DOCSLIB.ORG

25 Years After Prop 187 Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
25 Years After Prop 187 Report Reports StudyLA 2019 25 Years After Prop 187 Report Fernando J. Guerra Brianne Gilbert Alejandra Alarcon Vishnu Akella Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/studyla-reports Recommended Citation Guerra, Fernando J.; Gilbert, Brianne; Alarcon, Alejandra; and Akella, Vishnu, "25 Years After Prop 187 Report" (2019). Reports. 15. https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/studyla-reports/15 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the StudyLA at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Reports by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FALL 2019 Loyola Marymount University Thomas and Dorothy Leavey Center for the Study of Los Angeles Fernando Guerra Brianne Gilbert Alejandra Alarcon Vishnu Akella 25 YEARS AFTER PROP 187 Changes in the Political Landscape of California and Los Angeles from 1994 to 2019 Thomas and Dorothy Leavey Center for the Study of Los Angeles (StudyLA) Loyola Marymount University 310.338.4565 1 LMU Drive LMU.edu/studyLA Los Angeles, CA 90045 @LMUstudyLA TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 ABOUT US ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Loyola Marymount University ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Center for the Study of Los Angeles ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 About This Report ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Recommended Citation ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Setting the Stage ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Political Representation ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Voting Patterns .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Total Population ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 POLITICAL REPRESENTATION ....................................................................................................................................................................................4 Political Affiliation .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................4 California Partisan Elected Officials ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 California Statewide Elected Officials..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Race and Ethnicity ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 California Partisan Elected Officials ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 California Statewide Elected Officials..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 VOTING PATTERNS .........................................................................................................................................................................................................8 Voter Registration ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 8 Voter Registration Versus Voter Turnout .................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Election Results .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 9 TOTAL POPULATION .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10 Race/Ethnicity ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10 Citizenship ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................11 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 APPENDIX ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Loyola Marymount University Thomas and Dorothy Leavey Center for the Study of Los Angeles 25 YEARS AFTER PROP 187 | 1 ABOUT US LOYOLA MARYMOUNT UNIVERSITY LMU is a private Catholic university with 6,250 undergraduates, 2,150 graduate, and 1,100 law students from diverse backgrounds and many perspectives. Our seven colleges and schools boast best-in-the-nation programs in film and television, business, education, and more. Our stunning campus in West Los Angeles is a sun-soaked oasis overlooking the Pacific coast and a model of sustainability. We are rooted in the heart of Los Angeles, a global capital for arts and entertainment, innovation and technology, business, and entrepreneurship. Our mission is grounded in centuries-old Jesuit educational tradition that produces extraordinary men and women dedicated to service and social justice. We are proud of more than 92,000 LMU alumni whose professional achievements are matched by a deep commitment to improving the lives of others. For more LMU news and events, please visit LMU.edu/news. CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF LOS ANGELES At its core, the Thomas and Dorothy Leavey Center for the Study of Los
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Joshua Groban NEWEST ASSOCIATE JUSTICE of the SUPREME COURT of CALIFORNIA
    California Supreme Court Historical Society newsletter · spring/summer 2019 Joshua Groban NEWEST ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA On Page 2: Insights from a Former Colleague By Justice Gabriel Sanchez The Supreme Court of California: Associate Justices Leondra Kruger, Ming Chin, and Goodwin Liu, Chief Justice of California Tani Cantil-Sakauye, Associate Justices Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar, Carol Corrigan and Joshua Groban. Photos: Judicial Council of California Introducing Justice Joshua Groban by Justice Gabriel Sanchez* hen Joshua Paul Groban took the oath of A native of San Diego, Groban received his Bach- office as an associate justice of the California elor of Arts degree from Stanford University, major- WSupreme Court on January 3, 2019, he was in ing in modern thought and literature and graduating one sense a familiar face to attorneys and judges through- with honors and distinction. He earned his J.D. from out the state. As a senior advisor to Governor Edmund G. Harvard Law School where he graduated cum laude Brown Jr., Justice Groban screened and interviewed more and then clerked for the Honorable William C. Con- than a thousand candidates for judicial office. Over an ner in the Southern District of New York. He was an eight-year span, the governor, with Groban’s assistance accomplished litigator at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Whar- and advice, appointed 644 judges, including four of the ton & Garrison from 1999 to 2005 and Munger, Tolles seven current justices on the California Supreme Court & Olson in Los Angeles from 2005 to 2010, where he and 52 justices on the California Courts of Appeal.
    [Show full text]
  • Media Release
    MEDIA RELEASE For Immediate Release February 27, 2017 Contact: Dave Jacobson, (818) 943-2348 Maclen Zilber, (510) 508-9142 Jacobson & Zilber Strategies NEW ENDORSEMENT IS BOON TO ED HERNANDEZ' BID FOR CA LT. GOVERNOR State Assembly Member Tony Thurmond Joins Scores of Assembly, Senate Colleagues Backing Senator Hernandez for Lieutenant Governor of California WEST COVINA, CA -- Continuing to build widespread support in his campaign for California Lieutenant Governor, today State Senator Dr. Ed Hernandez received the highly coveted support of State Assembly Member Tony Thurmond, a prominent representative from Northern California's east bay area. Thurmond, who represents California's 15th State Assembly District, announced his endorsement by remarking: "Senator Dr. Ed Hernandez is a tireless advocate for California's children, families and working people. His unyielding drive for excellence when it comes to advancing good government policies, investing in local neighborhood schools, expanding higher education, increasing healthcare access, bolstering job-training, enhancing public safety and pushing for more environment protections is precisely the leadership we need from our next Lieutenant Governor of California. These are just a few of the reasons why I'm pleased to announce my support of Senator Hernandez. I know he'll make our state proud." Notably, just recently, Senator Dr. Hernandez scored a milestone endorsement from California's new Attorney General Xavier Becerra. Underscoring his sweeping, broad appeal among influential leaders throughout California, to date, Senator Dr. Hernandez' campaign has released the following list of endorsements: Organizations UNITE HERE International Union, AFL-CIO Teamsters Joint Council 42 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 11 United Association (UA) Steamfitters and Refrigeration Local 250 California Pharmacists Association (CPhA) Association of California State Supervisors (ACSS) Pilipino American Los Angeles Democrats Federal Elected Leaders U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 Election Preview: the Projected Impact on Congressional Committees
    2012 Election Preview: the Projected Impact on Congressional Committees K&L Gates LLP 1601 K Street Washington, DC 20006 +1.202.778.9000 October 2012 Table of Contents Table of Contents 1-2 Introduction 3 House Key Code 4 House Committee on Administration 5 House Committee on Agriculture 6 House Committee on Appropriations 7 House Committee on Armed Services 8 House Committee on the Budget 9 House Committee on Education and the Workforce 10 House Committee on Energy and Commerce 11 House Committee on Ethics 12 House Committee on Financial Services 13 House Committee on Foreign Affairs 14 House Committee on Homeland Security 15 House Committee on the Judiciary 16 House Committee on Natural Resources 17 House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 18 House Committee on Rules 19 House Committee on Science, Space and Technology 20 House Committee on Small Business 21 House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 22 House Committee on Veterans' Affairs 23 House Committee on Ways and Means 24 House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence 25 © 2012 K&L Gates LLP Page 1 Senate Key Code 26 Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 27 Senate Committee on Appropriations 28 Senate Committee on Armed Services 29 Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs 30 Senate Committee on the Budget 31 Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 32 Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 33 Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works 34 Senate Committee on Finance 35 Senate Committee on Foreign
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Interim Hearing on Proposition 63: English As the Official State Language Assembly Task Form on Proosition 63
    Golden Gate University School of Law GGU Law Digital Commons California Joint Committees California Documents 9-29-1986 Joint Interim Hearing on Proposition 63: English as the Official State Language Assembly Task Form on Proosition 63 Senate Committee on Elections Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/caldocs_joint_committees Part of the Legislation Commons Recommended Citation Assembly Task Form on Proosition 63 and Senate Committee on Elections, "Joint Interim Hearing on Proposition 63: English as the Official State Language" (1986). California Joint Committees. Paper 27. http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/caldocs_joint_committees/27 This Hearing is brought to you for free and open access by the California Documents at GGU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in California Joint Committees by an authorized administrator of GGU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. • • L I RY GOLDEN GATE UN ERSITY TABLE OF CON'l'ENTS -' PAGE LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL . i TABLE OF CONTENTS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • ii TRANSCRIPT OF TESTIMONY . 2 TESTIMONY SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD ••••••••••••••••••• MARK SCHICKMAN • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 6 9 JOSE R. PADILLA • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • . • • • 7 3 s. I. HAYAKAWA I PH.D. • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • . • . 9 4 GEOFFREY NUNBERG • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • . • • • . • • • • • •
    [Show full text]
  • Letter from Stephen Johnson to Governor Schwarzenegger Denying
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 DEC 1 9 2007 OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR The Honorable Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor of the State of California State Capitol Sacramento, California 95814 Dear Governor Schwarzenegger, As I have committed to you in previous correspondence, I am writing to inform you of my decision with respect to the request for a waiver of Federal preemption for motor vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). As you know, EPA undertook an extensive public notice and comment process with regard to the waiver request. The Agency held two public hearings: one on May 22, 2007 in Washington, D.C. and one in Sacramento, California on May 30, 2007. We heard from over 80 individuals at these hearings and received thousands of written comments during the ensuing public comment process from parties representing a broad set of interests, including state and local governments, public health and environmental organizations, academia, industry and citizens. The Agency also received and considered a substantial amount of technical and scientific material submitted after the close of the comment deadline on June 15, 2007. EPA has considered and granted previous waivers to California for standards covering pollutants that predominantly affect local and regional air quality. In contrast, the current waiver request for greenhouse gases is far different; it presents numerous issues that are distinguishable from all prior waiver requests. Unlike other air pollutants covered by previous waivers, greenhouse gases are fundamentally global in nature. Greenhouse gases contribute to the problem of global climate change, a problem that poses challenges for the entire nation and indeed the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Europe the Way IT Once Was (And Still Is in Slovenia) a Tour Through Jerry Dunn’S New Favorite European Country Y (Story Begins on Page 37)
    The BEST things in life are FREE Mineards’ Miscellany 27 Sep – 4 Oct 2012 Vol 18 Issue 39 Forbes’ list of 400 richest people in America replete with bevy of Montecito B’s; Salman Rushdie drops by the Lieffs, p. 6 The Voice of the Village S SINCE 1995 S THIS WEEK IN MONTECITO, P. 10 • CALENDAR OF EVENTS, P. 44 • MONTECITO EATERIES, P. 48 EuropE ThE Way IT oncE Was (and sTIll Is In slovEnIa) A tour through Jerry Dunn’s new favorite European country y (story begins on page 37) Let the Election Begin Village Beat No Business Like Show Business Endorsements pile up as November 6 nears; Montecito Fire Protection District candidate Jessica Hambright launches Santa Barbara our first: Abel Maldonado, p. 5 forum draws big crowd, p. 12 School for Performing Arts, p. 23 A MODERNIST COUNTRY RETREAT Ofered at $5,995,000 An architecturally significant Modernist-style country retreat on approximately 6.34 acres with ocean and mountain views, impeccably restored or rebuilt. The home features a beautiful living room, dining area, office, gourmet kitchen, a stunning master wing plus 3 family bedrooms and a 5th possible bedroom/gym/office in main house, and a 2-bedroom guest house, sprawling gardens, orchards, olives and Oaks. 22 Ocean Views Private Estate with Pool, Clay Court, Guest House, and Montecito Valley Views Offered at $6,950,000 DRE#00878065 BEACHFRONT ESTATES | OCEAN AND MOUNTAIN VIEW RETREATS | GARDEN COTTAGES ARCHITECT DESIGNED MASTERPIECES | DRAMATIC EUROPEAN STYLE VILLAS For additional information on these listings, and to search all currently available properties, please visit SUSAN BURNS www.susanburns.com 805.886.8822 Grand Italianate View Estate Offered at $19,500,000 Architect Designed for Views Offered at $10,500,000 33 1928 Santa Barbara Landmark French Villa Unbelievable city, yacht harbor & channel island views rom this updated 9,000+ sq.
    [Show full text]
  • Capcon-1106-Special Election Edition.Pub
    Special Edition Volume 8, Issue 5 October-November 2006 2006 ELECTION RETURNS Initiatives Initiative Subject/Description Yes No Proposition 83 Sex Offender Monitoring and Residency Restrictions: Requires 70.5% 29.5% lifetime GPS monitoring of felony registered sex offenders. Increases PASSED penalties for violent and habitual sex offenders. Expands the definition of a sexually violent predator. Prohibits registered sex offenders from residing within 2000 feet from any school or park, and changes the term of a current involuntary civil commitment from two years to an indeterminate amount of time. Proposition 85 Parental Notification Before Termination of a Minor’s Pregnancy: 45.8% 54.2% Amends state constitution to prohibit abortion for an unemancipated FAILED minor until 48 hours after physician notifies minor’s parent or legal guardian. Permits minor to obtain a court order waiving parental notification based on clear evidence of minor’s maturity or best interests. Additionally, the proposition authorizes monetary damages against physicians for violation, and, in most cases, requires minor’s consent to abortion. Proposition 90 Government Acquisition and Regulation of Private Property: Bars 47.5% 52.5% state and local governments from condemning or damaging private FAILED property to promote other private practices or uses. Limits the government’s ability to adopt land/property usage regulations, except when necessary to preserve public health and safety. Summary of Senate and Assembly Election Results: By Party and Number of Attorneys Assembly Pre-election Post-election 48 Democratic Seats 48 Democratic Seats 32 Republican Seats 32 Republican Seats 16 Attorneys 16 Attorneys Senate Pre-election Post-election 25 Democratic Seats 24* Democratic Seats (results pending) 15 Republican Seats 16* Republican Seats (results pending) 12 Attorneys 7 Attorneys Page 2 October-November 2006 Constitutional Officers Office Candidates Notes Term Limit Governor D – Phil Angelides (39.2%) Incumbent.
    [Show full text]
  • Down-Ballot Report
    LOCAL IMPACT How Down-Ballot Seats Affect Reproductive Freedom Presented By: #VOTEPROCHOICE is a national political organizing project and technology platform founded in March 2016 by Democrats.com LLC. We connect the nation’s prochoice majority voters with prochoice champion candidates in every election and will continue to do so until all people in America have full, unrestricted legal access to abortion and reproductive health care services that are affordable, accessible and respectful. Contact Information: www.voteprochoice.us [email protected] Acknowledgements and Resources: State Information Exchange National Institute For Reproductive Health Center for Reproductive Rights COMS Project Guttmacher Institute State Policy Trends The Gavel Gap TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION How each Local Seat Affects Reproductive Freedom 4 STATEWIDE Governor 6 State Legislator 9 Attorney General 14 Lieutenant Governor 18 Treasurer 19 Secretary of State 22 Controller 23 State Auditor 24 Natural Resources Commissioner 26 Insurance Commissioner 27 Superintendent of Schools/Instruction 28 Public Service Commissioner 29 COUNTY GOVERNMENT District/County Attorney 31 County Executive 33 Board of County Commissioners 34 Sheriff 35 Clerk of the Court 36 County Coroner 37 County Auditor 38 CITY GOVERNMENT Mayor 40 City Council/Board of Alderman 43 City Council President 45 City Councilperson/Alderperson 46 At-Large City Councilperson 47 City Manger 48 City Auditor 49 School Board 50 Township/Village Trustee/Town Council 51 City Attorney 52 City Treasurer 53 JUDICIARY State Supreme Court 55 Superior/Trial Court 57 County Common Pleas Court 59 Introduction America is becoming a forced birth nation. It seems like each week an abortion ban becomes law in another state.
    [Show full text]
  • California Indian Tribes Political Contributions Since 2000
    $212 Million in Tribal Political Spending Shapes Policy Outcomes in California Since 1998, tribes have spent more $100,000,000 than $212 million $90,000,000 on politics in $80,000,000 California.1 $70,000,000 $60,000,000 Limiting $50,000,000 competition and $40,000,000 protecting industry $30,000,000 privileges are the $20,000,000 top focus of tribal $10,000,000 spending. Since $0 gaining a 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 monopoly on lucrative Las Vegas-style Figure 1 Total Tribal Spending in CA casinos in the late 1990s, Indian tribes have quickly become the top-ranked political spenders in California.2 While Congress mulls lobbying reforms following an estimated $26 million in total federal political expenditures by tribes, there is no sign that tribal political spending in California will abate. Tribes spent more than $56 million in 1998 and again more than $86 million in 2004 on ballot propositions seeking to persuade voters to protect and expand their gaming monopoly. Starting with the gubernatorial recall in 2003 and continuing through bruising statewide ballot propositions in 2004, tribal political spending mushroomed to $107 million in the two year period. During the calendar year that included the recall, tribes spent $19 million directly on the recall and on elected officials. According to the San Diego Union Tribune, $8 million of that total went to Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, who lost to Arnold Schwarzenegger. Three quarters of all tribal political contributions historically occur in the last half of the year. In addition to costly ballot fights, California Tribes gave more than $23 million directly to state elected officials, who play a critical role in limiting tribes’ competition by controlling the ratification of new gaming compacts and shaping industry policy.
    [Show full text]
  • California Policy Options
    UCLA California Policy Options Title The State of California Politics Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2vf4g4x2 Author Kayden, Xandra Publication Date 1998 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA POLITICS Xandra Kayden Much of California's political structure has been crafted by initiative in recent years, and most of it is in the hands of the courts. No one is confident of what will happen. Awaiting judicial decision are term limits, campaign fmance regulation, and the open primary: There are many possibilities --and many odds-takers --but uncertainty will be the most characteristic quality of the coming political year. For those who like their politics to be full of unexpected twists and turns, 1998 could be a very interesting year. "Handicapping the shape of the legislature is usually like a regular chess game," a Sacramento lobbyist noted. "Now, it's like a three-dimensional chess game, wondering what will happen with all 20 senateseats, and probably 30 assemblyseats." Term Limits Proposition 140, which was passed in 1992, limited the terms of the state legislative offices to 3 two-year terms for the Assembly, and 2 four-year terms for the Senate. Suit was brought against it immediately in the California courts, which supported it, but later in the federal courts, it was ruled unconstitutional by Judge Claudia Wilkin. She allowed the current limits to stand while it is appealed up the line to the 9th District Court of Appeals. The District court is one of the most liberal in the country.
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking the Bank Primary Campaign Spending for Governor Since 1978
    Breaking the Bank Primary Campaign Spending for Governor since 1978 California Fair Political Practices Commission • September 2010 Breaking the Bank a report by the California Fair Political Practices Commission September 2010 California Fair Political Practices Commission 428 J Street, Suite 620 Sacramento, CA 95814 Table of Contents Executive Summary 3 Introduction 5 Cost-per-Vote Chart 8 Primary Election Comparisons 10 1978 Gubernatorial Primary Election 11 1982 Gubernatorial Primary Election 13 1986 Gubernatorial Primary Election 15 1990 Gubernatorial Primary Election 16 1994 Gubernatorial Primary Election 18 1998 Gubernatorial Primary Election 20 2002 Gubernatorial Primary Election 22 2006 Gubernatorial Primary Election 24 2010 Gubernatorial Primary Election 26 Methodology 28 Appendix 29 Executive Summary s candidates prepare for the traditional general election campaign kickoff, it is clear Athat the 2010 campaign will shatter all previous records for political spending. While it is not possible to predict how much money will be spent between now and November 2, it may be useful to compare the levels of spending in this year’s primary campaign with that of previous election cycles. In this report, “Breaking the Bank,” staff of the Fair Political Practices Commission determined the spending of each candidate in every California gubernatorial primary since 1978 and calculated the actual spending per vote cast—in 2010 dollars—as candidates sought their party’s nomination. The conclusion: over time, gubernatorial primary elections have become more costly and fewer people turnout at the polls. But that only scratches the surface of what has happened since 19781. Other highlights of the report include: Since 1998, the rise of the self-funded candidate has dramatically increased the cost of running for governor in California.
    [Show full text]
  • Cumulative Report — Unofficial
    Cumulative Report — Unofficial Humboldt County, California — STATEWIDE PRIMARY ELECTION — June 08, 2010 Page 1 of 18 06/08/2010 08:22 PM Total Number of Voters : 13,898 of 76,446 = 18.18% Precincts Reporting 0 of 132 = 0.00% Party Candidate Vote by Mail Precinct Total GOVERNOR, Vote For 1 EDMUND G. "JERRY" BROWN 5,071 82.32% 0 0.00% 5,071 82.32% JOE SYMMON 138 2.24% 0 0.00% 138 2.24% PETER SCHURMAN 64 1.04% 0 0.00% 64 1.04% CHARLES "CHUCK" PINEDA, JR. 238 3.86% 0 0.00% 238 3.86% RICHARD WILLIAM AGUIRRE 223 3.62% 0 0.00% 223 3.62% VIBERT GREENE 137 2.22% 0 0.00% 137 2.22% LOWELL DARLING 114 1.85% 0 0.00% 114 1.85% Unresolved Write-Ins 175 2.84% 0 0.00% 175 2.84% Unqualified Write-Ins 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Cast Votes: 6,160 93.93% 0 0.00% 6,160 93.93% GOVERNOR, Vote For 1 LAWRENCE "LARRY" NARITELLI 213 4.03% 0 0.00% 213 4.03% ROBERT C. NEWMAN II 143 2.70% 0 0.00% 143 2.70% DAVID TULLY-SMITH 80 1.51% 0 0.00% 80 1.51% MEG WHITMAN 3,302 62.43% 0 0.00% 3,302 62.43% STEVE POIZNER 1,158 21.89% 0 0.00% 1,158 21.89% BILL CHAMBERS 149 2.82% 0 0.00% 149 2.82% KEN MILLER 84 1.59% 0 0.00% 84 1.59% DOUGLAS R.
    [Show full text]