Nancy Pelosi

What Nancy Pelosi’s Endorsement Means For the California Senate Race

February 3, 2023 By Joe Garofoli 8 Comments

House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi — who rarely weighs in on Democrat-versus-Democrat races — is endorsing Burbank Rep. Adam Schiff for Senate if Sen. Dianne Feinstein declines to run in what will be a fiercely contested, possibly once-in-a-generation contest.

It is the strongest sign yet that Feinstein will not seek re-election in 2024. Feinstein, 89, has said she will announce her intentions by spring. Pelosi delicately nodded to her Pacific Heights neighbor’s timeline in a statement obtained by The Chronicle Thursday: “If Senator Feinstein decides to seek re-election, she has my whole-hearted support.”

If Feinstein doesn’t run, Pelosi said in the statement, “I will be supporting House Intelligence Committee chair Adam Schiff, who knows well the nexus between a strong democracy and a strong economy. In his service in the House, he has focused on strengthening our democracy with justice and on building an economy that works for all.” Last month, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy removed Schiff from the House Intelligence Committee where has served since 2008 and chaired from 2019 to 2023.

Pelosi’s endorsement marks a rare occasion in which she is wading into a race with no incumbent and multiple high-profile Democratic House members. It is also a huge boon for Schiff. Pelosi has previously endorsed the two other Democrats seeking the seat in their House races, Rep. Katie Porter, and Rep. Barbara Lee. Porter, D-Irvine, announced her campaign last month, while Lee, D-Oakland, is expected to officially announce her run soon.

Wade Randlett, a national Democratic donor from San Francisco who supports Schiff, said that “an endorsement in any open-seat Democratic primary from the greatest speaker of all time is golden. But to get it this early when there are at least three members of her caucus running is a Willie Wonka ticket.”

Pelosi and Schiff have had a close professional relationship. She tapped him to lead the first impeachment of President Donald Trump and to the panel investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection at the Capitol.

Trump and his MAGA supporters have relentlessly targeted Pelosi and Schiff for their dogged pursuit of the former president. On Thursday, Pelosi commended Schiff’s strength in withstanding their attacks.

“Ever since I supported Adam in his race for Congress in 2000, I have known his commitment to putting the American Dream in place for everyone,” Pelosi said. “Coming from a family of immigrants, Adam has dedicated his life to public service. Every time I have asked Adam to take on the tough fight against extremist forces, he has responded with integrity, strength and success.”

Schiff said he was “deeply honored and so proud to have the support of Speaker Pelosi, who has been a friend and mentor throughout my time in Congress. She has accomplished so much for Californians, for children and for working families, and deeply understands the challenges to our democracy that lie ahead,” according to a statement obtained by The Chronicle.

Not only is Pelosi, the first female speaker of the House, one of the most popular figures in the Democratic Party, she is its most prolific fundraiser and could steer donors to Schiff. She has raised more than $1 billion for Democrats since she ascended into party leadership two decades ago.

Schiff’s campaign coffers hold nearly $21 million cash on hand, which could give him an early advantage in what is expected to be an expensive race. Porter has $7.7 million in cash on hand, according to the latest federal campaign finance report. She raised $25 million last year but had to drain much of that in an unexpectedly tough House race in a redrawn, more GOP district. Lee has only $54,940.

It is also notable that Pelosi endorsed Schiff over two women. Porter is a member of the House Progressive Caucus. Lee is a former chair of the Congressional Black Caucus and co-chair of the Progressive Caucus. Lee plans to make representation a central theme of her campaign.

One of the challenges that Schiff may face in the primary in deep blue California is being a straight white man in a diverse state.

California was represented in the Senate by two women from 1993-2021. Feinstein and Barbara Boxer were the first women elected to the Senate from California in 1992. Kamala Harris replaced Boxer after she retired in 2016 and served until she was sworn in as vice president in early 2021. California’s other senator is Sen. Alex Padilla, who is the first Latino to represent California.

The nod from Pelosi, a pioneering woman in the political world and a role model to many, will help Schiff in that regard.

The endorsement is also unusual since Pelosi has picked her spots in weighing in on top Democrat versus Democrat contests.

She didn’t take sides in the 2008 presidential primary battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. In 2016, she didn’t endorse Clinton over Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders until the morning of the California primary, when she announced her support of Clinton on ABC’s “The View.”

That’s in contrast to what Pelosi had told reporters in San Francisco five weeks earlier, when she said she was withholding her endorsement so as not to dampen enthusiasm among supporters of either candidate.

“I have a responsibility to elect a Democratic House because whenever we get a new president — whomever she may be — we want that president to have the strongest possible Democratic Congress,” Pelosi said then.

She also has picked incumbents over rising Democratic stars. She endorsed Rep. Mike Honda (twice) and former Rep. Tom Lantos over now-Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Santa Clara, when Khanna challenged the incumbents. And she backed incumbent Rep. Pete Stark over now-Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Livermore, in 2012.

In choosing Schiff, Pelosi said, “America is at a crossroads. We can continue to lift our communities, strengthen our economy and defend our democracy — or let Republicans roll back our progress, threaten our freedoms and give tax breaks to the wealthy special interests. In 2024, the fight for America’s future is on the ballot.”

Click here to read the full article in the San Francisco Chronicle

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi, US Senate

All 14 California Republicans in House Hold the Line on Tax Reform

October 27, 2017 By Joel B. Pollak 7 Comments

All 14 California Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives voted Thursday to pass the Senate’s version of a new budget bill that prepares the way for tax reform.

They did so even though one of President Donald Trump’s proposed reforms is an end to the state and local tax deduction (SALT), a $1.8 trillion boost that would hit high-tax, Democratic-dominated states like California, whose high earners benefit disproportionately from the deduction.

On Wednesday, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) had warned California’s Republican delegation that they would be hurting their own state if they voted for the budget. According to the Sacramento Bee, she called them potential “accomplices” in hurting California taxpayers, describing tax reform as “really an urgent time for the state of California.” She advised them they would have more leverage over the final legislation if they voted no.

But House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) disagreed, telling the California Republican Party convention in a speech over the weekend: “I don’t think it’s fair that somebody else subsidize poor management of California or New York policies. … No longer can Sacramento say, I’m gonna raise the rates, just cause I’ll have the federal government subsidize it. They will have to be held accountable for when they want to raise taxes higher.”

Some representatives, like vulnerable Mimi Walters (R-CA) of Orange County, seemed undecided. Capital Public Radio quoted her spokesperson as saying: “The Congresswoman’s top priority is putting more money back into the pockets of middle class Californians. … She will carefully review any change to the SALT deduction to determine the impact on hard working taxpayers in need of tax relief.” In the end, however, Walters, too, held the line.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He was named one of the “most influential” people in news media in 2016. He is the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

This article was originally published by Breitbart.com/California

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: Donald Trump, Kevin McCarthy, Mimi Walters, Nancy Pelosi, Tax Reform

Democrats Talk Openly About Challenging Nancy Pelosi’s Leadership

June 22, 2017 By Joel B. Pollak 5 Comments

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is facing unprecedented pressure, as frustrated Democrats have begun — for the first time in seven years — to talk about replacing her after a series of disappointments at the ballot box.

Pelosi was hailed as a driving force behind Democrats’ victory in 2006, when the party seized both houses of Congress and set the stage for victory in the 2008 presidential election. She became the first female Speaker of the House, and set about centralizing power in the Speaker’s office, ruling her caucus with unquestioned authority and promoting an unapologetically liberal agenda.

However, Pelosi’s role in the Obamacare debacle of 2009-10 helped provoke the Tea Party wave, sending her party to historic defeat and costing her the Speaker’s gavel. Amazingly, Pelosi did not resign at that point, and dispatched several would-be challengers, most notably Rep. Heath Shuler (D-NC), who later lost his seat to a Republican. She also fended off a challenge by Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH) after 2016. Pelosi has been a prolific fundraiser for the party, even if she has also become a lightning rod for criticism and a useful political foil for Republicans to run against.

Ironically, Pelosi’s power within her caucus only grew as the Democrats lost seats, because most of the losses were in conservative swing districts. That left a core of liberal representatives from major cities, and blue states such as New York, Illinois, and Pelosi’s home state of California. There has been no political constituency in the caucus for an ideological alternative to the left-wing agenda that Pelosi and her coterie have continued to push even in defeat.

The high expectations that Pelosi set for Tuesday’s special election in Georgia may prove to be her undoing. Early in the week, with Jon Ossoff expected to win, Pelosi let it be known that she expected to take back the Speaker’s gavel after 2018. But Republican Karen Handel surged to victory, partly by tying her opponent to Pelosi.

As reality hit home, some Democrats began to break the taboo around challenging their leader. MSNBC analyst Matthew A. Miller tweeted: “No Dem wants to say it publicly, but taking their top bogeyman Pelosi off the table would help too. Fair or not, it’s the truth.”

Now, other critics are beginning to emerge.

“It’s time for some change. I think it’s time for a new generation of leadership,” said Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA). And Rep Filemon Vela (D-TX) told Politico: “I think you’d have to be an idiot to think we could win the House with Pelosi at the top … Nancy Pelosi is not the only reason that Ossoff lost. But she certainly is one of the reasons.”

But Pelosi also has her defenders — and she will not go easily.

This piece was originally published by Breitbart.com/California

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: Congress, Democrats, Heath Shuler, Nancy Pelosi, Tim Ryan

A Supreme Court Litmus Test from Our Founders

March 14, 2017 By Gary M. Galles Leave a Comment

Photo courtesy Envios, flickr

As the March 20 start of confirmation hearings for Neil Gorsuch approaches, Americans have been hearing about litmus tests. For instance, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., have set up a standard of “being mainstream” in their eyes and respecting precedents they like, ignoring whether they violate the Constitution.

However, there is a far more relevant litmus test – our founders’ views of American government under the Constitution justices pledge to defend. They are worth reviewing as a primer for where attention should focus on any nominee for the Supreme Court.

Samuel Adams: The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil constitution … it is our duty to defend them against all attacks … to maintain the rights bequeathed to us.

Patrick Henry: Liberty ought to be the direct end of your government.

Thomas Paine: A constitution is not the act of a government but of a people constituting a government … . All delegated power is a trust, and all assumed power is usurpation.

James Wilson: Government … should be formed to secure and enlarge the exercise of the natural rights of its members; and every government which has not this in view as its principal object is not a government of the legitimate kind.

Benjamin Franklin: An equal dispensation of protection, rights, privileges and advantages, is what every part is entitled to.

Thomas Jefferson: A sound spirit of legislation … banishing all arbitrary and unnecessary restraint on individual action, shall leave us free to do whatever does not violate the equal rights of another.

John Dickinson: We cannot be free, without being secure in our property … we cannot be secure in our property, if, without our consent, others may, as by right, take it away.

George Washington: [Government] has no more right to put their hands into my pockets, without my consent, than I have to put my hands into yours.

John Adams: The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. …“Thou shalt not covet” and “Thou shalt not steal” … must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be … made free.

Richard Henry Lee: It must never be forgotten … that the liberties of the people are not so safe under the gracious manner of government as by the limitation of power.

James Madison: The powers of the federal government are enumerated … it has legislative powers on defined and limited objects, beyond which it cannot extend its jurisdiction.

John Taylor of Caroline: Every innovation which weakens the limitations and divisions of power … makes [government] strong for the object of oppression.

Alexander Hamilton: A limited Constitution … can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing. … To deny this would be to affirm … that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.

Joseph Story: The Constitution of the United States is to receive a reasonable interpretation of its language and its powers, keeping in view the objects and purposes for which those powers were conferred.

James Otis: An act against the Constitution is void.

George Mason: Flagrant violations of the Constitution must disgust the best and wisest part of the community.

Mercy Otis Warren: Any attempt [to] subvert the Constitution … cannot be too severely censured.

Our founders clearly revealed their central purpose was defending Americans’ rights and liberties against encroachment, particularly from overbearing government. That is the Supreme Court’s primary function. Therefore that should the central litmus test focus in evaluating Judge Gorsuch, as well as any other nominee, to the court tasked with preserving and protecting the highest law of the land.

Gary M. Galles is a Professor of Economics at Pepperdine University, a Research Fellow at the Independent Institute, an Adjunct Scholar at the Ludwig von Mises Institute and a member of the Foundation for Economic Education Faculty Network. His books include “Lines of Liberty” (2016), “Faulty Premises, Faulty Policies” (2014) and “Apostle of Peace” (2013).

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: Charles Schumer, Gary M. Galles, James Wilson, Nancy Pelosi, Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine

Hillary Clinton gets away with reinforcing gender stereotypes

December 29, 2015 By Susan Shelley Leave a Comment

There was always something odd, and slightly dated, about Hillary Clinton’s promoted reputation during her years as first lady. Women were not a novelty in the workforce in 1992, but you would have thought so to hear the fawning excitement over Mrs. Clinton’s career. She was said to be the most intelligent. The most accomplished. The most influential, qualified, powerful … . The list went on and on, as if some husbands apologize with publicists instead of diamonds.

In 2008, when Nancy Pelosi was the first female speaker of the House of Representatives in U.S. history, Hillary Clinton was not the first woman ever to run for president. But she seemed to get all the press for being the groundbreaking, ceiling-shattering feminist. Nancy Pelosi was treated by the media as the Ethel Mertz of the story, the perpetual second banana who delivers the set-up lines for the star comedienne.

“Comedienne” is considered sexist today, so let me correct that to “comedian.” I don’t want to use a politically incorrect term that offends women, although I am a woman, and that should buy me some slack on these issues but it probably doesn’t.

The rules are so difficult to figure out.

For instance, Hillary Clinton was asked during the recent debate if it was time to change the role of the president’s spouse.

Mrs./Sen./Secretary Clinton answered generally, and then said, “With respect to my own husband, I am probably still going to pick the flowers and the china for state dinners and stuff like that.”

What in the name of Gloria Steinem was that about?

To get a sense of what an outrageous statement that is, imagine the response if a Republican man, or any man, had said he believes that as president, Hillary Clinton will probably choose the flowers and china for state dinners.

Great Betty Friedan, he’d have been strung up with the nearest microphone cord, right there on the spot, and his head would have been impaled on a tall can of hair spray as a warning to the others.

And what Hillary Clinton said next was even more startling. “I will certainly turn to him as prior presidents have,” she said, “for special missions, for advice, and in particular, how we’re going to get the economy working again for everybody, which he knows a little bit about.”

Mother of Bella Abzug! Did the woman who might become the first female president of the United States just say her husband knows more than she does about the economy and jobs? What on Gaia’s green earth was she thinking?

The answer is in the polling data. The Quinnipiac University poll just revealed publicly what a candidate polling privately would already have known: by 53 to 43, voters think Donald Trump “would do a better job handling the economy” than Hillary Clinton.

Some time ago, a conservative-leaning friend of mine, a woman, said she would vote for Hillary Clinton in a heartbeat. “Why?” I asked. “Because we’ll get Bill back to run the economy for eight years,” she told me.

How many voters think that? How many voters would vote for that?

Who knows, but with my own eyes, I saw the woman who once snarked that she wasn’t “some little woman standing by my man like Tammy Wynette,” who once sneered at women who “stayed home and baked cookies and had teas,” announce to the country that as president of the United States, she’d handle the dishes and her husband would handle the money.

Holy Alice in Wonderland!

###

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: Election 2016, Feminism, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Sexism