Posted on 03/10/2006 5:35:09 PM PST by ArmstedFragg
Congressman Elton Gallegly announced today he would not run for reelection, citing "a medical issue that is yet to be resolved."
In a press release, Gallegly said it has been a privilege to have served Ventura County for the past 20 years, but said "circumstances over the past two weeks have convinced me that it is now time to begin the next chapter of my life."
(Excerpt) Read more at venturacountystar.com ...
I think the biggest concern for the GOP would be a scenario where more than one prominent Pubbie tries to mount a primary campaign write-in, and meanwhile only one prominent Dem tries to do likewise, and the Pubbies end up with Gallegly nominated (and then presumably a general election write-in effort), while the Dems end up with their preferred nominee. In short, I think the GOP best needs to coalesce around a write-in campaign swiftly.
I don't see any conceivable "loophole" in what CA statutes I've looked at that would otherwise permit a replacement for Gallegly (unless he drops dead).
http://www.flashreport.org/blog.php?
Theory? Or Fact?
by Jon Fleischman - Publisher
3-10-2006 7:45 pm
I've been contacted by several people advancing this theory, explaining what happenned today with Gallegly...
Supposedly the Congressman filed for reelection, and THEN decided (due to health reasons) that he would not run again - apparently not realizing that once you file your candidacy, you cannot "unfile" - thus he is on the ballot, and because he (the incumbent) technically filed for re-election, filing closed. I was told that Gallegly had assumed he would be able to "unfile" and this filing would be open for another week....
Now we have this bizarre situation of Gallegly on the GOP ballot but not wanting to be, this unknown guy, Tannenbaum.
Rumor has it that Strickland may seek legal recourse on Monday, asking a judge to extend filing in light of this bizarre thwarting of the democratic process...
As of 7:57 pm tonight there is no "unknown guy, Tannenbaum" on the ballot. The only filings for CA-24 are Gallegly (R), Jill Martinez (D), and Mary Pallant (D).
Ventura County Elections confirmed by phone that Tenenbaum filed "this afternoon" and is on the Primary ballot along with Gallegly.It takes a bit of time for that to show up on the SOS list -- counties take time to transmit that info to Sacramento.
38 posted on 03/10/2006 7:19:35 PM PST by calif_reaganite
Interesting. So this could very well turn into the battle of the nonentities. LOL I suppose that would be entertaining too. Not often you get one of those!
You get that all the time in 'Rat districts. Well, perhaps if not non-entities, colossal wastes of space.
Gallegly is a putz. Of course you can't "unfile" for an office. Neither are you allowed to withdraw your name from the ballot. Maybe he should have read his filing documents once out of the twenty years he's been in office.
If he was really so sick he ought to resign, and consulting with staff for TWO WEEKS over how to get his name off the ballot he should have announced his two weeks ago.
Fine - We're rid of Thomas thank God, and of Gallegly, who until yesterday I admired a lot, especially for being stalwart against illegal immigration.
Give Elton What He Asked For -- Another Term
by Mike Houston - Political Law Correspondent
3-11-2006 1:39 am
There has been lots of e-ink spilled on this blog in the past 10 hours about Elton Gallegly's strategic decision to wait until literally the 11th hour to announce he has no plans to seek another term in Congress. In doing so he has prevented several well qualified candidates from seeking that seat, nonetheleast of which is former Assemblyman Tony Strickland (full disclosure, I am general counsel to his wife, Assemblywoman Audra Strickland).
Here is one solution: Instead of the grass roots getting worked up about Mr. Gallegly's chicanery and instead of engaging in Quixotic legal efforts to get an extended filing deadline, I say let the voters call Mr. Gallegly's bluff and elect him to another term. He obviously has high name ID, and he is the "incumbent" (whatever that means given his circumstances). A few well placed mailers should get him re-elected to another term. If he then decides he isn't up to serving, he can retire and a special election can be called so that a real campaign can be had to fill his replacement.
That's once solution, particularly if a person is a supporter of the Tom McClintock/Tony Strickland faction of the GOP (which is opposed by the Elton Gallegly faction).
Well, the other is to support Mr. Tenenbaum who seems to be somewhat of a mystery.
Why is there so much animosity toward the McClintock/Strickland faction?
Are they not in the same corner on most issues?
It's not impossible that someone might believe this. The rules for state legislative offices permit a five day extension if there's no incumbent running.
Excellent idea !
Sounds horrid to me. Elect someone who doesn't want to serve? It won't happen. Someone will mount a viable write-in campaign.
He has only himself to blame for a stunt like this. What a shameful way to end a formerly distinguished 20-year tenure in Congress. Re-elect him and let him resign (and perhaps the state of CA can send him the bill for the $$ it will cost to have that special election on behalf of the taxpayers).
From what's been reported, Gallegly sounds like a selfish jerk who doesn't care about the party or about the democratic process. Good riddance.
I'm not sure whether the county officials were right to refuse to let Strickland file. The LA Times reported that they determined he was "already on the ballot" for state controller. How could that be if the filing period was open until 5 p.m. yesterday?
From the SoS website, any potential write-in candidate has just over ten weeks to get the papers together, although obviously he would have to decide very soon:
"For the primary election, the statement of write-in candidacy and nomination papers must be filed between April 10 and May 23, 2006.
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/qualifications/write-ins_2006.pdf
And, as pointed out in post 52, Strickland cannot withdraw as candidate for Controller.
ELECTIONS CODE SECTION 8800-8811
8800. No candidate whose declaration of candidacy has been filed for any primary election may withdraw as a candidate at that primary election.
I'm sure they can find some other conservative Republican to run besides McClintock and Strickland. Maybe the Mike Robinson who ran against Audra Strickland for Assembly? Seriously, though, the Dem candidates are obscure enough, because the seat was "safe" for Gallegly, and Tannenbaum is unknown, too, unless the local GOP really promotes him well. Being the longtime incumbent, Gallegly probably will still win the primary, and getting about 30,000 write-ins for someone else will be really difficult.
In the last five primary elections, Gallegly ran unopposed.
2004: 78,236 votes
2002: 62,239 votes
2000: 92,010 votes, 63.3% in the open primary
1998: 71,151 votes, 63.5% in the popular vote
1996: 56,700 votes
"And, again, highly deceitful and undemocratic."
"Why is there so much animosity toward the McClintock/Strickland faction?
Are they not in the same corner on most issues?"
The issues aren't ideology, but political power and patronage. The legislature has term limits and lower-level offices usually get little publicity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.