Recall Senator Pan 2.0: Should we or shouldn’t we?

Introduction

There has been much controversy revolving around the efforts to recall Senator Pan, a campaign waged by some of those who opposed SB 227, the vaccine mandate bill. Since SB 277 was ghostwritten by Pharma Lobbyists, and delivered to the legislature on pharma’s behalf by Senator Pan, some feel he should be made into an example to deter other legislators from following in his footsteps. This article seeks to explore the previous and upcoming recall efforts, as well as try to answer a question rarely heard amongst the vengeful mob: Should we even be attempting to recall Senator Pan?

Recall Pan, Chapter 1

The initial recall Pan effort has completely fizzled out, not garnering enough signatures to get the recall on the ballot. As would be expected, there is plenty of name calling and finger pointing to go around. I support the pursuit of truth inherent in various efforts, including Andrew Liebich’s petition[1] to the Sacramento County District Attorney, calling for an investigation into the apparently fraudulent activities of the original Pan Recall committee. Activities ranging from failure to timely report contributions and expenditures to regulators, to a YouTube mea culpa by Katherine O’Neal Duran, the citizen who filed the Pan Recall Petition with the Secretary of State. In said video, she admits she never intended for the recall to succeed in the first place. Click in to the citation link and watch the video of Ms. O’Neal Duran if you like. I shall digress no further. I really do want to get to exploring that nagging question.

California Campaign Finance Regulations

We’ll get to the question in a moment. First, we are going to explore some key facts of reality and Campaign Finance Reform. Putting some context to the question, that is otherwise lacking in the mob mentality.

In California, each individual contributing to a political candidate is subject to a contribution limit. These limits are set forth by the CA Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) and codified into law. In the current election cycle, an individual or corporation can contribute at most $4200 to a candidate for State Senate or State Assembly.

When a politician is subject to recall, these contribution limits are removed, should the candidate set up a PAC to oppose the recall. Here is the key excerpt as shown on the CA FPPC website[2]:

Exceptions

Contribution limits do not apply to a committee established by a state officeholder who is the target of a recall to oppose the qualification of the recall measure, and if the recall petition qualifies, the recall election.

This assertion above is a summary of the CA State Code of Regulations, Title 2, Division 6, Chapter 5, § 18531.5[3]. Recall Elections, and is reflected in subparagraph § 18531.5.b.1, which reads:

(b) Application of Contribution and Voluntary Expenditure Limits to State Recalls.

(1) Target Officer. Pursuant to Government Code section 85315, the contribution limits of Chapter 5 of the Act do not apply to contributions accepted by an elected state officer who is the target of a recall into a separate recall committee established to oppose the qualification of the recall measure or the recall election. Pursuant to Government Code section 85315, the voluntary expenditure limits of the Act do not apply to expenditures made by an elected state officer who is the target of a recall to oppose the qualification of the recall measure or the recall election.

In essence, the BEST POSSIBLE THING FOR Senator Pan in his Machiavellian pursuit to become Mandator General[sic] is to be subjected to a recall BECAUSE he can legally receive more money from his benefactors than he could for his re-election efforts in a normal election. Merck and GSK can break past the $4200 limit and quite literally donate millions of dollars to this PAC. The committee to oppose the recall can spend that money on things that will not only help fend off the recall, but also assist Pan’s re-election efforts. For example, ads to boost his image, provax scare ads, more trolls, excuse me, Publicists and Public Relations Workers, to spread Pharma’s propaganda.

UPDATE from The Sacramento Bee on January 4th

The anti-recall campaign, on the other hand, pulled in tens of thousands of dollars to defend Pan. Groups representing physicians, real estate interests, educators and organized labor contributed around $125,000 to the campaign, which unlike conventional races does not impose contribution limits.

Yep, $125K for Senator Pan. Bupkis for our movement.

Link: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article52931130.html

pan-cha-ching

I’m sure Ogilvy Mather will gladly take all that money to add to Pharma’s current web of lies, deception and fraud. Interesting thing about this law, under § 18531.5.b.2, anyone who would run as a replacement candidate IS STILL SUBJECT to legal campaign limits.

(b) Application of Contribution and Voluntary Expenditure Limits to State Recalls.

(2) Replacement Candidates. The replacement candidates in a state recall election are seeking elective state office and therefore the contribution and voluntary expenditure limits of Chapter 5 of the Act apply to replacement candidates.

Recall Pan, Chapter 2

Is this knowledge a complete and perfect barrier to a successful recall? Not necessarily. A well-funded recall effort that can match the spending of Pan’s benefactors, and that is run by conscientious, experienced and humble people might actually stand a chance of success.

Nevertheless, our movement is not sufficiently funded. Absent that funding, the efforts to Recall Pan amount to nothing more than a campaign to enrich his election coffers by eliminating the campaign contribution limits set forth by state law.

Summing Up

Make no mistake, those people who supported Recall Chapter 1 or who are actively supporting Recall Episode 2, are either directly or unwittingly supporting Senator Pan’s re-election efforts. There is an old adage: Do not mistake for malice that which can be explained by ignorance or incompetence. I say: Don’t be naive about Pharma’s limitless cash-driven sphere of influence. Follow the money. It is quite possible that every recall effort in this fight is a Trojan Horse sent to us by Pharma, to drain our resources, time, personnel, and morale, while handing Pharma a free pass to purchase more politicians.

Citations

  1. Petition calling for investigation into the PanRecall Committee (FPPC ID #1377741)
    https://www.change.org/p/investigate-panrecall-committee
  2. CA FPPC State Contribution Limits and Voluntary Expenditure Ceilings
    http://www.fppc.ca.gov/learn/campaign-rules/state-contribution-limits.html
  3. CA State Code of Regulations, Title 2, Division 6, Chapter 5, § 18531.5[3]. Recall Elections
    https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Document/I81BD9560D49311DEBC02831C6D6C108E?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)
Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Recall Senator Pan 2.0: Should we or shouldn’t we?

  1. In said video, she admits she never intended for the recall to succeed in the first place. Click in to the citation link and watch the video of Ms. O’Neal Duran if you like.

    There’s no link provided above to the video.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s