Writing Shotgun

LB COUNCILMEMBERS REYES URANGA & LOWENTHAL WON’T RUN FOR ASSEMBLY IF PROP 93 GIVES KARNETTE ANOTHER SHOT

Dave WielengaWed. January 16
 

Long Beach City Council members Tonia Reyes Uranga and Bonnie Lowenthal want to run for the California State Assembly’s 54th District seat this year. Before they actually go through with it, however, they’ve got to lose an election.

The candidacies of Lowenthal and Reyes Uranga hinge on the defeat of Proposition 93, the Term-Limit-Tweaking initiative on the Feb. 5 ballot. Ironically, it’s a measure they both support.

If Prop 93 passes, about-to-be-termed-out 54th District incumbent Assemblywoman Betty Karnette will be free to run again. Karnette leaves no doubt that, given the chance, she will run for one more term. “I feel I represent the people well,” she says, “and I’d like to remain in office.”

Lowenthal and Reyes Uranga — who like Karnette, are Democrats — are equally adamant that they will not run against her.

“If Proposition 93 passes, I will be behind Betty Karnette,” says Lowenthal, who represents the First District on the City Council. “She has been a strong advocate for this area.”

“Betty has indicated she would only run for one more term,” notes Reyes Uranga, the Seventh District council member. “If that’s the case, I’d wait until 2010. Why push it if she’s only going to run for one more term?”

Proposition 93 would reduce the number of years state legislators can serve from 14 years to 12 years — total, in both houses — as opposed to per-house limits of six years in the Assembly and eight in the Senate. Proponents suggest the change would eliminate the counterproductive scramble for political survival among legislators who often spend their time in one house angling for seats in the opposite house so as to extend their careers.

But the measure offers a kinda-creepy one-time advantage to current incumbents — most notably, its major advocates, Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez and Senate president pro Tem Don Perata — who are permitted a full 12 years in whichever house they now occupy, no matter how many years they’ve already been in office.

Karnette confirms she will run for only one more two-year term, even though Proposition 93 would permit her two more Assembly terms.

“I feel pretty good about the people re-electing me,” she says, her voice still thickly flavored with a Kentucky accent some 55 years after she moved to Long Beach from her birthplace of Paducah. “Each time I run I get more votes. But no matter what happens with Prop 93, I am running for State Superintendent of Public Instruction in 2010.”

That would seem to fold nicely into the political timetables of Reyes Uranga and Lowenthal, inasmuch as they face City Council term limits in 2010.

“We’ll just do it again in two years,” says Reyes Uranga.

Lowenthal, however, won’t commit to an assembly run in 2010.

“I can’t predict what I am going to do two years from now,” she maintains.

As much as both women say they want Prop 93 to pass — and we’ll take them at their words on that — Lowenthal and Reyes Uranga are well prepared in case it doesn’t. They’ve filed paperwork, opened campaign accounts and accepted thousands of dollars in contributions for an assembly run.

As of June 30, 2007 (the last reports available from the California Secretary of State), Lowenthal had amassed $108,130.58, while Reyes Uranga had banked $60,953.85 and a third candidate, Jim Brandt — another Long Beach Democrat — had $3,026.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

RELATED

COMMENTS

  1. 1

    Right on the mark, Mr. Weilenga, “… kinda’ creepy …” nails precisely the most smelly aspect of an otherwise tepid heap of legislation. Proposition 93 fails by merely tinkering. Term limits — love ‘em or hate ‘em — are popular with voters precisely because power grabbing is so unattractive a trait. The current Speaker and any other lawmaker worth their salt, oughta be courageous enough as to draft legislation that they feel GOES TO THE HEART of policy failures. Term limits is a policy failure. It leaves our people serviced by lawmakers who have collectively far less working knowledge of the Legislature, their Chamber and the lawmaking process itself than the staff, the media, the lobbyists, the corporations and everyone. Again, term limits is a policy failure. But TINKERING with a policy that is merely popular but failing the people is not enough. And worse yet is the KINDA CREEPY powergrab, allowing several dozen Californians the chance to get not THREE but suddenly SIX terms in a single chamber? The Speaker would rival the Governor~! Naw, that’s not a fair or effective way to attack a failed policy. I URGE A NO VOTE on state ballot measure PROPOSITION 93.

    [report]

    Posted By Bill Orton on January 17th, 2008 at 10:08 am

     

  2. 2

    Thanks Mr. Orton. I enjoyed everything about your passionate post except the way you spelled my last name. Cheers!

    [report]

    Posted By Dave Wielenga on January 17th, 2008 at 10:34 am

     

  3. 3

    If anybody has any information about Prop 93, please e-mail me at Dave@thedistrictweekly.com

    [report]

    Posted By Dave Wielenga on January 17th, 2008 at 1:27 pm

     

  4. 4

    How do we know whether Betty has TRULY served the community well when she has never been challenged by a solid opponent? The Democratic Party has played the “Clinton entitlement game” with their assembly and state senate seats, and the gerry-mandering of the districts have never given either party to challenge people in elections.

    I think that is a solid candidate on the Republican side comes forward and truly makes Betty talk about the issues she’s ignored, like the state budget, the increasing illegal alien entitlements and the increased air pollution at the ports, she’d have to hide from the debates or vow to change her pandering ways.

    [report]

    Posted By John Stammreich on January 18th, 2008 at 8:40 pm

     

  5. 5

    It may be convenient for Mr. Stammreich to omit in his slam of state Assemblywoman Betty Karnette, but she was narrowly defeated in the 1994 general election (less than 600 votes), by a man who got $125,000 in tobacco money on the last weekend of the election and used that to pay for 300,000 pieces of campaign mail that otherwise would have died for lack of postage. That loss — again, less than 600 votes — coming in the Newt-Gingrich-Contract-With-America-Angry-White-Males election did take Betty out of office, but voters seemed to like her well enough to nominate her for an open Senate seat that had been held for 20 years by a Republican and, despite her opponent spending more than a million dollars against her and more mud being thrown then anyone cares to remember, Betty won overwhelmingly. People like her. She has dignity and class. She’s n-i-c-e. And she also happens to be in synch with the residents of her district. And, on your “issues,” it’s worth noting that Betty has caught a LOT of guff within her party for consistently voting to deny drivers licenses to undocumented residents. She’s not hiding.

    [report]

    Posted By Bill Orton on February 6th, 2008 at 12:10 pm

     

  6. 6

    Fast-forward to today, Mr. Orton. Do you think the residents of Long Beach, San Pedro and Palos verdes can afford the mortgage deduction “loophole” patch that Karnette is supporting? Who do you think is going to see the biggest drop in home-ownership? White couples, or minority couples?

    Who’s looking out for these constituents? Who does the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association endorse for the 54th AD?

    Gabriella Holt - that’s who!

    [report]

    Posted By John Stammreich on March 18th, 2008 at 11:51 pm

     

Leave a Reply

DISCLAIMER: We do not screen comments in advance, but we do reserve the right to delete or edit any we find inappropriate. Please note that commenters are free to use whatever name(s) they choose.

 

© 2007-2008 Seven Days Publishing LLC.