How John Duran Helped Richard Bloom Beat Betsy Butler

Steve Martin
Steve Martin

Richard Bloom’s narrow victory in the 50th Assembly District was certainly a validation of the benefit of the recently adopted “top two” run off that allows that first and second primary finishers will be re-matched in the November general election regardless of partisan affiliation.

The “top two” concept was sponsored by good government advocates and was adopted by California voters over the vehement objections of the Democratic and Republican party establishments. Ideally it would force candidates in the general election to address the concerns of political moderates and force California’s skewered partisan politics toward the center.

In our progressive Westside assembly district it was a bit hard to detect exactly who was supposedly running toward the center as both Betsy Butler, the nominal “incumbent” and Santa Monica Mayor Richard Bloom were both unabashedly liberal. Previously we would simply automatically vote for whichever Democrat survived the primary as the other candidate would be a Republican who would not be aligned with the politics of the district. But the match up between two Democrats gave voters in the district an opportunity to get a closer look as to who was the candidate who had deeper roots in the district and may be more qualified to tackle the difficult challenges of governing this state.

Despite massive amounts of outside money pouring into Butler’s campaign at the instigation of Assembly Speaker John Perez, Bloom managed to emerge victorious, largely due to the fact that he had actual connections with the district. Given that Butler spent at least $1.5 million to Bloom’s $500,000, the Bloom win was clearly an upset and a repudiation of the Democratic party establishment.

The basic issue was that the Democratic party under John Perez unilaterally decided that the 50th, which is a veritable cash cow for progressive fundraising, should not be able to select its own representative, and that a weak but loyal back bencher, who had been representing the South Bay, would be our anointed as our representative. The fact that Butler was both a carpetbagger and was being imposed on the district by distant powers did not sit well with the locals.

Torie Osborn, the former executive director of the Gay and Lesbian Center and a policy maker for Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaragiosa, certainly felt that the Speaker had no powers of appointment that she was bound to respect. Backed by influential former State Senator Sheila Kuehl, Osborn waged an aggressive campaign against Butler. Bloom began a below-the-radar effort to rally his base and connect with voters put off by the carpet bombing mailer campaigns inflicted on the district by Osborne and Butler.

The three progressive candidates in the primary divided feminists, environmentalists and the GLBT community. The most divisive split was in the West Hollywood gay and lesbian community.

West Hollywood council members John Duran and Jeff Prang immediately jumped into the fray, Duran claiming that Butler’s tenure on the Board of Equality California should make her our community’s standard bearer. Prang endorsed Butler, claiming that he was doing so at the bequest of openly gay Assembly Speaker John Perez. For many in West Hollywood’s GLBT community, the endorsements by our council members seemed like cynical power plays given that Osborn had a record of front line community activism going back 30 years. If Osborn herself was not a community icon, certainly her major backer, Sheila Kuehl was.

Other than serving on the EQCA board, Butler’s GLBT resume was a tad thin, to say the least. What stuck many in the gay community was the fact that John Duran, who had run for the state legislature three times, was not endorsing a qualified openly lesbian candidate. Indeed both Duran and Prang had raised money within the community stressing how important it was to have a gay “place at the table.” Prang’s claim that he himself had withdrawn from the race at the bequest of the gay assembly speaker in order to make way for a heterosexual woman was both odd and amusing. You would assume that if someone dedicated to empowerment of our community was withdrawing that he would at least endorse the other viable community candidate.

Many young activists where shocked that our gay male leaders were not too concerned about having a lesbian place at the table. What made it worse was that John Duran clearly made the race personal, as if Osborn’s very presence in the campaign was illegitimate and an affront to his sense of self importance. Duran seemed offended that, after he had endorsed Butler, Osborn would have temerity to remain in the race.

Duran and Prang also had other self-interested motivations for endorsing Butler. Under the newly expanded legislative term limits, Butler as a current member of the assembly could only serve two more terms, for a total of four years. If a new person were elected, they could serve a total of six, for a total period of 12 years. If Osborn won, an assembly seat might not open up for a West Hollywood council member until 2024.

The race took another odd turn when Butler announced the endorsement of the Apartment Owners Association of Los Angeles, historically the biggest foe of West Hollywood’s rent control protections. Both Prang and Duran defended Butler’s acceptance of the endorsement. This defense seemed like a betrayal of the basic interests of West Hollywood tenants. Clearly Butler had a tin year when it came to issues important to our community.

It all blew up at the West Hollywood/Beverly Hills Democratic Club endorsement meeting where Osborn emerged as victor. As she went to the podium to make her acceptance speech, suddenly John Duran started screaming “this is bullshit,” and then, most infamously, “we’re not all lesbians.” Duran’s misogynist tirade was captured by dozens of cell phones and soon went viral.

On primary night, it became apparent that Butler and Osborn were both wounded and for most of the evening Bloom, the underfunded and underestimated candidate was ahead. In the end only about two hundred votes separated Bloom from Butler, despite Butler having the Democratic Party endorsement and having spent hundreds of thousands of dollars.

But the Osborn supporters did not go quietly into the night as the Butler camp had assumed. While the Osborn folks were down, they were not out.

When I appeared at the Stonewall Democratic Club’s endorsement meeting in October, I suspected that the room would be stacked with Butler supporters given that the club’s leadership seemed beholden to the party establishment. But when I spoke in favor of a Bloom endorsement, I was surprised by the level of enthusiastic applause.

Apparently the Osborn supporters had not forgotten Duran’s attack and were out to make their continued displeasure known. In the end Butler got the endorsement, but only by a mere two votes. The disgruntled Osborn supporters across the district found an outlet to express their frustration with the Democratic establishment by voting for Bloom.

So John Duran’s disrespectful comments about lesbians did have repercussions. While Duran wanted to insure that he would be a decisive influence on the race, it turned out to be true in ways that he never anticipated. The 1,700 vote margin of Bloom’s November victory could easily be attributed to the lesbian and gay voters who did not forget Duran’s misogynist tantrum.

  1. I turn the table Duran and please tell us what original idea have you generated in the last four years?

    Vote yes on C! Enough of developers and their associates buying the WeHo elections. Less than 10% of Duran’s donors were actually from West Hollywood.

  2. Well, this is what I like to see – a firey debate with substance among candidates instead of the usual & predictable rhetoric. As far as I’m concerned, all politics are personal. And indeed they are. I’m looking forward to some gloves off debates for a change that will separate the men from the boys. I also would like to see more people take advantage of this valuable community forum with their comments, which I find much more interesting than the articles themselves & I’m always more curious about how the community feels about things than I am the politicians. This is an important election, and BTW, judging from the enthusiasm from the community during the signature gathering for term limits, I think Measure C should pass handily.

  3. O Please John, if you want to discuss unstable, just look at your own record over the last eighteen months. If and when you really want to discuss issues, then I am ready and waiting. It is nice that Betsy Butler is your friend but that was no reason for you to tear down Torie Osborn except that your inflated ego was heavily invested in a Butler victory. Your tantrum at the West Hollywood Democratic Club was revealing in that you actually felt entitled to disrupt the meeting with your anti-lesbian rant. Rather than being embarrassed, you chalked it up to being “passionate”. Well I am passionate too-about saving this community and bringing some accountablity to city hall. For all the respect I have for your past contributions toward gay rights, I am troubled by your tenure as a Council member.

    But if you want to belittle me, any time you want to match records of accompolishment, I will put my two term record against that of your 3 terms and Jeff Prang’s 4 terms any day of the week. You and your buddies at City Hall have accused me of a lot of things but no one every accused me of being ineffective. The problem you have is that you think your city council seat is a reward for your commendable record on gay rights; but that gives you no right to subject the public to your arrogant and dismissive attitude toward anyone who comes before the City Council who happens to disagree with you. Your sense of entitlement allows you to come to City Council meetings unprepared and spend most of your time up there texting, (apparently no one told you that the audience can tell when council members are texting rather than reading-it is kinda obvious). You seem to have plenty of time for junkets but no time to review your City Council agenda. The City Attorney told the LA Times that you needed to charge thousands of dollars in meals to the City credit card because you simply were too busy to meet with your deputy to reveiw the council agenda at any other time. Lucky for you that you can’t see John Heilman rolling his eyes or shaking his head during some of your off point ramblings during Council meetings. It is quite entertaining.

    Clearly holding the title of Council member is more important to you than actually doing the work. Unlike Jeff Prang, you never show up to neighborhood meetings. As Mayor you did appear at meeting with about 80 residents who were upset about the Plummer Park Re-Design; you bailed out of that meeting in 20 minutes. Apparently meeting with people who you purportedly represent is too trying for your fragile ego.

    If I was so unstable, why did you guys keep me on the budget subcommittee the entire time I was on City Council? On a completely different issue, why did you endorse John D’Amcio for City Council when you vote against him nearly as often as John Heilman? On nearly every vote on new development, you and D’Amico are on opposite sides. While I am grateful that John D’Amico is on the Council, it makes you wonder if the only reason you endorsed him was to spite John Heilman and Lindsay Horvath. You seem to have little in common with D’Amico other than sexual orientation. Indeed D’Amico’s thougthful comments and analysis at Council meetings has clearly outclassed you and reflects what happens when you elect someone who actually cares about the issues facing West Hollywood.

    In the meantime you have been bullying Chris Landavazo’s supporters and threatening business owners and residents who are supporting term limits. Why can’t you just debate the issues rather than engage in this sort of underhanded, childish behavior. Is this the reason you ran for office? Is this why we need to elect gay people to office?

    John, you have talents, you just don’t apply them to City Council. Over the past several years the only vision you have presented to the City is that of unbridled growth which you claim is necessary to pay for social services. That is really a co-out and simply not the truth.

    Ready for a one on one any time you are.

    Steve Martin

  4. The only one unstable here is Duran and he has been for QUITE some time.

    First off as a longtime member of the WeHo Dems, I was at the meeting where Duran flew off the handle. It was not only embarrasing and frightening for the city’s mayor to act in such an irresponsible manner, Betsy and pretty much everyone there was visibly shaken by someone so profoundly unraveling before their eyes. Her volunteers were equally distressed by Duran’s actions. Talk about going off the deep end:

    Incidentally, the meeting was not “hijacked” in the least. It’s amazing how being a sore loser clouds one’s perceptions. If Duran was as close to Betsy as he claims, he would have pulled away from supporting her so publicly after his out of control outburst. His support and the coverage that video received were hurtful and certainly did not help a candidate who already was on very shaky ground.

    As far as West Hollywood’s election, I have thrown my FULL support behind Steve Martin in hopes that he succeeds Duran. In fact if Martin’s plans for term limits had already been enacted, Duran would currently be doing his farewell tour and we’d never have to see his smug face again. If only.

    Unlike Duran, Steve Martin doesn’t have a lengthy and high profile District Attorney investigation hanging over his head for the fraudulent use of the city’s credit cards over a 3-year period. Why hasn’t Duran explained this? Unlike Duran, Steve Martin didn’t turn up his nose at the entire east side of the city in regards to Plummer Park. It was as though me and my neighbors were wasting Duran’s precious time because we wanted input into what our beloved park that we use every day was going to turn into. Unlike Duran, Steve Martin isn’t bought and sold by businesses and developers in the city. The most recent is SoHo House, which against the wishes of nearly every constituent within its radius, is now increasing its noisy and paparazzi-filled hours til 4am 7 nights a week. I wonder how much money they’ve given to Duran’s campaign? And unlike Duran, Steve Martin isn’t constantly painting our city in a bad light by publicly making a fool of himself fawning over go go boys that are 35 years younger than him and being the epitome of a dirty old lecherous man. With elected leaders like this, no wonder WeHo was just named the most promiscuous city in America. What an honor, Duran must be so proud. Its disgusting and it is time for change.

  5. Bravo John. The truth be told. The lies and distortions from Steve Martin have no place in this campaign. Vote NO for Steve Martin.

  6. While I don’t usually respond to Steve Martin’s unstable remarks, I have to clarify some points for the other readers who may not know about Steve Martin’s inability to speak truthfully.

    First, Betsy Butler and I have been personal friends for 25 years. When I was sick in the hospital, she was at my bedside. We know each other’s families. And she remains one of my best friends. My endorsement of her had nothing to do with politics. She is a very dear personal friend. And this was something I communicated to Torie early on. Had Betsy not been in the race, I would have supported Torie or Jeff Prang or neither.

    Second, Betsy Butler has a history of LGBT advocacy beyond fighing for marriage equality. I first met Betsy in 1986 when she was advocating to include LGBT people in hate crimes legislation that Leo McCarthy was sponsoring. She has also been a fierce advocate on AIDS and was helpful to us in the Clinton White House when she worked there. I don’t expect that Steve Martin would know this because he has not had much history working on LGBT issues beyond the local level.

    Third, Jeff Prang, John D’Amico and I all endorsed Betsy Butler – a fact that Steve conveniently omits. He also omits that Councilman John Heilman also supported Richard Bloom. These endorsements are based on relationships that go beyond any particular Assembly Race. But another example of Steve’s half truths.

    Finally, the comment I made at Weho/Bev Hills Dem Club meeting was based upon the fact that the Osborne campaign stacked the room with people who did NOT live in Weho or Beverly Hills. They hijacked our local club. The club has since changed its policy to prevent this from happening again. And my comment was “they’re not all lesbians” not “we’re not all lesbians”. When a Torie supporter attacked me and called me a mysoginist for not supporting Torie, I pointed out the obvious – that Betsy was also a woman although not a lesbian. Steve believes if he repeats something 3 times, it becomes a fact. And then he rants. Enough Steve. I have fought hard for both lesbians and gay men for 30 years. It would have been nice to have had Steve participate in the battle for marriage equality. This affected both lesbians and gay men. Sadly, he was not present at either Equality California or No on Prop 8.

    Sadly, Steve Martin fails to recognize in his ridiculous opinion piece that Betsy did carry West Hollywood. Not because of my endorsement. But because she has been a fierce advocate for LGBT issues – something Steve used to do before he went off the deep end. He also fails to recognize that Richard Bloom is a decent man who also has a history with the LGBT community. I never once attacked Richard Bloom. And I only called out Torie’s campaign when they employed unfair tactics. I did not attack Torie the person or her lifetime of work. She and I have served together on many fronts. It was unfortunate that she was running against one of my best friends. Put me in a terrible predicament.

    Life goes on. Betsy and I have had dinner. She is attending the Gay Men’s Chorus concert this weekend as she always does. And our friendship endures. Steve Martin used to be a friend to Jeff Prang and me. But his constant destruction of himself and those around him is unbearable. Perhaps in the upcoming campaign against Jeff and I – he can focus on what he would do for the community of West Hollywood. Rather than just tearing down people, organizations and city hall. Those are the actions of a demagogue, not a leader. He is most comfortable being the constant critic. It would be nice if he generated an original idea from time to time.

  7. Prang endorsed Bytler, claiming he was doing so at the bequest of openly gay Assembly Speaker John Perez.” “Prang claimed that he himself had withdrawn fom the race at the bequest of the gay Assembly Speaker….”. What do these statements (among others) say in support of Prang’s leadership abilities & dependability? Not much, I’d say.

Comments are closed.