any of the Democratic candidates of this cycle, $20,000 so far. Please help elect Bao Nguyen in November, a real progressive Democrat with the record to prove it-- even if no help from an establishment that stinks to high heaven. You'll find Bao by tapping the thermometer below: