Mike Meza, a retired Pasadena Police sargeant and a local businessman is banking to win a seat in Sacramento with a non partisan campaign.
He said the over-reliance on the "R" or "D" after a candidates' name has precluded the ability to put into office competent stewards of the state's coffers and true representatives of each respective district.
Meza is running in the 48th Assembly District, which includes Glendora, against Democrat Roger Hernandez, incumbent in the 57th District, and West Covina resident Joe Gardner, 57.
1. Why are you running for the 48th Assembly seat? What change do you think you can make through this position?
I am running for the 48th assembly district because I believe I am more representative of the people in this district and prior representatives have used this position for their self-interests. With over 35 years living in the district living in Baldwin Park, West Covina, Charter Oak and Covina I have a unique attachment to most of the district's communities and am familiar with their respective issues.
They say experience is the parent of wisdom and I feel I have vastly more experience than the other candidates. Born and raised in the barrio of ELA, I am also aware of the pitfalls to gang involvement and the potential life of crime.
As a retired police sergeant and current small businessman, I have a better sense of public and private sector needs. The 48th assembly district has the capacity to provide prosperity to all its inhabitants.
2. What do you think has contributed to the state's current fiscal situation? What would you do to help with the state's recovery?
The current state financial crisis is a result of over-promising. Spending without a true grasp of income is unreasonable and this is what the state has done. The state has failed to live within its means and has made it worst by virtually fabricating budgets the legislative analysts office has denounced. Now they are looking to raise taxes to a select group of income earners. The only thing left to do is to minimize government to the extent that every position is an absolute necessity and that the role of government is limited to those functions that the private sector can not or should not do on its own.
3. What is your stance on illegal immigration and what policies do you think must be in place or changed to address the issue?
An intense and profound dialogue regarding the history and relationship between Mexico and the United States is essential to any resolution to illegal immigration. No other group comes close to Mexicans to the subjugation and criticism of there presence and often within the same time frame their necessity in this country. At the same time, the United States is confronted with its Christian values in what I see as the struggle between humanity and sovereignty. Milton Friedman of Stratfor projects that Mexican immigration will increase in the next 100 years. We as a country (not California) must first understand with respect to Mexicans, the unintended consequence of manifest destiny, the intended war against Mexico and the myriad of machinations up to this date that leaves Mexicans often feeling like necessary evils, and prepare for that eventuality. Mexico's stability must be considered in constructing policies with respect to ingress and egress by Mexicans.
4. Would you have an instrumental role as previous local representatives have had in bringing funds to the Gold Line extension project? Why or why not?
Generally I am in favor of the Gold line extension and feel that it would be most beneficial to the working commuters. I believe there are sufficient number of riders capable of making mass transit profitable. My only concern is in the ability to establish effective incentives to move people from their cars to mass transit. The key to success lies with this and I would do my best look at all incentives to increase ridership.
5. Schools have long struggled with dwindling state resources. How do you think the state should treat funding for public schools and higher education? What should be done to maintain quality education?
I have difficulty separating education with the bureaucracy of education. I am of the view along the thinking of John Stuart Mill who discouraged state run education. It is time for a renaissance in education and an extinction of bureaucratic discourse that advances no child. This is another area where total change is necessary. For the immediate future local school districts should be given all the power necessary to educate. Today learning comes in a variety of media/forums. Canned education need not be the road to learning. I am open to all ideas that will facilitate learning while taking into consideration the capacity and desire of the individual student.
6. Many local government officials have pushed for more independence from the state and gaining more local control of funding. What is your stance on this perspective?
In general I agree with relegating as much as possible to local control to the extent that state remains the primary facilitator of all functions that support the greater good.
Keep up with Baldwin Park Patch: