California Republican Jan-Feb 2012

A few days ago President Obama submit-ted his proposed budget for 2012-13.

Besides $1.3 trillion in deficits, larger than this year, he also has tax increases.

The total of the tax increases included in the budget go on for ten years. The total Barack wants transferred from your family and business over the ten year period is a minimum of $1.5 TRILLION. Then because businesses do not pay taxes, they pass them on to the consumer, they will add one tril-lion to the cost of goods and services.

That means, if passed, your family, and mine, will transfer $2.5 trillion dollars to government.

Here is one example: “Taxes raised on families who consume energy by at least $100 billion over the decade. A whole series of tax increases on oil and gas com-panies, coal, and other producers of oil are proposed in this budget. Companies don’t pay taxes--people do. These higher

taxes will be passed along to families in the form of higher energy bills, skinnier 401(k) balances, and lower wages”, this is from article written by Grover Norquist, head of Americans for Tax Reform.

Remember you will have an opportunity to vote for Obama in November. If elected he will have four more years to transfer trillions more from you to government. At least he is honest, he says he favors redistri-bution of wealth—this is the policy to do it.

Then you have on the California Novem-ber ballot Guv Brown’s attempt to transfer $35 billion, over five years to the State of California. We also have the billion-aire Munger wanting to support our failed schools, without ANY Reforms, with $120 bil-lion of your money over a twelve year period.

With the Republican nomination for President still unde-cided, this year’s CRA Presidential Endorsing Convention

looks to be exciting. The Hacienda Hotel in El Segundo will be the setting for this

event which begins on Friday, April 20th and runs through Sun-day April 22nd. Located just one mile south of LAX, the Hacienda Hotel has 630 rooms, heated outdoor swimming pool, Jacuzzi, dance floor, and coffee shop open from 5am to 1am.

Room rates are just $99 per night + tax. Overnight parking is $8, daily parking is $4. There is also limited street parking nearby. The hotel offers a free airport shuttle every 20 minutes.

The convention is being hosted be the South Bay Republican Assembly. In addition to the slate of guest speakers and the endorsement vote, there will be a debate between CRP National Committeeman Shawn Steel and Former Senator Ray Haynes on the National Popular Vote Compact (NPVC).

Take advantage of “Early Bird” discounts and send in your registration form today.

A registration form can be found on page 9.

Full Court Press: The National Popular VoteBy Tom Hudson, CRA Vice President

On Friday, January 20, 2012, a group of Vice Presi-dents met with the proponents of the National

Popular Vote project and received a great deal of infor-mation. The meeting was held in conjunction with the Southern Republican Leadership Conference in Charleston, South Carolina. Prior to our private meeting, we witnessed a very interesting panel discussion on this subject, which was pre-sented to the whole Convention and aired on CSPAN.

At the private NFRA meet-ing, the following NFRA Vice Presidents were present: James Dickey, Lester Olson, Celeste Greig, and me (Tom Hud-son). Former California Senator Ray Haynes represented the National Popular Vote. Beforehand, we heard from Tom Golisano and Senator Fred Thompson on this issue. Vice President Robert Cahaly attended the Convention, but he was not present at the meeting. As you will re-call from the NFRA Board of Directors meeting in Des Moines, Rob is well-informed on this subject and he is

2012 CRA Presidential Endorsing ConventionApril 20-22 at the Hacienda Hotel in El Segundo

The Official Publication of The California Republican Assembly — “The Conscience of the Republican Party” – Pres. Ronald Reagan © CRAVolume 35, No. 10 Jan-Feb 2012

IN THIS ISSUE / NEWS AT A GLANCE

President’s Column ......................................... 2Special Report: Political Fundraising 101 ....... 3Malkin: Taxing Medical Progress to Death .. 5CRA Activity Around the State .................... 6Inside the Beltway: Rep. Royce .................... 7

Inside Sacramento: Assem. Harkey ............ 7Farah: Obama’s Divide & Conquer Strategy ... 8Convention Registration Form ........................ 9CRA Unit Roster ............................................ 10and more...Ca

lifor

nia

Repu

blic

an A

ssem

bly

1123

0 G

old

Expr

ess D

r., #

310-

325

Gol

d Ri

ver,

CA 9

5670

Pres

ort F

irst C

lass

US

Pos

tage

PAID

Perm

it #

604

Sacr

amen

to, C

A

Taxes: Issue #1 On November Ballot by Steve Frank

See NPV, page 4

CRA Announces 2012 Membership ContestBy George E. Park Jr., Membership Secretary

Announcing the 2012 CRA Membership Contest: Build your Unit Club’s membership and receive the

recognition and rewards that your CRA Unit deserves. Unit/Club rewards will be as follows:

1. CRA Unit with the most new paid membership ap-plications from January 1st to June 30th 2012 will receive a $150 check. (minimum of 10 new members)

2. CRA Unit with the highest percentage increase in membership from January 1st to June 30th 2012 will

See Membership, page 8

Tom HudsonCRA Vice President

See Taxes, page 2

The California Republican January/February 2012Page 2

Let us not forget the $11 billion ($22 billion when you include inter-est) for a water bond that even Arnold did not have the guts to put on the bal-lot. I do not have to remind you that Arnold’s choo choo train is supported by his ideological twin, Jerry Brown. That is a $200 billion project, without a dime to operate it even if built.

I could go on, but you get the point—the November ballot is about taxes and money.

The bottom line is not Barack, the ballot measures or the GOP nominee. The question is whether you will have money to be free, or will government have so much of your money that you will need government to live. Cur-rently upwards of 47% of Americans do not pay income taxes—but get government benefits.

Regardless who is the GOP nomi-nee, none of us can afford four more years of the Obama Error.

We need to work to get every Cali-fornian NO to say no to Obama and no to the tax increases.

Remember, every dollar of taxes is a dollar less of freedom—pass it on. Freedom is a human right.

WE ARE ON A ROLL and moving forward to make 2012 a memorable year. Our mem-bers are enthusiastic about the prospect of making President Obama a one-term president. They all have been working very hard and passionately for their Republican Presidential candidate, who would reflect the values that the California Republican As-sembly embod-ies – a Constitu-tional Conser-vative person, someone that we so desperately have been waiting for and that our country needs to save us from the path of destruction from the Obama administration, both economically, socially and nationally and internationally defense.

As members of CRA, our conservative views and convictions are part of our DNA, we do not have to define ourselves, we are conservatives period.

We work hard for those values. When the call came from CRP Chairman Tom

Del Beccaro asking CRA members to get involved and gather signatures for the referendum to overturn the unfair redis-tricting, we were all there. We were able to submit thousands of signed petitions.

We have always been on the front lines opposing Illegal Immigration and in sup-

port of E-verify. We have always stood firm against anyone trying to buy power or to gut our Conservative GOP Platform, both state or national.

Once again I ask you all to continue standing tall for those winnable prin-ciples and policies that make us different from the rest and has made us successful. Continue to put a lot of love, energy and financial resources into what we believe in, as Albert Schweitzer (1875-1965) said it so well, “Success is not the key to happiness.

Happiness is the key to success. If you love what you are doing you will be successful.”

Lets make our upcoming 2012 Endors-ing Convention a success (see page 9) a lot of preparations are under way.

The whole package for members and guests to attend is very conservative. We expect to have surprise well-known guest speakers, a big friendly debate between

CRP National Committeeman Shawn Steel and Former Assemblyman/State Senator Ray Haynes on the National Popular Vote Compact (NPVC), workshops, elections, endorsements, etc, etc, etc.

So with lots of love we’ll welcome all of you on April 20-22 in El Segundo, (South-ern CA).

End of the Year

TaxesFrom Page 1

Life Would Be Simple If Pols, Judges Accepted Gun Rights As Real Rightsby Raquel Okyay

IF LAWMAkERS AND JUDGES would simply accept the Second Amendment as lawful and binding, a need for proac-tive measures to protect our natural and constitutional right to keep and bear arms, would not exist.

Forced to challenge existing Illinois laws that prohibited gun owners from carrying loaded handguns outside their home, the Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org), a legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right to own and possess firearms, sued the Attorney General of the State of Illinois for being in violation of the Second Amendment.

Gun control advocates claim victory when federal district Judge Sue Myer-scough, an Obama appointee, on Feb. 3, turned a blind eye to the Second Amend-ment and ruled that citizens do not have a right to be armed outside of their homes.

“This Court finds that the Illinois Un-lawful Use of Weapons’ and Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon’ statutes do not violate Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights. The United States Supreme Court and the Seventh Circuit have recognized only a Second Amendment core individual right to bear arms inside the home.”

However, the inherent and very real

rights contained in the Second Amend-ment lies in our favor, still; and the SAF on February 6 filed an appeal to the United States Supreme Court. SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb issued this statement:

“The Second Amendment does not say, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed except outside your home or that it only applies inside your house. We don’t check our constitutional rights at the front door.”

Indeed, our Second Amendment right was never intended to place boundaries on our freedom to keep and bear arms.

“The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.” -- George Washington

Battling boundaries becomes necessary due to misinformed politicians, and the gun control lobby that support them, who blatantly place restraints on our freedom, in spite of the Constitution’s restriction to do so.

For example; the District of Columbia’s once, all out ban on hand guns, and other limitations on the use of firearms amount-ed to a lawsuit that questioned the legality of D.C.’s extreme gun control laws.

Gun rights advocates claimed vic-tory when the issue, making its way to the United States Supreme Court, in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), was resolved by the court as follows:

“[T]he Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess firearms and that the city’s total ban on handguns, as well as its requirement that firearms in the home be kept nonfunctional even when necessary for self-defense, violated that right.”

So whether on offense or defense, the battle for firearm freedom continues be-cause we acknowledge and are committed to protecting what our founding fathers figured out more than 220 years ago, the right of the people to keep and bear arms without infringement is key to the success of the Republic.

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect them-selves against tyranny in government” -- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Raquel Okyay is a conservative writer and activist in New York State.

The California RepublicanJanuary/February 2012 Page 3

FEBRUARY MAY SEEM a little early to start thinking about summer jobs. But a “cultural exchange” program run by the State Department is already filling jobs in Ocean City and elsewhere — jobs that will not be available when American kids start looking for work.

Foreign students admitted through the Summer Work Travel (SWT) program work not only at nearby beaches but all over the country, at restaurants, con-venience shops, supermarkets, moving companies, roadside vegetable stands, factories, fish processing plants, and — until recently — at a distribution center for Hershey candy. Hershey ended the program after a protest by SWT work-ers drew international attention to their claims that they were being overworked and mistreated.

After years of mounting problems, the State Department is finally conducting a reevaluation of the program that every

year brings more than 100,000 foreign college students to the U.S. to work in seasonal jobs and tour the country. In addition to ex-ploitation of some participants, those problems include an almost com-plete disregard of the program’s im-pact on American young people seek-ing the same jobs.

In this respect, SWT is emblematic of a larger problem with the nation’s immigra-tion system, where new programs are cre-ated and allowed to expand significantly without giving careful consideration to their effects on the labor market or the larger American society.

The State Department labels SWT as “cultural exchange” that showcases the American way of life and wins friends

among future world leaders. Indeed, many participants talk enthusiastically about their experiences, including An-

drius Sarkune-lis of Lithuania, whom I met in Ocean City.

Mr. Sarkune-lis, who learned a b o u t S W T from a friend’s Facebook page, raved about it

last September as he cleaned counters at Boog’s Barbecue. “I hope I can come back next year, and I’m going to tell all my friends about this place,” he said.

Word is spreading fast, as the program is promoted by organizations that an-nually receive more than $100 million in fees from the students. They are the State Department-designated sponsoring agencies and their foreign partners. They

recruit students, help them obtain visas and match them with employers.

While the students each pay an average of $1,100 in program fees, employers pay nothing. If they commit to hiring a certain number of workers, sponsors take them on free junkets to job fairs at universities around the world. The recruitment of American workers is meager by com-parison. Ocean City businesses promote their annual job fair by sending posters to colleges in a 300-mile radius.

Meanwhile, the town’s police depart-ment, which hires only American citizens, recruits on several dozen campuses in a five-state area.

SWT recruiting websites play Ameri-can music, show images of Broadway and Hollywood, and buzz with too-good-to-be-true astonishment at the benefits for employers. A Russian agency, noting that SWT participants and employers are

Political Fundraising 101 JESSE UNRUH (1922–1987), speaker of the California Assembly for eight years said, “money is the mother’s milk of politics.” This statement was made almost 5 decades ago and it still holds true today!

Fundraising, fundraising, fundraising… In this day and age of politics, a candidate’s message will not reach the electorate with-out spending significant sums of money on paid advertising and other forms of voter outreach.

Today fundraising efforts often start even before a candidate has ‘officially’ declared his or her intent to run for office. And, the fundraising often continues just a few days after a candidate is sworn into office. A candidate’s ability to fundraise is often used as a measuring stick for suc-cess – it can determine the longevity and viability of your candidacy.

For the first time candidate, fundraising starts with very simple fundamentals – by putting one foot in front of the other. You should make a list of your friends, family and business associates who have urged you to seek political office. It is at this point that you find out how serious and commit-ted your friends really are to supporting your candidacy. Lists should be divided up based on those who can afford larger and smaller contributions.

Fundraising typically happens in 4

stages – get them on the phone, get them to commit, get them to send in the money and then collect the money. Usually, you have to repeat one or more of these stages.

Remember the old adage, when you can’t get through the front door, knock on the back door, when you can’t get through the back door, knock on the side door and if you can’t get through the s ide door, go through the basement and if you can’t get through the basement then go back to the front door and start all over again – This is the first lesson in political Fundraising 101 – It all comes down to commitment, prodding and persistence.

After a candidate has reached out to those people he/she knows, then it’s time to start the ‘cold calls’ to people who are perennially involved in politics. It helps to have a professional fundraiser who has significant experience and connections to the donors within your district.

When cold calling these major donors, you will need to introduce yourself and make a strong case as to why you’re the best candidate. It’s usually more than one phone call, but first impressions stick. Af-

ter the donors have agreed to take your call and you’ve made your pitch, most donors will want to meet with you to discuss issues of common concern.

Then the follow up and persistence kicks in… follow-up calls, notes to the donor and

subsequent meetings may be required. It’s important not to get frustrated, this pro-cess could take one day or many months. It really is like planting a seed and waiting for it to bloom.

Politically active donors are in a ‘club of their own’. They counsel with each other and seek each other’s advice concerning all of the candidates running for office; so it’s vitally important to have one of their peers serving as a volunteer member of your finance committee. This ‘finance chair’ will be instrumental in carrying your message to the donors. This finance chair should not only be accepted by ‘the group’, but should also have the ability to make the sale, follow-up and close the deal.

The constant cultivation of donors and

the competition between candidates going after the same donors has turned the art of fundraising into a ‘star wars arms race’.

Independently wealthy candidates have a built in advantage or leg up on their com-petition for the obvious reason that they start out with immediate cash on hand, and have the ability to write checks at will. However, this advantage does not always transfer into immediate electoral support. In some cases it can have a negative effect if the candidate is perceived as trying to ‘buy’ the office. It’s important that even when a candidate has the ability to fund his/her own campaign they should still take the opportunity to reach out to donors and voters through fundraising.

Despite term limits, contribution limits, spending caps, corporate restrictions, etc. political fundraising continues to be rel-evant and thrive in the 21st century.

The inflationary costs of television, radio, print, postage and staff continue to rise. And, with the substantial increase in permanent absentee voter status, can-didates are forced to spend more money, earlier in the political campaign season to reach these ‘early’ voters.

The recent rise of internet fundrais-ing in major races of state and national prominence and their success, has clearly

Summer Jobs for Foreigners Crowd Out Americans State Department program, though well intentioned, is out of controlBy Jerry Kammer

See Fundraising, page 6

See Jobs, page 4


exempt from Social Security, Medicare and federal unemployment taxes, asks, “Sounds like a scam?” Then it answers the question. “It’s not. This is Work and Travel USA program, designed by the U.S. Dept. of State to promote intercultural friendship.”

At consulates and embassies world-wide, State promotes SWT with the sort of boosterism normally associated with the Chamber of Commerce. Last May, as it rolled out a website for SWT and other exchange programs, officials raved about SWT’s growth. “Brazil is a very big sending country,” said one. “A lot of the

Eastern and Western European countries are top sending countries. China is defi-nitely growing. India is growing.”

So at a time when the world’s popular culture has been Americanized, the State Department strives to globalize the American summer job. State and its partners call SWT a great international civic enterprise, good for foreign relations and good for young participants.

Unfortunately, as the program has boomed — from about 20,000 in 1996 to a peak of 153,000 in 2008 — it has denied a place in the workforce for many American young people, who are now suffering record levels of unemployment.

Sarah Ann Smith gives a tally of how the arrival of SWT students affected her

teenage son’s dish washing schedule at a restaurant in Camden, Maine: first week, when there were no SWT workers, 24 hours of work; second week, after the arrival of two SWT workers, eight hours; third week, when the SWT staff totaled six workers, zero hours.

Ironically, Ms. Smith is a former State Department Foreign Service officer who told me she endorses the philosophy that underlies SWT: “I think the best way to convince the rest of the world that we’re not bad guys is for them to come here and see the United States,” she said. “But it’s wrong to have a program that allows foreign kids to come in and take jobs that American kids need.” SWT, she said, “is out of control.”

From his home not far from Hershey, Pa., former Harrisburg mayor Stephen Reed, a Democrat, put SWT in a domes-tic policy frame: “In times of economic distress, you can’t have the Department of Labor and other departments calling job creation the number-one priority and then simultaneously have the State Department not just ignoring that but working in a contradictory manner.”

Unfortunately, contradictions like this are not limited to the SWT pro-gram. Much of our nation’s immigration policy — for both temporary visitors and permanent residents — is made with little concern for its impact on American society. Reevaluating SWT is a first step toward changing that.

JobsFrom Page 3

strongly in favor of it.(As you may remember from Des

Moines, the National Popular Vote is a proposed agreement to award the presi-dential electors from participating states to the presidential candidate who wins the plurality of the nationwide vote. The goal is to force candidates to campaign for every vote, in every state, rather than just campaigning in ten battleground states and ignoring everyone else in the so-called “flyover states.”)

Speaking for myself, I should say that I was initially very opposed to this idea. The discussion did a great deal to change my views on this subject. In case you care, I will summarize a few of my observations and thoughts on this subject:

Despite my initial concerns, the National Popular Vote is not unconstitutional and it is not an attempt to eliminate the Electoral College. The United States Constitution explicitly authorizes this proposal (i.e., Article II, Section 1 says “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress. . .”) Thus, this proposal is invoking the Constitution, not seeking an “end run” around it.

The proposal is normally presented as an Interstate Compact, which also raises some constitutional concerns. However, we heard some excellent answers to these concerns as well. First, the Constitution explicitly authorizes such interstate com-pacts in Article I, Section 10, Clause 3, pro-vided they are approved by Congress. The proponents publicly stated their intention to obtain Congressional approval in their panel discussion at the Southern Republi-can Leadership Conference in Charleston.

It is not absolutely clear to me that such approval would be needed, since this would not be a true compact in the normal sense of that word: Each state that chose to par-ticipate would be changing state law and thus the rule would be enforceable in state courts as a matter of state law. It is not a normal compact in the sense that citizens of one state would never have occasion to seek to enforce the deal against citizens in another state.

Fraud:One of my main concerns with this

proposal is that it might encourage voter fraud, since a Big City political machine in one state might gain the opportunity to steal a national election, rather than just a state election. However, I was forced to take a closer look at this issue and I now think that this proposal will actually re-duce opportunities for fraud, rather than expand them. Under the current system, it is much easier to steal an election with a few thousand fraudulent votes. Under the National Popular Vote, it would normally take millions of fraudulent votes to change an election result. In other words, fraud is always a problem under any system, but the current system makes it less likely that a few fraudulent votes will impact the outcome; thus, changing that system will reduce the incentives for fraud, while mak-ing it less likely. Furthermore, in modern history, wide scale voter fraud seems to involve unions and their minions and pup-pets. Those groups care a lot more about the membership of city councils and school boards that award contracts to unions, so it is difficult to imagine that they would have any more incentive for fraud than they have now.

Unintended consequences: As conservatives, we naturally oppose

change. Our present system has served our nation well, despite whining from crybabies, so we should not rush to make changes that may end up causing prob-lems. The good news about this concern is that the National Popular Vote project is designed for our federal system, to be adopted in accordance with the Constitu-tion on a state-by-state basis. Unlike a constitutional amendment, which might be almost impossible to repeal, any par-ticipating state could simply opt out at any time and go back to the present system or change to a new system. The compact does not go into effect until states that represent a majority of the vote in the Electoral Col-lege have adopted it. The compact would be null and void if states opted out and the compact states ever represented less than a majority of the Electoral College. I may not have explained this very well, but my point is that (unlike an amendment), this fragile agreement could be easily repealed if it does not work the way it was intended. This is really important to me because so many statutory changes do not turn out the way we want they were supposed to.

States Rights: The National Popular Vote proposal does not change the fundamental nature of our federal system and it respects states rights. It was important for me to hear more on this subject, since I never support anything that would further erode states’ rights! Under this proposal, states could choose whether or not to participate. Aside from determining which slate of electors would be seated as the Electoral College members from that state, no other state or federal election laws would be changed. The election official in each state would determine who won and by what margin. Contrary to what I had heard, there would not be any federal bureaucracy or official who would determine the winner of the national popular vote.

Incentives:On further reflection, I think the pro-

ponents of the National Popular Vote proposal are probably correct that it would tend to encourage presidential candidates to campaign in every state, not just the battleground states. No system is perfect, of course, and every change involves trade-offs.

In closing, I should end with a quick anecdote that kept coming to mind as we talked about the National Popular Vote proposal: In 2008, I was the Chairman of the Placer County Republican Party in California’s most Republican county. The McCain campaign refused to provide any bumper stickers, posters, yard signs, or any other campaign materials. When we tried to buy our own materials for the Party Headquarters, they quoted prices that were actually above the market rate for such materials. In other words, they were so un-interested in campaigning in the most Republican county in California that they were not even willing to sell us campaign materials unless they could make a net profit from us, so that they could spend it elsewhere. I understand their predica-ment. Even though finding Republican voters in Placer County is easier than catching fish in a barrel, the current system compels presidential campaigns to spend every dime in the battleground states and ignore Republican strongholds in the “fly-over states.” With the National Popular Vote, voters in Placer County would matter just as much as voters in Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida or anywhere else in America. This might be a real improvement. Tom Hudson is a CRA Vice President and Parliamentarian. He also serves as General Counsel and Vice President for Special Projects for the NFRA.

NPVFrom Page 1


REPUBLICAN U.S. SENATE candidate Elizabeth Emken, an accomplished businesswoman specializing in effi-ciency and cost-cutting, and nationally recognized advocate for autism research and treatment, continued her impressive campaign rollout, capping off a busy weekend with a standing ovation follow-ing her speech to the Board of Directors and members of the California Federa-tion of Republican Women Sunday.

The enthusiastic response is yet an-other sign that the California GOP is excited about the coming U.S. Senate race and Emken’s candidacy.

“Feinstein is in real trouble, and Eliza-beth Emken is certainly energizing the Republican Party,” said Lois Godfrey, Past President of the California Federa-tion of Republican Women. “There’s a renewed sense of hope and optimism that we can win this seat, especially this year with Emken as our nominee and

with Feinstein’s polling numbers being the lowest of her career. Elizabeth has us renewed and ready for the battle. We’ve got a great shot at winning this seat.”

A long time respected conservative leader, Lois Godfrey is also the former Vice Chairman South for the California Republican Party and served as State Volunteer Chairman for former Secre-tary of State Bill Jones in his 2004 bid for the Senate. Lois has led grassroots and fundraising efforts for a wide range of campaigns ranging from presidential to local candidates including George W. Bush in 2000 and GOP gubernatorial nominee Bill Simon in 2002.

Three times a year, the CFRW prepares workshops, conferences and board meetings to continue the goal of educat-ing their membership, and often invites candidates to speak. Emken delivered an impressive performance in a speech that not only introduced her to an influential

Republican organization, but also estab-lished her credentials as an exceptional candidate.

“I knew the ladies would love her, and it was gratifying to see their overwhelm-ing response,” said Emken campaign manager Jeff Corless, who attended Sun-

day’s speech. “Elizabeth proved without a doubt that she has the substance to run successfully for the U.S. Senate.”

Emken has served as Vice President of Government Relations at Autism Speaks, the nation’s largest science and advocacy organization devoted to the public health emergency of autism. Before becoming active with the autism issue, Elizabeth served as an efficiency and cost cutting expert at IBM, stream-lining operations, eliminating waste and achieving multi-million dollar savings.

Elizabeth graduated from UCLA in 1984 with dual degrees in Economics and Political Science. Her studies also included course work at Cambridge University, where she focused on inter-national political and economic issues throughout China and the Middle East. Editor’s Note: You can learn more about Elizabeth Emken at www.Emken2012.com

TWO YEARS AGO this month, as public debate over Obamacare raged, former President Bill Clinton rushed to the hos-pital because of a heart condition. He im-mediately underwent a procedure to place two stents in one of his coronary arteries. It was a timely reminder about the dangers of stifling private-sector medical innovation. No one listened.

Stents don’t grow on trees. They were not created, developed, marketed or sold by government bureaucrats and lawmak-ers. One of the nation’s top stent manu-facturers, Boston Scientific, warned at the time that Obamacare’s punitive medical device tax would lead to worker losses and research cuts. The 2.3 percent excise tax, the company said, “would be very damag-ing to Boston Scientific, and the medical device industry as a whole. In a nutshell, it would raise costs and lead to significant job losses. It does not address the quality of care but the political scorecard of savings.”

Two years later, Bill Clinton’s doing just peachy. But many medical device manu-facturers are suffering, and many more are preparing for the worst as the White House gears up to collect on an estimated $20 billion from the lifesaving industry. In typical Obama-transparent fashion, the Internal Revenue Service quietly released a complex thicket of medical device tax

implementation rules in a Friday document dump earlier this month. Barring congres-sional intervention, the medical device tax will go into full effect in 2013.

Cook Medical, which manufactures products for everything from endovascular therapy, critical care medicine and general surgery, to diagnostic and interventional procedures, to bioengineered tissue replace-ment and re-generation, gas-troenterology and endoscopy procedures, urology, and obstetrics and gynecology, has called for the levy’s repeal. Cook Group chairman Stephen Ferguson noted the tax burden amounted to a whop-ping 55 percent of its profits.

“For a company like ours, which pays 35 percent of our net earnings in federal corporate taxes and another 4 to 5 percent in state and local corporate taxes, the excise tax translates to another payment that will consume 15 percent more of our earnings,” he estimated. “This creates tremendous pressure for us to move manufacturing to Europe and other parts of the world.” According to the trade publication Mass Device, the company has already canceled plans to build a new factory in the U.S.

because of the Obamacare tax burden.Stryker, a maker of artificial hips and

knees based in kalamazoo, Mich., an-nounced in November that it would slash 5 percent of its global workforce (an esti-mated 1,000 workers) this coming year to reduce costs related to Obamacare’s taxes and mandates.

Covidien, a N.Y.-based surgical supplies manufacturer, recently announced layoffs of 200 American workers and plans to move some of its plant work to Mexico and Costa Rica, in part because of the coming tax hit.

Mass.-based Zoll Medical Corp., which makes defibrillators and employs some 1,800 workers in the U.S. and around the world, says the medical device tax will cost the company between $5 million and $10 million a year. Its profit in 2009 was $9.5 million. “Running our company at close to break even would not be a sustainable position for us,” CEO Richard Packer said in a public statement, “so we will be forced to look at alternatives.”

Those “alternatives” include cutting payroll, cutting R and D and passing on the costs to patients, of course. Industry estimates put the tax-induced job losses at 43,000. So far, the number-crunchers at 1600 Pennsylvania are mum on the num-ber of potential jobs -- and lives -- destroyed by the medical innovation death tax.

In fact, the Obama administration’s response so far has been a flippant shrug. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, whose only manufacturing claims to fame are faulty tax returns and near-double-digit un-employment figures, brushed off concerns this week about the medical device tax. Obamacare’s expanded access to health care, he argues blithely, will create more consumers for their products. “On balance, it is a good package for people in the health care business,” he told Bloomberg News.

Fewer jobs. Fewer entrepreneurs. Fewer medical advances. Only with a gallon of self-delusion does the Obamacare medical tax medicine amount to anything other than economic and medical malpractice.

Obama 2012: Winning the future ... by killing it. Michelle Malkin is the author of “Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies” (Regnery 2010). Her e-mail is [email protected].

Taxing Medical Progress to Death

Emken Wows Crowd at CA Fed of Republican Women Meeting

Elizabeth Emken

Note from the Editor: The California Republican Assembly has not taken a position on the U.S. Senate race yet. There are multiple candidates running for the Republican nomination at this time. This article is provided as a news item for our readers and should not be construed as official support or an endorsement.


Sarkis Named Assistant for Voter RegistrationLONGTIME CRA MEMBER STEVE SARkIS has been appointed by President Celeste Greig to the position of Assistant for Voter Registration.

“It is no secret to anyone how important now more than ever is, for us to increase our Republican voter registration,” said President Greig.

“Therefore, effective immediately I’m appointing Steve Sarkis, a long time CRA member and past Unit President and very active in the GOP of Orange County, to be Assistant for Voter Registration.”

Steve has been an active volunteer working to gather signatures for Referendums and Initiatives, as well as registering voters at fairs, local meetings and other venues. He is a devoted volunteer and up to this new challenge.

“I hope each of you would join me in supporting Steve,” said President Greig. “Please go out and do the monumental task of registering new Republicans especially for this election cycle and send to Steve via email copies of your Bounty reports. “

Expect more detailed information very soon directly from Steve Sarkis regarding CRA’s registration efforts.

Fountain ValleyWhen you think of Fountain Valley CRA the words “flurry of

activity” come to mind. From registering new voters to listening to informative speakers at our meetings, Fountain Valley members always have something to look forward to.

In September from the Pacific Research Institute , Brad Dacus, treated us to a thought provoking talk regarding union members to opt put of paying their union dues and other conservative judicial matters.

October’s meeting was of great interest to all as Fountain Valley School Board member, Sandra Crandall, educated us about school board issues and the mountain of information that board members research monthly. Sandra was a marvelous mentor who left us all with a greater understanding of how school districts work and the rules and regulations under which they operate. This was the first speech by Crandall who had been elected for the first time the previous November. Crandall was one of three candidates elected for the first time with the help and endorsement of the FVRA.

In November, FVVA sponsored a Forum for the three candidates running for the newly formed 72nd Assembly seat. The forum was open to the public and drew approximately 100 Republican Assembly members and interested voters from Westminster, Huntington Beach, Westminster and Fountain Valley were able to pose questions with President John W. Briscoe acting as monitor. The evening allowed a crowd of citizens to hear firsthand about the candidates backgrounds and viewpoints regarding a wide variety of issues. The candidates then took time afterwards to mingle with the community and become acquainted with them. It was a unique and personal experience that was appreciated by all. This was the first even for the 72nd assembly election process. Vice President Dennis Catron and Treasurer Jeff Clitheroe did an excellent job putting this together.

In November several members of our unit, John Briscoe, Terri Briscoe, David Pruyne and Ray Silva, attended the special CRA State Convention in Los Angeles.

December was a time for fun as the group gathered at the home of Board member Jeanne Galindo and Craig Rosenberg to enjoy a potluck and relax and enjoy the season. The warm, cozy evening gave us time to get to know each other better especially since our association is gaining new members at a fast pace.

Past President Bob and Bev Cielnicky treated us to and airing of the documentary “Agenda” in January. This historical piece traces the mission of karl Marx and Saul Alinsky to defeat democracy by undermining the basic family values of our country.

The movie built a very strong case by linking socialism to liberalism and the attempts to weaken the “Bill of Rights” on which this country was formed.

At our February meeting we were honored to host CRA State President Celeste Greig who spoke in CRA’s political involvement in this year’s critical election.

She was followed by an informative talk “Stop Special Interest Money” initiative by CRA Recording Secretary Craig Alexander.

Looking forward to this busy election season, we are pleased to have our County Supervisor, Janet Nguyen, bring us up to date on issues that relate to county business. At this March meeting issues such as city pensions, budgets and electing candidates will all be addressed. As the

county endorsing convention will follow this meeting a discussion of whom to endorse at that meeting will be discussed.

Murrieta-TemeculaSam Paredes, President of Gun Owners of California spoke

recently regarding “Confrontational Politics.” He also made a presentation regarding the Inside Scoop on Fast & Furious, and

California Law---What you can and can’t do. Future meetings will include: In March, Brad Dacus on the new petition to overturn SB 48 – the State requiring public schools to teach homosexual history; In April, local endorsement convention for local races such as Assembly District 67 all members are delegates; and in May, John Fer- Vietnam POW – was in Vietnam’s Hanoi Hilton with John McCain.

Santa BarbaraWe are a proud conservative unit who has many dedicated volunteers who have created

an efficient and professional face to our unit. We have a new website which we encourage all to view at sbcra.com. The website includes an active blog, and our stellar monthly newsletter. It is updated and posted each month with the current political news events. The newsletter is an outstanding example of the group of volunteers who make up our Board and devote time to make all this happen.

Our priority is making our monthly General dinner meeting into an interesting and informative venue. We include a guest speaker each month with politically informative topics for a lecture segment to our meetings. We welcome all guests to attend the fourth Thursday of each month. We can be contacted directly by our google phone number, (805) 500-6690 for dinner reservations or inquiries to our time and location.

So come visit us when possible, we are an example of the pride we bring to the CRA organization.

CRA Activity Around the State

shown us where we are headed in the future… Internet fundraising is the ‘new frontier’ of politi-cal fundraising.

Buyers beware in this business (and it is a business), there is no room for threats, goading or coercing! One can be firm and assertive, but be careful to remain respectful. All candidates and their staff should remain committed to the process, while maintaining a lighthearted nature.

IMPORTANT - The word ‘thank you’ in the written or verbal form can never be said enough to the donor!

Political action committees (PACS) or inde-pendent expenditure committees (IE’s) need to be treated with ‘kid gloves’. PACS/IE’s can be a tremendous asset to your campaign by sponsor-ing advertising, etc. at no cost to you. However, they can also be very damaging. It’s important to ‘court’ the PACS/IE’s who are like minded; but it’s also just as important to avoid antagonizing

the groups who may choose to use their resources against your campaign. If a PAC/IE comes in to the race in opposition to your campaign it will force you to raise even more money to match their independent efforts.

Campaign Finance Laws at all levels should ALWAYS be strictly followed; and remember to never accept CASH!! Wendy Warfield is one of California’s premier fundraising professionals. She founded Wendy Warfield & Associates in August of 1997 and in less than twelve years has become one of California’s most preeminent fundraising consultants. Her firm, located in Sacramento, specializes in fundraising for Associations, Republican political candidates and issue campaigns throughout the state. Warfield is best known for her aggressive and persuasive fundraising campaigns. She also has a well-established reputation for the personal and individual attention she offers her clients. To contact Wendy or to learn more about the services she offers please visit her company website at www.wendywarfield.com.

FundraisingFrom Page 3


COLOR

China Profits From U.S. Pipeline BlunderIT WAS ANNOUNCED recently that the Obama administration has decided to re-ject the keystone XL pipeline project. It has delayed this project for years, even though its own State Department judged it envi-ronmentally safe. Until Congress forced a decision in December’s tax legislation, President Barack Obama’s announced plan was to delay a keystone decision further, until after November’s election.

Unfortunately, his political gamesman-ship comes at considerable expense to our economy, including our ability to compete with a rising China.

The proposed keystone pipeline would move the proven crude oil reserves of Alberta, Canada – the third-largest such reserves in the world – to U.S. refineries on the Gulf Coast. This would help lower pric-es at the pump, among its many benefits.

Celebrity-backed protests aside, there is nothing extraordinary about this project. It is no different than the 360,000 miles of pipeline that crisscross the United States. In fact, it merely extends an existing pipeline.

By one estimate, more than 20,000 U.S. construction and service jobs would

be created if the president had given the go-ahead. Many of these are good-paying manufacturing jobs, building pipe, earth movers and other construction equipment. With our high u n e m p l o y -ment, passing up these jobs is unacceptable.

But this is also about our economic contest with China, whose economy is the world’s second-largest and is still growing rapidly. Building keystone, along with developing our own abundant energy and gas reserves, would strengthen us in a increasingly competitive global economy. U.S. manufacturing is seeing an uptick in business, in fact, because of the boom in U.S. natural gas production. Lower energy prices are making U.S.-based manufacturing more competitive against China and other nations.

With its growing energy appetite, China is aggressively locking up energy resources in North America. The Chinese energy companies PetroChina, Sinopec and Cnooc all have invested heavily in Canada’s oil

patch, totaling some $10 billion. Earlier this month, PetroChina took complete ownership of a Canadian oil-sands pros-pect, the first for a Chinese company.

In November, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper met with Chinese Presi-dent Hu Jintao and stressed his country’s interest in supplying Asian energy markets. He will make a high-profile trip to China next month.

If we snub our neighbor to the north, which badly wants keystone approved, a Canadian pipeline to the Pacific Ocean will be built, to fuel China.

The keystone decision came the same week a National Science Board study made news reporting that the United States is rapidly losing high-technology jobs to Asia, many to China, as U.S. companies shift their research and development. One major CEO said his company is expanding

its overseas research “in preparation for a world where the West is no longer the dominant manufacturing power.” Deci-sions like keystone move that day closer.

China is a challenge in many ways. I held a congressional hearing last year on its theft of American intellectual property. State policy in Beijing is to bully U.S. firms wanting market access in China to give up their crown jewels: cutting-edge tech-nology in the important fields of energy, transportation, telecommunication and computing. This is a determined campaign to surpass us in becoming the preeminent world power, plain and simple.

The Obama Administration makes much of its “Pivot to Asia” – the reorienting U.S. foreign policy focus and resources to the Far East. That is all well and good. The Pacific region is tremendously important to the U.S., especially California. But it would sure be nice if we pivoted from a position of strength. Rep. Ed Royce, Republican congressman representing Fullerton and other parts of North Orange County.

INCREASINGLY, VOTERS believe they’ve bought a lemon. One would think with millions of dollars for statewide marketing at their disposal, the California High Speed Rail Authority would be able to increase support for the multi-billion dollar project, which only 52% voted for in 2008. HSR proponents blame the Tea Party and/or the Republicans in Congress, accusing the Tea Party of being short-sighted, and Congress as vengeful toward Obama policies.

Left-leaning California is hardly rep-resentative of the groups found wanting by the pro-HSR lobby. A recent statewide Field Poll revealed that nearly 2/3 of the voters surveyed would like to re-vote on the issue. By nearly two to one, voters would reject the $9.95 billion bond to fund start-up costs for HSR. The reality is that even those that originally supported the concept know they were deceived; Californians do not support high speed rail at any cost.

In fact, the voters were misled; the courts ruled that the analysis of the bond mea-sure, Proposition 1A, was misleading, writ-ten in promotional language. In addition, the original price tag of $33 billion has now escalated to $98.5 - $117 billion for Phase I construction. Phase II promised from Anaheim to San Diego is not even being

discussed, and neither is the cost to operate whatever is actually built. The voters were assured there would be “no state operating subsidy” and that the riders would pay for the system. However, the analysis failed to mention hefty “construction costs” would be excluded, re-quire financing, and repayment from the state’s General Fund ( o r t a x - p aye r subsidy).

A l s o n e v e r mentioned, the initial construction would begin with 120+ miles somewhere be-tween “near” Fresno and Bakersfield, the now professed “backbone” of the system. Who will ride and who will pay for the un-electrified piece of track, is uncertain at best. But, Authority wizards and the Federal Railroad Administration are insist-ing $3.9 billion in stimulus dollars must be spent, match-funded by over $2 billion State Proposition 1Adebt, in the least-likely-to-succeed location. Not to mention, the location, timing and funding, may not meet the legal requirements for accessing Proposition 1A debt.

To re-vote requires obtaining 2/3 vote of

the Legislature or accumulating millions to gather signatures and campaign. The election could be held in November 2012, or be postponed until after the destruction of the Central Valley had begun. Once the gaping hole is dug and eminent domain

has usurped businesses and productive farmland, what happens next? What is the likelihood that the Federal Government will kick-in billions to complete a usable segment or an entire Phase I? How will California, with the lowest credit rating in the nation, recurring budget deficits, and forced “trigger cuts” to education, public safety and the needy, finance the shiny new toy without ridership?

A December 15, 2011 hearing in Wash-ington, DC confirmed that Congress is not going to rescue California if we begin construction, but they could rescind the $3.9 billion Fed funds wagging the $100+ billion dog. Waiting for Washington lar-

gesse to prevent our state from becoming the Greece of the nation, is fantasy, but we do have options.

Constantly searching for strategies to improve our state’s dire financial situation that fall within the Legislature’s purview, I discovered that:

Article XVI of the California Constitu-tion authorizes the Legislature, at any time after the approval of a general obligation bond act by the people, to reduce the amount of the indebtedness authorized by the act to an amount not less than the amount contracted at the time of the reduc-tion or to repeal the act if no debt has been contracted.

When proposed last year, California Public Interest Research Group argued the project would create 160,000 jobs, and further stated “The cost of scrapping the high-speed rail project is not zero...the highway and airport expansions ... without high-speed rail are expected to exceed $80 billion [statewide].” Considering our highways already have proven ridership, $80 billion appears a bar-gain next to $170 billion - the Authority’s own cost estimate to provide equivalent capacity through airport and highway expansion. And we have shovel-ready, real jobs, needing funds statewide.

AB 1455 Constitutional Lemon Law for High Speed Rail

See Harkey, page 9


BARACk OBAMA IS A not only an abor-tion zealot, he’s also a fascist control freak – determined to make government the ultimate arbiter of morality on all matters political and economic.

That’s the only conclusion one can reach from his efforts to force individuals like me, institutions like the Catholic Church, insurance com-panies and em-ployers nation-wide to provide “free” abortions, “free” steriliza-tions and “free” contraception to those who are part of any health insurance program in the U.S.

It’s a natural manifestation of Obam-acare – and something advocates of the legislation assured would never happen as a result of passage.

It didn’t take very long to reveal the administration’s deceit.

There’s no compromising with this hideous plan.

Last week, in an effort to defuse what has become a constitutional crisis prompted by the administration’s edicts, Obama sug-gested no one’s moral compass would need to be adjusted from true north because he would simply require insurance companies to pay for the taking of innocent human life rather than religious institutions.

This misses the point of the objections by 180 degrees.

Let me make this personal: I am not part of the Catholic Church. I am just an employer who runs a private business. I have religious and moral views that are as deserving of respect and constitutional protection as are the Catholic Church’s. I will not be coerced into participating in abortions and sterilizations because the

federal government says I must. Period. End of story.

Religious freedom, as protected by the First Amendment, is not a matter for compromise by institutional churches. It is a private and personal matter – a matter of individual conscience.

What Obama is attempting to do with his “compromise” is the old Saul Alinsky divide-and-conquer strategy for all to see.

It doesn’t matter how many people may like it. America has always been about protecting the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority.

Obama believes if he can reach an ac-commodation with the Catholic Church leadership, he can effectively destroy the First Amendment’s religious liberty protec-tions. But the First Amendment nowhere mentions institutional churches. The

protections afforded in the Constitution are individual protections – protections for people like me and you who govern themselves according to their personal relationship with the God of the universe and what we believe he requires of us.

What Obama has done with this health-care power grab is, in my estimation, an impeachable offense.

I don’t want to hear from House Speaker John Boehner that “it will not stand.”

What I want to hear is what we’re going to do about a man sitting in the White House who is dishonoring and abrogating the Constitution.

I don’t want to hear Boehner tell the American people not to worry about this – and just leave it to him.

What I want to hear is when we’re marching on Washington by the millions.

I don’t want to hear the Catholic Church negotiating a statist solution that accom-modates its concerns.

What I want to hear is how we’re all go-ing to get together to force this tyrant from office and save America from going the way of other nations.

Listen to the arrogance exuding from Obama in his statement on this contro-versy: “As part of the health care reform law that I signed last year, all insurance plans are required to cover preventive care at no cost. That means free check-ups, free mammograms, immunizations and other basic services. We fought for this because it saves lives and it saves money – for families,

for businesses, for government, for everybody. That’s because it’s a lot cheaper to prevent an illness than to treat one.”

This is the heart of the problem with Obamacare. The federal gov-ernment is exceed-ing its constitu-

tional authority by establishing individual mandates and corporate mandates. There is no compromising with that kind of tyranny.

“We also accepted a recommenda-tion from the experts at the Institute of Medicine that when it comes to women, preventive care should include coverage of contraceptive services such as birth control. In addition to family planning, doctors often prescribe contraception as a way to reduce the risks of ovarian and other cancers, and treat a variety of different ail-ments,” Obama continued. “And we know that the overall cost of health care is lower when women have access to contraceptive services.”

Obama is not concerned with lower costs. He’s concerned with extending his power over all of us. Contraception is not an expensive thing. It’s cheap.

“Nearly 99 percent of all women have relied on contraception at some point in their lives – 99 percent. And yet, more than half of all women between the ages of 18 and 34 have struggled to afford it,” he continues. “So for all these reasons, we decided to follow the judgment of the na-tion’s leading medical experts and make sure that free preventive care includes access to free contraceptive care.”

It makes one wonder how the 99 percent have gotten along for all these years with-out “free” contraception. It doesn’t seem to have been a problem up until now. This is just another step toward command-and-control, centralized authority. Everybody has a stake in fighting back – not just the Catholic Church, which has often been too complacent is promoting the socialist agenda.

There’s no compromising with Obama on any of this.

The only acceptable solution is ending Obamacare 100 percent. Joseph Farah is founder, editor and CEO of WND and a nationally syndicated columnist with Creators Syndicate.

Obama’s Divide-And-Conquer Strategy

receive a $75 check (minimum of 5 new members).*

3. CRA Unit with the highest percentage of renewing members from January 1st to June 30th 2012 will receive a $50 check.*

* Providing that those Units do have regular meetings.

I look forward to your Unit/Club participating and helping to grow CRA membership and I also look forward to visiting your Unit (and possibly President Celeste Greig) to present you with the reward you have earned!

Paid for by Ed Royce for Congress #C-00200865

Named “Taxpayer Hero” by the

Citizens Against Government Waste

Anaheim • Brea • Buena Park • Chino Hills Diamond Bar • Fullerton

Hacienda Heights • La Habra La Habra Heights • Placentia

Rowland Heights • Walnut • Yorba Linda

MembershipFrom Page 1


CRA Presidential Endorsing Convention

April 20-22, 2012

Hacienda Hotel525 North Sepulveda Blvd. El Segundo, CA 90245

310-615-0015 - Haciendahotel.comRoom Rates $99 per night + tax. The hotel is located one mile south of LAX.

Overnight parking $8. Daily parking $4. Limited street parking. Free airport shuttle very 20 minutes

Convention dress code: Business/Professional attire

Members Only Members Only Non-Member “Early Bird” “Fiscal Conservative” and a la Carte By March 31 After April 1

Registration included included $35Friday Dinner included included $50Saturday Lunch included included $45Saturday Dinner included included $50Sunday Breakfast included included $40 Total $175 $195 $220

REGISTRATION FORM_________________________________Name

_____________________________________Address

_____________________________________City

_____________________________________State Zip

_____________________________________Telephone

❏ Check enclosed payable to “CRA”

❏ Charge my: ❏ Visa ❏ Mastercard

Card Number: ______________________________________ Exp. Date __________

Mail to: CRA • 14311 Riviera Drive • Huntington Beach CA 92647

Qty. Item Amount

__ “Early Bird” Package ($175) ______

__ “Fiscal Conservative” Pkg ($195) ______

A la Carte

__ Registration ($35) ______

__ Friday Dinner ($50) ______

__ Saturday Lunch ($45) ______

__ Saturday Dinner ($50) ______

__ Sunday Breakfast ($40) ______

Total ______

Hosted by: The South Bay Republican Assembly

Co-Chairs: Bill Schmidt

South Bay R.A. President

Sergio Picchio National Committeman and Past CRA President

Candidates, Great

Speakers, Workshops,

Debates, Vendors,

Entertainment, Silent

Auction and......

Surprises!

To recap, the voters were deceived; the project lacks sufficient private, public or

debt funding to complete even a requisite operating segment, as required under Proposition 1A; the Environmental Impact Report is incomplete; California is strug-gling with long term deficits and debt; the

Governor claims to need more taxes; our existing infrastructure is in dire need of extension and repair; and voters are suf-fering from buyer’s remorse. There ought to be a law - and there is.

Assemblywoman Diane Harkey represents the 73rd District including the communities of Aliso Viejo, Dana Point, Laguna Hills, Laguna Niguel, Oceanside, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano.

HarkeyFrom Page 7


CRA Local Unit ContactsUNIT NAME PRESIDENT PHONE EMAIL

ANAHEIM Steven Sarkis (714) 894-7635 [email protected]

ANTELOPE VALLEY Lew Stults (661) 948-7167 [email protected]

BAKERSFIELD Fred Porter (661) 327-0362 [email protected]

BERRESSA MILPITAS Ty Greaves (408) 929-2010 [email protected]

BREA-LA HABRA Paul Ruiz [email protected]

BUENA PARK Baron Night (714) 469-8623 [email protected]

CHATSWORTH NORTHRIDGE Gary Aminoff (310) 387-6900 [email protected]

CHINO VALLEY Cherie Pondoff (951) 333-4663 [email protected]

COLUSA COUNTY Owen Manor (916) 580-9438 [email protected]

COSUMNES Carl Brickey (916) 806-3015 [email protected]

CONTRA COSTA Marguerite Kauble (510) 758-2637 [email protected]

CORONA DEL MAR Dick Nichols (949) 644-7735 [email protected]

COSTA MESA Phil Morello (714) 434-1009 [email protected]

EAST SAN DIEGO COUNTY Sylvia Sullivan. (619) 328-9866 [email protected]

EAST SAN GABRIEL VALLEY Fred Chyr (626) 248-6127 [email protected]

EL DORADO La Veta Stelzmiller (530) 622-1358 [email protected]

EL SEGUNDO Julius Wilson (310) 322-4155 [email protected]

FOUNTAIN VALLEY John Briscoe (714) 531-8291 [email protected]

FRESNO COUNTY Tim Thiesen (559) 315-5244 [email protected]

FULLERTON Zonya Townsend (714) 525-9441 [email protected]

GARDEN GROVE Bert Ashland (714) 269-7531 [email protected]

GLENDALE BURBANK Sonny Sardo (818) 952-0131 [email protected]

GLENDORA Linda Boyd (626) 914-5850 [email protected]

GLENN COUNTY Steve Thompson (530) 868-5088 [email protected]

GREATER IRVINE Jeff Lalloway (949) 235-2656 [email protected]

GREATER PASADENA Walt Mix (626) 403-1792 [email protected]

GREATER SANTEE Frank Hilliker (619) 390-5698 [email protected]

GREATER SANTA CLARITA Brian Koegle (661) 373-4529 [email protected]

GREATER TULARE Paul Olson (559) 688-1682 [email protected]

HESPERIA William Muller (760) 244-9796 [email protected]

HUNTINGTON BEACH John Fugatt (714) 892-7777 [email protected]

KERN RIVER VALLEY Saul McGarity (760) 376-6393 [email protected]

KINGS COUNTY Steve Engbrecht (559) 410-7480 [email protected]

LADERA RANCH Donald Fremming (949) 360-4324 [email protected]

LAGUNA BEACH Kevin Muldoon (310) 850-0919 [email protected]

LA VERNE Darla Zayas (909) 599-9107 [email protected]

LONG BEACH Margherita Underhill (562) 900-0631 [email protected]

MODOC COUNTY Elmer Ferry (530) 233-4760 [email protected]

UNIT NAME PRESIDENT PHONE EMAIL

MID SAN FERNANDO VALLEY Dan Carasso (818) 786-1456 [email protected]

MURRIETA-TEMECULA Bob Kowell (951) 600-7370 [email protected]

NEVADA COUNTY Greg Marks (530) 265-0140 [email protected]

NEWPORT BEACH Kurt English (714) 875-2837 [email protected]

ORANGE-VILLA PARK Alexia Deligianni (714) 271-1036 [email protected]

PALOS VERDES PENINSULA Col. John Fer (310) 982-0560 [email protected]

PLACER COUNTY Aaron F. Park (916) 251-9628 [email protected]

PORTERVILLE AREA A.L. Lucketta (559) 784-PARA [email protected]

RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA Jennifer Beall (949) 589-7632 [email protected]

RIVERSIDE Ernie White (866) 546-6392 [email protected]

SACRAMENTO Tim Snipes (916) 968-6628 [email protected]

SADDLEBACK Dale Tyler (949) 360-1717 [email protected]

SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY Mike Reynolds (951) 532-3532 [email protected]

SAN DIEGO NORTH COUNTY Sally Cruver (760) 731-0745 [email protected]

SAN FRANCISCO Michael Denunzio (415) 391-9667 [email protected]

SAN JOAQUIN CO James Shoemaker (209) 333-1900 [email protected]

SAN LUIS OBISPO Bill Rosensteel (805) 773-0331 [email protected]

SAN MATEO COUNTY Martin Gufler (650) 697-1964 [email protected]

SANTA ANA Charles Hart (714) 606-6445 [email protected]

SANTA BARBARA Linda Foster (805) 570-3619 [email protected]

SANTA CLARA VALLEY Jack Davis (408) 445-9890 [email protected]

SANTA CLARITA VALLEY Wendy Albright (661) 200-5633 [email protected]

SEAL BEACH Judy Duvall (562) 431.9600 [email protected]

SHASTA COUNTY Peter Stiglich (530) 347-9276 [email protected]

SISKIYOU COUNTY Don Schweitzer (530) 398-4571 [email protected]

SOUTH BAY (LA) Bill Schmidt (310) 214-8319 [email protected]

SOUTHEAST KERN Jim Payne (661) 256-6543 [email protected]

SOUTH ORANGE COUNTY Craig Alexander (949) 636-1003 [email protected]

SOUTH PASADENA Sam Knowles (626) 799-6403 [email protected]

SOUTHERN SOLANO Norman Reece (707) 644-3875 [email protected]

STANISLAUS COUNTY Susan Dignan (209) 545-3216 [email protected]

SUTTER COUNTY Vaughn Minnix (530) 671-9465 [email protected]

TEHAMA COUNTY C Jerome Crow (530) 200-0091 [email protected]

TRI CITIES Mike Mc Gill (714) 373-0873 [email protected]

TUSTIN AREA Jay Peterson (714) 544-1456 [email protected]

VENTURA COUNTY Regina Risolio [email protected]

WEST VALLEY Earl De Vries (909) 947-5311 [email protected]

WESTCHESTER DEL REY Dr. Carl Davis (310) 670-1573 [email protected]

WESTMINSTER Cao Cuong (714) 658-5250 [email protected]


SINCE 1934, the California Republican Assembly – CRA – has been working to elect Republican candidates who stand unwaveringly for Republican principles.

As California’s oldest and most influential volunteer Republican organization, CRA’s endorsement is a coveted privilege for those candidates who meet our high standards — conservative, principled, electable and the overwhelm-ing choice of our membership.

When CRA endorses a candidate, we are committing volunteers, resources and our reputation. This is what President Reagan had to say about CRA:

“The best symbol of the grassroots worker I can think of is the California Republican Assembly ... CRA provides the nucleus of the Republican candidate’s volunteer work brigade.

I know from personal experience. It’s hard to imagine my campaigns being anywhere near as suc-cessful as they were without the dedication of CRA’s members. I urge you to join CRA today.”

Inalienable Rights: We believe that man’s “rights” flow from the Creator and the rights of life, liberty, and justice cannot be legitimately granted or rescinded by men.Judeo-Christian Foundation: We believe in the guiding force of moral law as expressed by the Judeo-Christian ethic and contained in the Holy Scriptures of these his-toric faiths.Self-Government: We believe that the only answer to the current moral decline that our nation now faces is a return to the beliefs and standards of morality which our founding fathers placed into the Constitution. We believe with the framers of that document when President Adams stated, “This Constitution will not work except with a religious people.” We understand that the concept of self-government begins with governing one’s self first, then family, community, state, and nation.Education: We believe in the rights of parents to a quality education for their children. We support parental choice to create competition among the schools. We must in-sure that no school or teachers union can compromise the education of our children or advance a particular political agenda at the expense of our future generation’s educations.Decentralized Government: We believe in the power of the individual over the power of the state. We believe that only small government truly serves the needs of the people.Taxes: We believe that the federal tax system is abusive to the American people while discouraging investment and growth. We believe in growth-oriented tax policies which would gradually eliminate punitive income taxes and move our tax system in the direction of use taxes and sales taxes only.Sanctity of Life: We believe that the preborn child is a hu-man being deserving the full protection of the law.National Defense: We believe in a strong and consistent national defense. We believe in victory over, and not ac-commodation with, tyranny in any form or philosophy.Free Enterprise: We believe in the free enterprise system as the best hope for men and women to fulfill their economic hopes and dreams. We know that the free market is the most efficient and the least costly system to deliver the highest quality goods and services at the lowest price to the consumer. We will support only those who support the free enterprise system through legislation to reduce or eliminate intrusive government intervention in the marketplace.Family: We believe that the traditional American family, defined as any persons related by blood, marriage of a man and a woman and/or adoption, is the cornerstone of our American society, and the government is duty bound to protect the integrity of the family unit through legislation and taxation policies.Right to Bear Arms: We believe in the unqualified right of our citizens to keep and bear arms without the intrusive hand of government.Victims’ Rights: We believe in the concept of victims’ rights over the rights of any criminal. We support a system of restitution as a deterrent to crime and recidivism.Term Limitation: We believe that public service is a privi-lege. We support term limits for public officials, not as an ideal but as a necessity to dissuade career politicians. It is the people who should rule, not an elite with little accountability.National Sovereignty: We believe in an America first pro-gram in which Government’s first concern is the welfare and protection of the American people. We support political leaders who will adopt policies that create fair and com-petitive trade.

What We Believe

The California Republican AssemblyCarrying the Republican Banner for over 75 years. Why not join us?

CRA Membership Application

❏ YES! I wish to be a proud member of the CRA. I’ve enclosed annual dues in the amount of $_________.

❏ Please have someone contact me at this time.

❏ YES! I wish to be a member of the CRA Grizzlies. I’ve enclosed annual dues in the amount of $1,000 per person.

Name _______________________________________________________________________

Address ______________________________________________________________________

City/State/Zip __________________________________________________________________

Home Phone ________________________________ Fax Number______________________________________

E-mail Address _________________________________________

I understand that in order to become and remain a member of the CRA, I must be a registered Republican, keep my dues current, and uphold the principles and objectives of the CRA.

Signature of Applicant _________________________________________________________________________

Mail completed application and check made payable to “CRA” to: CRA Membership Secretary H 401 Bremerton Ct H Roseville, CA 95661-5106

Join the CRA Today!At-Large-Membership dues are $25 per year For One Person and $15 for each additional household member.

EXAMPLES:

Husband & Wife ..........................$40.00

CRA GrizzliesAre you a Grizzly? Help CRA impact elections and make a difference in this state.

Become a Grizzly today!

The $1,000 annual membership gives you many benefits...

• Free convention registration and meals• Access to special CRA events• Recognition at the convention and more...

www.DianeHarkey.com

California State Assembly

HarkeyDiane

PARKLinda

assembLy 2012Citizen Legislator

Accessible H AccOUNTAble H eXPeRieNceDASSEMBLY 2012ASSEMBLY 2012ACCESSIBLE ACCOUNTABLE EXPERIENCED

LINDA PARKCONTACT

INFORMATION

LINDA PARK for ASSEMBLY 2012 ID #1344257801 Riverside Ave., Ste 100, Roseville, CA 95678Phone: 916.258.5476 [email protected]

California Republican Jan-Feb 2012

Documents

national popular vote

series of tax increases

night tax

tax reform

higher taxes

registration form

endorsement vote

year period