Washed It!

After a survey of U.S. troops and their families, a Pentagon study group has concluded that the military can lift the ban on gays serving openly in uniform with only minimal and isolated incidents of risk to current war efforts, the Washington Post reported Wednesday.

The newspaper quoted two people familiar with a draft of the study, which is to be completed for Defense Secretary Robert Gates by Dec. 1., but with an uncertain public release date.

More than 70% of respondents to a survey sent to active-duty and reserve troops over the summer said the effect of repealing the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays and lesbians in uniform would be positive, mixed or nonexistent, the sources told the newspaper.

The newspaper said the survey results have led the report’s authors to conclude that objections to openly gay colleagues would drop once troops were able to live and serve alongside them.

The long, detailed and nuanced report will almost certainly be used by opponents and supporters of repeal legislation to bolster their positions in what is likely to be a heated and partisan congressional debate. And it is expected to reveal challenges the services could face in overturning the long-held policy, including overcoming fierce opposition in some parts of the force — primarily in the Army and Marine Corps — even if they represent a minority.

The Marine Corps commandant, Gen. James Amos, last week said that with forces fighting in Afghanistan and still deployed in Iraq, now was the wrong time to lift the ban.

“This is not a social thing. This is combat effectiveness,” Amos said.

That brought a mild rebuke from Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mike Mullen, who said he was surprised that Amos had spoken publicly. He said the heads of the military services had committed to “look at the data and then make our recommendations privately.”

The Post said Gates, Mullen and uniformed and civilian leaders of the four military branches received copies of the draft report late last week.

The document totaled about 370 pages and is divided into two sections, the newspaper said. The first section explores whether repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell” would harm unit readiness or morale. The second part of the report presents a plan for ending enforcement of the ban. It is not meant to serve as the military’s official instruction manual on the issue but could be used if military leaders agreed, one of the sources told the newspaper.

Among other questions, the survey asked whether having an openly gay person in a unit would have an effect in an intense combat situation. Although a majority of respondents signaled no strong objections, a significant minority is opposed to serving alongside openly gay troops. About 40% of the Marine Corps is concerned about lifting the ban, according to one of the people familiar with the report, the Post said.

Pentagon spokeswoman Cynthia Smith said that of the 400,000 surveys sent randomly to troops, 115,052 responded. An additional 150,000 surveys were sent to spouses with 44,266 completed. Defense officials have said they were pleased with the response rate and believed it was enough to get an accurate sampling of the force.

President Obama has vowed to end the policy. A Democratic proposal to repeal the 1993 law already has passed the House as part of a broader defense policy bill that includes such popular provisions as a pay raise for the troops. But that same legislation sank in the Senate under Republican objections just weeks before the Nov. 2 elections.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has promised another vote by year’s end, although the political dynamics in this lame-duck session haven’t changed much. Gates has asked Congress to act before January, but Senate Democrats still hold a shaky majority and they are unlikely to give in to Republican demands for a protracted debate.

A Republican gay rights group, the Log Cabin Republicans, has challenged the constitutionality of the policy in court. The Obama administration on Wednesday urged the Supreme Court to keep the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in place while a federal appeals court considers the issue.

The administration filed court papers in defense of an appeals court order that allowed “don’t ask, don’t tell” to go back into effect after a federal judge declared it unconstitutional and barred its enforcement. The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco is reviewing the administration’s appeal.

The Log Cabin Republicans asked the Supreme Court to step into the case to reverse the appeals court decision that has allowed “don’t ask, don’t tell” to remain in effect despite the order by U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips.

Among several recommendations, the Pentagon report urges an end to the military ban on sodomy between consenting adults, regardless of what Congress or the federal courts might do about “don’t ask, don’t tell,” the source told the Post.

The report also concludes that gay troops should not be put into a special class for equal employment or discrimination purposes, that person said. The recommendation is based on feedback the study group obtained from gay troops and same-sex partners who said they do not want a special classification, according to the source.

The report recommends few, if any, changes to policy covering military housing and benefits because the military must abide by the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which does not recognize same-sex marriage.
Pentagon draft study shows low risk to ending ‘don’t ask’ policy

In a number of key races around the country, aggressive and meticulously targeted spending by independent conservative groups appears to have helped produce dramatic results for Republicans.

Unlike Democrats, who relied heavily on financial assistance from unions and Democratic Party committees, Republican candidates got their boost from advertising, mailers and get-out-the-vote drives financed by more than a dozen newly formed conservative groups.

Those groups employed a two-pronged strategy: First, they poured much-needed cash into districts where Republican candidates lagged behind in fundraising. Second, they sent millions into what were once considered safe Democratic districts in an attempt to thin out Democrats’ resources.

The strategy appears to have been a success. In an election cycle where Democratic candidates and party committees had out-raised Republicans by about $168 million, outside conservative groups, armed with $187 million, were able to strategically and successfully leverage that money to produce results for the GOP.

In the 74 House and Senate seats that had switched party hands by early Wednesday morning, 57 were won by Republicans who held the advantage in spending by outside groups, according to an analysis by the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen.

Republican Mark Kirk enjoyed the greatest advantage in non-party outside spending in his winning bid to represent Illinois in the Senate. Thanks to large and consistent ad buys by groups such as American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS — big spenders that were formed this year by Karl Rove and other GOP strategists — Kirk held an $8-million advantage in outside money over his Democratic opponent, Alexi Giannoulias.

In the House, Republican Mick Mulvaney topped the list of outsider support with his successful bid to replace 14-term incumbent and chair of the powerful House Budget Committee, John M. Spratt Jr.

In the final two weeks of the campaign, non-party groups opposing Spratt spent nearly $500,000 in his South Carolina district, compared with just $6,000 spent by groups in support, according to data compiled by the Sunlight Foundation

In southern Virginia, 14-term incumbent Rick Boucher was defeated after conservative groups waged a costly ad campaign that went unmatched by groups on the left.

On the Iron Range of Minnesota, 17-term incumbent James L. Oberstar, chair of the House Transportation Committee, was swept from office after a late October storm of conservative group advertising on Duluth television.

“We were able to go places where Democrats were comfortable and require them to start spending money,” said Carl Forti, political director at the Crossroads groups, citing Oberstar’s district and others. “For us, it was an effort to expand the field.”

Liberal groups did not spend a single dollar advertising in Oberstar’s district, according to the Public Citizen analysis. But the onslaught forced Oberstar to run the first negative ad of his career.

kim.geiger@latimes.com

Times staff writer Tom Hamburger contributed to this report.
Outside groups made the difference for some Republicans

Shaken by Tuesday’s Republican landslide, Democratic fundraisers who felt hobbled by President Obama’s hard-line opposition to outside campaign spending are now planning to do what many groups did for the GOP — funnel millions of dollars into independent political advertising and voter mobilization campaigns.

Republican-aligned

Democrats fought Republicans on Saturday in a campaign battle that stretched coast to coast, pushing against an epic tide of anger, frustration and economic anxiety that could sweep the GOP to control of one and possibly both houses of Congress.

Driving deep into once-solid Democratic territory, Republicans spent the last weekend of the midterm election campaign targeting House seats in blue-state bastions such as California, New York and Massachusetts. Democrats poured tens of millions of dollars into a last-ditch effort to save dozens of threatened incumbents, writing off others whose chances appeared beyond hope.

With spending near the $4-billion mark, a record for a midterm contest, there was little escaping the last blast of campaigning. Candidates and others with a stake in Tuesday’s outcome — including, most prominently, President Obama — staged rallies while hundreds of thousands of volunteers knocked on doors and manned phone banks, urging supporters to the polls.

In Philadelphia, the first stop on a final campaign swing, Obama said all the progress of the last two years could be rolled back if Republicans seize control of Congress.

“We can’t move backwards now. We’ve got to keep moving forward,” Obama told an audience of Democratic volunteers at Temple University. “And that’s all going to be up to you. So I want everybody to get out there, knock on doors, make phone calls, volunteer, talk to your friends, talk to your neighbors.”

Rep. John A. Boehner of Ohio, the likely House speaker if Republicans take over, used the party’s weekly radio address to jab at the president and Democrats and to promise a change from the last time Republicans ran Congress. He promised smaller government and greater accountability.

“We’ve tried it President Obama’s way,” Boehner said. “We’ve tried it Washington’s way. It hasn’t worked.”

All the while, a torrent of TV and radio advertising provided a loud and surly campaign soundtrack, blaring virtually around the clock. In some states, every last minute of TV ad time was sold out.

All 435 U.S. House seats are up on Tuesday. Republicans need a gain of 39 to win control of the House, which they lost in 2006. Despite a public show of optimism, based on healthy Democratic turnout in some early voting, party strategists privately echoed Republicans who have suggested a change in power was highly likely. The only question, both sides agreed, was the magnitude of Republican gains and whether it approaches — or surpasses — the 52-seat GOP landslide in 1994, the last time Democrats controlled Congress and the White House.

Voters will cast ballots for 37 of 100 U.S. Senate seats. Democrats were confident they would keep the majority, albeit narrowly, and Republican strategists conceded the likelihood. The GOP needs to convert 10 seats to take over and many handicappers predicted the party would fall short, as contests in Connecticut and West Virginia seemed to tip the Democrats’ way and as Sens. Barbara Boxer in California and Patty Murray in Washington appeared to shore up support.

The last time either party gained at least 10 Senate and 40 House seats in a single election was in 1958.

Also on the ballot Tuesday are the governorships of 37 states, including California, Florida, New York and Texas. Republicans seem poised to gain about a half-dozen governor’s seats and take control of several statehouses, which could have significant implications for races in 2012 and beyond, as legislators redraw the boundaries used to elect members of Congress.

Midterm contests are typically a referendum on the president and almost always cost his party congressional seats. This year appears no different. If anything, the achievements of Obama and congressional Democrats — passing massive economic stimulus and healthcare bills, rescuing the auto industry, cracking down on Wall Street — sharpened the opposition, giving birth to the “tea party” movement that promised to usher a number of insurgents into Congress.

Compounding problems for the president and his party, this year’s races were run in a brutal economic climate, following the worst downturn since the Great Depression. At nearly 10%, the jobless rate is the second highest it has been for a midterm election in the last 50 years.

“If unemployment was 7.4%, or even 8.1%, but dropping, and people clearly perceived that things were getting better, then Democrats would take some losses,” said Tim Hibbitts, an independent pollster in Oregon. “But not the potential catastrophe they’re facing.”

A look at the national map showed the party’s dire circumstances.

Of 100 or so House seats that looked at least marginally competitive, Democrats were on the defensive in all but a handful. Some of the party’s most durable incumbents — including committee chairmen Barney Frank of Massachusetts, Ike Skelton of Missouri and John M. Spratt Jr. of South Carolina — were in trouble or, at the least, facing their toughest reelection fight in years.

Seats that would normally be out of Republican reach, in districts Obama easily carried two years ago, were in the toss-up category or leaning Republican, leading some independent analysts to forecast GOP gains of as many as 70 seats or more.

A swing of even 60 seats would be the largest midterm shift since 1938.

Both parties campaign to the finish line

Democrat Kendrick Meek reasserted on Friday that he was in Florida’s three-way Senate race to stay, despite reports that he had been urged to withdraw in favor of Gov. Charlie Crist.

Meek took to the airwaves in the morning to deny reports that former President Clinton had urged Meek to withdraw so that Crist would stand a better chance of defeating Marco Rubio, the Republican nominee who is a “tea party” movement favorite.

“I told him I didn’t have any thoughts about getting out of the race,” Meek said of Clinton on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” “He didn’t encourage me to get out of the race.”

Meek made similar statements exonerating Clinton on the other morning shows and Clinton himself weighed in later in the day, reaffirming his support.

“We did talk last week following a rally in Orlando about the race and its challenges,” Clinton stated. “I didn’t ask Kendrick to leave the race, nor did Kendrick say that he would. I told him that how he proceeds was his decision to make and that I would support him regardless.”

It may take three points to define a plane, but in politics, three-way races are notoriously unstable — as the battle in Florida illustrates.

Crist, once a rising star in the GOP, was forced to run as an independent when it became clear he could not win his party’s primary against Rubio, who is far more conservative, especially on social issues such as abortion rights and stem-cell research.

Meek, a Democratic congressman, won his primary against businessman Jeff Greene, setting up a three-way race among an African American Democrat, a moderate Republican running as an independent and a staunch conservative Republican supported by the tea party wing.

There have been numerous reports that top Democrats would have been happy to see Meek withdraw, clearing the way for Crist, who famously hugged President Obama, to gather the anti-Rubio vote in one column. Polls show Rubio with a solid lead over Crist, with Meek running a distant third.

Part of the rationale is also based on the arithmetic of the Senate, where the GOP is hoping to at least increase its influence and perhaps win a majority. The Florida seat is held by a Republican, and Crist has been careful to avoid saying with which party he would caucus during the organization of the post-election Senate. Two independents already caucus with the Democrats and are key members of the Democratic majority.

The Florida race would not be the first in which top Democrats, seeking to save the Senate, got involved in local races.

During the primaries, there were reports that White House aides had discussions about a job for Joe Sestak if he dropped his bid to unseat Sen. Arlen Specter, a fellow Democrat. Sestak went on to win the primary and is locked in a close race with Republican Pat Toomey.

Michael.muskal@latimes.com

Twitter.com/LATimesmuskal
Democratic candidate denies Bill Clinton urged him to quit Florida Senate contest

Defections from Meg Whitman’s ranks on the part of women, Latinos and nonpartisan voters have fueled a surge by Jerry Brown in the race for governor, according to a new Los Angeles Times/USC poll.

The shift comes after a tumultuous month for the Republican candidate that has led some voters to question her veracity and her handling of accusations by an illegal immigrant housekeeper.

Brown, the Democratic attorney general and former governor, led Whitman 52% to 39% among likely voters, the poll found. His advantage has more than doubled since a Times/USC poll in September.

The abrupt movement in the race for governor came as Democratic incumbent Barbara Boxer held onto her 8-point margin over Republican Carly Fiorina in the U.S. Senate contest. Boxer’s 50% to 42% lead was statistically unchanged from September’s 51% to 43% edge.

For both Democrats, the month between the two polls found the party’s strongest supporters rallying to the candidates’ sides: liberals, women and Latinos either solidified or expanded their backing for Brown and Boxer. Nonpartisan voters, whom Republicans had counted on to overcome the Democratic advantage in voter registration, moved away from the two Republican candidates, and moderate voters also tilted toward the Democrats.

Paula Bennett, a schoolteacher in the Sacramento-area town of Acampo, said she was drawn to Brown in part by the blizzard of cash Whitman has thrown at the race.

“I like the little guy; he didn’t have the money behind him like she did,” she said in a follow-up interview, adding that she sided with Brown for the same reason that she favors a mom-and-pop establishment over a retail behemoth.

“We don’t shop at Walmart. We shop at the local store. He just seemed like more of a down-home candidate.”

Although she is Republican, Bennett is also siding with Boxer. She said she was offended by both Whitman’s and Fiorina’s infusions of personal cash into their races.

“That message that they’re sending to people is a very bad choice,” she said. “We’re looking to people to act their values rather than throw money at causes. People are holding their money really closely and those candidates are really splurging.”

Most of the nation has seen pronounced enthusiasm by Republican voters as the midterm elections approach. In California, however, Democrats have gained strength and GOP motivation has ebbed slightly in the last month, the poll showed. The current standings represent a reassertion of a more typical profile for the state after an election year convulsed by a foundering economy, widespread discontent about the future and record-breaking spending by Whitman, who has dropped more than $141 million of her own money into her campaign.

The poll was conducted for The Los Angeles Times and the USC College of Letters, Arts and Sciences from Oct. 13 to 20 by the Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner and the Republican firm American Viewpoint. It included a random sample of 1,501 California voters, including 922 likely voters. Results for likely voters have a margin of sampling error of 3.2 points in either direction, with a larger margin for subgroups.

The survey was taken as the two gubernatorial candidates pummeled each other over the state’s airwaves and flooded telephone lines and mailboxes with entreaties for the election — now nine days away. And it came at the close of a particularly difficult period in the race for Whitman.

A turning point appears to have been the Sept. 29 announcement by her former housekeeper, Nicandra Diaz Santillan, that she had been employed by the former EBay chief for nine years, a period during which she said Whitman became aware of her illegal status. Whitman countered that she had not known of Diaz Santillan’s status until shortly before firing her in 2009, and she released copies of falsified documents presented to her by Diaz Santillan.

Diaz Santillan, accompanied by attorney Gloria Allred in a series of sob-wracked news conferences, displayed a copy of a 2003 government document sent to Whitman and her husband that could have alerted them that their employee was using a false Social Security number.

The subsequent days of controversy upended Whitman’s carefully nuanced position on illegal immigration and whipsawed her between voters who thought she was too easy on Diaz Santillan and those who thought the housekeeper deserved better than banishment. Whitman slipped among both groups in the new poll.

Among likely Latino voters, support for Brown grew from a 20-point lead in September to a 34-point advantage in the new survey. His lead among women voters expanded from 9 points to 21 points. Among nonpartisan voters, who in California register as “decline to state” and tend to recoil from tough stances against illegal immigrants, Brown’s lead over Whitman grew from 6 points to 37 points.

At the other end of the ideological scale, Whitman’s standing among conservatives ebbed slightly, from 77% to 70%. She continued to outdistance Brown among those voters, although his support grew slightly from 16% to 21%.

Overall, by 52% to 41%, voters said that Whitman had not handled the housekeeper controversy well. The same key voter groups — women, independents and Latinos — offered the harshest verdicts. When asked how Brown had handled the matter, voters were more divided, with 37% saying he did well and 43% saying he did not. Among independent voters, a plurality approved of Brown’s actions.

Jerry Brown’s lead doubles in a month; little change in Senate race

With the 2008 Democratic primary race all but won, Barack Obama appeared at a massive outdoor rally here and delivered a message that was unique by the cutthroat standards of American political campaigns.

“We’re not going to worry about what other folks are doing,” Obama told a crowd of 75,000 at the waterfront event in May 2008. “We’re going to try to focus on what we think we can do for America.”

Obama returned to Portland on Wednesday night and delivered a different sort of speech. His message of national unity and reconciliation had been replaced by a stark warning against cynical Republican tactics, vague threats to America’s political system and the urgent need to keep the GOP marginalized.

There was less hope, more fear.

Obama conveyed much the same message Thursday during a rally in Seattle, and the appeal is not expected to vary significantly as he campaigns in Los Angeles, Las Vegas and Minneapolis over the next two days.

Obama in Portland suggested that “foreign-controlled corporations” were bankrolling a “misleading, negative” ad campaign that serves Republicans, but offered no evidence.

“We don’t know,” he said.

Whereas his 2008 speech said that Americans needed to “start trusting each other again, start working together again,” he said at the Oregon Convention Center rally this week that even if Republicans cooperate more with the White House, they would be forced to “sit in the back seat.”

Two years ago, he said Americans are “tired of a politics that’s all about tearing each other down.” On Wednesday, he painted a grim picture of life under Republican leadership: The chronically ill, the unemployed, the student who can’t afford college tuition — all would be cut “loose to fend for themselves.”

The shift in tone reflects the realities of Obama’s political predicament. With Democrats facing the likelihood of major losses in the midterm election, Obama wants to fire up his base and make sure voters go to the polls. Instead of letting the campaign become a referendum on his first term at a time when the unemployment rate is nearly 10%, Obama is instead framing the election as a clear choice.

David Axelrod, a senior White House advisor who helps craft Obama’s speeches, said the aim was to lay out the stakes in the Nov. 2 election.

“Everything looks different through the gauzy recollections of the past,” said Axelrod when asked how Obama’s message has changed in the last two years. “We offered a fairly strong critique of the Republican policies of 2008…. Every election is a choice. People need to understand what the contrast is.”

Obama has been delivering a similar version of the Portland speech recently. Speaking in Columbus, Ohio, earlier in the week, he imputed a motive to lawmakers who’ve resisted his agenda: Republicans opposed his proposals because they want him to founder, cynically positioning themselves to pick up seats in the upcoming election at the nation’s expense.

Appearing in Boston last week, he told the crowd that with the country facing an historic economic downturn, Republicans “didn’t lift a finger to help.”

The darker message may be rooted in Obama’s experience as president. Nearly two years into the job, the partisan divisions are not going away.

“As a candidate in 2008, Obama made an appealing but naive promise to bring Republicans and Democrats together in Washington and end the bitter partisan standoff,” said Thomas Mann, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who studies and writes about governance. “He learned that was easier said than done.

“He is now giving voice to a reality that he was hesitant to accept.”

peter.nicholas@latimes.com

cparsons@latimes.com
In two years, a fearful turn in Obama’s speeches

Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman go round and round: quibbling over the slur someone in Brown’s camp used to describe Whitman and how offensive it was (or wasn’t) and whether Brown should (or shouldn’t) be more contrite. This drives Kim DuPont crazy.

DuPont, a political independent and Whitman supporter, said after Brown apologized in their last debate, “She should have just accepted, and they both should have gotten on with it.”

DuPont ticks off her concerns: jobs, the economy, making Sacramento more business-friendly. “Those are the issues affecting the state and our place in the world,” said DuPont, 50, a financial consultant in the agriculture industry. “Those are what matter.”

The race for governor has been long, contentious and, by far, the most expensive in history. To many in this rural stretch of Central California, it has also been a disappointment: feeding their cynicism, taxing their patience — they long ago tuned out the incessant advertising — and instilling little faith that either candidate can deal with the state’s paralyzing dysfunction.

The last several weeks of the campaign, dominated by debate over an inadvertently recorded epithet and Whitman’s illegal immigrant housekeeper, have seemed especially pointless.

“A sideshow,” said Margo Michael, a cook. “Silly,” said Jerry Caperton, a retired firefighter.

For the last 16 years, San Benito County has been California’s political bellwether, a slice of rich farmland just south of the San Francisco Bay Area with an unparalleled record of matching statewide voter sentiment. In 2002, Gray Davis won reelection with 47% of the vote; in San Benito County he received 49%. In 2006, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger cruised to victory with 57% support. In San Benito County, he got 56%.

If the pattern holds this November, and if San Benito again speaks for the rest of the state, then neither candidate will run away with the contest.

Democrat Brown and Republican Whitman have their partisans: people who believe political experience (in Brown’s case) or business acumen (cited by Whitman backers) would be just what’s needed to shake up Sacramento (the way politicians always pledge).

But many more voters echoed Chuck Obeso-Bradley, who was not particularly enamored of either candidate and regarded their promises, and their charges and countercharges, with a good dose of skepticism.

A Democrat, he leans toward Brown (“holding my nose a bit”). But he thinks it will be some time before the state cycles from recession to recovery, regardless of the outcome Nov. 2. “I’ll support whoever wins and wish them both Godspeed,” said Obeso-Bradley, 56, the sales manager for a software company. “They’re going to need it.”

With about 55,000 residents, roughly the population of Arcadia or Cerritos, San Benito is more rural and Latino than California as a whole. There are relatively fewer college graduates and a slightly higher proportion of registered Democrats.

But the economic hardship — the bankruptcies, jobs lost, homes foreclosed, businesses hanging by the merest of threads — are familiar to many Californians battered by the Great Recession.

In some ways, San Benito County had it worse. Even before the housing bubble burst, regulators imposed a local building moratorium until a new sewage plant was built. The work was finished just in time for the recession, which devastated the construction industry. Unemployment, always subject to the vagaries of the agricultural season, peaked near 22% in February.

There have been hopeful signs of late. Unemployment was 14.8% in August (compared to 12.4% statewide.) A long-awaited expansion of the Hollister airport may finally go forward, and the county could land a new solar farm, with the promise of as many as 650 jobs.

Still, not one person in more than 40 interviewed felt good about the direction things were headed, a contrast with 2006, when business was robust and state lawmakers passed a budget the day before the July 1 start of the fiscal year — with a surplus.

“Sacramento keeps rolling on, like it always has, but things are out of control,” said William McDonald, 39, a courier for the San Benito County Health Department and an undecided independent. “It’s October, and they’re just now barely passing a budget?”

Even though Schwarzenegger is not on the ballot, the governor loomed large in the minds of many. That has not helped Whitman. She is running on the same outsider message Schwarzenegger used in the 2003 recall election, and several voters suggested his years in office didn’t work out too well.

“He was new. He was fresh. I thought, give it a shot,” said Bob Rowlands, 59, a Democrat who sells evidence-tracking software to police agencies. “Now Whitman is talking about running Sacramento like a business, but running a business and running the government aren’t the same. Brown may not have all the answers, but at least he knows the lay of the land.”

Whitman has spent more than $140 million on the campaign — the vast majority from her own pocketbook — and that alone has put some people off, including Peggy Neubauer, a Republican who may vote Democratic for the first time in her life.

“It’s all about feeding her ego: ‘I’m going to be the governor of the biggest state in the union,’ ” said Neubauer, 55, who owns a struggling real estate and property management firm. “Well, you can’t buy it. And if she gets there, she’s going to have all the problems Arnold had, without his finesse.”

The controversy over Whitman’s illegal immigrant housekeeper — the candidate said she did not know her status until just before the woman was fired — apparently swayed few people. Mary Martinez, 67, a retired bookkeeper and political independent, was ready to back Whitman but will skip voting in the governor’s race. “I don’t like the way she was treated,” said Martinez, referring to the maid’s brusque dismissal after nine years of employment.

But most of those interviewed waved off the matter as a diversion cooked up by Democrats. That included many Brown supporters, like Lauretta Avina, 46, who suggested that candidates “do what it takes to get elected. They play dirty on both sides.”

While Schwarzenegger shadows Whitman’s campaign, Brown has to contend with the record of another California governor: himself.

“I remember him saying they weren’t going to spray for the Medfly, and then all those planes came overhead spraying all over the place,” said Jan Van Erven, referring to Brown’s equivocating stance during the 1980s agricultural infestation. Van Erven also remembered Rose Bird, the state Supreme Court justice who overturned 64 death penalty convictions and became a soft-on-crime symbol to Brown critics.

“Brown had his shot,” said Van Erven, 62, a Republican-leaning independent. “I think Whitman could do a better job dealing with the Legislature, which is nothing but a bunch of hard-core liberal Democrats.”

Unless asked, no one talked about the latest campaign flap involving someone close to Brown using the word “whore” to describe Whitman for allegedly cutting a deal to win an endorsement. The private conversation was picked up on voicemail, after Brown thought he had hung up the phone.

Caperton, 70, the retired firefighter, was typical of the overwhelming majority who rolled their eyes or simply shrugged off the remark. “You have to wonder what she calls him back in her office when no one’s listening,” he said, laughing. Unhappy with the choices, he may not vote for anyone for governor.

mark.barabak@latimes.com
State’s bellwether voters want more attention paid to issues

President Obama laid out a broad case Saturday for rejecting Republican candidates in the upcoming midterm elections, accusing his political opponents of cynically refusing to cooperate in difficult times while accepting help from secretive special-interest groups pumping millions of dollars into various campaigns.

Obama spoke at a rally for a longtime political ally and friend, Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, who is locked in a tough reelection campaign against Republican Charlie Baker. The president also spent part of his quick trip to Boston at a fundraising event for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. A Democratic official said people paid up to $30,400 apiece to attend a VIP reception and have their picture taken with the president.

With unemployment at nearly 10% and people anxious about job security, Obama has struggled to articulate a single compelling message for keeping Democrats in power. At the Patrick event, he rolled out a range of arguments for voting against Republicans on Nov. 2.

While he and fellow Democrats labored to fix the economy, he said, the Republican leadership watched from a safe distance, hoping they would founder.

Speaking to more than 15,000 people at the Hynes Convention Center, Obama said that Democrats were enmeshed in the “grinding, frustrating work of delivering change inch by inch, day by day.”

Republicans, in turn, made the “tactical decision” that if they stay “on the sidelines and don’t lift a finger to help … they figured they could ride people’s anger and frustration all the way to the ballot box,” Obama said.

Obama reverted to a favorite metaphor, saying he and other Democrats had been down in the ditch trying to get the battered car going while Republicans fanned themselves and enjoyed Slurpees.

Now that the metaphorical car’ is on the mend, “they can get in and ride with us if they want, but they’ve got to get in the back seat,” Obama said.

The president’s speech was interrupted by hecklers who shouted their disapproval over his AIDS funding policies. That touched off a counter-chant of “four more years” from supporters of Obama and Patrick.

Obama, wearing a jacket but no tie, stared at the demonstrators, who held up a sign that read, “Keep the promise.”

“Take a look at what the Republican leadership has to say about AIDS funding,” the president challenged.

Obama renewed a charge that special-interest groups aligned with the Republicans were spending huge sums of money in the campaign without revealing their donors. Because the source of funds is unknown, “foreign-controlled corporations” could be underwriting the TV ad buys, Obama said.

“They don’t even have the courage to stand up and disclose their identity,” he said. “They could be insurance companies, they could be banks, they could even be foreign-controlled corporations — we will never know.”

The White House has faced a backlash over such attacks. Critics have said that Democrats have yet to produce concrete evidence that foreign money is fueling campaign attack ads.

They’ve also said that with the economy in such wretched shape, Obama is distracting voters from deeper problems by focusing on campaign finance disclosure.

Obama’s visit to Boston testifies to his special connection to the Massachusetts governor.

Patrick worked in the Clinton administration in the 1990s, yet when it came time to endorse a candidate in the Democratic presidential primary in 2008, he chose Obama over rival Hillary Rodham Clinton.

A recent poll by Suffolk University showed Patrick leading Baker by 7 points.

Partisan emotions were strong at the rally. Before Obama spoke, the audience heard from Rep. Edward J. Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat.

Markey, in a reference to Delaware Senate Republican candidate Christine O’Donnell, said, “We have gone from Democrats who say, ‘Yes we can!’ to Republicans who say, ‘Yes, wiccan.’”

O’Donnell has said that when she was young, she “dabbled” in witchcraft.

With election day about two weeks away, Obama is stepping up his campaign travel, flying across the country to raise money and stump for Democratic candidates. On Sunday he and First Lady Michelle Obama are attending a rally at Ohio State University in what will be the president’s 11th visit to the perennial swing state since he took office.

On Wednesday he leaves the White House for a three-day Western swing that includes stops in Los Angeles, Las Vegas and Portland, Ore.

peter.nicholas@latimes.com
Obama says GOP accepts special-interest money while refusing to cooperate in government

Thousands of activists from groups that support the Democratic Party gathered for a march and rally on the National Mall on Saturday in a bid to rejuvenate the enthusiasm of more liberal voters and stave off an expected GOP comeback in next month’s midterm elections.

Organizers said the rally included more than 400 groups representing black, gay and lesbian, labor, environmental and civil rights activists who gathered at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial for the “One Nation Working Together” rally. People from all 50 states attended the rally demanding improvements on jobs, justice and education.

“We bailed out the banks, we bailed out the insurance companies, now it’s time to bail out the American people. We need to re-build the infrastructure and provide jobs, and savings for the American people,” Rev. Al Sharpton, civil rights activist, told the crowd.

After months of planning, the first groups of supporters arrived Saturday and festivities stretched well into afternoon. About 50 speakers and entertainers spoke at the rally including civil rights activists Rev. Jesse Jackson and Harry Belafonte, NAACP President Benjamin T. Jealous, and AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka.

“For the past two years President Obama has had to put up with the word no. Forty people, 40 people in the United States Senate have held down the working man of America. Forty Republicans have decided to say no.” liberal television and radio show host Ed Shultz said.

The progressive groups also focused on energizing democrats during the election season in which republicans and Tea Party activist continue gain momentum. It remains an open question of whether or not group organizers and activist can re-ignite democratic enthusiasm by November.

Laurie Christmas, traveled by bus from Toledo, Ohio to attended the rally. Christmas carried a sign that read “Health care. Not war fare,” on one side and a plea for green energy on the other. Christmas said she was excited to be surround by progressive thinkers but said she still has doubts about sparking progressive enthusiasm for the upcoming elections.

“Where are all the people who represented Obama in 2008,” Christmas asked as she pointed down the Mall. “There should be more people here.”

Cara MacDonald , a 21-year-old political science student from the University of Mary Washington in Fredericksburg, Va, sported her “I love pro-choice boys” T-shirt and said that even though democrats maybe frustrated this election, she does not believe they will shy away from the polls this November.

“It’s hard when people are riding the anti-Obama train,” MacDonald said. “But when democrats get people out to the polls, democrats win.”

The rally in part is a response to conservative commentator Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally in August that drew thousands to hear a call to return to American values of liberty and faith. However, organizers said the “One Nation” rally had been planned since April.

A request to stop the One Nation rally was rejected by a Washington D.C. judge on Friday, according to Denise Gray-Felder, spokeswomen for. The request was filed by National Events, one of the companies that helped organized the Beck rally.

Beck has criticized the liberal response, in part because he said it includes members of socialist groups.
Terry Cardwell, 56 of Rome, N.Y., said she viewed the Beck rally as a “white revival,” and on Saturday she carried a sign that read, “Fear of diversity makes a bitter cup of tea.”

“I’m here to support what we started in 2008,” Cardwell said. “We can’t go back to what we’ve already had.”

jordan.steffen@latimes.com

Civil rights, labor groups rally on National Mall