EAST BAY CITIZEN. EVERYWHERE SINCE 2009

Monday, May 4, 2015

Attack ad against Susan Bonilla echoes another used effectively last year

New attack ad against Susan Bonilla is paid for
by a conservative IE so conservative it opposes
some of the most conservative pols in the country.
STATE SENTATE | DISTRICT 7 | It seems being a member of the California Legislature makes you a sitting target when seeking higher office. A rash of public ethics allegations against sitting members of the State Senate made running against Sacramento a prime strategy during last year's election cycle.

And with a seat in the Seventh State Senate District up for grabs this month, an independent expenditure group unveiled a television ad that echoes the content and style of an attack ad utilized last spring by Rep, Eric Swalwell against primary challenger and now former State Sen. Ellen Corbett.

The 30-second spot paid for by Independent Women's Voice charges Bonilla, a Democrat who is running against fellow Democrat Steve Glazer in the May 19 special election, as being fiscally irresponsible.

The ad uses snappy graphics to illustrate Bonilla spending excessively on a previous re-election campaign despite running unopposed and receiving over $44,000 in gifts from special interests, including trips to Hawaii, Italy and Taiwan. All the while a static photo of a smiling Bonilla periodically blinks after each charge.



Similarly, Swalwell's re-election campaign paid for a similar ad titled, "Gaming the System" to illustrate Corbett as spendthrift with taxpayers' money and absent from the Legislature. In addition, the ad uses the same type of graphical representation to mock the challenger. In Swalwell's video, the information is offered using a three-dimensional Monopoly game board.



Despite some factual errors, Swalwell's ad was extremely successful in contributing to Corbett's surprise third-place finish in last June's primary. If the attack ad against Bonilla gets enough play, it could also have the same effect in this expensive and closely fought state senate race. However, any traction could be blunted by exposing the IE behind the anti-Bonilla ad.

In the past, Independent Women's Voice has spent almost exclusively on supporting conservative candidates and issues. The group's website clearly notes its opposition to the Affordable Care Act, but, just how conservative is Independent Women's Voice? Very much so.

According to OpenSecrets, an online database for tracking the nexus between special interests money and candidates, Independent Women's Voice spent more than $586,000 to support Republican last year, but also spent over $209,000 against incumbent Mississippi Sen. Thad Cochran, a very conservative Republican who staved off an insurgent primary challenger who charged him with not being conservative enough and out-of-touch with voters.

15 comments :

I had already decided to vote for Mr. Glazer since he's the only clean 'politician' in this race. My neighbor then reminded me that Second Place Sue still has time left on her assembly term. She's greedy. She's decided that she wants the tax payers to spend for yet ANOTHER special election, which is exactly what would happen if she jumped boats to the senate. Let her finish her term and then--G-d forbid--go back to the private sector and work for a living. We don't need yet another special election at tax payer expense. My neighbor is right that Steve Glazer is the best choice in the election. A vote for Steve is a vote against spending for a special election.

I am convinced. Steve Glazer is definitely the People's Choice and great for the tax payers, too!!!

So let me get this straight "anonymous" -- you are voting in a special election and don't complain the cost of that so you can vote for a political consultant like Glazer who has cost taxpayers millions in special election costs?

According to SourceWatch, this group is funded by the Koch Brothers http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Independent_Women%27s_Voice.

Should anyone be surprised that the Koch Brothers are supporting Steve Glazer and want to defeat Susan Bonilla? Glazer has gotten more than $1 million + from the oil and tobacco industry JobsPAC that he used to work for, $1.6 million from a GOP LA developer, and $1 million + from profit-based education interests.

This shows the desperation of the corporate conservative groups that are backing Glazer. My friends who live in SD7 will vote for the woman who has supported middle class families. It is moderate Susan Bonilla for us. By the way, Eric Swallwell is supporting Susan Bonilla because she is the moderate. It is important not to let these 1% corporate groups from out of state and out of town buy the election for Glazer.

Agree that my family would rather have a moderate woman like Susan who gets her support from unions than someone like Glazer who worked for the corporate elite and has gotten about 4 million from these extreme conservative out of the District groups.

Nice try, Steve Maviglio, but we all know that you are an unabashed, radical, ultra-liberal paid whore for the unions. Your pronouncements have about as much worth to them as what we wipe our asses with. Please don't insult the intelligence of the electorate of this district--where you neither reside, work, nor recreate--by casting aspersions about the only MODERATE AND CLEAN DEMOCRAT in this election.

It would do you well to prostitute for BIG LABOR over in Berkeley or Oakland, and stay the hell out of our backyard!

SENATOR STEVE GLAZER, HE'S THE PEOPLE'S CHOICE AND THE SCOURGE OF THE SPECIAL INTERESTS!

Nice try anti-union, pro conservative Glazer troll. Your candidate has been bought and paid by big out of town business billionaires and their corporate stooges like big oil and tobacco. I'd rather vote for a working family moderate like Susan Bonilla.

Ordinary folks are suffering. The middle class is shrinking. We’re having trouble sending our kids to college and paying our bills, to say nothing of our inability to save for retirement.

All of this is true, but coming from the very people who caused this middle-class meltdown, the words are meaningless.

It’s easy for them to say that working families matter. And some of them can even muster the courage to finally acknowledge the obvious: Families’ incomes have fallen while corporate profits have reached astronomical heights. The economy has grown since 1980, but average working people haven’t benefited much. In fact, the only people whose incomes have gone up belong to a very exclusive club – the richest 1 percent.

But what the extremist politicians won’t say — at least not on camera — is that their own union-busting policies created the very problems they suddenly see.

In earlier decades, when wages rose in tandem with economic growth, it was largely because the labor movement was robust enough to help people get into — and stay in — the middle class. Through the power of working people coming together in unions and bargaining collectively, unchecked corporate wealth was reined-in and the folks who helped to create that wealth could share in it.

But fewer people are represented by unions today than 100 years ago. That means workers’ voices are weaker and bosses hold most of the cards. This imbalance means they can keep wages artificially low, be stingy with benefits and take advantage of those who work for them. The extremists don’t want us to have a say in our future; they have rigged the game for their benefit and ordinary Americans are suffering the consequences.

We know that if given the option, more people would join unions because they recognize there is strength in solidarity. But the extremist politicians — and the super-wealthy Americans and corporations that support them — recognize this strength, too. So they’ve spent the last several years passing laws in state after state that weaken unions and make it harder for people to join them. It doesn’t matter how these laws are labeled, they all are intended to do one thing: destroy the labor movement. Don't belong to a union, but wish I did.

Dear Voter,

Each year brings new challenges to those serving in the state Legislature. Issues are examined, votes are taken, and soon today’s concerns have been replaced by newer ones. If elected to State Senate, as your representative, I won’t always know the next big issue on the horizon. But as my constituents, you will always know the principles by which I conduct your business in Sacramento.

This framework of Ten Governing Principles lays out the values I will use when I evaluate budget and policy initiatives. You’ll see in it such lifelong priorities as education and the environment, as well as the need for priority setting, efficiency and bi-partisanship. I hope it helps you understand how I view the role of Senator and what you can expect from me if I’m selected to undertake this cherished responsibility.

My Ten Governing Principles:

1. Represent the people of our Senate district, not political parties or special interests.
2. Maintain a balanced budget to allow government to help people, and people to have confidence in government.
3. Pursue bi-partisan decisions. They are always better and longer lasting.
4. Emphasize education as the gateway to opportunity and prosperity.
5. Work hard to set priorities and hold the line on taxes.
6. Incorporate environmental protection as a part of every decision.
7. Empower local decision-making rather than state mandates. It is more responsive and trustworthy.
8. Advance accountability and efficiency with every government program.
9. Promote civility and respect for all people and perspectives.
10. Conduct myself always with honesty and integrity.

Please join the conversation. I want to know what you think.

Sincerely,

Steve Glazer

P.S. Please like my post and share this link with your friends.

Glazer is not the people's choice, but he is the millionaire's choice. The growing economic gap in America,shows that "millionaires and billionaires" run a rigged system that benefits the wealthy at the expense of huge numbers of working-class and poor citizens.

Ninety-nine percent of all new income generated in this country is going to the top one percent. That type of economics is not only immoral, it's not only wrong, it is unsustainable.

Most of us are vehemently opposed to recently implemented laws that relaxed campaign finance rules, which allows millionaire and billionaire donors to buy candidates of their choosing, like what is happening in this race. Glazer is bought and paid by corporate PACS and millionaire independent expenditures.

That's why we think Susan Bonilla deserves our vote May19th. Susan is a moderate who cares about the 99% of us who aren't millionaires and billionaires or is a consultant to the 1% like Glazer is. Although her campaign has been outspent about 2-1 by her opponents, most of us hope that Susan will be victorious.

I had already decided to vote for Mr. Glazer since he's the only clean 'politician' in this race. My neighbor then reminded me that Second Place Sue still has time left on her assembly term. She's greedy. She's decided that she wants the tax payers to spend for yet ANOTHER special election, which is exactly what would happen if she jumped boats to the senate. Let her finish her term and then--G-d forbid--go back to the private sector and work for a living. We don't need yet another special election at tax payer expense. My neighbor is right that Steve Glazer is the best choice in the election. A vote for Steve is a vote against spending for a special election.

I am convinced. Steve Glazer is definitely the People's Choice and great for the tax payers, too!!!

Glazer is not clean and he is not the people's choice. He is the dirtiest as he has taken twice as much independent expenditure money than Susan Bonilla, and his has come from corrupt corporate billionaire's who are trying to destroy working families and the middle class in this country.

It’s the most pressing economic challenge of our time. While the economy has grown overall during the last 35 years, the average worker is still looking at the same slim paycheck. It’s called wage stagnation, and it’s the driving force behind income inequality. Since 1979, productivity — the nation’s output of goods and services per hour worked — grew by 64 percent. Meanwhile, the inflation-adjusted hourly wage of the typical worker rose by just 6 percent.

But in the last few decades we have seen unprecedented attacks on collective bargaining rights. The erosion of collective bargaining is the single largest factor behind the stagnation of middle-class wages. As union membership rates declined, the share of income earned by middle-class households declined, too. This trend explains one-third of the gap between rich and poor men, and one-fifth of the gap among women.

Big business has been cracking down on the unions in an effort to consolidate their power over workers and increase their profits. We are seeing more and more coercive and punitive tactics designed to intensely monitor and punish union activity, including plant closing threats and actual plant closings, terminations, harassment, disciplinary actions, surveillance, and altering benefits and working conditions.

Billionaires and CEOs have come together to push legislation that would weaken and destroy collective bargaining. That's why they are supporting Glazer who has worked for them and that's why those of us who want to save the middle class are voting for Susan Bonilla.


Steve Glazer for 7th District State Senate Proven Environmentalist, More Accessible--The Independent

The Independent
April 23, 2015
By Janet Armantrout

Voters in the State Senate 7th District have a choice between two Democrats on May 19. Susan Bonilla and Steve Glazer are on the ballot to replace Mark DeSaulnier, who was elected to Congress last November.

Bonilla and Glazer were the top two finishers in the March 17 primary.

With little to separate them on the issues, independent political action committees have launched a barrage of nasty flyers in support of and opposition to one or the other candidate. Both have big spenders behind them. Glazer is backed by Bill Bloomfield, JobsPAC (California Chamber of Commerce PAC) and the California Charter Schools Association; Bonilla is heavily favored by unions.

Their associations with such groups have raised questions about their ability to maintain an objective viewpoint on issues impacting the funders of their political campaigns.

The Independent interviewed each separately. Both support more storage for water and are against the two tunnel system proposed by Gov. Brown to deliver water from the Delta. They see the need to improve traffic along the I-580 corridor by bringing BART to Livermore. Each expressed the necessity of a strong educational system to keep the economy growing and to lift people out of poverty.

Glazer has a demonstrated involvement with environmental issues, with a long history of working with such organizations as Save the Bay. On behalf of the Trust for Public Land, he worked on measures in more than 25 states to protect clean water and thousands of acres of open space. He has said that he supports minimizing regulations that don't diminish health and safety, but have a negative impact on business. As technology changes, environmental laws have to keep up.

He supports laws enacted to reduce carbon emissions, which he calls an important method of reducing greenhouse gases. It is a stand that is contrary to that taken by the Chamber of Commerce, and one we support.

His desire to prevent BART strikes has drawn the ire of unions. He notes that New York, Chicago, Massachusetts, and San Francisco all restrict transit strikes. We believe his tone is too strident when he talks about the issue. However, he says that he still believes in the collective bargaining process.

We do agree with his stand on moving forward with pension reform, which he believes is necessary to ensure funds are available when workers retire. We don't agree with his lack of support for closing the business tax loophole in Proposition 13.

Glazer strongly backs adding more charter schools, a move we believe would weaken regular public schools.

Bonilla mentioned favoring a sunset clause for environmental laws, which would limit how long they are in effect. She says that would provide an opportunity to review their value. A sunset clause could lead to a loss of important provisions. While she votes favorably on most environmental issues, she has no record of active involvement.

Bonilla has been strong on child care, noting that without the availability of affordable care for their children, many women would not be able to work.

Because of her backing by unions, Bonilla has been accused of being too in tune with unions to take on pension reform or changes in teacher tenure.

With both of them coming from the northern portion of the district, accessibility is of concern. Glazer appears more willing to involve himself in local issues. Bonilla has shown little interest, focusing more on topics where she lives than the Tri-Valley.

Although we don't support his views on some important issues, we are recommending Steve Glazer for the State Senate 7th District mainly because of his proven record on behalf of the environment and his willingness to engage in Tri-Valley issues.

Source: http://www.independentnews.com/editorials/steve-glazer-for-th-district-state-senate-proven-environmentalist-more/article_1c624344-e92f-11e4-b174-0f57bc52fdb4.html

Glazer is not the people's choice, but he is the millionaire's choice. The growing economic gap in America,shows that "millionaires and billionaires" run a rigged system that benefits the wealthy at the expense of huge numbers of working-class and poor citizens.

Ninety-nine percent of all new income generated in this country is going to the top one percent. That type of economics is not only immoral, it's not only wrong, it is unsustainable.

Most of us are vehemently opposed to recently implemented laws that relaxed campaign finance rules, which allows millionaire and billionaire donors to buy candidates of their choosing, like what is happening in this race. Glazer is bought and paid by corporate PACS and millionaire independent expenditures.

That's why we think Susan Bonilla deserves our vote May19th. Susan is a moderate who cares about the 99% of us who aren't millionaires and billionaires or is a consultant to the 1% like Glazer is. Although her campaign has been outspent about 2-1 by her opponents, most of us hope that Susan will be victorious.

I had already decided to vote for Mr. Glazer since he's the only clean 'politician' in this race. My neighbor then reminded me that Second Place Sue still has time left on her assembly term. She's greedy. She's decided that she wants the tax payers to spend for yet ANOTHER special election, which is exactly what would happen if she jumped boats to the senate. Let her finish her term and then--G-d forbid--go back to the private sector and work for a living. We don't need yet another special election at tax payer expense. My neighbor is right that Steve Glazer is the best choice in the election. A vote for Steve is a vote against spending for a special election.

I am convinced. Steve Glazer is definitely the People's Choice and great for the tax payers, too!!!

What hasn't been pointed out so far is that Glazer was almost totally funded by anti-consumer groups. The middle and lower class lost when he won. Our family doesn't belong to a union but I agree that 2016 will bring out more anti-Glazer voters and will probably spell his doom. Usually more progressive candidates win in presidential years. 23% voting in this election will be doubled or tripled in 2016. Those voters will represent the people.

Post a Comment