Election 2008: What year is it really?

Alas, some of us are clearly no longer on the mailing lists to receive campaign brochures and mailers from the campaign of current Riverside Councilman Frank Schiavone for Riverside County supervisor. Maybe to save several bucks, the people sending out these latest installments in Election 2008, Riverside County style have clipped a few names off of their mailing lists.

But that doesn't matter because people have still been talking about what they've been seeing in the mail during the past week or so from the Schiavone camp so those who aren't on the mailing list for the latest episodes from that side of the county's latest reality show can still catch the action updates.

Just when you thought that non-issue of undocumented immigration (because if it were an issue, these candidates would make their positions well known outside an election year) had finally been laid to rest and the candidates would finally talk about among other things how they plan to replace the county's aging infrastructure in terms of how it will handle the higher volume of cars and trucks that will hit one of the fastest growing counties in the states. Perhaps, the candidates would finally start talking about how to address the other issues such as the future of March Air Field. And that's just for starters.


In the 2004 campaign, one of the silliest claims made by a losing candidate for one of the district seats was that the county's residents had to be protected from individuals on welfare getting plastic surgery as if there were large numbers of individuals on welfare getting face lifts and breast implants. Perhaps, the intention was to bar welfare recipients and their family members from other plastic surgeries to treat conditions like cleft palate and harelip or to repair tissue damage from burns, but it was difficult to tell from the campaigning. Since the candidate who included this on the political platform was a candidate pretty much put up and fronted by the Riverside Sheriffs' Association following its "no confidence" vote against Buster's vote on a salary and benefits package, most of the campaigning besides the strange foray into welfare and plastic surgery involved law enforcement issues. But more on the resurgence in mentioning that "no confidence" vote later.

Mercifully, Schiavone at least isn't borrowing this campaign strategy from the past individual who used it and is currently endorsing his current campaign, but the direction his campaign has taken on the latest round of mailers is just as bizarre.

His two targets of choice are undocumented immigrants allegedly exploiting social services and the needle exchange program for those addicted to drugs. Then there's some reference to comments that Buster made about marijuana, which brings back memories of past presidential campaigns. What's so fascinating is that his material on both of these issues is fairly old, if the citations included in it and other available information is what was actually used and would have been more timely campaign issues during the 2004 election rather than this latest one. And this posting isn't about the positions to take on these respective issues because that's up for each person to ultimately decide, it's about how they have been used and reused and in some cases reinvented for the purpose of political campaigns. It's about the twists and turns that campaigns can take as their contestants compete for high stakes prizes, this time a political seat on the county's dais.


What struck me as interesting right off the bat was Schiavone's assertion that Buster was pushing for Riverside County to be a designated sanctuary for undocumented immigrants. I was shocked. I mean, I have never heard of any attempts or even mention of turning Riverside County into a sanctuary, at least not for undocumented immigrants. Now, there's been such talk about turning the county into a sanctuary for the sand loving lizard.

This little guy here and his friends.

But it's news to me as to why alleged attempts by Buster to force Riverside County to become a sanctuary not for endangered animal species but for undocumented immigrants as stated on one mailer have just come to light given the dearth of information that can be found searching the internet on that issue and his alleged attempts. It kind of reminds me of something that's common in political campaigns, which is otherwise known in debating circles as the "strawman" argument. That's when you create your opponent's own argument which is different than what is raised by your opponent and then focus your argument on refuting that argument. And this particular strawman is wearing neon with the whole sanctuary deal that's apparently flared up all of a sudden during an election year.

Here, that argument is that there's this big drive to turn Riverside County into a sanctuary county, which if there was, you figure there would be a lot of published information about it, who proposed it, who discussed it and how any votes taken on the issue went down, what the end result was this time around and what plans there were for the next time. But that's just it, there really doesn't seem to be much history on the issue of establishing or not establishing sanctuary for undocumented immigrants, hence again, it becomes the perfect strawman argument, not used to educate the public on the issues but to misstate, misinterpret and to inflame those who will be voting in the District One election.

Both sides have engaged in this tactic to varying extents in their mailers, taped phone messages and radio advertisements but the latest mailer by Schiavone that's circulating is the most virulent yet. Its sole objective is clearly to try to inflame a lot of voters into forgetting that there's been no real definitive platform put out by Schiavone and it's not to vote for him, it's not really a cry to vote against Buster, but it's a call to vote against undocumented immigrants who as far as I know, aren't running for the District One seat. And if that not going to deliver on its own, then there's always inflaming voters by getting them not to vote for Schiavone and not really against Buster but people addicted to drugs through the resurrection of the Ghost of Politics Past, the failed needle exchange program and they don't appear to be running for the district seat either.


What's interesting from a political standpoint is why there's all this complaining about undocumented immigrants receiving county resources right now. Schiavone's been fairly quiet at least at city council meetings on this issue and backed a candidate for the Ward Five city council position last year who was being attacked by her competitor for allegedly promoting a policy for accepting identification cards from undocumented immigrants at the credit union.

And what did many of her supporters say in Donna Doty-Michalka's defense? That immigration is a federal issue rather than a local one. End of story from everyone except perhaps the Chris MacArthur campaign, at least until the District One election.

Schiavone's only publicly known comments on the issue of undocumented immigration that are accessible come through statements he made at a city council meeting on July 22, 2003 where he along Loveridge voiced their support for the issuance of identification cards from the Mexican consulate. More details about the agenda item which was withdrawn are in this report. His argument from a security perspective was interesting, but now somehow his campaign is denying that he even supported the ID card at all, rejecting his original reasoning as documented in the Los Angeles Times article dated July 23, 2003 which wasn't completely out of thin air. But he must believe that his statements put him at political risk in 2008.

It's pretty sad when you have to take a fairly thought out and in some cases, at least an argument that's based on something and toss it out because you believe it might hurt you politically. It's like disowning a part of yourself which is why when faced with the actual act of doing so, most average people can't stomach being political candidates and prefer to be at the polls or on the sidelines. Because politics and being a politician is about reinvention and if you're confident about who you are and what stand for, that's a line you can't cross. But it's a line that politics practically shove you across, especially during political campaigns.

Schiavone's statements to me several years ago about specifically not wanting to deny children access to social services as one reason he voted against Proposition 187, to not punish them and so they could go back to Mexico and take what they learned about the American political system to work towards changing the system in Mexico was very interesting, clearly evolving from some serious introspection but either he wasn't telling me the truth or he has changed his mind since then which is his prerogative. I had walked away from that earlier discussion surprised but impressed with what he said because it was different than the opinions expressed from others of his political stripes, but that was then and this is clearly now. With all the saber rattling about every stereotype regarding undocumented immigrants that can be dragged out, it's clear that such views if he really ever believed them are considered a serious liability now.

But since Schiavone has designated himself as someone who says "enough is enough" in terms of the county providing social services to undocumented immigrant, isn't it a bit surprising that not much has been heard from him on these issues until now? You would think that someone this adamant would have spoken up before an election year. But this isn't an issue that's been discussed much on the dais by the city's elected officials and if it's discussed off of it, the public hasn't had much access to those conversations.

The thing that makes me curious too is that even though a very small percentage of undocumented immigrants actually access public services because doing so creates risk of exposure and deportation, that there's so much focus on this issue to the exclusion of almost every other issue impacting the county that many voters really wish the candidates would start talking about in terms of where they stand, how they view these issues or problems and what they would do.

And if either Buster and Schiavone are steamed about undocumented immigration, why do they focus on a minuscule number and not the far larger population of them who work in their respective fields of agricultural farming and home construction? Why hasn't there been as much outcry over the use of undocumented immigrants as a cheap labor source, where pay is minimal, conditions including living conditions often abysmal, no benefits, no health care and any taxes or social security benefits paid out as required by law, remaining in federal and state coffers never to be refunded or reimbursed to them?

Both Buster and Schiavone must be familiar with the realities of undocumented labor in their respected professions yet there's complete silence on the labor issues. So why isn't there any complaints about that? Even as Professional Roofing Magazine addressed the issue of the use of undocumented immigrants as roofers by building contractors, there's been silence from at least one building contractor on that issue that's greatly impacting the industry that employs him and where he employs others. Even the practices of competitors in his industry impacts his company.

One can only guess at what the reasons for this relative silence about labor practices in both industries from individuals who apparently have both taken on the role of placing this issue on the top of their lists as a county concern. Even though the funny thing, most of the county's voters are talking about the housing crisis, the role of development, the future of March Air Field (which is admittedly a very sensitive topic for at least one of the candidates) and how the county's agencies address the situation involving parolees and registered sex offenders. And you have one candidate talking about what happened five years ago, when most of the voters are living in 2008.

Except for Schiavone designating himself the role of singlehandedly combating DHL because apparently the rest of the city council is just window dressing, the same corporation that he had embraced when he wasn't running for election, not much has been said or stated about any of these issues. Even the law enforcement employees from Riverside city and county who are stumping for Schiavone don't talk about much in terms of public safety except for undocumented immigrants or as they call them (and it's the only thing all parties on this issue can agree on), "illegal aliens".

Then there are allegations that Buster is promoting drug addition, because of comments he made about the needle exchange program (and it's exchanging needles, not handing them out, a common misperception and misrepresentation) that came before the county board of supervisors five years ago.


When it comes to needle programs, whether you support them or not (and I don't really have a position on this issue), here's some more information of why they've been proposed and implemented in different cities and counties. Their intent was to reduce the infection rates of diseases that are contracted through the reuse or sharing of contaminated needles from one person to a next. These diseases include AIDS/HIV, Hepatitis B and C. Another goal of most of those programs is to provide resources to drug addicts who utilize it for rehabilitation which some programs do but others don't. Most of the issues that arise are cost, effectiveness and whether this increases or decreases drug addiction or endorses it. The discussion has gone back and forth in many cities and counties and Riverside County's no different but this controversy took place again five years ago. Not much has been said about it lately certainly not in the city of Riverside and it's not like Schiavone has been leading any charge against such a program himself.

Here are just a few resources on this issue.


Needle exchange articles


Riverside County rejects needle exchange program. In this article, Buster suggests a pilot program to test its effectiveness when the issue came up for a vote in 2003. The needle exchange program item (by Inland AIDs Agency) was rejected by the board of supervisors, 3 to 2.

How many infections can be attributed to needles by percentages in Riverside County (May 13, 2003):

AIDs/HIV: 23%

Hepatitis B: 4%

Hepatitis C: 60%


1998 National Institute of Health/HHS study and position paper on programs and HIV infection rate.

It might be useful to read these links and other links and resources rather than to rely on information provided on a political mailer especially since that information has little to do with the issue and more with something else, especially considering the alleged marijuana reference by Buster that was thrown in the mix. Despite what one candidate is stating, this issue's not received much focus in this area so there's not been much factual information circulating or being presented to county residents.

It's not that the needle exchange issue's not a serious one whether you're supportive of the idea of it or against it, it's why it's being resurrected five years after the board's narrow decision not to adopt even a pilot needle exchange program. It's being resurrected to make personal attacks at a candidate as being "pro-drugs" because that's an inflammatory and kind of vague statement to throw out there but useful during an election campaign. Perhaps because there's nothing recent worth talking about and the issues impacting the county now never seemed to be worth talking about.

There was also some rhetoric about the "drug war" on one mailer, again not an issue that Schiavone has waxed on much at the city level.

This is a complex issue that goes beyond cities and counties even though that's where the battlegrounds have been, but it's difficult to fight a war let alone win it when you're fighting on both sides.

And there's an excellent article written by a former Drug Enforcement Agency agent who was assigned to fight the drug war as it's called in the "golden triangle" in South-East Asia. He and his other agents had worked very hard to find a particular drug kingpin and he was calling his supervisors to ask if they would bust him and his operation. What did his supervisors say? No, he could not. Why? Because the kingpin might have been a drug dealer whose drugs were impacting the lives of many people in a bad way, but he was also a CIA operative and therefore despite the damage he caused, hands off and just let him keep running his drug operation. But then again, it's not like the CIA and DEA are actually friends and that agents in the DEA have never expressed concern that their lives are endangered by the CIA's policies. They can't be friends, because they are clearly fighting on opposite sides of the same war. Because the United States did the same thing by financially supporting a well-known drug dealer and governmental leader for years in Panama. Until he became what's called a "blow back" and is now sitting in a prison in the United States after a military operation that killed hundred to thousands of people in Panama.


And then there's one former police chief's examination of the drug war. I don't agree with him on legalization, but he raises interesting points on how well the current strategies have worked so far and provides an alternative proposal. Which is a lot more than Schiavone has done with this serious issue that impacts this country which he feels is suitable to mention only to slam his opponant.

But forgetting all the international intrigue which is a major reason why this is not a winnable war, it's kind of interesting to see an issue that was raised five years, dragged back out, put on a mailer and then have the author or sponsor of that mailer complain that he's the object of mudslinging. Schiavone is politically very savvy but one thing he does when you mention a political issue that he's uncomfortable with or that you disagree with him on especially publicly is make personal attacks. And that's called mudslinging. After all, he doesn't just restrict it to his political rivals.

That's unfortunate, but it is what it is. What the candidates should be focusing on, instead of trying to drag out every bit of political "dirt" they can on each other to put on mailers that most voters really toss away in the trash the moment they reach their saturation level on how much drivel they can process, is to talk about roads, traffic, infrastructure, development, housing issues, annexation issues, the future of March Air Field, the future of utilities including the ever more difficult challenge of accessing adequate quantities of both electricity and water, or other wise subjects which are actually issues.

They should be trying to convince voters why it's important to vote for them not why it's important to vote against the other guy or if that fails, some third-party standin.

This is more critical for Schiavone than Buster because Schiavone has no resume as a county supervisor, so he's more of a question mark and his stint as a city council member doesn't change that because that's Class A and the county is bumping up to the next minor league division.


But things get more interesting as more and more old news is dusted free of its cob webs and all of a sudden becomes so critical.

Another event that's pretty old but was used to make it seem more recent is the well-known "no confidence" vote issued not by the Riverside County Sheriff's Department but the Riverside Sheriff's Association, its major labor union which actually issued the vote in 2003. A "no confidence" vote is usually aimed not at elected officials but at either the chief or sheriff of a law enforcement agency. It's not uncommon in the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. For a while, it seemed even more common in the Riverside Police Department.

What's not clear and what needs to be explained is whether or not the association has submitted that older "no confidence" vote in for a more current one. You think they would have done so and issued a former release to the District One voters so there's no misunderstanding of when this "no confidence" vote actually took place. Because it didn't just seem like it was quite a while ago, it actually was.

But that's what is so interesting about the mailers from both Buster and Schiavone is how quiet all the factions of the Sheriff's Department have been at least in terms of what's been showing up in mail boxes and being issued by the auto dialer in Massachusetts to telephone numbers across the district. Buster's main quote from the Sheriff's Department comes from former Sheriff Cois Byrd who is endorsing him. Most of what has been said or stated about Schiavone from law enforcement has been not from the Riverside County Sheriff's Department but the Riverside Police Department.

Instead of current Sheriff Stan Sniff doing regular radio advertisements, it's been Riverside Police Department Chief Russ Leach who through his membership in the California Association of Police Chiefs is endorsing Schiavone. Instead of taped telephone messages from even members of the RSA, there's been messages from current and former members of the police department's upper management. Even though the RSA is putting its funding in Schiavone's campaign as they did Community Police Review Commission member and former candidate Linda Soubirous, there's not the same amount of noise that county residents heard from them during the supervisor election in 2004.

Another thing that's striking on one of the mailers is how Schiavone apparently single-handed led the charge for preventing rolling blackouts from hitting Riverside. This episode all began when he and other city council members voted to increase electric rates by the creation of a multi-tier payment plan that charged a higher rate based on the amount of electricity used. Then when the city residents revolted during a critical election year for three city council candidates, the city council voted to lower the rates, which the Press Enterprise's editorial board didn't approve of because it felt that it left a gap in the city's funding of new utility stations to meet the growing demand of electricity anticipated in the next couple of years while the city's and region's population continues to rapidly grow.


If you want to revisit a hilarious rendition of what Dan Bernstein of the Press Enterprise called "Shocked Revolted", here it is where elected officials on the dais all tried to make sure that the audience knew that they alone were each the saviors of the day, in one of the most noted examples of political pandering in recent memory. And that record may stand until at least this Tuesday.


An interesting presentation on why the campaign strategies using mailers and phone messages should be taken with a grain of salt. Most people don't give them much weight precisely they are one-sided and about 90% of the time, it's not about why you should vote for them, it's why you shouldn't vote for the opponant and that's really not what voters want to know before they go to the polls.

The irony is that it's an "against Schiavone" contingent that might get him elected to the supervisor position as many voters in Ward Four have said that they plan to vote for him because they're not pleased with him remaining on the city council. That's kind of a strange voting strategy indeed, but it seems to be one that's growing in popularity. But that's not surprising considering that many voters in the ward that Schiavone doesn't see fit to represent for the full term he was elected to serve, feel a little bit abandoned, something that several individuals interested in running for the seat in 2009 are already taking advantage of.

And why not?

After all, two incumbents on the city council were kicked off last year by voters and one was reelected by a handful of votes, it wouldn't be at all surprising if round two of the fever that struck voters last time out reemerges in Election 2009.




The Press Enterprise Editorial Board weighs in on Attorney General Jerry Brown's recent ruling on disclosing the names of law enforcement officers involved in onduty shootings.

Though the ruling appeared aimed at the Riverside County Sheriff's Department, the Riverside Police Department soon after named the three officers involved in two recent officer-involved shootings after having Brown's opinion vetted by the City Attorney's office.

K&N Engineering, one of the largest companies based in Riverside lost one of its buildings to a major fire.

Fortunately, none of the company's workers were injured and none will be affected by the fire which caused severe damage to one of the complexes buildings on Industry Row which sits along Iowa Street.

It's not the free-for-all reelection that the recall election for the governor's seat saw a few years ago, but Colton's Mayor Kelly Chastain still has to face four rivals during her recall election on June 3.



Officer-involved shootings have risen sharply in Charlotte, North Carolina.

In Memory

" The tranquillity of mind comes to me, as it does to anyone similarly situated, from the firm belief that right is allied with might and the weak peoples of the world will not be shackled in slavery. "

---from his last letter written in 1944 in a P.O.W. camp

Dr. John Wister Haines, M.D. (May 12, 1912-Oct. 24, 1944 on the Arisan Maru)

Brother, son, uncle, friend.