Dear Editor,

      I’m truly upset and disappointed to see my name dragged into the political drama surrounding the current State Senate race here in California.

      The incident being referenced is one that took place over 30 years ago between myself and Michelle Chambers when we were both very young.  Let me be clear, Michelle didn’t stab me. I should know, I was the victim. Like many young people, we made mistakes and had to face the consequences of our actions. What’s most important, though, is that Michelle and I have long since reconciled and remain close friends to this day. Not to mention that what was reported was grossly exaggerated as police reports and court documents often are.

      It really bothers me that a campaign would hire an investigator to track me down all the way in Pennsylvania and unearth this old, personal matter in an attempt to score political points. 

      Before this, I did not know about Laura Richardson.  This is a clear example of an attempt to exploit the past for personal gain, and it speaks volumes about the kind of campaign Ms. Richardson is running. A candidate who digs up a 30-year-old incident between two friends to attack their opponent cannot, in good conscience, claim to be a supporter of criminal justice reform or second chances.

      True criminal justice reform is about acknowledging that people can grow, change, and move beyond their past mistakes. Michelle Chambers embodies that. She has used her life experiences, including the challenges she faced in her youth, to become a dedicated public servant who is deeply invested in making our community stronger. She has shown that personal growth is not only possible but also integral to becoming a compassionate leader. That’s why I wholeheartedly support Michelle in her campaign for State Senate. 

      By focusing on a decades-old event, Laura Richardson reveals her lack of commitment to the principles she claims to champion as a Democrat. Exploiting old incidents to gain a political edge contradicts these values.  Democrats, and those who genuinely support criminal justice reform, understand that the power of redemption lies in allowing individuals to evolve and contribute positively to society. That’s something Ms. Richardson should be familiar with considering her own troubled history of repeatedly being cited as one of the most corrupt members of Congress due to her repeated ethical violations and misuse of power and that was only 12 years ago–not 31.  

      This move by Richardson’s campaign should also raise a larger issue for voters in California. How can you trust a candidate who says they support criminal justice reform and second chances when they are willing to dig into Michelle’s 20s to smear her? It demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of what reform truly means and I wouldn’t count on her to support any legislation to give justice-involved individuals meaningful opportunities to secure housing, employment, healthcare, and other key resources.

      Instead of uplifting a narrative of growth and forgiveness–which she herself wants for her own history of improperly pressuring her staff to campaign for her on government time, neglecting to disclose financial information, and misusing her position to influence decisions related to personal property–Ms. Richardson is choosing to weaponize Michelle’s three-decades ago history, which undermines the very principles of growth and positive change.

      Ms. Richardson exploited and exaggerated what happened between Michelle and myself but what she couldn’t do was say that I was against Michelle.  If what happened 31 years ago was all that bad, I would not be writing to you to say that I am proud to support Michelle Chambers. I know firsthand the kind of person she is today. Her commitment to her community and her ability to learn from her past is precisely why she is the right choice to represent the residents of California. Michelle stands for true reform—acknowledging our mistakes, learning from them, and moving forward to make positive contributions to society. Laura Richardson’s attempt to exploit this old issue for political advantage is not only divisive, but in my opinion, disqualifies her from being seen as a true advocate for reform in our community.

Sincerely,

Rhonda Tobey