For six generations since emigrating from Mexico to America, Clarissa Renteria’s family never voted.

If any campaign mailers arrived during election season, Renteria’s parents — who both worked as warehouse workers in Woodlake, an agricultural town of 7,600 in California’s citrus belt — would throw them away. When their neighbor was elected mayor of Woodlake, Renteria’s father shrugged it off. “Look at him trying to fit in,” Renteria remembers her father saying.

“My family just didn’t feel included in the politics, didn’t feel seen,” Renteria, 25, said in an interview at a voter registration event in Tulare. “It was just like: ‘You guys obviously don’t care about me. I don’t care about you, and I’m not going to vote. I’m just going to work to live and that’s it.’”

Lack of engagement is common among millions of eligible Latino Californians who miss out on voting each year. Latinos are the least likely to vote, though they comprise the single largest racial and ethnic group statewide, research shows. They account for just 25% of the state’s likely voters despite making up 36% of the adult population statewide, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.

But they could hold the key to the 2024 U.S. Senate race since they’re a voting bloc largely untapped by the leading candidates.

“Whoever wins over Latino voters is going to win the March primary in 2024,” said Christian Arana, vice president of policy at the Latino Community Foundation.

But who’s that going to be? With less than four months until the March 5 primary, many Latino voters aren’t sure yet.

The leading Democratic candidates — U.S. Reps. Barbara Lee, Katie Porter and Adam Schiff — are polling mostly less than 20% among Latino voters, while 30% to 40% remain undecided, according to surveys conducted this year. In an October Latino Community Foundation and BSP Research poll of 900 Latino voters, roughly half said they did not have an opinion about the Senate candidates yet or did not know enough about them to form one.

“We are not seeing yet any of the Latino electorate connect with any particular candidates for U.S. Senate,” said Matt Barreto, founder of BSP Research and the Latino Policy and Politics Institute at the University of California Los Angeles.

“I think all of these candidates who are running right now are behind.”

Among all voters, Schiff and Porter are the frontrunners in polls in the past two months, well ahead of Lee and Republicans, though roughly one third of those surveyed are still undecided. The top two vote-getters on March 5, regardless of party, advance to the November general election.

Candidates have met with Latino leaders, conducted listening tours in communities of color and visited Latino business owners around the state, some as early as February, according to the campaigns. They have also been racking up endorsements from Latino leaders locally and nationally. On Nov. 4, the three top Democrats — Lee, Porter and Schiff — participated in a forum on immigration issues hosted by The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights Action Fund.

But political experts say it requires much more to gain support from Latino voters: Early, consistent and aggressive campaign outreach, but more importantly, issues resonating enough to persuade Latinos to not only vote, but vote for them.

“Low voter turnout is almost as significant an indicator of a lack of appeal of a message as voting for another party,” said Mike Madrid, former political director for the California Republican Party and a political strategist with expertise on Latino voting.

“I don’t care how early you start. If you don’t have a message that resonates, it doesn’t matter.”

Population-wise, the potential political power of Latinos in California seems unmatched.

They are the biggest racial and ethnic group, accounting for 40% of the state’s population. California is also home to 8 million — or one quarter — of the nation’s eligible Latino voters, more than any other state, according to the Pew Research Center. And that number is growing due to young Latinos coming of age, increasing their share of the state’s eligible voting population.

But Latinos are significantly underrepresented in voter registration and turnout statewide and nationwide.

They made up just 14% of “frequent voters” (those who voted in at least five of the seven most recent elections), while white voters made up 71%, according to an August poll from the University of California Berkeley Institute of Government Studies.

Latinos also had the lowest turnout rate of all groups in the 2020 election statewide and nationwide, according to a 2022 analysis by the UCLA Latino Policy and Politics Institute. Just 60% of eligible Latinos in California registered to vote, and just 55% of eligible Latinos voted, the data shows. They accounted for 32% of California’s eligible voters, but only 27% of those who voted that year.

Poorer + younger = less engaged

Why are Latinos less likely to vote?

One contributing factor: Latinos are disproportionately poorer, especially in California, which is among states with the highest income inequality, Madrid noted.

More than half of Californians living in poverty are Latinos, according to data from the Public Policy Institute of California. Only 1 in 10 Latino households can afford a median-priced home in the state — a percentage lower than their white and Asian counterparts, according to the California Association of Realtors.

“When you have no upward economic mobility … that’s a very big problem for turnout,” Madrid said.

Jovonna Renteria, a 26-year-old Latino voter in Tulare County, said working-class Latinos in her neighborhood prioritize their immediate needs — such as housing, food and childcare — over voting. Her mother works in a warehouse, and she is a first-generation college student majoring in social work.

“When people are so focused on just trying to survive, (voting) gets pushed to the side,” said Renteria, who is not related to Clarissa Renteria.

Latinos in California also tend to be younger, and more than half of the state’s population ages 24 and younger are Latinos, research shows. Nationwide, 34 million young Latinos will be qualified to vote next year.

But younger voters are less likely to participate, political experts say. They tend to be less affluent and motivated to vote not by habit, but by issues that matter to them, said Mark Baldassare, survey director at the Public Policy Institute of California.

Youths also have a lower “stake in society” since they are less likely to be parents or homeowners, who tend to be more invested in local politics such as property taxes or school bonds, Madrid said.

“If you don’t do that, you have a very transient mobile society, and that is a very civically disengaged one, which is not good for democracy,” he said.

‘Disenfranchised’ and disconnected

Mateo Fernandez, 17, will be a first-time voter next year. While he is excited, the San Diego native said no one around him talked about voting until he was in eighth grade.

“A lot of people will tell you: ‘I just don’t know … how that works.’ Or they feel hopeless, like they have no power in what’s going on around them because everyone else seems so much more powerful,” he said.

Jovonna Renteria saw the same in her community. She said Latinos feel “disenfranchised” and have “lost faith in the system” since they don’t see how they can benefit from those elections.

The feeling of disconnect is partly due to a historical and current lack of outreach from political campaigns, said Mindy Romero, founder and director of the Center for Inclusive Democracy and a political scientist who studies voting and underrepresentation among communities of color.

It’s a chicken-and-egg problem echoed in other states such as Texas: Latinos are less likely to vote because campaigns rarely reach out to them, but campaigns are less inclined to reach out to them because they focus on likely voters, Romero noted.

“We know that often in the Latino community … that you need to make the case and build trust and use trusted messengers,” she said. “We still don’t see candidates doing it, or at least not in a sustained way.”

But when campaigns do reach out, some rely on stereotypes about the Latino communities, holding events featuring mariachi bands, sprinkling in a few Spanish words and “parachuting” in and out, Romero said.

Presidential campaigns are also known to hold events at taco shops to rally the Latino vote, running the risk of what Barreto called “Hispandering.” Both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden dined at King Taco — a famous Los Angeles joint — during their presidential bids.

“But there’s so much more to our community than that one particular taco shop in East L.A.,” Arana said.

The inconsistent outreach makes Latino voters feel ignored, said Jose Barrera, national vice president for the Far West at the League of United Latin American Citizens.

“Come every four years, it seems like everybody wants our vote,” he said. “But once elected, candidates seem to forget about us. …Why should we as a community support some people who really promise everything but never deliver?”

A wide-open race

When asked by CalMatters how they have connected with Latino voters, the leading U.S. Senate candidates pointed to their outreach efforts, endorsements and track record.

Lee, Porter and Schiff have all met with Latino business owners and leaders in Southern California, the Central Valley and the Bay area, holding most events in San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego, Fresno or nearby areas, according to their campaigns.

All three campaigns pointed to their advocacy in Congress for a path for citizenship for undocumented immigrants and for expanding health care coverage. They are all co-sponsors of the House version of the “Registry Act,” which would allow some undocumented immigrants to qualify for lawful status.

Schiff’s campaign highlighted his support for expanded child tax credits, affordable housing, clean energy and more as well as his role leading the first impeachment trial against former President Donald Trump. He also introduced the Head Start Expansion and Improvement Act, which would invest billions in providing services to children from low-income families.

Porter’s campaign also noted she pushed for more language assistance for non-English speaking voters and advocated for free COVID-19 testing for all. She was also the first Senate candidate to launch her campaign website in multiple languages including Spanish, her campaign said.

Lee — who responded to CalMatters after the story was published — mainly touted her stance on immigration issues, noting she is the only candidate to have voted against the creation of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in 2002 and says she now wants to slash Customs and Border Protection funding in half. Schiff, then in his first term, voted in favor of creating ICE. Lee also noted her long history supporting Medicare for All and said she supports canceling all student debts.

Lexi Reese, a Democratic candidate who is barely registering in polls, said her background as a business owner helps her understand the struggles of small businesses. She said she is the only fluent Spanish speaker in the race and conducted listening tours in both languages.

A spokesperson for Eric Early, a top GOP contender, said that Latino voters he spoke to want a lower cost of living, tougher regulations on violent crimes and a stop to “the indoctrination of our children in schools” and “the flood of illegal immigration and fentanyl across the southern border.” He also touted his lawsuit against the Santa Barbara Unified School District for diversity training, which was thrown out in federal court.

Republican Steve Garvey, the L.A. Dodgers legend who entered the race last month, did not respond to a CalMatters’ inquiry.

While Latino advocacy groups haven’t announced or don’t plan endorsements, some notable community leaders have made up their minds.

Schiff, who has received dozens of endorsements from Latino lawmakers and leaders, gained support from state Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, U.S. Rep. Nanette Barragán, chairperson of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, and today from former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. Porter’s campaign stressed her support from nearly a dozen Latino leaders, including U.S. Rep. and former Long Beach mayor Robert Garcia, as well as Eddie Martinez, executive director of Latino Equality Alliance and mayor of Huntington Park. Lee also received endorsements from Dolores Huerta, longtime activist and co-founder of United Farm Workers.

But despite the months-long outreach by some campaigns, a sizable portion of Latino voters are still undecided, polls show. That’s partly because none of the top candidates have been on a statewide ballot and therefore have low name recognition, some experts say.

“I don’t think that any of the candidates come with a natural advantage,” Baldassare said. “(Schiff) has been high-profile in Washington, but that doesn’t mean he’s high-profile with the California voters.”Additionally, campaigns must expand beyond immigration as a top issue, which is a “relic of the past,” Madrid said. A fast-growing portion of the electorate are U.S.-born Latinos who are not as motivated by the issue, and polls have shown that the economy, inflation and joblessness — not immigration — are consistently the top issue among Latinos, he said.

“How do you have the largest ethnic group in the state with the lowest voter turnout rates when they are telling you … that the No. 1 issue they have is jobs and the economy, and yet, all the Latino advocacy groups are talking about is immigration?”

The Nov. 4 forum was focused almost exclusively on immigration. Madrid argues that while the issue was important, it shouldn’t be all there is.

Fatima Flores, a spokesperson for the coalition that hosted the forum, said it was to “uplift the intersections of other issues within immigration” so members could “walk away informed and knowledgeable.”

And Angelica Salas, the coalition’s executive director, said it wants to see a “torch bearer” on immigration issues among the Senate candidates seeking to succeed the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who Salas deemed a “vanguard” of immigration reform.

“Yes, they are all supportive,” Salas said of top Democrats in the race. “But we are looking for the leader who is going to advance this cause, but more importantly, is going to finally be part of the leadership that’s going to get immigration reform over the finish line.”

Arana said he is glad candidates have been out engaging Latino voters. But they must make sure the outreach is consistent and the message is on point, he said, pointing to Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ win in the California presidential primary in 2020.

Sanders proposed debt-free public colleges and universal health care, which resonated with young Latino voters, Arana said.

“He opened offices in areas where campaigns … normally wouldn’t,” he said. “Not only did he open that office, he hired people from the community, so it almost made it seem like it was a partnership to change the country.”

As for now, things have mostly been quiet in the city of Tulare.

At the local voter registration drive and Día de Los Muertos celebration hosted by several Latino advocacy groups, including the League of United Latin American Citizens, two dozen residents showed up, some drawn by the free food. Half a block away, a train whooshed by every few minutes on the railway track that sliced through the city, the blaring horn in contrast with the sleepy downtown.

“I thought it was not real,” Clarissa Renteria said outside the event venue, joking about when she first heard about it. Such events are rare in Tulare, she said. No one has knocked on her door for the Senate candidates, and she has seen no signs of campaign outreach in the area.

“We don’t really have a lot of that around here,” she said. “But I feel like as soon as you get other people who are also Mexican, like myself, to see: ‘Hey, I’m talking about these issues,’ maybe they’ll get more engaged. I think that’s what we need to see.”

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Many Latino Californians aren’t voting. Can U.S. Senate candidates motivate them? appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The right to an abortion is currently protected in California in two ways. In 2002, the Legislature passed the Reproductive Privacy Act, which made the right to obtain an abortion the official law of the state.

The other layer of protection is the privacy provision of the California Constitution, which was enshrined in 1972 and has been used by the California Supreme Court to strike down numerous attempts at abortion restrictions in the state ever since. Should voters pass Proposition 1 in November, it would add an even more formidable layer of protection, by enshrining these existing abortion rights into the state Constitution.

Why do we need to shore up protections Californians already have? Because the demise of Roe v. Wade at the hands of the Supreme Court in the Dobbs case this summer made clear that nothing is truly guaranteed, even in a progressive state like ours. Just as one California Legislature made a policy to protect the right to abortion, another could repeal it. Furthermore, the overturning of Roe showed the obvious danger in relying on court precedent to protect abortion rights.

The Supreme Court’s decision in the Dobbs case essentially said that previous courts were wrong when they ruled and maintained that the right to abortion is a fundamental liberty protected under the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. So what’s to stop a future California Supreme Court from doing something similar at the state level — turning its back on previous court precedents, and deciding that the privacy provision doesn’t actually protect abortion and contraception? Nothing.

This is exactly why California needs to pass Prop. 1. By explicitly adding protections for abortion and contraception to our state Constitution, the right to abortion will still be secure even if a future Legislature were to repeal the Reproductive Privacy Act or a future California Supreme Court decides the privacy provision no longer applies to reproductive rights. Some Californians may worry that Prop. 1 is an overreach, or that it will affect our current laws.

We believe this is fundamentally wrong. Prop 1 does not alter or displace the Reproductive Privacy Act, nor does it change any element of California’s existing reproductive laws. Instead, it explicitly bolsters these protections under current law. It states in no uncertain terms that nothing in the proposed amendment “narrows or limits the right to privacy or equal protection.” Rather, by spelling out that the state cannot “deny or interfere with an individual’s reproductive freedom…which includes their fundamental right to choose to have an abortion and their fundamental right to choose or refuse contraceptives,” Prop 1 identifies and secures the right to abortion and contraception as fundamental rights in our state.

Some opponents of the amendment, including the Republican Party of California and the California Catholic Conference, argue that the amendment’s language is too broad and will therefore allow the legalization of all abortions later in pregnancy, overriding current laws that restrict abortions to pre-fetal viability unless a pregnant person’s life is at risk.

That is not true. The three-sentence amendment is broad by design, much like the privacy provision that is currently used as the basis for abortion protection, because constitutional provisions are supposed to be skeletal outlines that the legislature can then use as the basis for drafting legislation. The privacy provision did not prevent the Legislature from adding some restrictions to abortions. Prop 1 won’t have that effect either.

It’s true that the threat to abortion and contraception in California seems low right now. Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature have made clear their intention to make California an abortion sanctuary, as restrictions to reproductive care have ramped up in more than a dozen states across the country since the Dobbs decision. The majority of Californians support the right to an abortion in most, if not all, cases. Recent polling indicates that 69% of likely voters in California support Prop 1.

But likely votes don’t mean much until they’re cast. The rights to abortion and contraception are too important to be left beholden to any particular governor, Legislature or court. Prop 1 ensures that they are not.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Endorsement: Don’t leave California reproductive rights to chance. Vote yes on Prop. 1 appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Ann Smith | Contributed

Mark your calendar for NOVEMBER 8, 2022! Hemet has lots going on and your vote can make a difference! There is a critical measure on the ballot, MEASURE H. If you were living in Hemet in 2016, Measure E was on the ballot, a $.01 tax that was intended to support additional police and fire protection. Why did we need that extra money? The city was on the verge of bankruptcy. That Measure was voted down largely because it was a tax.

The other reason it was voted down was because it required a 2/3 majority vote and failed with less than 2/3. That tax was specific and could not be used for anything other than public safety (police and fire department). The same group that brought this initiative to City Council introduced Measure U. There were no built-in safeguards regarding how the money was used. The Measure E tax was written in a way that protected the integrity of the Measure, i.e., that money could only be used for public safety and not to pay other debts.

The city was on the state’s watch list because it was a “high-risk” city. There were many other such cities on that list, but most cleaned up their act. Hemet did not and because Measure U was written in a way that allowed all tax proceeds to go into what’s called the “general fund,” the money could be used for anything. How much money are we talking about? $65 million over approximately 4+ years. In essence, the city lied to the voters about how they planned to use the tax money. Now, the city is attempting to cover up how the money was used, and police and fire did not receive all the money they were entitled to.

Yes, they did get some and yes, they were able to purchase new equipment. Managers received their raises. In a recent council meeting, Interim City Manager and Chief of Police Eddie Pust touted the hiring of 11 employees. A Freedom of Information Request was made to the city on September 12, 2022. As of this writing, we have yet to receive an explanation of what those 11 hires represented, i.e., sworn officers, community officers, etc. (there is a difference). For a variety of reasons, not necessarily the fault of the police department, we have approximately the same number of sworn officers as we did when Measure U went into effect. Some officers retired and some relocated. Life happens. But it’s interesting to note that former councilwoman Bonnie Wright promised on video (YouTube) that we would have 36 officers on the street as soon as Measure U went into effect. That did not happen.

We have all kinds of crime in the city and very little is happening to stem it. Approximately $65 million was collected since the passage of Measure U. Essentially, Measure U tax money was used to balance the city’s budget and to keep Hemet out of bankruptcy. That is the result of the city taking the intended Measure U money and using it to balance the budget. Chris Lopez, the city manager who approved those expenditures, is no longer on the payroll. Lopez was just one of many city managers to go by the wayside. We eventually came off the “high risk” watch list, but we hope the state still keeps an eye on our city.

Measure U has what’s called a “sunset clause,” meaning the $.01 tax will expire in approximately 4+ years. Unbeknownst to most voters, the city council approved Measure H. It isn’t very clear: first, we have Measure E, then Measure U, and now Measure H. How Measure H (which will appear on the November ballot) was handled was somewhat devious. The primary difference between Measure U and Measure H is that there is no expiration date, and the tax will go on into perpetuity or until the voters say NO MORE TAX! What we need to see is real accountability to the taxpayers.

There is absolutely no accountability. The only way we can get that is to vote down Measure H. There is plenty of time to present the kind of Measure that will work for the city and its voters, that will provide the safety net for police and fire. We are not talking about defunding public safety. We know it costs money to protect the city and its citizens. The tax can serve a useful purpose but only if there is accountability. Voting no on Measure H will allow police and fire to reintroduce a workable measure, using appropriate language and guaranteeing how the money will be used. We are offering the city a solution to this public safety issue, a way out of the mess they created. By the way, the Measure U Oversight Commission has no teeth and has repeatedly asked for a forensic audit.

It would be nice if a nationally known firm with no ties to Hemet were chosen for such an audit. Former City Manager Lopez had all kinds of excuses about why that could not happen. We want to see City Council act responsibly. They spend more than they take in and the city is not well run. We have a good fire department and we would not want to see it outsourced to Cal Fire. The Police department has suffered tremendously due to their inability to bring in more “boots on the ground.“ Attend a city council meeting or if you have a computer, watch the meeting online and you can call in with a comment. Make your position known!

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post A MEASUSRE TO LOOK FOR ON UPCOMING BALLOT appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — The Kremlin paved the way Tuesday to annex more of Ukraine and escalate the war by claiming that residents of a large swath overwhelmingly supported joining with Russia in stage-managed referendums the U.S. and its Western allies have dismissed as illegitimate.

Pro-Moscow officials said all four occupied regions of Ukraine voted to join Russia. According to Russia-installed election officials, 93% of the ballots cast in the Zaporizhzhia region supported annexation, as did 87% in the Kherson region, 98% in the Luhansk region and 99% in Donetsk. Possibly explaining the lower favorable vote in Kherson is that Russian authorities there have faced a strong Ukrainian underground resistance movement whose members have killed Moscow-appointed officials and threatened those who considered voting.

In a remark that appeared to rule out negotiations, Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelenskyy told the U.N. Security Council by video from Kyiv that Russia’s attempts to annex Ukrainian territory will mean “there is nothing to talk about with this president of Russia.”

He added that “any annexation in the modern world is a crime, a crime against all states that consider the inviolability of border to be vital for themselves.”

The preordained outcome sets the stage for a dangerous new phase in Russia’s seven-month war, with the Kremlin threatening to throw more troops into the battle and potentially use nuclear weapons.

The referendums asking residents whether they wanted the four occupied southern and eastern Ukraine regions to be incorporated into Russia began Sept. 23, often with armed officials going door-to-door collecting votes.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is expected to address Russia’s parliament about the referendums on Friday, and Valentina Matviyenko, who chairs the body’s upper house, said lawmakers could consider annexation legislation on Oct. 4.

Meanwhile, Russia ramped up warnings that it could deploy nuclear weapons to defend its territory, including newly acquired land, and continued mobilizing more than a quarter-million additional troops to deploy to a front line of more than 1,000 kms (more than 620 miles).

After the balloting, “the situation will radically change from the legal viewpoint, from the point of view of international law, with all the corresponding consequences for protection of those areas and ensuring their security,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Tuesday.

Many Western leaders have called the referendum a sham, and the U.N. Security Council met Tuesday in New York to discuss the voting, with the U.S. and Albania planning to introduce a resolution that says the results will never be accepted and that the four regions remain part of Ukraine. Russia is certain to veto the resolution.

The balloting and a call-up of Russian military reservists that Putin ordered last Wednesday are aimed at buttressing Moscow’s exposed military and political positions.

The referendums follow a familiar Kremlin playbook for territorial expansion and more aggressive military action. In 2014, Russian authorities held a similar referendum on Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula, under the close watch of Russian troops. Based on the voting, Russia annexed Crimea. Putin cited the defense of Russians living in Ukraine’s eastern regions, their supposed desires to join with Russia, and an existential security threat to Russia as a pretext for his Feb. 24 invasion of Ukraine.

Putin has been talking up Moscow’s nuclear option since Ukrainians launched a counteroffensive that reclaimed territory and has increasingly cornered his forces. A top Putin aide ratcheted up the nuclear rhetoric Tuesday.

“Let’s imagine that Russia is forced to use the most powerful weapon against the Ukrainian regime that has committed a large-scale act of aggression, which is dangerous for the very existence of our state,” Dmitry Medvedev, deputy head of the Russian Security Council that Putin chairs, wrote on his messaging app channel. “I believe that NATO will steer clear from direct meddling in the conflict.”

The United States has dismissed the Kremlin’s nuclear talk as a scare tactic.

The referendums asked residents whether they want the areas to be incorporated into Russia, and the Kremlin has portrayed them as free and fair, reflective of the people’s desire for self-determination.

Tens of thousands of residents had already fled the regions because of the war, and images shared by those who remained showed armed Russian troops going door-to-door to pressure Ukrainians into voting.

Mariupol Mayor Vadym Boychenko, who left the port city after the Russians seized it after a months-long siege, said only about 20% of the 100,000 estimated remaining residents cast ballots in the Donetsk referendum. Mariupol’s pre-war population was 541,000.

“A man toting an assault rifle comes to your home and asks you to vote, so what can people do?” Boychenko asked during a news conference, explaining how people were coerced into voting.

Western allies sided firmly with Ukraine, dismissing the referendum votes as a meaningless sham.

British Foreign Secretary James Cleverly said the ballots were “a desperate move” by Putin. French Foreign Minister Catherine Colonna said while visiting Kyiv on Tuesday that France was determined “to support Ukraine and its sovereignty and territorial integrity” and described the ballots as “mock referendums.”

Elsewhere, trouble emerged for Putin in the mass call-up he ordered of Russians to active military duty.

The order has triggered an exodus of nearly 200,000 men from Russia, fueled anti-war protests and sparked violence. On Monday, a gunman opened fire in an enlistment office in a Siberian city and gravely wounded the local chief military recruitment officer. Scattered arson attacks had been reported earlier on other enlistment offices.

One destination of fleeing Russian men is Kazakhstan, which reported Tuesday that about 98,000 Russians have crossed into Kazakhstan over the past week.

The European Union’s border and coast guard agency says 66,000 Russian citizens entered the 27-nation bloc from Sept. 19 to 25, a 30% increase over the preceding week.

Russian officials tried to intercept some of the fleeing reservists on one of the main exodus routes, issuing conscription notices on the Georgian border. According to the state-run Tass agency, an enlistment task force was handing out notices at the Verkhnii Lars checkpoint, where an estimated 5,500 cars were lining up to cross. Independent Russian news sources have reported unconfirmed claims that draft-age men will be banned from leaving after the referendum.

As Moscow worked to build up its troops in Ukraine, potentially sending them to supplement its proxies who have been fighting in the separatist regions for the past eight years, Russian shelling continued to claim lives. Russian barrages killed at least 11 civilians and wounded 18 in 24 hours, Ukraine’s presidential office said Tuesday.

In other developments, Ukrainian authorities reported more success in their counteroffensive to reclaim territory in some of the very regions where Russia is staging the referendums to consolidate its grip.

Ukrainian troops claimed to continue their push beyond the Oskil River in the country’s east, pressing further into the Donbas. A video on social media Tuesday showed Ukrainian soldiers entering the village of Koroviy Yar, 15 kilometers (about 9 miles) from the river. Ukraine’s military intelligence said that the country’s forces continued to force Russian troops out of the northeastern Kharkiv region and claimed to recapture the major railway junction of Kupyansk-Vuzlovyi.

The war’s human toll was also reflected in a U.N. human rights monitoring mission’s first comprehensive look at violations and abuses Russia and Ukraine committed between Feb. 1 and July 31, the first five months of Russia’s invasion.

Matilda Bogner, the mission’s chief, said Ukrainian prisoners of war appeared to have faced “systematic” mistreatment, “not only upon their capture, but also following their transfer to places of internment” in Russian-controlled areas of Ukraine and Russia itself.

The war has brought an energy crunch for much of Western Europe, with German officials seeing the disruption of Russian supplies as a Kremlin power play to pressure Europe over its support for Ukraine.

The danger to energy supplies grew when seismologists reported Tuesday that explosions rattled the Baltic Sea before unusual leaks were discovered on two underwater natural gas pipelines running from Russia to Germany. Some European leaders and experts pointed to possible sabotage during an energy standoff with Russia provoked by the war in Ukraine. The three leaks were reported on the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines, which are filled with natural gas but not delivering the fuel to Europe.

The damage means that the pipelines are unlikely to be able to carry any gas to Europe this winter even if the political will to bring them online emerged, analysts at the Eurasia Group said.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Kremlin announces vote, paves way to annex part of Ukraine appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

In a move to increase access to democracy and enfranchise more voters, the Governor signed AB 37 authored by Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park), permanently requiring a vote-by-mail ballot be mailed to every active registered voter in the state. The practice of sending vote-by-mail ballots to every registered voter first began in California in 2020, and was extended through 2021, as a safety measure to counteract pandemic-related disruptions and resulted in record voter participation.

“As states across our country continue to enact undemocratic voter suppression laws, California is increasing voter access, expanding voting options and bolstering elections integrity and transparency,” said Governor Newsom. “Last year we took unprecedented steps to ensure all voters had the opportunity to cast a ballot during the pandemic and now we are making those measures permanent after record-breaking participation in the 2020 presidential election. I extend my thanks to Assembly Elections Committee Chair Assemblymember Marc Berman for his leadership on this issue.”

“The bill will permanently expand access and increase participation in our elections by making voting more convenient and meeting people where they are,” said Secretary of State Dr. Shirley Weber. “Vote-by-mail has significantly increased participation of eligible voters. Voters like having options for returning their ballot whether by mail, at a secure drop box, a voting center or at a traditional polling station. And the more people who participate in elections, the stronger our democracy and the more we have assurance that elections reflect the will of the people of California.”

“When voters get a ballot in the mail, they vote,” said Assemblymember Berman. “We saw this in the 2020 General Election when, in the middle of a global health pandemic, we had the highest voter turnout in California since Harry Truman was president. I want to thank Governor Newsom for signing AB 37, ensuring that every active registered voter in California will receive a ballot in the mail before every future election. As other states actively look for ways to make it harder for people to vote, California is expanding access to an already safe and secure ballot.”

Governor Newsom also signed SB 35 authored by Senator Tom Umberg (D-Santa Ana) making changes to the distance within which electioneering and specified political activities near a voting site are prohibited; AB 1367 by Assemblymember Evan Low (D-Campbell) increasing penalties for the egregious personal use of campaign funds to up to two times the amount of the unlawful expenditure; and SB 686 by Senator Steve Glazer (D-Contra Costa) requiring a limited liability company (LLC) that is engaged in campaign activity to provide additional information regarding the members and capital contributors to the LLC.

A full list of the bills signed by the Governor is below:

• AB 37 by Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) – Elections: vote by mail ballots.

• AB 319 by Assemblymember Suzette Valladares (R-Santa Clarita) – Political Reform Act of 1974: contributions: foreign governments or principals.

• AB 796 by Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) – Voter registration: California New Motor Voter Program.

• AB 1367 by Assemblymember Evan Low (D-Campbell) – Political Reform Act of 1974: committee accounts and campaign funds.

• AB 1495 by Assemblymember Luz Rivas (D-San Fernando Valley) – Vacancy elections.

• AB 1590 by Committee on Elections – Political Reform Act of 1974.

• SB 35 by Senator Tom Umberg (D-Santa Ana) – Elections.

• SB 503 by Senator Josh Becker (D-Menlo Park) – Voting: ballots and signature verification.

• SB 594 by Senator Steve Glazer (D-Contra Costa) – Elections: redistricting.

• SB 686 by Senator Steve Glazer (D-Contra Costa) – Campaign disclosure: limited liability companies.

gov.ca.gov | Contributed

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Governor Newsom Signs Landmark Elections Legislation Making Vote-by-Mail Ballots Permanent for Every Registered Voter, Strengthening Elections Integrity appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Every registered California voter will get a ballot mailed to them in future elections under a bill signed Monday by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The law makes permanent a change adopted during the pandemic for the 2020 election and the recent recall against Newsom. California, the nation’s most populous state, joins several other Western states in mailing all voters a ballot, including Utah, Colorado, Washington and Oregon. Republicans who hold a minority in the state Legislature opposed the expansion of voting by mail.

Under the new law, ballots in California must go out at least 29 days before the election. Voters still have the option to drop off their ballot or vote in person. Prior to the pandemic, many Californians were already voting by mail.

“Voters like having options for returning their ballot whether by mail, at a secure drop box, a voting center or at a traditional polling station. And the more people who participate in elections, the stronger our democracy and the more we have assurance that elections reflect the will of the people of California,” California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, a Democrat, said in a statement.

Newsom signed 10 other voting-related bills on Monday, crafting them as part of an effort to expand voting rights and access. Voting rights have become a major political flashpoint nationally. Democrat-led states are pushing legislation aimed at expanding voting access while many Republican-led states are trying to tighten it amid baseless accusations of widespread voter fraud by former President Donald Trump and other GOP leaders.

“As states across our country continue to enact undemocratic voter suppression laws, California is increasing voter access, expanding voting options and bolstering elections integrity and transparency,” Newsom, a Democrat, said in a statement.

Mail-in voting put California Republicans in a tricky spot during the recent recall election against Newsom, which he handily defeated. Many Republicans didn’t trust the process, leaving party leaders to both encourage their voters to cast ballots while promising they were closely monitoring claims of fraud. There has been no evidence of widespread fraud in the recall.

California Republican Party Chairwoman Jessica Millan Patterson didn’t state a clear position on the bill.

“The California Republican Party is committed to ensuring elections are safe, fair and secure, giving voters the confidence they need to cast a ballot,” she said in a statement.

Another proposal Newsom signed relaxes the rules around ballot signatures, giving officials more leeway to accept ballots if the signature doesn’t exactly match what’s on file. The legislation by Democratic Sen. Josh Becker bars election officials from taking a voter’s party preference into account when evaluating their signature. Republicans in the state Legislature also opposed the bill.

In order to reject a signature, two other election officials must also determine if the signature differs in obvious ways from the signature in the person’s registration record.

Other bills Newsom signed:

-Increase penalties for improper use of campaign funds.

-Ban political contributions from foreign governments or foreigners in state elections. Federal law already prohibits this, but the law gives the state’s campaign regulatory body the ability to enforce it.

-Changes a new law requiring candidates for governor to submit copies of their tax returns, giving candidates more time to provide documents and fix errors. That bill also expands the distance at which campaign activities are blocked outside of polling places.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post California to mail every voter a ballot in future elections appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

In response? Biden “just sort of stared at me,” Jones said, describing an “awkward silence” that passed between the two.

For Jones, the moment was emblematic of what he and a growing number of Democratic activists describe as a lackluster engagement from Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris on an issue they consider urgent and necessary for the health of the democracy.

Although the White House has characterized the issue as “the fight of his presidency,” Biden has prioritized his economic initiatives, measures more likely to win Republican support in the Senate. And he’s shown little interest thus far in diving into a messy debate over changing Senate rules to pass the legislation on Democratic votes alone.

But as Democrats’ massive election legislation was blocked by Republicans on Tuesday, progressives argued Biden could not avoid that fight much longer and must use all his leverage to find a path forward. The criticism suggested the voting debate may prove to be among Biden’s first major, public rifts with the left of his presidency.

“President Obama, for his part, has been doing more to salvage our ailing democracy than the current president of the United States of America,” Mondaire said, referring to a recent interview in which the former president pushed for the legislation.

The White House argues that both Biden and Harris have been in frequent touch with Democratic leadership and key advocacy groups as the legislation — dubbed the For the People Act — moved through Congress. Biden spoke out forcefully at times, declaring a new Georgia law backed by Republicans is an “atrocity” and using a speech in Tulsa, Oklahoma, to say he was going to “fight like heck” for Democrats’ federal answer, but he left negotiations on the proposal to Hill leaders.

On Monday, in advance of the vote, Biden met with Sen. Joe Manchin, D.W.Va., at the White House to discuss both voting rights and infrastructure.

But Biden didn’t use his clout to work Republicans, who have expressed staunch and unified opposition to any voting legislation, arguing Democrats are pushing an unnecessary federal takeover of elections now run by state and county officials.

Biden spent much of the month focused on foreign policy during a trip to Europe, encouraging Americans to get vaccinated and selling his infrastructure plan to the American public. He tasked Harris with taking the lead on the issue, and she spent last week largely engaged in private meetings with voting rights advocates as she traveled for a vaccination tour around the nation.

Those efforts haven’t appeased some activists, who argue that state laws tightening election laws are designed to make it harder for Black, young and infrequent voters to cast ballots. The best way to counter the state laws is with federal legislation, they say, and Biden ought to come out for a change in the Senate filibuster rules that require 60 votes to advance most legislation.

“Progressives are losing patience, and I think particularly African American Democrats are losing patience,” said Democratic strategist Joel Payne, a longtime aide to former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. “They feel like they have done the kind of good Democrat thing over the last year-plus, going back to when Biden got the nomination, unifying support around Biden, turning out, showing up on Election Day.”

“Progressives feel like, ’Hey, we did our part.’ And now when it’s time for the bill to be paid, so to speak, I think some progressives feel like, ’OK, well, how long do we have to wait?’”

Still, there could be a silver lining for Democrats in the ongoing battle over voting rights: The issue is a major motivator for progressives and may serve to drive enthusiasm among Black voters as well, potentially driving engagement in a midterm year where Democrats are certain to face a tough political climate.

Harris is expected to continue to meet with voting rights activists, business leaders and groups working on the issue in the states, and will speak out publicly on the issue aiming to raise awareness of new voting laws and to pressure Republicans to get on board with federal legislation.

She watched the legislation fail to advance to debate on Tuesday, in her role as president of the Senate, and coming off the floor told reporters that she and Biden still support voting legislation and “the fight is not over.” Ezra Levin, co-executive director of Indivisible, a progressive grassroots group, said it’s been nowhere near the level of advocacy the public has seen on the infrastructure bill.

“The president has been on the sidelines. He has issued statements of support, he’s maybe included a line or two in a speech here or there, but there has been nothing on the scale of his public advocacy for recovery for COVID relief, for roads and bridges,” Levin said.

“We think this is a crisis at the same level as crumbling roads and bridges, and if we agree on that, the question is, why is the president on the sidelines?”

White House aides push back against any suggestion the president and vice president haven’t been engaged on the issue, and say his laissez-faire approach to the negotiations is based partly on his experience as a senator and his belief that his involvement risks undermining a deal before it’s cut.

But in private, White House advisers see infrastructure as the bigger political winner for Biden because it’s widely popular among voters of both parties, a White House official said. Passing a major infrastructure bill is seen within the White House as going further towards helping Democrats win in the 2022 midterms and beyond than taking on massive voting overhaul that had a slim chance of passage without a debate over filibuster rules, said the official, who requested anonymity to discuss internal talks.

Embracing filibuster changes, in particular, risks undermining Biden’s profile as a bipartisan dealmaker and could poison the delicate negotiations around infrastructure, where the White House insists it still sees opportunity for bipartisan compromise.

“He does have to preserve some negotiating power, and his brand probably does not compute with being at the tip of the spear on reforming the filibuster,” Payne acknowledged.

Still, other Democrats say it’s time for Biden to get out front on the issue. Rep. Colin Allred, D-Texas, said the proposals Republicans are looking to pass in his home state are “more explicit and more dangerous than anything I’ve ever come across.”

Allred said that the voting fight increases pressure on Biden to take the leadership on the filibuster fight. “We do need President Biden to make that a priority, because if you’re going to talk about supporting the underlying legislation, it really doesn’t matter if we don’t have way to get past the filibuster,” he said.

ALEXANDRA JAFFE | AP NEWS

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Biden faces growing pressure from the left over voting bill appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

“Our country mourns the loss of a giant, an icon and a warrior for democracy, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In her nearly three decades of service on our nation’s highest court, she fundamentally changed life for women in America, and changed our entire nation for the better,” stated Congressmember Lee. “Justice Ginsburg was a pioneer for reproductive rights, civil rights and equal protection under the law. Without her leadership and conviction, the world would be a different place for women, people of color and other marginalized communities. Her tenacious fight for gender equality in the face of powerful opposition, and her historic opinions and dissents on the bench, bent the arc of history towards justice. As courageous as she was intelligent, her decency, her legal brilliance and her commitment to a democracy that serves all, rather than the few, make her a model for the next Supreme Court Associate Justice and for all justices that will follow her.”

“California Democrats are saddened by the passing of Justice Ginsburg,” said Hicks. “As we reflect on her life, we are determined to continue the march towards progress. We will honor the legacy of Justice Ginsburg by making our voices heard in the halls of power, in the streets of our communities and at the ballot box on November 3rd,” Hicks stated.

Vargas, School Board Trustee in Stockton lead the event in remembering RBG by stating, “As a Latina, former foster kid, survivor of a household of domestic violence and sexual abuse, and mother of two brilliant little brown girls, I wanted to share what RBG meant to me,” said Vargas. “Her life was a revolution that paved the way for young women to be seen, heard, believed and valued. Justice Bader Ginsburg spent her life rising above – despite adversity. She fought against gender discrimination, unified women across the world, and stood firmly against patriarchy and sexism.”

During the event, California leaders applauded the record-breaking number of registered voters in the Golden State. “Voters are fired up and ready,” said Padilla. “We have over 21 million registered voters in California. Nearly 85 percent are registered to vote – a rate we have not seen in nearly 70 years. But that means there are still 4 million unregistered and eligible. And there are an unknown number of voters who need to update their registration – they moved, been displaced by fires, or maybe they’re college students back at their parent’s house since their campus is closed,” continued Padilla. “There is no time to rest – keep registering voters!”

“Almost every aspect of our lives has something to do with voting,” said Lewis. “People have fought and died for us to be able to vote freely. They’ve literally sacrificed their lives so that our voices could be heard, so that we would have a voice in the democratic process in our cities, counties, states and country,” Lewis concluded.

During the event, CADEM encouraged all of Californians to get involved in the Vote 2020 Truth Squad and the Voter Protection Team. The volunteers will share facts about voting in 2020 and vote-by-mail as well as provide resources to community members through the Voter Protection Hotline, which is scheduled to open up October 20 until the polls close on November 3rd.

For more information, visit https://cadem.org/vote/voter-and-vote-by-mail/ or https://cadem.org/vote/voter-protection-team/.

-CADEM

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Hundreds of Activists Joined California Democratic Leaders to Remember Justice Ginsburg During the Vote 2020 Day of Action appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

DeJoy has cut hours and banned all overtime and is also having fewer trucks on the road. He has even changed priorities in mailing. As a result, the US Postal Service now has a serious backlog of letters and packages, which are piling up at distribution centers. He is piloting a new program that will take already-delayed first-class mail and delay it even further, by ordering carriers to no longer sort and box newly arrived mail in the morning and then deliver it; instead, they must wait till the end of the day.

Coincidentally (NOT!), this will be a record year for voting by mail, which Trump is doing everything he can to undermine because, as he has already admitted, he thinks mail delays will help him win in this election. Right when we need more mail carriers, not fewer, DeJoy has instituted a hiring freeze and is trying to encourage early retirement of postal workers, two things Democrats in Congress specifically asked him NOT to do. While Trump created an uproar with his bogus suggestion that he might delay the election, his unprecedented politicization and gutting of the Postal Service is a much greater (and REAL) threat to American democracy. These changes and delays could lead to millions of ballots being thrown out because they weren’t received in time to be counted – thirty-four states require that ballots be received BY Election Day – and not one Republican has spoken out against this, despite the fact that Republican voters will be affected just as much as Democratic voters. THIS IS NOT A PARTISAN ISSUE – this affects EVERY voter!

If this prospect angers and outrages you, let your representatives know. Even if they are Democrats and are already opposed to this voting sabotage, let them know they need to be even more vocal and focused on this issue. Democrats keep allocating money for the Post Office in the stimulus bills, but Republicans keep cutting that money out. Time is running out! We need to demand more funding ASAP, along with safeguards to ensure that the funding will first of all, be used (and right away!), and secondly, that the funding will be used for the purposes for which it was intended.

Meanwhile, what can each of us do to ensure our mail-in votes get counted? First, make sure you get a ballot. This year, ALL REGISTERED California voters will automatically be sent a vote-by-mail ballot for the Nov. 3 General Election. To verify whether you’re registered, go to www.sos.ca.gov/elections and use the “My Voter Status” tool. If you are not already registered, you can register online at RegisterToVote.ca.gov. If you don’t have a computer, call (916) 657-2166 for the California Elections Division, or the Voter Hotline at (800) 345-VOTE (8683). As you register, you have the option to become a “permanent vote-by-mail voter,” if you wish. Remember, if your address has changed for this election, you must re-apply in order to receive your ballot and election guides. The Riverside County Elections Office is at 2724 Gateway Drive, Riverside 92507-0918, phone (951) 486-7200, www.voteinfo.net, or email rovweb@co.riverside.ca.us. This is also the office to contact if you don’t receive your ballot by the time you think you should have.

There is no deadline to register to vote, but the longer you wait, the harder it will be to receive your mail-in ballot in time and to get it returned in time. (See above regarding sabotage of the Postal Service.) While you can take your mail-in ballot to a polling place on Election Day and turn it in (and you may have to do that if you procrastinate too long), I am assuming you are trying to avoid that hassle and possible exposure to COVID-19. (Maybe you are even nice enough to worry about exposing the poll workers to the virus.) California provides several options for returning your mail-in ballot.

If you decide to mail it in, DON’T WAIT! Because of the postal delays detailed above, get your vote in early – at least two weeks before Nov. 3, which would be Oct. 20; mark your calendar so you don’t forget. The ballot must be POSTMARKED on or before Nov. 3 and RECEIVED by your county elections office no later than 17 days after Election Day. If you are worried about being on the late side of mailing your vote, you might want to use certified, priority or express mail so there is proof of delivery and of the date your ballot was mailed.

Another option is to take your ballot to the country elections office (see above for the address) no later than the close of polls at 8:00 p.m. on Election Day.

Alternatively, you can take your ballot to one of your county’s ballot drop boxes by no later than the close of polls by 8:00 p.m. on Election Day. The County Elections Office (also known as the Registrar of Voters) has a 24-hour drop box east of the main entry doors (see the Gateway Drive address above). Other locations as of the June election were the City Clerk’s Offices in Menifee, Canyon Lake, Wildomar and Riverside. Check www.voteinfo.net for their addresses, and, as the Nov. 3 election approaches, to see if any other locations have been added.

If you don’t want to mail your ballot but can’t get to a ballot drop box or the county elections office yourself, you can authorize someone to return your ballot for you, as long as they do not get paid on a per-ballot basis. Remember to fill out the authorization section found on the outside of your ballot envelope if you are going to go this route.

Riverside County participates in a system called WheresMyBallot.sos.ca.gov, if you want to track where your vote is at and whether there are any problems with it.

As a final note, please let me be clear that I love my postman (and the subs who deliver our mail when he is out); they all do a consummate and praiseworthy job of getting our mail to us faithfully in all kinds of weather, day in and day out. I have always gotten great service at the counter when I’ve gone into the Hemet Post Office to buy stamps or mail packages, too. The sterling work and dedication of these people make me all the angrier at Louis DeJoy and his boss, Donald Trump, for trying to cripple this vital institution of the Postal Service, and the sacred institution of voting, for partisan ends. They did not begin the attack on the Post Office; that started back in 2006 when Republicans passed the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, giving the Post Office 10 years to fully fund retirement pension and health care benefits for the next 75 years. Trump and DeJoy are “just” capitalizing on the pandemic to try to force the Postal Service to be complicit in making it harder for citizens to vote by mail and to have their votes count. That is despicable, evil, and to my mind, criminal.

Pam Sherrod

Hemet

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Vote-by-Mail Imperiled by Postmaster General appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.