County Supervisor D2 Race

Eric Andersen Eric Andersen 7 Comments

Share

Candidate “A” vs. Candidate “B”

Republicans will be faced with a choice between two conservatives for San Diego County Supervisor D2 next Spring. Who should the GOP endorse “A” or “B”? I think the choice for conservatives is clear. Not only about who should receive the GOP endorsement but about whom is in the best position to win in the General.

Conservative Credentials Both candidates are conservative, but one has a decided edge.

Candidate “A”

Taxation Without Representation In a 28-1 vote in the 40-member chamber, “A” was the lone Republican to get up from his seat and take the floor amid one of the most severe ethical crises in modern times for the legislature in the nation’s most populous state. At issue should three Democrat Senators facing separate criminal cases receive pay while taking leave of their offices?   “A” argued that all three Democrats should not only not receive their pay but be expelled outright. “A” stated it was wrong to receive a salary while facing such serious charges.  “A” was the lone Republican in the Senate to leave his seat. The lone Republican to speak and and the lone Republican to take a stand and mirror our founders on a modern day spin of ‘taxation without representation’. Principled. Statewide stage. Courageous.

Civil Asset Forfeiture and Policing for Profit. An owner of a food truck from Northern California traveled to Los Angeles to make a large purchase. He has $10,000 in cash with him – not unusual, given that he operated a cash-based business.

Unfortunately, his $10,000 was taken – by law enforcement. His cash was seized at a drug interdiction stop and, while no illegal drugs were found in his vehicle and he wasn’t charged with a crime, his money was taken under a process called civil asset forfeiture.

Civil asset forfeiture has become particularly lucrative for some cities. To address this growing problem Sen. Holly Mitchell, D-Los Angeles, introduced Senate Bill 443 with co-sponsor “A”.

While passing in the Senate it failed in the Assembly 24-44 with nearly unanimous Republican opposition until it was watered down. Property Rights. Statewide stage. Principled. Due Process. Leadership. Courage.

Export-Import Bank Should California taxpayers be looted to provide foreign loans to Kazakhstan for the purchase widgets from General Electric? “A” voted against as it was neither moral nor coherent with free markets. Principled. Property Rights. Anti-Corporate Welfare.

Candidate “B”

SANDAG Sales Tax Increase Candidate “B” voted against the tax increase while a number of his Republican peers did not. While “B” was not as quick to stand as the Councilwoman from Vista (who literally had two mayors physically restrain her from standing) I give a “well done”. Principled. Property Rights. Limited Government.

Fail: “Poway Mayor Proposes City (taxpayers) Pay for Granny Flats” Government derives its power from the consent of the governed. If an individual lacks authority to take money from his neighbor’s it follows that he also lacks said authority to transfer to government. All this does is move money from where Poway families wish to spend to where the “State” wishes to spend.

Candidate “B’s” plan to use the tax dollars of Poway families to address housing not only ignores the housing shortage is government created but eschews conservative principle to address it. Government breaks our leg and expects us to be grateful when it offers a crutch? Housing and wealth redistribution aren’t conservative principles. Natural rights don’t impose an obligation on our neighbor to provide them. Those ideas belong to the progressive. Property Rights Violation. Not Limited Government. Plunder.

You tell me who has the conservative credentials and should receive our endorsement.

Candidate “A” – Former Senator Joel Anderson

Candidate “B” – Poway Mayor Steve Vaus

Share

Comments 7

  1. An interesting but flawed view of the notion of what it is to be a conservative. A conservative is many things,an voting record on taxes is not necessarily the only thing that would make a person conservative.

    One must look to the larger and bolder version of conservatism to choose a truly conservative candidate. There are many references gentlemanly character being the sine qua non of conservatism. One of the basic tests for a candidate calling himself a conservative is whether that man is a gentleman. As Harvey Mansfield noted, “A gentleman—to define him quickly—is a man who is gentle by habit and character, and not because he is somehow forced to be. Character is key.”

    In the present case, we have one candidate who throws out the term “bitch slap” in mixed company. Would a gentleman ever utter such a comment in front of a woman? The answer is no. We have a candidate who makes excuses for campaign finance violations. What would a gentleman do? Find excuses or admit fault? The other candidate speaks humbly and without resort to cursing. That candidate admits fault rather than blaming, that candidate is the gentleman and indeed Mansfield was correct “character counts”, if you are really a conservative.

    We also must look to Sir Roger Scruton, arguably the prominent conservation philosopher of our time. Scruton notes that “For Conservatives, all disputes over law, liberty and justice are addressed to a historic and existing community. The root of politics, they believe, is attachment – the motive in human beings that binds them to the place, the customs, the history and the people who are theirs.” How do the candidates stack up on respect for place? One candidate sat quietly while the McCain Valley was slated for a wind farm, that candidate also received $30,000.00 in campaign contributions from the group seeking the permit. “Green Energy” at the expense of place and history. Does that fit into Scruton’s ideal of conservatism? The answer is an unequivocal No. The other candidate, endorsed by the current Supervisor, whose actions have protected the place, customs and history of the people who are hers, has also shown a conservative bend by protecting his city’s communities and sense of place.

    While I respect your opinion, the test for true conservatism you have proposed is flawed. If you want a true conservative, true in the historical sense of conservatism (which of course is the only way to even understand what it means to be a conservative) – your best choice is the Mayor of Poway.

  2. Post
    Author

    Thank you Kristine.

    Wondering why Adam Smith and Locke are deficient and needing to be replaced by this new person? By definition transcendent ideas are unchanging rendering a modern philosopher unnecessary.

    Speaking of gentlemen, does a gentleman give his word and then go back? Does a gentlemen use law outside it’s jurisdiction to redistribute wealth?
    Does a gentleman challenge a peer who in numerous ways (forthcoming) has demonstrated himself superior while being separated from his family? Both know the answer and I think at this juncture such a discussion distracting.

    If Candidate “B” had something to match Anderson’s record on scale and principle we could evaluate the issues you’ve raised. At that point it might be meaningful.

    Wish to make the case that “B” would have been the second Republican Senator to stand and challenge the State Senate? Make it.

    Wish to make the case that “B” understands conservatism and property rights better than nearly every Republican in the Assembly? Make it.

    “B” wasn’t even the first to stand against SANDAG and had to be pushed.

    I’m waiting.

    Show me the votes.

  3. Post
    Author

    It’s being brought to my attention that Steve Vaus could be taken as one of the two Mayors who physically attempted to inhibit Councilwoman Rigby from taking a stand against the SANDAG vote. I apologize to Steve. He definetly was not one of them.

  4. Back in 2013, I heard from someone that Joel Anderson was the most conservative state rep in CA. That year, I approached both him and Nathan Fletcher to sponsor The Balance of Powers Act – Asserting State’s Rights by Constitutional Process.
    Nathan told me this Act was unconstitutional. Joel said if I could find a Democrat to co-sponsor it, he would go forward. Since I did not know any Democrats who would want this bill, I was resigned to the fact that this bill would probably never get introduced in the CA State Legislature.
    It was passed in Tennessee and almost passed in Arizona before being stopped by progressives.
    The most serious threat to our constitutional republic right now is the Convention of States. All Americans who knew the real truth about this Convention of States would be against it as well.
    That is why The Balance of Powers Act is so important for our republic’s future. It is designed to streamline the process by which a state can exercise their constitutional power to identify and reject “unconstitutional” acts by the Federal Government – both past and present. What real Republican would be against that? Joel told me it would not stand a chance without a Democrat co-sponsor but we never put it to the test – getting support from California voters.
    Introduction to The Balance of Powers Act – http://northamericanlawcenter.org/introduction-to-the-state-balance-of-powers-act-2013/#.XJrprihKioE

  5. As always, your opinion is valued.

    I’m not pitting Locke and Smith against Scuton and Mansfield. Scruton and Mansfield reach back to a tradition in antiquity. This is a contrast between the classical world and the modern world of Smith and Locke.

    Being a gentleman has nothing to do with taxes and redistribution of wealth. Both both a gentleman and a cad can support or not support. Why do declare Anderson a gentleman? Because of a tax stance? A political stance? Both no relation to conservative thought.

    Again, conservative values are not displayed in voting records. Nor is it conformity with current political agendas a measure of being a conservative.

  6. Post
    Author

    Kristine,

    I respect and understand the attempt to move the post away from its intent – conservative credentials.

    With regard to the question of the Senator’s character I neither grant the premise nor do I find it significant. If one feels it significant you’re welcome to make it in a separate post. I will ask two questions.

    1. Whom did Candidate “B” vote for President?
    2. Is the President a serial adulterer?

    Personally, I lean toward Martin Luther on these issues, he states, whether apocryphal or not, he’d rather be ruled by a competent Turk than an incompetent Christian. I concur.

    In the event you’re not familiar with the Senator’s perspective and the context of his comment I offer the following.

    http://www.flashreport.org/blog/2018/08/24/cna-accuser-of-sen-anderson-was-arrested-for-assault/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *