Maviglio upset about our optometry articles

Maviglio upset about our optometry articles

Steven MaviglioOur recent articles on an optometrists’ bill upset powerful Democratic consultant Steve Maviglio, currently the spokesman for Assembly Speaker John Perez, D-Los Angeles.

Katy Grimes described how Maviglio is the News/Press contact for Bridging the Provider Gap, which favors SB 492. It’s a bill broadening what optometrists can do, such as being allowed to prescribe more medications than they currently are allowed, and perform surgeries, because they’re not M.D.s. Maviglio is doing that while getting paid $9,500 a month from the taxpayers for working with Perez.

As Grimes reported, “In March when he announced the job with Perez, Maviglio said he didn’t have any clients involved in Assembly matters.” Oops.

John Hrabe also reported on SB 492 and the large number of campaign contributions behind it.


Maviglio has been tweeting.

First tweet:

Maviglio tweet 1


Second tweet:

Maviglio tweet 2


It’s amusing that he put scare quotes around “journalism.” In fact, we’re doing what journalists are supposed to do: write the news. Katy told me that her sources say our articles were major factors in SB 492 getting pulled today. That’s journalism — no scare quotes.

He might be too used to the usual liberal journalists who just rewrite government press releases. When newspapers began slashing their Sacramento bureaus around 2006, many of the fired journos without a missing a beat just became flacks for the Democratic politicians they had been writing about. That showed the symbiosis between what are supposed to be antagonists.

I’m also not sure who “ConsumerWD” is. We don’t have anything to do with them, so the reference is irrelevant.

Private vs. government

As to our supposed “hypocrisy” for not disclosing our donors. Well, we’re a private organization. We don’t get tax money. So we shouldn’t have to disclose our donors, any more than I should have to disclose who gave me two Macanudos on my birthday. But actually,’s parent think tank, the Pacific Research Institute, is required to disclose public papers on its donors. So the information is out there.

By contrast, Maviglio pulls down $9,500 a month of my tax dollars. And his other jobs advise groups on how to get my tax money, or how to regulate my life. Paying taxes is not voluntary. If you don’t pay, people with guns actually will come around and put you in a cage. Just ask Wesley Snipes.

Full disclosure is required, please.


Write a comment
  1. Rex the Wonderdog!
    Rex the Wonderdog! 14 August, 2013, 00:54

    Steve, where are ya lil buddy, you usually post your own spin here!

    Reply this comment
  2. Steve Mehlman
    Steve Mehlman 14 August, 2013, 10:20

    Yawn! Just sitting back waiting for your b.s. so I can respond. Like shooting fish in a barrel.

    Reply this comment
  3. Steve Mehlman
    Steve Mehlman 14 August, 2013, 11:51

    Sorry, Rexie. Maybe you were referring to Steve Maviglio, not me. If so, just a reflex action on my part. My bad.

    However, after reading the hit piece on Maviglio, can’t help but wonder where the outrage was when Gov. Schwarzenegger hired corporate lobbyists and other industry people to serve in his administration. No conflict there, eh? LOL.

    Reply this comment
  4. admin
    admin 14 August, 2013, 14:19

    Steve M.: “Hit piece”? Just the news.

    As to Arnold, I bashed him over and over at the OC Register, including on his corporate connections.

    — John Seiler

    Reply this comment
  5. Steven Maviglio
    Steven Maviglio 30 August, 2013, 14:21

    Pacific Research Institute discloses its donors? Do tell!!! Provide the link please!

    Reply this comment
    • John Seiler
      John Seiler Author 30 August, 2013, 14:45

      Steve, my taxes already subsidize your pay. Do you also want me to do your work for you?

      Reply this comment
  6. Steven Maviglio
    Steven Maviglio 30 August, 2013, 14:22

    And btw, your parent company is tax-exempt, e.g., taxpayer-subsidzed.

    Reply this comment
    • John Seiler
      John Seiler Author 30 August, 2013, 14:44

      No, Steve. If PRI’s donors get tax deductions, PRI is not “taxpayer-subsidized.” The donors were just allowed to keep a little more of their own, hard-earned money away from the wastrels and tyrants in government, and give it to a good cause.

      Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Tags assigned to this article:
John PerezJohn SeilerKaty GrimesSteve Maviglio

Related Articles

Video: Gun control kills

Sept. 21, 2012 By John Seiler California’s gun control fanatics took a rest this year because of the election. Gun

Yet another in wave of CA DMV bribery scandals

The state Department of Motor Vehicles used to be a symbol of bureaucratic inefficiency, the subject of decades of jokes

Tension builds in San Francisco over police conduct

Recent attention has focused on the Oakland Police Department scandal, in which evidence shows several officers took advantage of a young