Very unfortunate mistake in the first word of the fourth-to-last paragraph. The sentence currently reads "Evans recently released a video where she rattles off the "bullshit" charges coming from Evans in a field dotted with cow plop."
The first word should be "Hopkins," the maker of that cow-plop filled video. A correction would be good.
Thanks for this informative look at how the Republicans, who have vowed to eliminate the CFPB, managed to persuade Democrats to join them in voting for this bill that was so enthusiastically supported by the National Auto Dealers Association but opposed by consumer advocacy groups.
It is doubly distressing that both of our members of Congress from the north bay voted with the Republicans on this very bad bill.
Jared Huffman’s response in explaining why he voted with the Republicans to cancel the CFPB’s regulatory guidance is particularly disturbing: “I heard from them (the auto dealers in his district) that it could drive up the cost of car loans and make them less accessible to some of those people—I felt like I had to listen to that side of the argument."
There is absolutely no evidence to support the statement that making sure that minorities don’t pay higher auto loan rates than white people do would drive up the cost of car loans; in fact, that’s a nonsensical statement. But it’s definitely an NADA talking-point that both Huffman and Mike Thompson seem to have heard loud and clear.
I’m normally a big fan of Jonah Raskin’s writing, so I’m doubly disappointed in this article.
I’m really confused about what his message is in this very long piece. What’s the focus? Is this a piece about Hunter S. Thompson or about why Hunter S. Thompson would be at home in the 5th District? Is it a piece about a journalist for another newspaper who reminds Raskin of Hunter S. Thompson? What does “Fear and Loathing” Thompson have to do with the 5th District Supervisor race, anyway?
At one point it sounds like a piece attempting to equate Hopkins with Bernie Sanders even though Hopkins has the backing of the big business organization, Sonoma County Alliance, and resource-extraction interests, none of whom appear to be supporting Bernie Sanders this year. Or maybe it’s a piece attempting to tag Noreen Evans as a carpetbagger for moving into the district last year, without mentioning that Hopkins *also* just moved into the district last year, leaving her former home in the 4th District so she would be eligible to run in the 5th.
I hope that any future North Bay Bohemian pieces about the very crucial 5th District Supervisor race will ramble less and focus more on substance. Thank you in advance!
Further focus for a real water solution is to immediately stop building cities and subdivisions where there isn't sufficient water available to serve the new residents. California MUST stop sending water away from its source. Californians must learn to live with the water that is available on site. We've seen what happens when water is sent hundreds of miles away, depriving the indigenous wildlife and environment of the water they need. We have to banish the idea that we can build communities without regard for where the water is going to come from.
This is a very informative round-up of California politicians who are being put into office and kept in office with the help of campaign contributions from the fossil fuel lobby.
Although he’s not mentioned in this article, 10th District Assembly member Marc Levine has also benefited from donations from fracking proponents. Last month he sent out a nice-looking flyer touting his anti-fracking position. Looks good on paper, but there’s one big problem: that flyer, costing $40,000, was paid for by Levine’s ballot initiative committee, a committee that is funded almost entirely by John Scully, the managing director of a private investment firm that includes in its portfolio a Texas company that is significantly involved in oil shale fracking. In addition to making personal campaign contributions to Assemblymember Levine, Scully has contributed $102,000 to that ballot initiative committee. Last month, Scully told the Press Democrat that he is “absolutely for” fracking, although he’s opposed to it in northern California.
Levine appears to have used funds provided by a fracking advocate to produce and mail a flyer that says he opposes fracking, even though he voted to continue it last year. This is double-dealing at its most insidious!
2016 Metro Newspapers. All rights reserved.
Website powered by Foundation