Mercury News claimed CA ballot initiative has "bipartisan support," cited one donor whose "main interest is GOP power"
The November 11 "Capitol Beat" column in the San Jose Mercury News on donors supporting a controversial proposal to award California's electoral votes by congressional district featured the headline: "Election initiative reveals bipartisan support: Election initiative enjoys surprising bipartisan support." Referring to the funding for the initiative provided by a supporter of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani's (R) presidential campaign, the article asserted that "[t]he Rudy Giuliani California conspiracy theory took a hit last week when supporters of an electoral college initiative revealed their list of donors." The article reported that the list "included those who support other Republican presidential candidates and even -- gasp -- Democratic hopefuls." However, as evidence of this purported "bipartisan support," the article named only a single donor who has contributed to both Democratic and Republican presidential candidates - Robert Day, chairman of the Trust Company of the West, who "has supported [Sen. John] McCain [R-AZ] and two Democrats: U.S. Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York and Christopher Dodd of Connecticut." But, the article went on to report, "[T]hough Day has contributed $4,600 to Clinton and $2,300 to Dodd, his main interest is GOP power: He's given $48,000 to GOP causes this year, including $25,000 to the RNC."
Further, while highlighting the initiative's purported "bipartisan support," the article did not note, as Media Matters for America has documented, that the initiative was proposed by Thomas Hiltachk, a lawyer with ties to the California Republican Party, and was endorsed by the party's state convention. In September, Hiltachk resigned from the committee supporting the initiative. In October, the effort to pass the initiative was reportedly revived by Republican political strategists Ed Rollins and Dave Gilliard and former Giuliani deputy campaign manager Ann Dunsmore.
From the November 11 edition of The Mercury News' "Capitol Beat":
Capitol Beat: Election initiative reveals bipartisan support
ELECTION INITIATIVE ENJOYS SURPRISING BIPARTISAN SUPPORT
The Rudy Giuliani California conspiracy theory took a hit last week when supporters of an electoral college initiative revealed their list of donors.
Democrats have insisted that the initiative's supporters are nothing more than Giuliani toadies trying to steal the election by changing the way the state awards its electoral votes.
But the list of donors included those who support other Republican presidential candidates and even -- gasp -- Democratic hopefuls.
Former Univision chairman and CEO Jerry Perenchio, who contributed $50,000, supports Sen. John McCain; Newport Beach investor Duane Roberts, who also gave $50,000 to the effort, has contributed money to McCain, Giuliani and ex-Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
Silicon Valley venture capitalist E. Floyd Kvamme, who gave $50,000, has contributed to Giuliani.
And Robert Day, chairman of Trust Company of the West, who gave $45,000 to the initiative, has supported McCain and two Democrats: U.S. Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York and Christopher Dodd of Connecticut.
"It's pretty obvious we have a broad base of support," said Dave Gilliard, the spokesman for the ballot proposal. "The Democrats' argument (that the initiative was hatched and run by Giuliani) doesn't hold any water."
But the greater point, says Chris Lehane, Democratic strategist for the opposition campaign, is that the contributors want to give Republicans an advantage in the presidential campaign -- regardless of who their nominee is -- by dividing California's electoral college votes by congressional district. That would guarantee the GOP nominee up to 20 electoral votes he wouldn't get under the current winner-take-all system.
A look at past political contributions shows broader ambitions on the part of the initiative backers. Perenchio, for instance, has contributed $79,200 this year to various Republican causes, including $53,500 to the National Republican Congressional Committee and the Republican National Committee. Over the years, he's given millions to other GOP causes, including $9 million to the GOP-linked Progress for America since 2004.
And though Day has contributed $4,600 to Clinton and $2,300 to Dodd, his main interest is GOP power: He's given $48,000 to GOP causes this year, including $25,000 to the RNC.














Is the San Jose Mercury News really so important that it needs its own thread?
any comment on the issue?
There is nothing new to comment. It is not bipartisan, what more can I say? If it was picked up by MSNBC or CNN I would be concerned. Or the LA Times.
Ok Sue,
Maybe this website can start focusing on cooking issues. Would that make you happy?
If the cooking issue had to do with Conservative misinformation yes.
then this is not conservative misinformation?
How is cooking conservative misinformation?
this, as in the story highlighted here. is it conservative misinformation?
Sue
The story has been used to claim there is a bipartisan effort, also it could be leaked to the national press.
The wire services pick up these stories, that's why it's important. It's also an astounding lie.
If this ballot initiative wins-- and it might-- and upheld in the courts-it will be, the judges are all Republicans-- then the Democrats will never win another presidential election.
Ever.
<!-- new --> The wire services pick up these stories, that's why it's important. It's also an astounding lie.
Good point. I neglected to think about AP running with the story as it being true. However that never stopped AP before.
The largest political party in the nation would never win another presidential election? You have to be kidding!!!
"Is the San Jose Mercury News really so important that it needs its own thread? "
In case you haven't noticed, this is the age of the internet. News items from what have previously been insignificant news sources on the national stage can now be linked by every Tom, Dick and Harry via the internet.
Major news networks have utilized material from local affiliates for years. Today, the same thing happens on the internet.
this is a republican driven issue. it will benefit them and them alone.
sure and the evil Republicans are controlling the Mercury News, got it.
does this idea not benefit the republicans?
What does not benefit Republicans?
then your answer is yes.
Of course it is yes, duh.
then why your sarcastic comment about the republicans controlling the mercury news?
It was not sarcastic. If it were sarcastic I would say it was.
"evil republicans". i saw sarcasm. but we can let others judge.
Lets be real, the Republican party is evil. That may be too strong but it has divided America , got us into a war and created a budget defecit that our great great great grandkids will be suffering to pay. I see no sarcasm in that statement.
but your statement was "sure and the evil republicans are controlling the mercury news, got it."
exactly do you not get that?
And please tell Sue that KO named himself a runner-up for Wosrt Person in the World for misstating a statistic regarding the percentage of American military veterans that are homeless.
What really does this have to do with the thread?
Sue, I attempted to post this remark below where someone was kidding you about Keith Olbermann. For some reason my post appeared here.
Your statement is not sarcastic about them being evil
Well Doris I have had this conversation before, I also feel both partys are part of an evil two party system that is destroying America but that is probably another topic and thread.
Media Matters can sniff out a hack right-wing reporter at 500 yards.
I think MMFA can do it at 50 yds. They have done an outstanding jon nationally lately, even with news sources less known. Kudos MMFA!!!
"Yeah no this is a bipartisan bill with bipartisan support, this one time a donor helped an old Democratic lady across the street."
The splitting of electoral votes is an interesting idea and may be a good solution/compromise between electoral college advocates and popular-vote-only advocates, but it needs to happen in every state or no states.
Speaking as a Calfornian, the only question that needs to be asked of the supporters of this scam is this;
Wanna try it in Texas first?
The GOP will use any dirty trick in 08. Scary .
I am sure we will see another Willie Horton in 08
What we're going to see is good, old fashioned race-baiting tactics, only this time, it will be ethnicity, rather than color.
If they didn't have dirty tricks and they did fight fair, they simply wouldn't win.
Exactly, HBL. I'd like to see them try that in a hard-core Republican state - then we'll see how voters react - and see the reaction of the Republicans.
The real issue with this measure is that the Republicans can't win here in CA (esp. in the Bay Area, thank God!), so they have to change the rules to benefit themselves. It's nothing new - just a new packaging of the "we can't win with the current rules, so we'll change them" meme.
Agreed do it everywhere, or don't do it. Hey 'Pub's... would you cry foul if the dem's were puching this kind of inititaive in Texas? If you would then you have no business doing it in CA. Hopefully CA has enoughDem's that the ballot inititaive will be defeated anyway, but it's a terrifying thought. The country, electorally is split sofine right now, splitting up california woulda guarentee republicn rule for a generation. Despicable tactics.a
In Republiconspeak bipartisan means regular right wingers and extreme far right wingers.
You mean Ann Coulter and Tim Russert?
Actually, Sue, I would be reluctant to include Ann Coulter in any equation that necessarily contemplated the inclusion of human beings. ;>)
What does Olbermann have to say about this?
I doubt anything since it has nothing to do with FOX Noise.
Just thought I'd say Olbermann before you did, unless you have made a pledge to never type his name again.
I just like the fact that you began this thread by saying that there was no reason to comment, and then a dozen posts later, you're still commenting.
Because what else were we going to say? No one here I do not believe agrees with the Republicans or the premise that this is bipartisan.
So you either enjoy typing to see yourself type or you've got a case of the trollies today?
Neither I was asked questions and interacted with others. Just like now.
Because what else were we going to say?- SueEld
Sue,are you saying that the most compelling validation you can give for your comments is that you didn't have anything better? Is this a school assignment that requires you to post a certain number a day?