On Sunday the LA Times portrayed Meg Whitman as positively loaded with law enforcement and firefighter endorsements, while at the same time suggesting that Jerry Brown had a few wimpy little public safety endorsements at most.
What’s up with that?
This skewed picture emerged in an “Election 2010″ article, written by reporter Catherine Saillant, about the potential influence of the police and firefighters unions and organizations on the California governor’s race. In the print edition of the paper, the article was titled, “These Allies Could Boost Whitman.”
Here are the first two ‘graphs of the piece:
Meg Whitman has repeatedly said she exempts police and firefighters from her plan to switch state workers from pensions to 401(k)-style retirements because they have dangerous jobs.** But analysts say the GOP gubernatorial nominee’s stance is also a shrewd political move.
Police and firefighter unions hold tremendous power in Sacramento and can use their cash and muscle to help a candidate get elected. They pay for hard-hitting TV ads that play up their role as the guardians of public safety. They turn out at campaign events to hector anyone who proposes to mess with their pay and benefits.
Saillant went on to quote experts who said that the cops, firefighters, and other law enforcement groups are perceived as our heroes. (and rightly so). Thus if Whitman has taken some heat due to her agreement to exempt state law enforcement personnel and firefighters from pension cuts, she was likely making a savvy move because, all the fire and cop unions who now endorse her will prove to be valuable assets by putting money and might behind her. And most importantly, they will lend to her their collective heroic and tough-on public-safety image. (Or words to that effect.)
Then the unions who endorse Whitman were listed: The LAPD union, (LAPPL) and the California Statewide Law Enforcement Assn., “a union of California Highway Patrol officers, firefighters and other public safety officials.”
Plus, there was a quote from Ron Cottingham, president of the Police Officers Research Assn. of California, “the largest group representing sworn officers,” which was positioned in such a way that most readers would assume that Cottingham’s organization also endorsed Whitman.
Finally, near the very end of the article, Saillant wrote that: “Brown has secured endorsements from other law enforcement groups and a police chiefs group.” That was it. End of story. And since none of those “groups” were deemed important enough to name, one was left to conclude that, whatever the organizations were, they were small potatoes compared to tough-on-crime Meg Whitman’s big, bad (but heroic) endorsements.
THERE IS ONLY ONE TEENSY-WEENSY PROBLEM with the article’s depiction of the candidates and their public safety supporters.
It is utterly misleading and…well…..kinda false.
Although both candidates have a reasonable list of public safety endorsements, including Whitman’s endorsement by the LAPPL (which carries a lot of weight in So Cal), when the lists are laid out side by side, one sees quickly that more of the state’s largest law enforcement and fire organizations support……..Jerry Brown.
Ron Cottington’s aforementioned 62,000 member organization, the Peace Officers Research Association of California, supports—not Whitman—but Brown.
The 30,000 member California Firefighters Organization supports Brown with a vengeance.
And the 800 lb. gorilla when it comes to exerting influence on California state politics, the CCPOA—the prison guards’ union—supports Jerry (not-your-father’s-moonbeam-anymore) Brown.
(I can’t actually find any firefighters’ group that endorses Whitman, but maybe I’m missing something.)
Moreover, Brown has performed this trick of getting endorsements without promising pension-reduction exemptions.
Below you will find listed the main dueling public safety endorsements according to the candidate’s own websites. (I left out individual endorsements, like LA County Sheriff Lee Baca and former LAPD Chief Bill Bratton, who also endorse Brown, and the Kern County and Sacramento County sheriffs who endorse Whitman.)
(By the way, I noticed that that Brown only lists his “key” endorsements whereas Whitman lists everyone she once passed on the street who said they were voting for her. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.)
WHITMAN ENDORSEMENTS
Los Angeles Police Protective League (LAPPL) – represents the more than 9,900 sworn officers of the Los Angeles Police Department.
California Statewide Law Enforcement Association (CSLEA) – represents 7,000 public safety professionals
California Peace Officers’ Association (CPOA) – represents more than 3,000 law enforcement officers working in local, state and federal agencies.
California Narcotic Officers’ Association – provides training for 7,000 officer/members
BROWN ENDORSEMENTS
California Police Chiefs Association (Cal-Chiefs)
– represents nearly all the police leadership throughout the state.
California Professional Firefighters – represents more than 30,000 firefighters
Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC)– represents 62,000 officers and 890 local public safety associations.
California Coalition of Law Enforcement Associations (CCLEA) – represents 80,000 officers statewide.
California Correctional Peace Officers Association (CCPOA) – represents 30,000 correctional peace officers
I don’t mean to be critical of Ms. Salliant, whom I assume is a nice person and usually an excellent reporter. But when an election is as close as this one, it would be helpful if the information given to voters by the biggest newspaper in the state was…..you know….correct.
**NOTE: Whitman’s campaign got in touch to correctly remind me that she does not guarantee to exempt state public safety workers from all pension reform, but only from her platform’s 401(k) strategy.
Yes, you’re right and laid out indisputably that there seems to be a blatant bias here – hard to put it down as oversight or just inadvertently skewed. More of what I’ve noticed from the Times last couple years since Zell took it over and the misc. machinations started, where they seem to be beholden to some Republican business interests more than anything else. In this case they endorsed Brown but there seems to be strong pressure from other quarters to make up for it…
As for the PPL since Novey arrived, they have a history of endorsing anyone the police chiefs are NOT endorsing – in fact, their blog and e-blasts have maligned (most explicitly in the words of “Jack Dunphy”/ Pajamas Media) both Bratton and Beck and Police Chiefs in general as too liberal to understand or speak for the common cop. Very strange and confusing to the general public – it seems to skirt insubordination, to undermine the Chiefs this way.
BTW does Cottingham really rep the Peace Officers RESEARCH (not ‘reserve?’) Association? Just sounds strange – since when are cops known mostly for doing research?
I checked out the Research Assn. website a bit and get the name: they focus on legal, educational, insurance and other “empowerment” issues. Nothing wrong with research of course but still, the name doesn’t convey the action image of those who are endorsing Whitman – I don’t buy the PPL’s blog excuse that her stance on pensions has nothing to do with it, but maybe her strong support of the death penalty and on illegal immigration does carry a lot of weight. Even this Research Assn. isn’t endorsing Harris, who you’d think would overall be a more compatible partner for Brown to work with, probably also because of her opposition to the death penalty which is allegedly anathema to beat cops. (A stance the now-schizo Times said in their endorsement of Cooley, they believe is correct from a moral point of view, as is her stance on more vigorous environmental prosecution, but not right for our tough economic times. Whatever sense that makes.)
P.O.R.A.C. isn’t endorsing Harris because the office she’s running for means nothing to them when it comes to pay and benefits for cops. P.O.R.A.C. has for decades supported liberal candidates because they open the money flow to their members. They will endorse candidates that are perceived as tougher on crime when they can’t do much for them in what matters most, their pay and benefits.
Who do you think it was that proposed the 3%@50 retirement, a Republican? I of course agreed that cops and firefighters deserved that retirement but it was the state liberal politicians that pandered to the unions and drove this state to the point it is now. I know, I was one they pandered to. Union members look at their paychecks and benefits, we weren’t the ones running the states bank account nor was that something any union leaders thought about.
You figure that some of these politicians knew what they were doing and none of you liberals here can make any type of serious arguement as to whose to blame for the fiscal crisi we’re now facing.
Yet you people will keep voting for the ones that took us down this misguided path. Way to go.
Harris is a liar when it comes to the death penalty. She is a flat out liar and cops don’t trust liars. She can be against it all she wants but cops see her as a Rose Bird type DA. She will stretch any crime that begs for the death penalty into one that doesn’t fit the circumstances that calls for it’s use. She’s done it more than once and the voters know it.
Celeste wrote:
“I don’t mean to be critical of Ms. Salliant, whom I assume is a nice person…”
Really? I would expect this kind of comment from a teenage girl, not a seasoned reporter.
When a major metropolitan newspaper makes a mistake of this magnitude you should not apologize for calling them out on it. Whether or not Ms. Salient is a “nice person ” (whatever that means) is irrelevant.
I can’t imagine a male blogger with your CV making this kind of comment. Please, grow some cojones.
Meanwhile the Daily News’ Rick Orlov features Don Novey saying how pleased he is that his flap has called attention to the PPL, which (as we’ve seen for a couple of years) it’s decided to get a lot more actively involved in politics. Orlov does note (w/ major understatement) that the rank and file has considered some of their endorsements a waste of money (and I’ve heard, the wrong choices too, with decisions being made by a small clique headed by Weber who leans right and the “choices” presented to the rank and file in a skewed way).
The schism (fanned by the PPL under Novey-Weber) between their political activism and choices, and the choices of their and other Chiefs of Police, who tend to be more sophisticated in the big picture and take into account “little things” like the import of, and reasons for, the Consent Decree versus “the cop is always right” attitude of the PPL leadership, says a lot and frankly, speaks volumes FOR Jerry Brown. (Note the recent case involving the Guatemalan immigrant, where the PPL and even the mayor pronounced that the cops involved were “guaranteed heroes” before the investigation had even started, earning boos for Beck, although he has correctly reserved judgment pending a full and fair investigation.) But Novey comes off in the interview as unbothered by such little things – any PR is good PR as far as he seems to be concerned.
Nikki/Misfire true to form broadly chides “you people” and “you liberals here” (#3), for the fiscal crisis and pretty much anything else he mentions, but castigates me for being unable to distinguish the bunch of older white guys who pose as Republican talking heads and political figureheads these days for the Republican party (in an earlier thread), yet he can’t come up with any distinguishing characteristics either.
On the other hand, we have seen dramatic differences among Democrats, notably Rahm Emmanuel vs. Pelosi, Holder vs. the most liberal faction, etc. – on very significant issues. And I for one disagree with many true liberals on many things (like eliminating Prop 13 – if it’s true that Brown has changed his views on that, so much the better – with so many people barely hanging onto their homes and having lost big on their portfolios, it’s no time to raise their taxes exorbitantly to make up for shortfalls elsewhere). Democrats can cover a braoder spectrum these days, while Republicans not with the Teabagger right are derided as RINOS and don’t get party support or backing.
Celeste wrote:
“Saillant went on to quote experts who said that the cops, firefighters, and other law enforcement groups are perceived as our heroes. (and rightly so).”
………….
Not always. Celeste, you wrote an entire book about Father Boyle and people in Boyle Heights. Ask some of those subjects about the police, and tell me if they perceive the police as heroes. Truth is, SOME police are heroes. Some are straight up thugs, and no different than gang bangers. And I think that’s a more accurate way to put it.
Celeste, I would love to see you go into Boyle Heights and tell people there that the police are heroes, and that you have no reason to believe Meg Whitman is a racist. Father Boyle would politely pat you on the back and say, “Uh, I’m getting the fuck out of here”. And he’d run for it. LAPD would have to escort you back to West LA and it would be your last trip east of the river.
You’re such an elitist SBL, pretty much feel like puking every time I read your posts. You have no idea what the rank and file think of endorsements unless you polled them, did you? What you’ve heard is supposed to carry weight here?
So PPL leadership are less sophisticated than chiefs because why, because they don’t care for the consent decree? You think any chief did, are you high? Everybody knew what it meant and how they had to work under it from the chief down so they did their jobs and now it’s gone.
What you raelly know about cops is zero, you’re an outsider and all you’ll ever do is guess.
As for your second posts, California dems. own the fiscal mess we’re in, anyone can see that. Why do you think the largest labor unions have been supporting them for years, including some law enforcement ones? There is little difference in anyone in the Obama Admin. especially now and I won’t do the “easy” legwork you could do to see the difference in many conservative commentators.
As their just “pasty white boys” to you does it really even matter?
As for Script, wonder how many of his pals in Boyle Heights think it makes someone a hero when they ask someone where their from and then blow their fucking head off before they can say boo?
Who cares what they think, not anyone I know.
The Times (not being widely called the “Slimes” for nothing) does it again today.
Its online version as linked by the PPL is “lawman takes an even-handed approach” but the print edition goes further, revealing the paper’s bent for editorializing in its so-called straight news section, slamming Harris by name: “Career lawman on the trail: His rival Harris may differ, but in L A Cooley’s seen as a moderate.” Any criticisms are buried and implied irrelevant.
By Jack Leonard, who I used to think of as fairly balanced – but I guess if you want to stay employed there you’d better tow the party line. (WHO sets it exactly? Jim Newton and colleagues in Editorial, or the publisher? As you heard there was another management shake-up today, but it’s being reported as more over style than substance.)
Just watch the Times get nastier and nastier as Nov. 2nd approaches if Harris looks like she is closing in.
What they did for an obscure guy from Long Beach most known for being on “speed dial” for Pete Carroll’s disgraced anything-goes sports stars (known for his “juice” with Cooley as his protege) with about as much qualification for his job as city attorney and demonstrated dedication to civic life and ability to get things done in real world politics, as Whitman has for Governor, was truly disgusting. Unworthy of any paper, let alone what used to be a respected one in the day of the Chandlers. Again teaming up with Novey and his anything-goes teaparty Republican-skewing partisans.
Maybe when Whitman loses big the rank & file will finally rise up against this waste of their money and political capitol.
There went the comment eater again, maybe assuming I had same comment as before? (And no I was not addressing Misfire! I’m letting him go “puke” and thinking it’s a shame he so disgraces the rank & file cops and peace officers he claims to speak for.) It was re: today’s L A Times’ front-page PR piece for Cooley in the guise of news, going even further in its bias pro-Cooley/slamming Harris, by Jack Leonard no less.
That would be a good point, Sure Fire, if more than 1% of Boyle Heights residents were murderers. Almost all residents in Boyle Heights are honest, hard working people, and they hate pigs.
It’s now rescued (and the dup is deleted). To make matters even more irritating, sbl, the spam killer happily let through a nice long post written entirely in Russian with a zillion porn links, plus links to many products with which males may enlarge their personal equipment.
(Mutter, mumble, hiss.)
What a poser you are Robbie. You run to your little buddies and show them all your hard posts? What a joke, and yeah Boyle Heights has no problems, it’s like living in San Marino.
Your friends have been keeping busy Rob.
http://projects.latimes.com/mapping-la/neighborhoods/neighborhood/boyle-heights/crime/