Friday, October 26, 2012

Hayashi Is A Yes Woman, After The Fact

ELECTION ‘12//ASSEMBLY/ALCOD2 | Is Assemblywoman Mary Hayashi like one of those sports fans who become supporters of teams once they become winners?

An Associated Press article Thursday showed California legislators altered over 5,000 votes this past session. Hayashi led the way with 291 missed or changed votes, according to AP. Most of the missed votes were later entered as aye votes, they reported.

The report is similar to an investigation by the Sacramento Bee in April 2011 finding Hayashi was the fourth most prolific voter in the Assembly. That report did not take into account, some of the votes may have been entered after the fact. Doing so is within the state’s rules, but a topic of derision to many open government proponents who say it distorts legislator’s true record and allows them to play both sides of controversial bills.

Hayashi is termed out of the Assembly this November and is currently running for Alameda County supervisor. Will her opponent, appointed Supervisor Richard Valle, use Hayashi’s poor attendance record against her during the final 10 days of the election? You would think so, but keep in mind Valle’s inaction when it comes to publicly attacking Hayashi’s shoplifting conviction head on, you never know.


  1. Can someone (please) get this story into the main stream news organizations quickly...

    This is just another example of Mary's deceptive behavior...I meant to vote (pay) for it...

  2. I would find it most unusual, if at this late date, the Valle campaign chooses to use this negative story about Hayashi, but continues to fail to use the public factual material regarding her felony arrest, her plea deal, her 30 month probation sentence, and her unbelieveable excuses that range from a "brain tumor" to being distracted on her cell phone causing her to walk out without paying.

    I mean, if you're willing to go negative, why use a pea shooter when you have a cannon in your hands?

  3. By MW:

    It was at least five years ago that I first saw this basic story, BUT ONLY ONCE, in a mainstream newspaper, but I do not remember which newspaper, in other words that members of the California Assembly are allowed to change their individual votes after the total vote is final on whether the bill passed or failed.

    In other words the way it works, or at least when I looked into it some years ago, since it is possible that the rules have been changed somewhat since, is that let's say for instance a piece of legislation that the public was unusually interested in finally passes the California Assembly in a very close vote, let's say by only a 49 to 48 margin, and with Assemblyman A in the majority, and therefore voting for it, but however most of the voters in Assemblyman's A district having been against it.

    So after that item passes the Assembly and the vote is final, Assemblyman A can then go up to the Clerk and say he has changed his mind on the bill, and therefore would like to be recorded as having voted against it.

    So while the vote of 49 to 48 stays final and the item remains passed, HOWEVER Assemblyman A is now recorded as having voted against it, and that is therefore the way it is normally reported in his hometown newspaper to the sheep in his district, and therefore the sheep in his district would normally be led to believe he voted the way they wanted him to vote, and although actually he sold them downriver.