Scanning email and the news from Bern, here's a bit of d.d. news.

PALIN AND PROPS: The Washington Post takes a look at Gov. Sarah Palin's last-minute intervention on behalf of mining interests against a ballot initiative this August. The Post suggests she may have broken state law barring the use of government resources to support or oppose a ballot measure.

FIRST 'YES ON 8' AD: It's brutal but effective. The supporters of the same-sex marriage ban in California debut a clever TV advertisement that stars Gavin Newsom, a same-sex marriage supporter. They don't make an argument against the marriage. They make an argument that you're being forced to accept same-sex marriage. (Newsom is quoted as saying that such marriages are coming whether you like it or not). It's not an idea pulled out of thin air. The state Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage this spring declared that gay couples had a constitutional right to acceptance of how they form families. It was a strong moral argument, but, in my reporting, some same-sex marriage supporters worried that it might be vulnerable politically (and perhaps legally).

PROP 10 DODGES A BULLET: I reported last week in the Scientific American the expectation that money might materialize from unions against Prop 10, the $5 billion bond for renewable fuels on this November's California ballot. (You may know it not by its number but by its sponsor, oilman T. Boone Pickens). Well, Prop 10 may not have the funded oppositions some of its opponents had anticipated. The California Teachers Assn., the best-funded union in the state, is spending money against four initiatives -- but not Prop 10. CTA had been expected by some to take the measure on because the bond is a general obligation bond, meaning that money will be repaid out of the same budget that funds education. (Hat tip, Education Intelligence Agency).

BOWEN BLASTS ARNOLD: The Secretary of State of California, Debra Bowen, issues a press release criticizing Gov. Schwarzenegger's veto of several seemingly uncontroversial election-related bills. One would have made it easier for signers of initiative and referendum petitions to rescind their signatures.