Kurt over at Fly at Night brings us up to date on Reiner's latest remarks and what's not happening with the state audit.

After a 3 month break from posting, I'm back to comment on the 2006 California Primary Election on June 6, 2006. I have a prelimary page up, and will be adding more. I will be covering the two propositions, prop 81 and prop 82, as well as the statewide primary races that will be on the ballot.

The Union Tribune remarks on new published reports that:

The First 5 panel paid $206,000 to three political consultants to run the commission TV ad campaign. After Reiner's initiative qualified for the ballot, the TV ad campaign stopped ? with a final tab of $23 million ? and the consultants went to work for the campaign touting the initiative.

This reeks. Of course there was a tight coordination of First 5's efforts to promote preschool and Reiner's push to get his measure on the ballot. It's astounding that Reiner still insists the TV ads were unrelated to his initiative, even though they stopped the day it qualified. Does he think we're the meatheads?

The Union Tribune is calling for Attorney General Bill Lockyer to investigate this $23 million use of public funds for Reiner's personal crusade. I will echo these call for the Attorney General to take action and encourage readers to vote No on Prop 82. .

While not directly related to the California Special Election, John Stossel comments here on the McCain-Feingold Incumbent Protection Act.

"I got elected. You may not criticize me."

OK, the incumbents don't put it that way. They say: "There's too much money in politics! We need campaign finance reform."

And they get it. "Reform" sounds good. McCain-Feingold and a host of state laws would protect us from the evil influence of big money.

But that's nonsense. When our behemoth government has the power to spend more than $2 trillion every year, big money will find a way to try to influence it. It's the little guys, who aren't in office, who are silenced by "reform."

The Gerrymander is another form of incumbent protection. Politicians redraw district lines so they can keep their seats. By voting YES on Prop 77, Californians can stop the politicians from creating their own districts.

State Finance Director Tom Cambell answers some questions about prop 76 on the JoinArnold.com website. Click here to read.

the CoyoteBlog has a great article on the Perils of Prop 79.

It turns out that the initiative contains a little-noticed provision that will allow private trial lawyers to sue drug companies for the new tort of "profiteering in prescription drugs."

California Director of Finance, Tom Campbell, reports why we need reform of the state's automatic spending formulaes that keep propelling spending above revenue. Even when we spend more than last year, the states employees unions call it a cut because the broken spending formulas say we should have spent even more.

I've decided to try and create a new blog to discuss issues pertaining to California'a 2005 special election.