For over a hundred years, people who believe that the right to run for office, and the right of people to vote for candidates of their choice, should not be restricted based upon the wealth of the candidates or their supporters. In 1909 the California Socialist Party lost the lawsuit Socialist Party vs. Uhl in its effort to do away with filing fees to run for public office in California in the State Supreme Court. Even though the Socialist Party lost that decision, the court held (Independent Progressive Party vs County Clerks, 1948, 31 C 2nd 549) that “”Throughout the court’s opinion in the Uhl case [Socialist Party v. Uhl, 155 Cal. 776 (103 P. 181)] it is emphasized that the power of the Legislature to restrict the right of suffrage is limited to prescribing tests and conditions for participation in primary elections which are reasonable and not arbitrary.” [Emphasis added].
John Haag - PFP Founder
In Haag vs California the California Peace & Freedom Party challenged the filing fees again in 1970, with John Haag of Venice, candidate for Lieutenant Governor, as the lead Plaintiff. The State Supreme Court turned PFP down.
In 1972, PFP started a new effort with Blaine vs Brown. John Blaine of Mount Washington (LA 90065). Due to a federal court injunction in Choate vs. Brown, all of the legislative and congressional candidates in the suit were able to run that year without paying the filing fees, but that left Don Paul Lubin, a PFP candidate for the non-partisan County Supervisor seat held by Pete Schabarum, as the only candidate left, so the PFP suit morphed into Lubin vs. Panish.
In the trial court, the runner-up for the Democratic Party nomination for Lieutenant Governor in 1970, Judge Robert A. Wenke, made the not so veiled racist/sexist remark that “any welfare mother who can’t afford $200 to run for Assembly is obviously a frivolous candidate.” Neither Wenke nor then-Secretary of State Edmund G. “Jerry” Brown, Jr., the defendant in Blaine vs. Brown, revealed that Wenke was a campaign contributor to Brown of $200 and an airline ticket for the 1970 election. Wenke’s decision against PFP came about a week after the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Bullock vs Carter 7-0 (two justices abstaining) 405 US 134 (decided February 24, 1972) that Texas’s filing fees were unconstitutional even though you could get on the ballot as an independent without paying the fees or have your write-in votes counted without a filing fee. In California, neither of those options existed.
Don Paul Lubin
Don Lubin’s case went to the California Court of Appeals and the State Supreme Court to no avail. Not a single judge even wanted to hear the case. Related litigation for injunctions went before the U.S. District Court and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Only 9th Circuit Justice Walter R. Ely Jr. saw the case for what it was, but was outvoted 2-1. When California Deputy Attorney General Henry G. Ullerich argued that filing fees dissuaded frivolous candidates from running for office, Ely inquired of him, “tell me counselor: how do these filing fees dissuade frivolous millionaires from running for office?” Ullerich had no answer.
With the case pending in the U.S. Supreme Court, we brought a new lawsuit, Jan B. Knaizansky-Tucker (and David Noble) vs Brown, which got an injunction from the 9th Circuit against the enforcement of the filing fees. Yes by the way, that was me while I was 18 years old and running for State Senator against Alan Robbins.
With a brief signed by the ACLU’s A.L. Wirin and Fred Okrand and signed and argued by Marguerite “Marge” Buckley and printed by Agency Lithograph with an Allied Printing Trades Union Label, nine justices of the Supreme Court decided 9-0 (nine to nothing) that California’s filing fees were facially unconstitutional.
So, the legislature eventually enacted a new filing fee law that allows candidates to get more signatures to get on the ballot without a filing fee or a proration of fees by the number of signatures.
Fast forward to this past week. With new election rules for the passage of Proposition 14 by the voters, the way that things worked out for me attempting to file in the 28th State Senate and Carl Iannalfo trying to run in the 17th State Senate district for special elections, instead of the old requirement for PFP candidates of 10% or 150 signatures whichever is less, with months to get them, the rules became 3,000 signatures with 3 days to get them for me and 2 days to get them for Carl.
In 1974 I ran for State Senator against Democratic incumbent Alan Robbins (the same Alan Robbins who later was convicted of various felonies while in office). In order to run for office that year I had to get a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals injunction against the enforcement of California’s filing fees for which there was then no legal alternative. You couldn’t even have write-in votes counted for you without paying a fee, meaning that indigents and people who worked for a living couldn’t run unless they had rich supporters to finance their campaigns.
While my case tied up the state with the injunction, Don Paul Lubin of the Peace and Freedom Party, who wanted to run for Board of Supervisors, got his case to the U.S. Supreme Court. Marge Buckley handled both cases. When Lubin vs Panish was decided 9-0 by the Supreme Court striking down California’s filing fees as facially unconstitutional, Jerry Brown, then Secretary of State, responded by throwing five (5) candidates off the ballot for not paying the fees that had just been declared unconstitutional, including Peace and Freedom Party candidates Bob Donovan (Attorney General), Bernie Klitzner (Controller), and Jim Stanbery (State Treasurer).
Since then, I’ve run for everything from Assembly to President at one time or another.
Tucker in Che Beret from Cuba
In 1974 as mentioned, I ran against Alan Robbins for State Senator in the San Fernando Valley. In 1976, I ran against Jim Keysor in the SFV for State Assembly. In 1978, I was the PFP nominee for Lieutenant Governor against Merv Dymally and Mike Curb. In 1980, I caused the defeat of ranking Californian in Congress Jim Corman by taking away nearly 2,100 votes, almost three times as many as the 750 votes he lost by to the Republican. In 1982, I ran for the PFP nomination for Governor against a candidate who claimed that nuclear power was safe and environmentally sound in the Soviet Union (sure, like the plant at Chernobyl). I lost the election, but in the light of history, I won the argument.
In 1992, I ran for Congress against Republican Carlos Moorhead, who had answered a question I posed to him at a community forum by saying he voted against Barbara Boxer’s bill for abortion funding for rape and incest victims because it included funding for victims of spousal rape, which he described as being “when a husband gets a little too aggressive with his wife.” I exposed him for the male chauvinist pig that he was throughout the district.
Jan B. Tucker with Dr. Benjamin Spock - 1976
In 1994 I was the PFP Candidate for State Treasurer against Phil Angelides and Matt Fong Eu. Following the one debate that included Angelides, Eu, and Libertarian Petersen along with myself, Eu and Petersen congratulated me admitting that I’d really kicked ass in the KQED FM forum, while Angelides stalked off.
In 1996, I ran for the PFP Presidential nomination and placed second out of four candidates in the primary, trouncing the Socialist Party’s candidate and edging out the party leadership endorsed candidate. I placed second to the Workers World Party nominee, Monica Moorhead.
In 1998, I was again the PFP’s State Treasurer nominee, setting the record for the highest vote ever in any PFP primary election that I hold to this day. That year, I was the party’s highest vote getter in the general election and got more votes than Green Party gubernatorial candidate and former Democratic Congressman Dam Hamburg. That was in spite of the fact that the party leadership refused to support me and overtly denounced me. In 2000, while PFP was off the ballot, I ran in the Green Party’s U.S. Senate primary.
Now, due to the death of State Senator Jenny Oropeza, I’ve taken out petitions to run for the 28th State Senate special election, but there’s a catch. After our court victories in 1974 getting the old filing fee law thrown out, the legislature wrote a new law. It imposed thousands of signatures to wave the filing fees for Democrats and Republicans, and a pretty hard but doable 10% or 150 signatures, whichever is less for a district or statewide election, for third parties. That may sound easy but it still is very, very difficult and almost impossible for candidates who are actively opposed by their own party’s leadership (which defeats the very purpose of party primaries, which are supposed to give the choice of a party’s candidate to the party rank and file, not to party bosses). Usually, you have months in which to gather the necessary signatures.
However for the special election in the 28th District, in which the State of California is now implementing the so-called “open primary” rules under Proposition 14, the alternative to paying the filing fee is that I got to take out the petition yesterday (Friday) and they have to be back with 3,000 good signatures on Monday. The State of California is just pretending to have an alternative to paying the filing fee at this point, because this is ridiculous, especially when it’s raining cats and dogs throughout the 28th District.
So California, get ready for another lawsuit.
For more info about my candidacy, go to the Facebook event page:
I appeared yesterday on CBS Channel 9, KCAL television, representing the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) denouncing Edmund G. “Jerry” Brown, Jr., Governor Elect of California, for violating the boycott of Arizona. As time permitted, I made it clear that I’m not giving Jerry a pass for this egregious behavior, but with the limitations of the average television local news, there was a lot said that didn’t make the editor’s cut.
“A liberal is one who leaves the room when the fight begins.” — Heywood Campbell Broun, founding president of The Newspaper Guild (AFL-CIO, CLC, CWA).
Edmund G. “Jerry” Brown, Jr., shortly after winning the California governorship for a second stint, took a vacation in Arizona. Most people including lots of his supporters know that a boycott has been declared not only by individuals and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) but even by cities like Los Angeles throughout California. The questions arise, “why was this boycott launched” and “why would Jerry Brown disregard the boycott.”
To answer the first question, there are a number of reasons to boycott Arizona and this isn’t the first time the state was the target of an economic boycott. Years ago, when Arizona was the last holdout state refusing to recognize the Martin Luther King Day holiday, it got hit with a highly successful boycott. Today, there are several compelling reasons to boycott the state to make it comply with ethics, morality, and the law.
First, there is the long time pattern and practice of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio violating the rights of prisoners under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Article 7 of the ICCPR states in part that “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” In spite of the fact that the United States has signed and ratified that treaty, Sheriff Arpaio keeps prisoners in tents and makes them wear pink underwear, amongst other humiliating treatments.
Second, there is SB 1070 which is well known and which has been declared in large part unconstitutional by a United States District Court Judge. The State of Arizona is appealing that verdict in an effort to continue the effective legalization of racial profiling and forcing police officers, whether they like it or not, to become immigration agents.
Occupied America
Pedagogy of the Oppressed
Third, there is Arizona’s HB 2281 which bans ethnic studies and which was expressly designed to single out Chicano and Mexican-American studies programs in Arizona’s schools. A spokesperson for the Arizona Department of Education hit the national talk circuit citing as a major reason for trying to dismantle these programs was because they were having students read Dr. Rudy Acuna’s Occupied America and Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed. When interviewed on MSNBC, the spokesperson for Arizona couldn’t even get the name of Freire’s book right, indicating that he’d probably never read it himself.
Liberals leaving the room now that the fight has begun.
Gil Cedillo & Jerry Brown
The CBS story that ran yesterday showed Senator Gil Cedillo justifying Jerry Brown’s trip to California with the contention that the Latino legislative leadership in California had called off the boycott of Arizona when the federal court suspended the worst parts of SB 1070. First off, that’s news to me. Why would you call off a boycott while Arizona is appealing the decision? Also, does this mean that with SB 1070 temporarily out of the way, it’s okay with Latino legislators for Arizona to ban Chicano Studies, ban Occupied America and ban Pedagogy of the Oppressed? Is it alright with them that Sheriff Joe Arpaio routinely violated Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights even before SB 1070 and HB 2281 even became issues?
Jan B. Tucker, Rudy Acuna, Estela Ayala
I was the second Gringo in America to get a degree in Chicano Studies from CSU Northridge in 1977 in a double major, cum laude, with Political Science. I also did graduate work in both disciplines. One of the professors who had the most influence on me was Dr. Rudy Acuna. I took five classes from him and got five A’s from him. When I ran into him when he was being honored by a well respected organization, I asked him to designate me as a Tlamatini and he did so unhesitatingly. That is one of the proudest honors I have ever achieved.
Heinrich Heine
That said and with that bias, it’s not alright with me for Arizona to ban Rudy’s books, or Paulo Freire’s books. Both of the books that the State of Arizona has officially and publicly denounced were required reading in CSU Northridge when I majored in Chicano Studies there, I read both of them, and have cited and referred to them repeatedly throughout my life. They were and remain tremendously important books with extremely important and relevant ideas. Heinrich Heine, writing in 1834 (some 99 years before the Nazis would get around to burning books and people in his native Germany) said that “”Das war ein Vorspiel nur, dort wo man Bücher verbrennt, verbrennt man am Ende auch Menschen.” (“That was but a prelude; where they burn books, they will ultimately burn people also.”)
So, these are the reasons why we boycott Arizona. Just as the mass demonstrations against repressive anti-immigrant legislation of a few years ago were the people’s response to a threat in which the politicians got dragged along reluctantly and which they were more than happy to capitalize on and attempt to control, the boycott of Arizona belongs to the people who support it. The California Legislative Latino caucus can no more call off a boycott than it can start one. Movements of people are necessary to carry boycotts out.
United Farm Workers
Would Jerry Brown or any mainstream Democratic Party politician for that matter, cross a United Farm Workers picket line around a grocery store or a ranch? Would they cross a Justice for Janitors SEIU picket line around an office building? Would they cross the picket line of UNITE-HERE around a textile factory or a hotel? The answer is intuitively obvious. With the labor movement being the most important buttress of the Democratic Party, they wouldn’t dare.
Well, the boycott of Arizona is just like a de facto picket line around the entire state of Arizona. Certainly, you can go there for a political reason such as a protest. Maria Elena Durazo and scores of union activists went there to protest SB 1070 and the other repressive measures that state is taking when there were mass protests. But taking a vacation in Arizona is different; it’s the moral equivalent of crossing a picket line at a hotel on strike.
Jack London
People who do that are called strike breakers. Less politely, they’re called scabs. Want to know the definition of a scab? Jack London said it most poignanttly:
“After God had finished the rattlesnake, the toad, the vampire, He had some awful substance left with which He made a scab.
A scab is a two-legged animal with a cork-screw soul, a water-logged brain, a combination backbone of jelly and glue. Where others have hearts, he carries a tumor of rotten principles.
When a scab comes down the street, men turn their backs and angels weep in heaven, and the Devil shuts the gates of Hell to keep him out.
No man has a right to scab so long as there is a pool of water to drown his carcass in, or a rope long enough to hang his body with. Judas Iscariot was a gentleman compared with a scab. For betraying his master, he had character enough to hang himself. A scab has not.
Esau sold his birthright for a mess of pottage. Judas Iscariot sold his Savior for thirty pieces of silver. Benedict Arnold sold his country for a promise of a commission in the British Army. The modern strikebreaker sells his birthright, his country, his wife, his children and his fellow men for an unfulfilled promise from his employer, trust or corporation.
Esau was a traitor to himself: Judas Iscariot was a traitor to his God; Benedict Arnold was a traitor to his country; a strikebreaker is a traitor to his God, his country, his wife, his family and his class.”
“FACTION” stands for “Friends And Cohorts of Tucker Independently Organizing Nationally.” It is my tongue-in-cheek, semi-Stalinist “Cult of Personality,” through which my friends (and cohorts) and I conduct our political operations in the electoral sphere. The following thoughts, recommendations and endorsements are for the California Ballot for the November 2, 2010 election.
Governor—Other than my view that electing Meg Whitman would portend a disaster for California, I’m not even considering voting for Edmund G. “Jerry” Brown, Jr. His father, “Pat” Brown, was a great governor assuming that one ignores his ties to the Chicago mob’s boys in California. But Jerry demonstrated throughout his career that he’s more interested in hyping his purported achievements in the media than he is in governing. When he was Secretary of State, he transferred so many employees to the P.R. office the real work of the office got slower and slower and practically to a standstill.
Jerry Brown (L) Jan B. Tucker (R)
I sued Jerry when he was Secretary of State and got an injunction against enforcement of the filing fees from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals which were then mandatory for all candidates regardless of whether they were wealthy, working class, or indigent, to run for office. A conservative Democrat, Ray Choate, also had an injunction against them in Northern California. The day after the U.S. Supreme Court in Lubin vs. Panish unanimously declared California’s electoral filing fees to be unconstitutional, Jerry threw five (5) candidates off the ballot, including Peace & Freedom Party candidates Robert Donovan (Attorney General), Bernie Klitzner (Controller), and Jim Stanbery (Treasurer) off the ballot for not paying the unconstitutional fees.
While serving as California Attorney General, he has allowed Deputy Attorney General Phillip Scott Chan to persecute the California League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) – tacitly assisting a LULAC member who is Chair of the California Democratic Party’s Chicano – Latino Caucus to assist a Republican Party takeover attempt of National LULAC – while ignoring complaints that she herself unlawfully ran a suspended corporation during her four (4) years as LULAC State Director.
Carlos Alvarez
So, I am voting without hesitation for CARLOS ALVAREZ, the Peace & Freedom Party candidate for Governor. Carlos is an activist with the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL). While I have disagreements with the PSL on some policy issues, they have always told me to my face when and why they disagree, unlike the Feiginite and Berkeley Bolshevik leadership cult of PFP who lied and backstabbed on foreign policy issues relating to Armenia (more about that later).
Lieutenant Governor—I am dual endorsing GAVIN NEWSOM (Democrat) and C.T. WEBER (PFP). While I would have much preferred Matt Gonzalez as Mayor of San Francisco, I admire Newsom’s unequivocal support for same sex marriage rights and his reorganization of San Francisco’s health care delivery system. C.T. has a long history of organizing and struggle on many causes and has at times been an outsider from the cabal that tends to hang onto power in PFP by keeping it cult-like. Hopefully his leadership in PFP will make the organization the independent, radical, and inclusive organization that it once was and which it purports to be.
C.T. Weber
Mayor Gavin Newsom 10-5-09
Marylou Cabral
Secretary of State—Again, MARYLOU CABRAL (PFP) is a PSL member running on the PFP ticket. Debra Bowen to her credit is prosecuting Larry “Nativo” Lopez for voter fraud (it would be more interesting if the State would look into all the non-profit corporations he has left suspended and bankrupt) but when she was a state senator, she had a penchant for trying to ban and criminalize standard and legitimate private investigator practices that are necessary to enforce the rights to criminal defendants and other litigants to due process of law and equal protection.
Karen Martinez
State Controller—KAREN MARTINEZ (PFP). Controller is a race that frequently helps keep PFP on the ballot and with recent changes in election laws, that may be imperative to insure that working people have a way to participate in elections and debate the issues.
Debra Reiger
Charles "Kit" Crittenden
State Treasurer—Dual endorsement: DEBRA REIGER (PFP) and CHARLES “KIT” CRITTENDEN (Green). Debra is one of the more sensible people in PFP. At CSU Northridge where he taught, we used to call retired Philosophy Professor Crittenden “Crito.” It was an in-joke with those of us who were studying ancient Greek philosophy.
Attorney General—KAMALA HARRIS (Democratic). PFP candidate Robert J. Evans is guilty of Feiginism and Berkeley Bolshevism (for details on what these ultra-sectarian disputes are all about, email me privately). In 1994, Evans (along with Senate candidate Marsha Feinland) took park in an Alice in Wonderland-like telephonic PFP State Executive Committee meeting which resulted in PFP taking a position that effectively meant that Armenia should be punished with sanctions for the crime of having been blockaded by Turkey and Azerbaijan. This was a position to the right of the Turkish Embassy and Dick Cheney (who was the recipient of the Azeri-American Chamber of Commerce “Freedom Support” award). Evans later denied that he knew anything about this position (I didn’t believe him when he made that claim in 1998 and I don’t believe it now). Evans is so sectarian that I could see him wince when PFP adopted a part of my proposed 1978 platform on breaking up large agricultural holdings with redistribution to small family farmers and farm workers. I guess his consternation at the proposal was that this was part of Lenin’s “New Economic Program” which was dismantled when Stalin collectivized agriculture (more to Evans liking I guess).
KAMALA HARRIS’s election is imperative because LGBTI rights are not trivial and same-sex marriage is a very important issue. Harris will not appeal decisions striking down Proposition 8 as unconstitutional; Republican Steve Cooley is committed to doing so.
United States Senate—BARBARA BOXER has her faults. But when she was in the House of Representatives my NOW Chapter (San Fernando Valley/Northeast Los Angeles) gave her a big boost featuring her at our “Rally in the Valley” in 1992 shortly after she made a big push to get funding for abortion for rape and incest victims. Reproductive rights are front and center of many “culture war” election issues throughout the country these days and Boxer is always on the correct side of the issue.
That said, in some ways she exemplifies what Newspaper Guild founder Heywood Campbell Broun was talking about when he said that “A liberal is one who leaves the room when the fight begins.” When she was up for re-election years ago, at a gathering in a private residence I found myself standing next to Actor David Clennon. He asked Boxer, “what about Palestinian rights?”
Boxer launched into a long and belabored explanation of why Israel was created, including the horrors of the World War II Holocaust. At the end she finally said, “…and Palestinian rights? Of course! Of course!” Weeelllllll, I’m not sure what rights and how they are supposed to get them, about which Boxer said nothing.
As to Feinland though, as pointed out earlier she was part of the cabal that voted to have Armenia sanctioned, in spite of the knowledge I had presented on the issue to the PFP leadership that: (a) just before the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Azeri mobs raped, pillaged, and drove out around 800,000 ethnic Armenians in old fashioned pogroms, (b) unlawfully and unilaterally stripped a 90% ethnic Armenian region of its autonomy when Azerbaijan declared independence from the Soviet Union, and (c) blockaded the formerly autonomous region (Nagorno-Karabakh) and Armenia itself, leading to the death of about 1% of the Armenian population through cold alone in a single year. As pointed out, this puts her to the right of Dick Cheney, and that is really difficult to achieve on almost any issue.
