Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association Cites DeMaio’s Experience in Balancing Budgets, Reforming Pensions, & Holding Government Accountable
Carl DeMaio accepting the endorsement of HJTA, alongside Richard Rider and TJ Zane
San Diego – As millions of taxpayers rush to file their taxes on time, California’s leading taxpayer group today endorsed Carl DeMaio for Congress as a way to make sure those taxes are efficiently and accountably spent.
“Carl DeMaio was the driving force behind reforming San Diego City Hall and saving this city from bankruptcy,” said Jon Coupal who heads the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. “From his success with the Pension Reform Initiative to his expertise on how to uncover wasteful spending in government budgets, DeMaio is a proven reformer with a stellar national reputation for getting results for taxpayers,” noted Coupal.
HJTA is considered the state’s most respected – and effective – taxpayer watchdog group, and has partnered with DeMaio in the past on a number of his reforms.
During his time on the San Diego City Council, DeMaio effectively led the way on many fiscal and government reforms, including putting an end to pension spiking, opening city services up to competitive bidding, cutting red tape on small businesses, and leading the campaign that defeated the largest tax increase in the history of San Diego.
“In Congress, Carl DeMaio will shift reform of wasteful spending into high gear,” Coupal added.
“I’m thrilled to have the endorsement of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association and I look forward to advancing reforms to eliminate wasteful spending with their help,” said DeMaio.
DeMaio carried the 52nd District with 58% of the vote in 2012 in his race for Mayor, whereas Scott Peters won the seat by less than 2 points. To learn more about Carl DeMaio and his campaign for Congress, visit carldemaio.com
Comments 27
Why won’t Carl DeMaio debate Kirk Jorgensen?
Why has the RPSDC refused to sponsor such an event?
Why has Roger Hedgecock refused to have Jorgensen on his program?
Why has the UT refused numerous requests for op-Eds and commentary regarding the 52CD CA?
What are they so afraid of?
Nevermind…don’t answer that! It’s pretty obvious.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zinw8lunN2I
re: Founding Father’s questions…all good ones that will remain unanswered by the GOP apparently..
I have read that the GOP wants only team players on their team and Carl DeMaio is certainy a team player. There is absolutely nothing on his website that states he will honor and adhere to the constitition. Nothing.
I fear that ‘Rep DeMaio’ would stand with John Boehner and McConnell rather than Ted Cruz and Mike Lee
I voted for Carl for Mayor. I thought he would be a good mayor and he promised me, as Mayor, he would disconnect San Diego from ICLEI (a foreign global org. aka Agenda 21 aka Wildlands Project aka Global Governance) . I do not hear him making such promises about disconnecting America from ICLEI .
It seems that the GOP and the Democrats are vying for leadership on the Titanic. Pres Obama is doing an awesome job at his promise back in 2008 – to fundamentally transform America .
Is it the agenda of the Republicans in Congress to slow Obama’s transformation down enough so they will be in power when this ‘transition into global governance’ – takes place?
Inquiring minds want to know.
“I fear that ‘Rep DeMaio’ would stand with John Boehner and McConnell rather than Ted Cruz and Mike Lee ”
Baseless conjecture. Two words debunk that theory: Prop D
Core values and money in the 52nd Congressional District
http://sdrostra.com/?p=37963
I actually spoke with Jon Coupal when I called to resign from HJTA because of their endorsement of DeMaio for Mayor in 2012. He didn’t even want to discuss the fiscal impact of what he dismissed as “social issues,” like the estimated hundreds of billions – even trillions – of dollars in lost tax revenues and productivity due to the killing of over 50 million babies (producers and consumers) through abortion since Roe v Wade.
And NOW Coupal is knowingly endorsing DeMaio, a candidate who wants to continue that loss. If he and the HJTA refuse to see the whole picture, that endorsement is worse than meaningless.
To quote the following article (http://fundamentalerror.com/economictruth.html)
“You see, the simple, cold, hard fact is that millions of abortions also equals millions of (missing) consumers not consuming, millions of (missing) taxpayers not paying taxes, millions of (missing) workers not producing new goods and material wealth, and all of that stuff, plus it also royally screwed up the core mathematics behind all insurances, pensions, securities, entitlement programs (Social Security, etc.), and all of that stuff.”
THIS is just one reason why no one should be supporting DeMaio.
Lets just go out in the open and admit it, most Jorgensen supporters are angry with DeMaio offer the subject of marriage. He’ll never pass their litmus test, but neither would the now 40% of Republicans that support same-sex marriage.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/support-for-same-sex-marriage-hits-new-high-half-say-constitution-guarantees-right/2014/03/04/f737e87e-a3e5-11e3-a5fa-55f0c77bf39c_story.html?hpid=z4
Kirk is a great leader with a distinguished career, but the social conservatism of the 80’s and 90’s paired with the overt national defense hawkishness of GWB just doesn’t play well with today’s GOP and electorate.
Lets try for some unity on Wednesday June 4th. I look forward to flipping the seat.
UnionBuster, your comment is akin to someone calling anyone who opposes Obama’s policies a racist. I’m sorry, but that’s just ridiculous. DeMaio supports abortion by calling it “choice.” That is undisputed.
Besides that, it is a plain lie that 40% of Republicans support genderless “marriage.” The only poll that counts is the one at the ballot box, and I don’t see a whole lot of Republicans actually voting for candidates that do support that. Besides that, if I’m not mistaken, the Republican Party voted to keep its pro-life, pro-family, and pro-Second Amendment planks in its platform at the last convention. I think that still counts for something. Why would anyone support a so-called “Republican” candidate who so clearly disrespects the platform of the party he supposedly represents.
Furthermore, why on Earth would you associate Kirk Jorgensen with “the overt hawkishness of GWB?” Are you painting every veteran candidate with that broad brush? That’s outrageous. We need more veterans in Congress, men and women who have risked their lives to serve this country, because THEY are the ones who know the true horrors of war, what it’s like to live as a family on a military salary, and what it’s like for returning veterans.
You’re comment also reflects an attitude that I find particularly reprehensible: that popularity is more important than character. To that I simply say “No.” I will always choose to vote for the person I know has exhibited in his life the greatest character, and it isn’t DeMaio, but is Kirk Jorgensen.
No UB…Let’s not…CD is simply a weak Republican, with a lot of baggage, forced to re-package himself every election cycle…People are not seeing the “new” in the “New Generation.” It is quite “Mozilla-ite”” for one to assume people’s rejection of CD or support for KJ is fueled solely on one issue.
The real issue is that the more people discover about KJ, the more they like. The more people learn of CD, the less they like…Its a geometric progression that is NOT in the endorsee’s or RPSDC’s favor.
I understand DeMaio not wanting to debate a Republican opponent and I understand the Republican Party wanting to coalesce around one candidate. However, what FF says about Roger Hedgecock and the UT, if true, is simply wrong. The media has an obligation that goes well beyond helping one candidate get elected. I would think FF’s claim, again if true, would concern even the strongest of DeMaio supporters.
Hypocrisy, I’m not sure I actually do understand why Carl won’t agree to a debate with Scott and Kirk. What I do know for certain is that people would walk away from that broadcast knowing who it is they will be voting for. Is he really that afraid he would lose such a debate? It’s like FF said, the more people learn about Kirk, the more they like him. The more they see of Carl, the less they like him. Could that possibly be why he won’t debate?
The funny thing about the UT refusing to run articles or editorials about Kirk is that the more articles they run about Carl, the more they showcase how strongly people oppose him. These articles have given people the opportunity to say what they really think about him in the comments, the vast majority of which are very negative, mainly about people’s experience with him as a Councilmember and as a candidate for Mayor.
It’s simply refreshing to see a statesman like Kirk make the commitment to continue his service to this country in the House of Representatives. THIS is the person we want representing the 52nd CD.
HQ,
Sadly, believe it! Hedgecock not only has not had KJ on, he has refused to entertain the idea, and is said to have out right rejected him. He just came out yesterday with a canned (same wording on CD’s site) endorsement of CD.
WRT the UT- At least two iterations, op-eds and commentary have been presented to the editorial board regarding 52CD race and then rejected out right with NO explaination of why. Understandably because it is said Papa Doug reviews ALL editorial content…the same Papa Doug that was in on the secret cabal in Oct “kingmaking” CD and KF for their respective annointments.
Some one mentioned in another Rostra comment they felt the increased support for KJ was simply a rejection to CD. I have observed it is way more about a rejection and revulsion to the current RPSDC construct and the way they finagled and “Tammaty-Halled” the endorsement process, then have been making lame and incoherent excuses since then on why CD got preferential treatment and the concerted culmination of the RPSDC leadership, the UT, and select business interests attempting to silence and marginalize KJ.
This is a very difficult reality for them to overcome..they look both unjust and weak, thus the explosion of supporters for KJ.
They have failed thus far!
This is why so many voters are leaving the Republican Party and the RPSDC in particular, because the Party no longer stands up for its own core values and because of the poor decisions blustered through by their leadership who would rather make back-room political deals than stand on principle.
How many voters will it take leaving the party and re-registering as Decline to State for the RPSDC to realize they need to stand up for the values they SAY they support and stop endorsing candidates who do not support those values as expressed in the Party Platform? Why do you think the number of DTS voters keep rising?
Karen,
This is what we can expect from the “New Generation”..villify Vets because they aren’t “your guy”…
Ole’ UB is a bit conflated…they just endorsed a Vet “Larry Wilske”..so where the “the overt national defense hawkishness of GWB” rhetoric is just a weak attempt to marginalize KJ.
Whatever they try to marginalize KJ with, they will marginalize Wilske…they probably didn’t think that one through…
They’re desperate and grabbing at what ever narrative they think will get their guy across the finish line…this is what happens when you place political pragmatism over moral and principled conviction..
Karen,
DeMaio won’t debate because he doesn’t need to in order to win and winning should be his primary motivation. The same is not true (or at least shouldn’t be) for the UT and Hedgecock.
” Brian Brady says:Baseless conjecture. Two words debunk that theory: Prop D
regarding my comment-.“I fear that ‘Rep DeMaio’ would stand with John Boehner and McConnell rather than Ted Cruz and Mike Lee ”.
———————–
Brian –
I now realize that using the phrase ‘I fear…” was inappropriate.
I should have used “I am concerned…” instead. but my point remains the same.
But please enlighten me on how ‘Prop D’ proves my opinion is baseless conjecture?
I also hear CD is part of the new generation of GOP leaders. So, does that mean that CD is on board with the GOP global governance agenda?
Republican president G Bush signed Agenda 21 into a soft law that has been implemented under the radar ever since by both Republicans and Democrats.
I imagine that could be why CD is not talking about restoring our constitution like Kirk Jorgensen has been.
They are two different Republicans. I hope and pray that enough voters recognize the difference and elect Kirk Jorgensen to help halt the GOP global agenda.
“But please enlighten me on how ‘Prop D’ proves my opinion is baseless conjecture? ”
Carl has never been a get along to go along guy; Prop D illustrates that. The members with whom he most closely identifies are Massie and Amash, members who voted AGAINST Boehner as Speaker. To speculate that he would buddy up to Boehner ignores fact and history.
“I imagine that could be why CD is not talking about restoring our constitution like Kirk Jorgensen has been. They are two different Republicans.”
That’s just not true. Carl; showed a (marginally) better understanding of the Constitution & Bill of Rights than Jorgensen did leading up to the endorsement. The two men communicated to me, positions which are almost identical on the war on drugs (a waste of money) & same sex marriage (best left to the States). They hold identical positions on spending and the Second Amendment.
…unless one (or both) of them lied to me to get the RPSDC endorsement. I doubt they did.
Both are good men; I’d be thrilled if either of them were in Congress and ecstatic if both made it to November.
1st and most important, I want to say that since the S.D. Republican Committee endorsed Pamela Bensoussen over Larry Breitfelder for Chula Vista City Council race in 2012, all their endorsements should be suspect.
It should be common knowledge that Pamela was honored at an ICLEI event a couple years ago for being one of their leading advocates . You cannot serve 2 masters well. It looks like to me, Pamela is prioritizing ICLEI (a foreign global org.) over our constitution. No one is talking about that and why not ?.
Re: your comment…”The members with whom CD most closely identifies are Massie and Amash…”
I hear the left demonizing Ted Cruz and Mike Lee and hear little about Massie and Amash. That says a lot to me.
also
I read that ‘Right to Life’ withdrew their support of Amash in 2012, citing an inconsistent voting record
Interesting.
I believe that Kirk Jorgensen is our choice if we want to stop this global governance track America is now on.
“I believe that Kirk Jorgensen is our choice if we want to stop this global governance track America is now on.”
He’s a good man whom I like and respect (a lot). Any one of the three Republicans running would make excellent Representatives; we’re lucky this year. Absent DeMaio’s position on Roe v Wade though, their views are very similar (and quite good, including the threats to property rights).
Lee Sandvick writes, “1st and most important, I want to say that since the S.D. Republican Committee endorsed Pamela Bensoussen over Larry Breitfelder for Chula Vista City Council race in 2012…”
That is FALSE, as in INCORRECT. The Republican Party cannot endorse or utilize member communications to support a Democrat running for office.
Bensoussan was not endorsed by the Republican Party, nor was she considered, nor did she seek the party’s support.
re: “1st and most important, I want to say that since the S.D. Republican Committee endorsed Pamela Bensoussen over Larry Breitfelder for Chula Vista City Council race in 2012…”
as to where I got my information – back in 2012, I was at a Republican meeting talking with 3 Republican women committee members. They are the ones who told me that the Republican group had endorsed Pamela Bensoussen. I was shocked. I asked them if they knew about Pamela’s affliation with ICLEI. They did not.
However, it appears there was no official endorsement for Pamela Bensoussen. I stand corrected.
To be very clear, there was no official or unofficial endorsement of her.
We appreciate the correction.
Back in 2010, three guys I ran into told me they read something on the internet about chemtrails, which I’ve been repeating ever since. I stand corrected.
It was the Lincoln Club, not the Republican Party, that endorsed Bensoussan in 2012. I can understand getting the two organizations confused.
We can understand getting the two organizations confused philosophically on a number of issues. But, only one is non-partisan and can endorse regardless of party (and has in a few instances).
Or, it could be that Bensoussen is being confused with Bensoussan, because they are two different people.
Or, it could be a refusal to spell Pamela’s last name correctly simply because she is a Democrat. Sad.
After all, the Lincoln Club also endorsed Tony Jung for reelection one year.
yikes misspelling. I apologize to the other Pamela.
below is a link to the announcement for Pamela honored by ICLEI
http://www.icleiusa.org/news/press-room/press-releases/chula-vista-councilmember-pamela-bensoussan-honored-in-washington-d.c.-for-important-achievements-in-sustainability-and-the-environment
the link to the promo video – Globalization of California.(ICLEI/Agenda 21) – http://www.freedomadvocates.org/videos/globalization-california-trailer/
but getting off track. Is CD aware of this?
T.A.,
No confusion on my part and I believe I spelled her name correctly.
As for Lincoln Club endorsement of Tony Young and Pamela Bensoussan, I would call those the exceptions that prove the rule. Or maybe it was just trying to court favor with a candidate that was a lock to win.
HQ:
We weren’t referring to you.