The full word is in on President Barack Obama’s visit to San Francisco later this month to raise money for U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer’s re-election campaign and for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and the word is “ch-ching!!!”
The tickets to the cocktail reception at 4:30 p.m. Tuesday, May 25, at the Fairmont Hotel atop San Francisco’s Nob Hill cost $250, $500 or $2,000 each, depending on where you want to stand or sit. But the big money will come at the 5:30 p.m. photo reception and dinner at the home of billionaire oil heir Gordon Getty and his wife, Ann, where it’ll be $35,200 per couple. The fundraisers make a point of noting an individual can give as much as $45,200 to California Senate 2010 while a couple can give as much as $90,400, so they’re clearly aiming for the deepest of the deep pockets.
How does that big money get broken down? The fine print says “(t)he first $4,800 of each contribution from a person will be allocated to the Friends of Barbara Boxer. The first $2,400 of each contribution will be considered designated for the primary election; the second $2,400 will be considered designated for the general election. The next $30,400 of each contribution from a person will be allocated to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Inc. The next $10,000 of each contribution from a person will be allocated to the Democratic State Central Committee of California-Federal. Any contributor may designate his or her contribution for a particular participant.”
Meanwhile, Boxer had nothing but praise today for the president’s nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, Solicitor General and former Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan:
“I congratulate Solicitor General Elena Kagan on her nomination to the United States Supreme Court.
“From what I have seen thus far, Elena Kagan understands the fundamental promise of our Constitution, which is equality, justice and fairness for all Americans. She has a proven ability to reach across ideological lines, which is so important so we can build consensus.
“Elena Kagan has broken barriers throughout her career – as the first female dean of Harvard Law School, the first female Solicitor General and potentially the fourth woman to sit on the Supreme Court. Her confirmation would be historic, marking the first time that three female Justices have served together on the nation’s highest court.
“I look forward to learning more about Solicitor General Kagan’s views and record during her confirmation hearing.”
Meanwhile, former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina – one of the candidates vying for the GOP nomination in June to challenge Boxer in November – was sounding the alarm:
“The American people should have the confidence that the next member of the Supreme Court will impartially serve and work to uphold the Constitution rather than legislate from the bench. It is crucial that the Senate Judiciary Committee subject Ms. Kagan to a rigorous confirmation process so that we can learn more about her background, views and the approach she would take to adherence to the Constitution as a member of our nation’s highest court. Given Ms. Kagan’s brief litigation experience, lack of any judicial experience and in light of some of the information publicly available about her record, the Senate must ensure a confirmation process that is fair, tough and includes a close examination of her career, writings and public statements.
“While I will reserve judgment as to whether or not I will support Ms. Kagan’s nomination to the Supreme Court until the public vetting and confirmation process has been completed, I do find some of the available information about her past record troubling. Specifically, the extent to which her effort to keep military recruiters off Harvard’s campus was motivated by her own political views rather than by following the law of the land may indicate a potential activist mentality I do not believe is appropriate for the Court.
“The job of a U.S. senator is to advise and consent to the nominations to the Supreme Court made by the President. In deciding to support or oppose a nomination as a member of the U.S. Senate, I would require a record showing adherence to the Constitution and proof the nominee would not use the bench to legislate or attempt to interpret the Constitution based on his or her own political philosophy.”