Fire Hydrant of Freedom
Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities => Politics & Religion => Topic started by: ccp on July 28, 2009, 09:31:49 AM
-
Solution is simple. A 95% tax on all those in the entertainment industry - music, cinema, TV, networks, actors, sports, etc.
It's time they start doing their "fair share" instead of bossing the rest of us to cough it up.
****Schwarzenegger likely to veto social programs
Jul 28, 3:41 AM (ET)
By JUDY LIN
(AP) Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger talks with his staff about potential line-item vetos while going over...
Full Image
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Tuesday is expected to use his line-item veto power to make additional cuts to the California's latest spending plan - a move advocates fear could hurt the poor.
Social service advocates worry the Republican governor has little choice but to go after money counties receive to administer welfare and social service benefits. Likely targets include welfare-to-work assistance, in-home support, foster care and health insurance for poor families.
With much of state spending tied up by federal and constitutional requirements, the Schwarzenegger administration believes more cuts are necessary to provide a cash cushion for the state in case of emergencies such as earthquakes and wild fires.
"I just want to assure everyone that we will build up our reserve. We will make the necessary cuts," the governor said Friday in announcing he'll sign the budget passed by the Legislature.
(AP) Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger talks with his staff about potential line-item veto's while going over...
Full Image
The governor and lawmakers had planned for a reserve in the revised budget, but the Assembly rejected two measures - raiding local transportation funds and authorizing additional oil drilling - that would have brought $1.1 billion to the state.
The governor's spokesman, Aaron McLear, said Schwarzenegger will try to fill that $1.1 billion but isn't expected to cut by that much. He declined to release details.
"We will always be in a position to aggressively respond to disasters," McLear said.
Advocates view additional cuts to social programs as another blow since the Schwarzenegger administration has reduced benefits in response to the recession.
California's economy has been hit by the housing market slump and high unemployment, and the latest efforts to close a $26 billion shortfall, just five months after lawmakers and the governor ended months of negotiations to close a previous $42 billion deficit.
Under the budget the governor will sign Tuesday, the state will impose tougher sanctions on CalWORKS recipients who don't meet work requirements. And in-home support workers will have to undergo background checks and have their fingerprints taken.
In earlier rounds of cuts, California lowered Medi-Cal reimbursement rates for health care providers and eliminated optional benefits such as dental and eye care for adult recipients.
"Why further punish children, low-income families, and the aged and disabled because the Legislature did not approve borrowing gas tax revenue?" said Frank Mecca, executive director of the County Welfare Directors Association of California.
Once Schwarzenegger signs the budget, his finance team is expected to begin briefing the state treasurer and controller, creditors and analysts on how the latest spending plan will impact day-to-day cash flow.
The governor and lawmakers are hoping their latest plan provides the assurance lenders need for the state to take out loans and stop issuing IOUs to thousands of vendors. Representatives for the treasurer and controller said it would take a few more days after that to assess the state's borrowing needs and decide whether California can stop issuing IOUs.
Matt Fabian, a bond analyst at Municipal Market Advisors, based in Concord, Mass., said the plan was filled with accounting tricks and will likely do little to improve the state's poor credit rating.
Fitch Ratings placed at California's general obligation bond debt at BBB. Most states have a AAA or AA rating.***
-
A year or so from now I may well be a Californian no longer, but nonetheless, here's this:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-karako26-2009jul26,0,757702.story
Opinion
Putting California back together
The state's Constitution needs a rewrite -- and the federal Constitution should be the model.
By Tom Karako
July 26, 2009
If this year's budget quagmire in Sacramento has you thinking there must be a better way, there is. To the extent that California is ungovernable today, it is partly because its legislative and executive branches are too weak and dysfunctional to resist entrenched special interests and non-elected bureaucracies. Fixing these problems requires constitutional change. It won't be easy, but the time has come to do it.
Over the last 130 years, California's Constitution has assumed the size of a textbook. The ease of amendment by initiative and referendum has produced endless gimmicks that diffuse accountability, confuse the public and produce thoroughly dysfunctional governance. People from across the political spectrum are calling for a constitutional convention.
If Californians do rewrite the Constitution, it should be revised to resemble more closely the concise federal Constitution: more responsible legislators and executives, stronger control of the bureaucracy and less direct democracy.
Of the many reforms being circulated, the Founding Fathers might approve these six.
Part-time Legislature: Forty-three states have part-time legislative sessions, and California should too. Freed from a yearlong legislative cycle, legislators would spend less time conspiring to make government increasingly complicated and intrusive, and more time in their districts meeting constituents. A part-time Legislature does not mean a part-time government. The execution of laws is constant, but the making of those laws can be done in advance.
A part-time Legislature should not be a "citizen legislature" resembling jurors who legislate as a kind of hobby. With the economy and geography of a small nation, California merits professional legislators to master the job we hire them to do. Salaries should remain the same, lest legislators be limited to the affluent, the corrupt and the amateur.
Hard spending cap: In 1979, voters passed the so-called Gann Amendment by a wide margin, imposing a severe formula of fiscal restraint tied to increases in population, inflation and economic growth. Unfortunately, Gann was eviscerated in 1988 when teachers unions pushed through Proposition 98 by a razor-thin margin, mandating huge increases in education spending.
A spending cap similar to Gann would again be prudent. If it resulted in a surplus, extra revenue could be returned to taxpayers or saved in a rainy-day fund, provided it could not be too easily raided by legislators.
Two-year budgeting cycle: The Legislature should be restricted to figuring out a budget one year, and only in the second year could it consider other legislation.
Eliminate the two-thirds supermajority requirement for budgets: A more controversial but necessary reform would be to reduce the two-thirds supermajority vote to pass state budgets, while retaining that requirement for tax increases. The current system, requiring two-thirds for both, has diffused responsibility without protecting the state from excessive spending. If voters want to give a clear majority of their representation to one party, let the majority prevail -- and let the people judge the consequences. Only three other states require a supermajority for budgets, but 15 require a supermajority to raise taxes.
Unified executive branch: When Americans elected Barack Obama, he got to fill his Cabinet not with a hodgepodge of John McCain and Obama appointees working at cross purposes but with nominees who would implement the president's policies. Similar unity would improve government in a state as large as California.
It is dysfunctional to have executive officers separately elected and in competition with one another, as are many executive officers in California.
The governor should also have greater latitude in firing and controlling non-elected bureaucrats and public employee unions that pursue their own agendas at taxpayer expense.
Repeal ballot-box budgeting: Budget-making is a complicated process that involves priorities and trade-offs. It is not well-suited to direct democracy, when the people can only register an up-or-down vote.
California's decades of ballot-box budgeting has helped to produce a monstrous Constitution, with mandates for specific amounts of spending that inevitably tie the hands of the Legislature and limit flexibility.
The need for flexibility was seen when Senate leader Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) offered up two of his favored programs, in Propositions 1D and 1E on the May ballot, redirecting their surplus billions to pay bills from the general fund. That would have saved the state $1 billion this year alone. But voters' anger at Proposition 1A's tax increases understandably doomed 1D and 1E, precluding nuance.
A better system would be to repeal all past ballot-box budgeting and put the programs under the general fund. Legislators would be able to set priorities, and the people would judge the results.
The genius of representative government, James Madison wrote, is excluding the people in their collective capacity from the direct business of governing. Hand the task of budgets back to our elected representatives, the ones we hired to make these hard decisions.
California needs constitutional reform before we can expect sustained fiscal reform. Whether that comes from a package of initiatives or a constitutional convention, it should focus on strong, responsible political institutions and draw on the wisdom of the U.S. Constitution.
Tom Karako directs the Claremont Institute's Golden State Center.
-
August 5, 2009
My suggegstion, first to be released should be those for pot "crimes". Indeed criminalizing drug use is a great foolishness IMHO.
===================
California Prisons Must Cut Inmate Population
By SOLOMON MOORE
LOS ANGELES — A panel of federal judges ordered the California prison system on Tuesday to reduce its inmate population of 150,000 by 40,000 — roughly 27 percent — within two years.
The judges said that reducing prison crowding in California was the only way to change what they called an unconstitutional prison health care system that causes one unnecessary death a week.
In a scathing 184-page order, the judges said state officials had failed to comply with previous orders to fix the prison health care system and reduce crowding.
The judges left it to state officials to come up with a specific plan within 45 days, saying there was “no need for the state to release presently incarcerated inmates indiscriminately in order to comply with our order.” They recommended remedies including imprisoning fewer nonviolent criminals and reducing the number of technical parole violators.
The order is the largest state prison reduction ever imposed by a federal court over the objection of state officials, legal experts said.
It comes as the state has emerged from a long battle to close a $26 billion budget gap. The latest budget includes severe cuts to social welfare programs, schools and health care. The governor planned to slash spending by reducing the prison population by 27,000 inmates, but law enforcement and victims’ rights groups stopped that.
Attorney General Jerry Brown said in a telephone interview Tuesday that he intended to appeal the ruling. “Eventually, we’re going to have to go to the Supreme Court because I think the California prisons are spending about $14,000 per year per inmate,” Mr. Brown said, adding that the changes the judges ordered would cost more money, which the state does not have.
The special three-judge panel described a chaotic system where prisoners were stacked in triple bunk beds in gymnasiums, hallways and day rooms; where single guards were often forced to monitor scores of inmates at a time; and where ill inmates died for lack of treatment.
“In these overcrowded conditions, inmate-on-inmate violence is almost impossible to prevent, infectious diseases spread more easily, and lockdowns are sometimes the only means by which to maintain control,” the panel wrote. “In short, California’s prisons are bursting at the seams and are impossible to manage.”
Mr. Brown, who is raising money for a possible run for governor, said that some sort of settlement might be negotiated, but he added that he did not believe the court has the authority to cap the state’s prison system.
“California is facing real financial challenges and at the same time the court is ordering standards of care that exceed the standard required under the Constitution,” he said.
The case began as the result of class action lawsuits addressing inadequate medical and mental health care in the prison system. Those lawsuits were resolved years ago. The medical care case ended up with a federal receiver overseeing the system, and the mental health care case with a special master.
“It’s an extraordinary form of federal involvement,” Kara P. Dansky, the executive director of the Stanford University Criminal Justice Center, said of the ruling. “I’m not aware of any other case in which a federal court has entered a prison release of this magnitude over the objection of a state defendant.”
Such federal interventions have become increasingly rare under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, which restricts inmates’ access to courts and prohibits federal courts from imposing population caps on prisons except as a last resort.
Prison reform advocates said Tuesday that the state would probably lose any appeal of the reduction order.
“These are cases that have been going on for more than 15 years,” said David Fathi, the director of the United States program for Human Rights Watch. Mr. Fathi added, “The record in regard to constitutional violations is massive, and the judges have tried other less intrusive remedies before.”
Although the state spent millions of dollars on court-ordered changes, the judges ruled Tuesday that the system still violates the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has shifted between supporting the court-ordered changes and, as state deficits grew and political pressures intensified, fighting them. In June, Mr. Schwarzenegger reneged on a deal with the federal receiver that would have provided $3 billion to build two prison hospitals and renovate other facilities to create 5,000 beds for ill inmates. An earlier plan was for the state to pay $8 billion for 10,000 prison hospital beds.
The governor has also pushed his own prison construction plan and a parole overhaul as ways to reduce prison crowding and to fix inmate health care services without federal intrusion.
But the court pointed out on Tuesday that the state had not committed enough money toward the governor’s prison construction plan and that even if that money was provided, it would take years for the state to build its way out of the overpopulation crisis.
The judges on the panel were Stephen Reinhardt of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and two Federal District Court judges from California, Lawrence K. Karlton and Thelton E. Henderson.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/05/us/05calif.html
-
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-pensions9-2009aug09,0,4200081.story
From the Los Angeles Times
Amid cost cutting, L.A. city pensions continue to soar
Collecting nearly $318,000 a year, the former head of the Department of Water and Power tops a list of 841 city pension recipients paid six-figure benefits, according to newly obtained records.
By Rich Connell
August 9, 2009
Collecting nearly $318,000 a year, the former head of Los Angeles' Department of Water and Power tops a list of 841 city pension recipients paid six-figure benefits, according to newly obtained records.
And, like many of the retirees, former DWP General Manager Ronald Deaton will be paid more beginning this summer -- boosting his annual retirement pay to more than $327,000 -- because of annual cost-of-living increases, records and interviews show.
New DWP pension data provide a fuller picture of the city's largest retirement packages at a time when City Hall is cutting services, the public is being hit with recession-driven tax increases to cover government budget shortfalls and rising public pension costs are under close scrutiny.
The Times previously reported that nearly 600 pensioners received $100,000 a year from the city's police, fire and general government retirement plans. The new data from the city's utility adds close to 250 names to the list, which includes retirees or, in some cases, beneficiaries.
Former DWP Assistant General Manager Frank Salas ranks second on the list, receiving about $290,000 a year.
Councilman Bernard C. Parks, a former Los Angeles police chief and head of the city's budget committee, is third.
The Times reported in May that Parks, 65, who has publicly warned about soaring payroll and pension costs, received $265,000 a year in retirement payments on top of his $178,789 council salary.
With a cost-of-living adjustment that took effect this month, Parks' pension has grown to $273,000 annually, roughly 10% more than his final pay as police chief, records show.
In addition, Parks, who is serving a second four-year council term, is participating in a civilian pension plan as a councilman, officials confirmed. That could add tens of thousands of dollars per year to his total city retirement income.
Parks' eligibility for a second pension -- and the amount -- would depend on how long he serves, his final salary and his age when he collects it, officials said.
Parks did not respond to an interview request.
City employee groups stress that six-figure retirees like Parks and Deaton are a small fraction of pensioners. Most collect far less, typically about $40,000 for civilian retirees and close to $50,000 for former police officers, firefighters and DWP workers. Also, officials note that career city employees don't normally receive Social Security payments, which also are adjusted yearly to offset increases in the cost of living.
"For the most part, the high pensions go to people who are not in the unions. They are basically senior management folks," said Barbara Maynard, spokeswoman for a coalition of city unions. "The vast majority of those we represent are frankly rank-and-file, hardworking people with modest pensions."
Still, the recession, the erosion of private-sector retirement benefits, and state and local budget cuts have given critics fresh ammunition to attack what they contend are overly generous government pensions.
"We should never, ever design a pension formula that provides more for a person when they retire than when they are working. It defies any common sense," said Marcia Fritz, vice president of the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility, a nonprofit pension reform group headed by former GOP Assemblyman Keith Richman.
"But that's what we're finding" in some school systems and public safety agencies, Fritz said.
The group has publicized more than 5,000 names of state and local government pension recipients across the state collecting more than $100,000. Fritz said high-end public pensioners are worthy of attention. They include "people who were advising, in closed-door labor negotiations . . . negotiating benefits," she said. "These are the ones that made this whole thing happen."
Deaton was a well-regarded executive who served in key city positions, including chief legislative analyst, over more than 40 years. He said his benefits flow from a bargain he struck in the 1960s, when he walked into the DWP as a young junior administrative assistant. His pension takes into account his long service, career advancement and final salary (about $345,000), he noted.
"It was a deal made at the beginning of my career, not the end of my career," he said.
"Because you happen to get up to the top, I don't think you should be paid any differently."
A looming jump in city pension costs, attributed largely to sharp declines in pension investment values, has prompted a major review of retirement plans at City Hall. One recent projection warned that the share of the city general fund receipts required by two large pension funds would jump from 15% this year to 33% in 2013-14.
That would amount to an increase of nearly $1 billion, making pension contributions the fastest-growing area of city spending, said Asst. City Administrative Officer Tom A. Coultas, an employee relations specialist.
"It's perfectly clear from our standpoint, design changes need to be made," he said. "The question is how much of a correction is necessary" to ensure that pension programs can be sustained.
Recent market gains and accounting changes have eased the financial blow somewhat. And a plan to cut 2,400 city jobs also could help control costs. Still, recommendations for pension changes, expected to be sent to the mayor and City Council in September, will probably include some combination of reduced benefits and adjusted contribution rates for many new city employees, Coultas said.
There are legal and practical limitations to the changes that could be made. Court rulings generally protect benefits provided to retirees and promised to current employees, officials say. Altering pension plans involves negotiations with unions and, in some cases, voter approval.
Ironically, Parks, one of City Hall's more fiscally conservative voices, has been among those warning about rising pensions.
During the recent budget battle, Parks said that soaring payroll and pension costs have brought the city to a "breaking point." Without swift and significant structural changes to city finances, he wrote on his website, the city could risk insolvency.
Maynard, the union spokeswoman, said labor groups would work with city leaders to craft a solution. "Clearly, there is a problem."
The larger issue, she argued, is how vulnerable retirement accounts have become for many Americans, particularly in the private sector.
"We need to lift all workers up to make sure they have a modest, secure pension. Not take away from those who do."
rich.connell@latimes.com
-
latimes.com/business/la-fi-caljobs22-2009aug22,0,6343107.story
latimes.com
THE ECONOMY
Unemployment in California hits post-World War II high
The state's rate jumps to 11.9% in July as the U.S. rate declines to 9.4%. Job losses have an outsize effect on Latinos in the state as work in the construction and hospitality sectors vanishes.
By Alana Semuels
August 22, 2009
California's jobless rate reached a fresh post-World War II high in July, climbing to 11.9%, a sobering reminder that though the nation's deep downturn may be nearing its end, the state's employment woes are far from over.
Golden State employers cut their payrolls by 35,800 jobs in July, according to figures released Friday by the state Employment Development Department. That's a significant improvement over monthly losses that averaged 76,000 over the first half of the year.
Still, July's numbers were worse than some analysts had expected, rising from 11.6% in June and led by declines in trade, construction and manufacturing. Even with the rise in unemployment here, however, a consensus is growing that the worst of the recession may be over.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke on Friday declared the economy to be "leveling out," and the National Assn. of Realtors reported a sharp rise in July home sales. Wall Street responded by pushing the Dow index to its highest point since November.
Still, a robust recovery appears unlikely, and some regions of the country are expected to suffer fallout from the bursting of the housing bubble for years to come. That includes California, which is now tied with Oregon for the fourth-highest unemployment rate in the nation, behind Michigan, Rhode Island and Nevada. The U.S. unemployment rate is 9.4%, down from 9.5% in June.
California's battered construction and housing industries, long pillars of the state economy, remain troubling sources of weakness. Over the last year, the state has lost 760,200 jobs, nearly 1 in 5 of them in construction. White-collar workers have likewise suffered from the housing crash as thousands of jobs in banking, mortgage processing and real estate sales have vanished.
The number of new-home permits issued in July fell 47.4% from a year earlier, according to the Construction Industry Research Board.
"We've disproportionately benefited from two sectors, construction and financial services," said Esmael Adibi, an economist at Chapman University.
"The demise of these two sectors has hurt us disproportionately."
That's had an outsize effect on California's 13.5 million Latinos, who are heavily concentrated in the building trades. In 2007, Latinos made up 47% of the construction workforce in the state, according to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
In July, California's Latino unemployment rate hit 12.7%, dwarfing the white jobless rate of 9.5%, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Black unemployment remains the highest in the state at 14.2%. But Latino joblessness has grown much faster. In July 2007 the Latino unemployment rate stood at just 5.9%, compared with 9.2% for blacks and 4.8% for whites.
Last month, 805,000 California Latinos were jobless. That's up 127% over the last two years. The number of unemployed whites in the state grew 103% over the same period, while the number of out-of-work African Americans rose 66%.
"You really begin to see desperate times for lots of Latino families throughout California," said Vince Vasquez, a senior policy analyst with the National University System Institute for Policy Research.
East Los Angeles resident Robert Gonzales said he was struggling to support his three children after his job as an industrial painter disappeared a year ago when his employer moved to Ohio.
When he first lost his job, he was able to find odd carpentry and plumbing work, but his phone has stopped ringing. Now, he can barely pay the taxes on the home he owns, and he struggles to put food on the table.
"I come to the EDD every day, and nothing happens," he said, standing outside the workforce development office in East L.A., where the computers had malfunctioned. "They say, 'Don't call us, we'll call you.' "
A large proportion of Latinos also are in hospitality, nondurable-goods manufacturing and warehousing, said Jerry Nickelsburg, senior economist for the UCLA Anderson Forecast. As consumer demand for products worldwide shrinks, companies responsible for making and shipping goods are jettisoning employees.
That leaves people like Juan Cortez, a 33-year-old from Monterey Park, scrounging for work. He was laid off from his job as a shipping clerk nine months ago, moved back in with his parents, sold his Chevy Tahoe and now is hoping to get a callback about a job as a forklift operator.
He and a few friends have been talking about moving back to Mexico, he said, where it's cheaper to live and the job prospects seem better.
"There's jobs there," he said. "There's no jobs in L.A."
The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate in Los Angeles County also reached 11.9% in July, up from a revised 11.2% in June. The government sector was especially hard hit as state budget cuts took their toll, with the number of jobs dropping 4.6% from June. Education and health services was the only sector in the county to employ more people this month than it did in July of last year.
The Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario area felt the most pain in the Southland, with the unemployment rate rising to 14.3% in July, up from a revised 13.9% in June. A major center for warehousing and distribution, the area has shed 20,100 jobs since July 2008 in the trade, transportation and utilities sector. The area's construction sector lost 20,700 jobs over the same period.
The recession has been particularly hard on less-educated Californians. People without a high school diploma had a 16.8% unemployment rate in June compared with a 10.8% unemployment rate in June 2008.
That's plagued the region's Latinos, many of whom have less schooling, fewer linguistic skills and spottier community connections than people who have lived in the country for generations, policy analyst Vasquez said.
"It's about where you went to school, it's about having relationships, and those are the things that really affect Latinos in a situation like this," he said.
About 44.5% of Latino adults in the state do not have a high school diploma, compared with 20% of the state overall, and 6.8% have a bachelor's degree, compared with 18.7% of the state overall, according to U.S. Census estimates.
After being laid off from her job as a receptionist at an oncology office in June, 22-year-old Denise Muralles decided it was time to hit the books. She's taking classes at Los Angeles Community College in the fall, she said, and hopes to eventually study physiology.
Her mother, a secretary, has been adamant that Muralles not follow in her footsteps.
"She really wants me to get an education," she said. "She doesn't want me to be a secretary."
Economists predict that the unemployment rate in the state will continue to climb. Job growth doesn't usually begin until about six months after the end of a recession, economist Adibi said. He expects the unemployment rate to keep rising into early 2010.
Still, there is some reason to be optimistic, economists said. The rate of job losses in the state is slowing.
Two categories, professional and business services and leisure and hospitality, added jobs last month. Employment in other sectors, including financial activities and natural resources and mining, were stable, which economists say is a good sign.
"There is a ray of hope," Adibi said.
alana.semuels@latimes.com
-
Abstract of a study exploring the regulatory costs imposed on CA citizens. Those costs are pretty astounding.
COST OF STATE REGULATIONS ON CALIFORNIA SMALL
BUSINESSES STUDY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ABSTRACT
This study measures and reports the cost of regulation to small business in the State of
California. It uses original analyses and a general equilibrium framework to identify and
measure the cost of regulation as measured by the loss of economic output to the
State’s gross product, after controlling for variables known to influence output. It also
measures second order costs resulting from regulatory activity by studying the total
impact – direct, indirect, and induced. The study finds that the total cost of regulation to
the State of California is $492.994 billion which is almost five times the State’s general
fund budget, and almost a third of the State’s gross product. The cost of regulation
results in an employment loss of 3.8 million jobs which is a tenth of the State’s
population. Since small business constitute 99.2% of all employer businesses in
California, and all of non-employer business, the regulatory cost is borne almost
completely by small business. The total cost of regulation was $134,122.48 per small
business in California in 2007, labor income not created or lost was $4,359.55 per small
business, indirect business taxes not generated or lost were $57,260.15 per small
business, and finally roughly one job lost per small business. This study provides the
most comprehensive and complete analysis of the total regulatory burden in California.
http://www.sba.ca.gov/Cost%20of%20Regulation%20Study%20-%20Final.pdf
-
So when are you punching out, Crafty? AZ or NV?
-
I just wanna know how many privates he has to teach to make his $134,122.48 nut.
-
There are several variables unique to our situation which should come down one way or the other by next summer.
In addition to obvious variables if we move, I will want a place where my daughter can have a horse and Conrad can continue his lacrosse. :-) Texas (Fort Hood/Austin area perhaps?) is an option.
-
We could always use a good man in Texas. Come on and Welcome!
Freki
-
No state's economy, with the exception of Michigan, has careened into a deeper ditch than California in this recession. The state now has the fourth-highest unemployment rate (12.2%), the third-highest rate of mortgage foreclosures, and for two years has had the biggest budget deficit in the history of the 50 states. So it is very good news that yesterday Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's bipartisan tax commission recommended a road out of this mess.
.The heart of the new plan is to broaden the tax base and slash tax rates on personal income, business and sales. California currently ranks at or near the top in all three categories. This has, paradoxically, contributed to the state's inability to pay its bills by driving men and women from the state and leading to revenue boom and bust. We don't agree with everything in this report, but there's no question it would be a huge improvement over the current tax code in its economic incentives, simplicity, revenue stability and fairness.
The commission hasn't recommended a pure flat tax, but something much closer to it. As shown in the nearby table, the income tax rate, which currently tops out at 10.55%, would be chopped to a more reasonable (but still high) 7.5%. (The plan doesn't eliminate the one-percentage-point millionaire income tax surcharge, alas.) Because about 70% of small businesses pay the personal California income tax, the commission found that California's high rate is driving enterprises to the likes of Nevada, Texas and Idaho. The number of tax rates is reduced to three from seven (we prefer one), and thanks to the elimination of credits and loopholes, the new California tax form would fit on a postcard.
Even more impressive is the recommendation to eliminate the corporate income tax and the 5% of the sales tax that contributes to the general fund. These would be replaced by a broad-based Business Net Receipts Tax of no higher than 4%. This taxes businesses on what they produce, minus their costs of purchases from other firms. This is similar to a value added tax.
One benefit of this new levy is that it creates a level playing field among industries and reduces tax favoritism based on the power of lobbyists in Sacramento. The greater virtue is that this tax would exempt all California investment and capital income from taxation. (Michael Boskin and John Cogan offer more details nearby.)
The commission—chaired by California businessman and former U.S. Treasury official Gerald Parsky—also calls for a rainy day fund by requiring annual revenues above a 10-year rolling average to be put into a reserve fund rather than being spent.
One danger is that the revenue-generating efficiency of the Business Net Receipts Tax would eventually increase the overall tax burden in California. To protect against this, the commission calls for a permanent cap on the BNRT at 4%. Some business groups don't like the new business tax because it means they'd have to pay tax even if they don't make money. But a sales tax has that same feature.
A higher rate would defeat the purpose of this corporate tax reform, which by eliminating the corporate income tax would go far to restore the state's competitiveness with other states, as well as Japan, China and Europe. Conservatives should insist that the current two-thirds vote requirement in the legislature to raise taxes applies to this new business tax to protect against jacking up the rate to grow the state government.
Part of Mr. Parsky's achievement here is political, because he managed to convince a bipartisan majority of nine of the commission's 14 members to endorse its proposals. This includes notable liberal Christopher Edley, while Democrats like Senator Dianne Feinstein and former Governor Gray Davis have also praised much of the plan.
They may be motivated by the reality that California's steeply progressive tax rates are defeating the purposes of progressive government. To wit, only a growing economy can create opportunity for the middle class and enough state revenues to finance schools and health care for the poor. A tax code that depends on 1% of taxpayers, 144,000 filers, to finance 50% of state income tax revenues has proven to be unsustainable, notwithstanding the liberal dogma that says tax rates don't matter.
Mr. Schwarzenegger will call for a special session of the legislature to approve this plan later in October, so let the debate begin. The only painless way to rebalance the Golden State's $150 billion annual budget is to expand the tax base by luring capital and jobs back to the West Coast. That's what happened when California passed Proposition 13 to cap its property taxes in 1978. If the legislature fails to act, as it probably will, then the Parsky plan should become central to next year's election debate over how to revive this once dynamic state.
-
second entry of the morning
By MICHAEL J. BOSKIN AND JOHN F. COGAN
For many decades California residents enjoyed a rising standard of living, an outstanding education system, and unprecedented upward mobility. Yet now, despite state leadership in technology, agriculture and entertainment, California's economy radically underperforms. The unemployment rate, 12.2%, is the nation's third highest. Residents are leaving the state—144,000 more than entered last year—for better opportunities elsewhere. And the state's bond rating is dead last.
While uncontrolled spending, excessive regulation and litigation have helped create a dismal business environment, the tax system is central to the state's economic woes. The top personal income tax rate (also levied on capital gains), the sales tax rate, the corporate tax rate, and the gas tax are all at or near the highest of any state. And the top 1% of the state's income earners pay almost half the income taxes: Thus the state experiences boom-bust cycles of exploding revenues and spending in the good times, followed by a collapse in revenues and emergency retrenchment in recessions. Ironically, California's progressive tax and spending policies now threaten the state's ability to fund everything from parks to prisons, education to health.
The excess spending during booms is never entirely cut back during the busts. Instead, the state also raises taxes and borrows temporarily. If spending had increased at the rate of population and inflation since 1996, recession-level revenues plus reserves would now be more than sufficient to balance the state budget, which is now back in the red, despite temporary tax hikes and spending cuts.
Recognizing the problem, Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Democratic legislative leaders Darrell Steinberg and Karen Bass appointed a bipartisan Commission on the 21st Century Economy in December 2008 to provide recommendations for a reformed tax code that would be far less volatile and substantially more competitive and pro-growth. While the two of us believe California needs to control and reform state spending, and to reduce as well as reform state taxes, we and the commission's other appointees were limited by the executive order creating the commission to changes on the tax side of the state budget that would neither raise nor lower the state's revenues on average over the business cycle.
The commission's majority report recommendations were made public yesterday. They include a sweeping overhaul of the personal income tax code that reduces tax brackets to two from six; eliminates all deductions and credits other than for charity, mortgage interest and property taxes; and cuts the top statutory income tax rate to 6.5% from 9.3%. Most taxpayers would receive a 25%-30% tax cut and all would pay less. The commission also recommends abolition of the state's corporate income tax and the elimination of most of the state sales tax that finances the state's general revenue fund (as opposed to special funds for transportation, etc.). Finally, to replace the lost revenue, the commission recommends a broad-based, low-rate state value-added tax (VAT), collected on business net receipts (revenues less purchases from other businesses, including immediate expensing of capital), that is capped at 4%.
These reforms will reduce the volatility of state revenues by 40% (using commonly accepted measures) mostly by reducing the reliance on personal and corporate income taxes, and moderate the current tax code's extreme progressivity. They also will result in a $7 billion net tax cut per year for Californians without raising taxes on any income group, as some of the new VAT would be borne outside the state and more of Californians' taxes would be deducted against federal taxes.
Proposals to scale-down existing taxes and replace revenues with a new tax raise legitimate concerns. The same political process that erodes the base and raises rates for income taxes might be repeated for a VAT. Such taxes have been used to grow government (for example, in Western Europe) with new taxes added without reducing others.
Some protection against this outcome is provided by California's wise constitutional requirement for a two-thirds vote for the budget and tax increases, and by the commission's recommendation of immediate abolition of the entire corporate income tax as the new business tax begins phasing in. A hard spending cap would be still better.
California can once again lead the nation, this time in moving away from ever-higher personal and corporate tax rates and excessive roller-coaster spending. If not, California and then the nation will lose the dynamism, growth and opportunities for rising living standards that once were the state's hallmark and crowning achievement.
Mr. Boskin is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor of economics at Stanford University. Mr. Cogan is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor of public policy at Stanford University. The commission's report is available online at www.cotce.ca.gov.
-
By SHIKHA DALMIA, ADRIAN MOORE AND ADAM B. SUMMERS
With the Golden State still struggling to balance its books, politicians from both sides of the aisle have come up with a nifty way to avoid responsibility for the mess: Blame the voters.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, summed it up for his fellow pols recently by telling a reporter: "All of those propositions tell us how we must spend our money. . . . This is no way, of course, to run a state." State Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, a Democrat, has made similar comments in denouncing "ballot-box budgeting."
Their indictment is false. Voters aren't tying lawmakers' hands too much, but too little. Here's the background:
For decades, state officials have habitually proposed deep cuts to the most popular programs unless voters agree to higher taxes. Tired of being manipulated, voters have used the ballot initiative to put some programs off-limits.
Nevertheless, a 2003 analysis by John G. Matsusaka, president of the Initiatives and Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California, found that no more than a third of California's appropriations that year were locked in by voter initiatives so stringent that legislators couldn't override them. Most of the appropriations—about $30 billion in 2003—were for Proposition 98, which passed in 1988 and mandates funding for K-12 education.
Even this overstates the case against ballot-box budgeting. K-12 spending has remained remarkably stable at around 40% of the budget pre- and post-Prop. 98. Today, California is 24th among the 50 states in terms of the percentage of its general funds it devotes to K-12. This suggests that education spending is not grossly out of line. Prop. 98 aside, Mr. Matsusaka found that only about 2% or 3% of California's budget is frozen as a result of ballot initiatives.
Mr. Matsusaka's analysis was affirmed last month by the Legislative Analyst's Office, a nonpartisan outfit that advises the legislature. It looked at all the restrictions on the state's budget—not just those imposed by ballot initiatives—and concluded that: "Despite these restrictions, the legislature maintains considerable control over the state budget—particularly over the longer term."
So what happened this year that got the politicians and others so upset with ballot-box budgeting? California faced a $42 billion budget deficit. After a round of spending cuts and $12 billion in new taxes, the governor and the legislature called for a special election and placed a number of propositions on the ballot that would have increased taxes an additional $16 billion and allowed for billions more in borrowing and fund shifts. Voters shot those measures down in May.
After much bickering, lawmakers nearly closed the deficit with severe cuts, but left the governor with a $1 billion deficit to close on his own. He did so by using his line-item veto to strike, among other things, $500 million for in-home care, transportation assistance and other social services.
Now the governor is being sued by a whole host of special-interest groups, including a coalition of organizations representing the disabled. Those organizations (along with Mr. Steinberg, who has filed a separate suit), claim that the governor cannot constitutionally cut spending beyond what the legislature has already cut. The suits ignore that the governor is bound by a constitutional requirement that the state's budget be balanced—but in any case have nothing to do with spending that is mandated by ballot initiatives.
In looking for the causes of the state's budget mess, a good place to start is with the unionized public employees, who have filed their own lawsuit against the budget. Public union ranks have grown a whopping 37% since 1990 and consume about one-third of the $85 billion budget in wages and benefits. California also faces a total unfunded future liability of about $110 billion for pensions and health-care benefits. Still, the state's chapter of the Service Employees International Union and other unions are suing the state because their members are being asked to take a few days of furlough to save the state about $1.5 billion. The unions say this is an illegal pay cut. Regardless of whether it is, ballot initiatives are not the issue.
True enough, some lawsuits are driven by ballot initiatives. The California Redevelopment Association is attempting to stop the state from raiding $2 billion in local redevelopment funds. Sixty years ago voters passed a constitutional amendment to prevent such raids, but the state government has found ways around that prohibition. But restoring the will of the voters in this case is essential for sound budgeting, because local development funds are used to pay for bonded contracts for roads and other infrastructure projects. If the state is allowed to grab these funds, the credit ratings of cities and counties will plunge and their borrowing costs will rise.
Whatever the wisdom of ballot initiatives that protect some programs from cuts, they are not the root cause of California's fiscal disaster. That cause is the government's spending addiction. From 1990 to 2008, California's revenues increased 167%, but total spending soared 181%.
This problem won't be tamed by letting lawmakers get their hands on more tax dollars by scrapping Proposition 13, which limits property taxes, as Mr. Steinberg and other lawmakers have suggested. Rather the solution is to restore the Gann Spending Limit that restricted state spending increases to population growth and inflation and required that anything left over be returned to taxpayers.
Such restrictions kept the state from slipping into a cycle of fiscal chaos in the 1980s by checking government expenditures and forced lawmakers to rebate $1.1 billion in excess revenue in 1987. But voters diluted Gann in 1990, when they passed Proposition 111, exempting infrastructure projects, disaster spending and a number of other state expenditures from the spending limit.
Prop. 111 freed politicians in Sacramento to use the revenues that gushed in during the dot-com boom and housing bubble to grow the state budget to unsustainable levels. If Gann hadn't been neutered, a Reason Foundation study found in February, California would have been rolling in a $15 billion surplus this year.
The Golden State's problem is not overly controlling voters—but out-of-control politicians.
Ms. Dalmia is a senior analyst, Mr. Summers a policy analyst, and Mr. Moore a vice president at the Reason Foundation.
-
latimes.com/business/la-fi-state-tax31-2009oct31,0,2028140.story
latimes.com
California to withhold a bigger chunk of paychecks
The amount goes up 10% on Sunday as Sacramento borrows from taxpayers. Technically, it's not an income tax increase: You'll get the money back eventually.
By Shane Goldmacher and W.J. Hennigan
October 31, 2009
Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento
Starting Sunday, cash-strapped California will dig deeper into the pocketbooks of wage earners -- holding back 10% more than it already does in state income taxes just as the biggest shopping season of the year kicks into gear.
Technically, it's not a tax increase, even though it may feel like one when your next paycheck arrives. As part of a bundle of budget patches adopted in the summer, the state is taking more money now in withholding, even though workers' annual tax bills won't change.
Think of it as a forced, interest-free loan: You'll be repaid any extra withholding in April. Those who would receive a refund anyway will receive a larger one, and those who owe taxes will owe less.
But with rising gas costs, depressed home prices and double-digit unemployment, the state's added reach into residents' regular paycheck isn't sitting well with many.
"The state's suddenly slapping people upside the head," said Mack Reed, 50, of Silver Lake. "It's appalling how brash that is."
Brittney McKaig, 23, of Santa Ana said she expects the additional withholding to affect her holiday spending.
"Coming into the holidays, we're getting squeezed anyway," she said. "We're not getting Christmas bonuses and other perks we used to get. So it all falls back on spending. The $40 gift will become a $20 gift."
The extra withholding may seem like a small amount siphoned from each paycheck, but it adds up to a $1.7-billion fix for California's deficit-riddled books.
From a single taxpayer earning $51,000 a year with no dependents, the state will be grabbing an extra $17.59 each month, according to state tax officials. A married person earning $90,000 with two dependents would receive $24.87 less in monthly pay.
California will probably continue to collect the tax at a higher rate for many years -- or find an additional $1.7 billion to slice from a future budget, an unlikely occurrence. All workers who have state taxes withheld will see their paychecks shrink.
"Many families are sitting at their kitchen table wondering how they're going to make ends meet," said state Sen. Tony Strickland (R-Thousand Oaks). "At the same time, the state of California is taking a no-interest loan."
The provision is one of numerous maneuvers state lawmakers and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger approved in the summer to paper over the state's deficit. Many of the changes, including the extra withholding, were little noticed outside of Sacramento.
Savvy taxpayers can get around the state's maneuver by increasing the number of personal withholding allowances they claim on their employer tax forms, said Brenda Voet, a spokeswoman for the state's Franchise Tax Board.
"People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would have to change their allowances through their employers. California's budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't.
The increase is coming at a bad time for store owners, many of whom depend on the holiday shopping season to keep their businesses alive.
"I don't think there's any question it's going to impact consumers' spending," said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers Assn. "Any time you reduce people's disposable income, there's going to be a negative effect on the retail sector."
But Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy, wasn't so sure.
"It's having a relatively small impact on people's income," Levy said, pointing out that many families will receive only $12 to $40 less each month.
Yet Erika Wendt, 28, of San Diego said she already lived on a tight budget: She rides her bike to work, for instance, to save on gasoline and parking costs.
"I am frustrated as this directly impacts my weekly budget -- what groceries I buy, how much I drive and can spend on gas," she said. "Now money will just be tighter, and I'm not sure where else I can cut back."
The extra withholding comes in addition to tax hikes the state enacted this year.
In February, state income tax rates were bumped up 0.25 of a percentage point for every tax bracket. The dependent credit was slashed by two-thirds. The state sales tax rate rose 1 percentage point. The vehicle license fee nearly doubled to 1.15% of a car's value.
Lawmakers and the governor also approved deep cuts to schools, social services and prisons to fend off one of the steepest revenue losses in California history.
Temporary budget bandages, such as the increase in withholding, were included at several points this year to avoid higher taxes and deeper cuts, said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of Finance.
Sacramento, meanwhile, is awash in red ink again. The state controller recently said revenue in the budget year already had fallen more than $1 billion short of assumptions. Outsize deficits are projected for years to come.
Such temporary measures as the withholding tax increase don't really fix the budget gap, "they just more or less hid it," said Christopher Thornberg, a principal with Beacon Economics in Los Angeles. "I call it a fraud."
shane.goldmacher@ latimes.com
william.hennigan@ latimes.com
-
WSJ
By JOHN FUND
Washington
When Carly Fiorina sat down to speak with me recently, I was briefly taken aback. The former CEO of Hewlett Packard and current candidate for U.S. Senate from California was sporting a close-cropped, salt-and-pepper hairdo. Having completed six months of treatment for breast cancer, the 55-year-old Ms. Fiorina has dispensed with the auburn wig she'd been wearing as her hair grows back.
She says her health is now fine, and that "after chemotherapy Barbara Boxer isn't that scary anymore," referring to the three-term Democratic incumbent she wants to unseat in 2010. She laughs when I suggest her new 'do may get her a hearing in precincts like Berkeley and San Francisco. On a more serious note, she says that "in these hard times, a lot of people across the spectrum will listen to my message—that California can only recover if we encourage economic growth and restrain spending and job-killing regulation."
With a 12.5% unemployment rate, the Golden State is certainly in trouble. In 2007 alone, 260,000 Californians moved to states with more opportunity. The nonpartisan Tax Foundation says only New York and New Jersey have worse business tax climates. And a new Los Angeles Times poll found that more than half of California residents think the state's major problems won't fade as the economy recovers.
Ms. Fiorina is not shy in pointing out what's to blame. "The high tax, big government, regulatory regime we see in California is the current course and speed for where the nation is headed," she warns. "California is a great test case, a factual demonstration that those programs don't work." She notes that while state spending has significantly outstripped inflation in recent years, every year government services perform more poorly and it becomes harder to open a business. "I very much doubt Hewlett Packard could be founded today as a manufacturing company in California," she adds soberly.
There are signs California voters have had enough. After the legislature passed a huge $12.5 billion tax increase last February to plug the state's budget gap, it put a measure on the ballot to extend the tax hikes for two years. The tax failed by an almost 2-to-1 margin.
View Full Image
Terry Shoffner
.Voters may also be in the mood for new leadership. "I'm not a professional politician, I'm a problem solver," she emphasizes, contrasting her record with that of the 69-year-old Ms. Boxer. That record is fairly stark: By most measures, Ms. Boxer has been an unbending ideologue during her three terms, as illustrated by her 95% rating from the liberal Americans for Democratic Action in 2008.
Given the deep national recession and a state economy deep in the red, Ms. Fiorina is especially critical of Ms. Boxer's opposition to "virtually every trade agreement." Ms. Fiorina also chides Ms. Boxer for the latter's lockstep support for the public employee unions that she claims enjoy "outsized political influence" in California.
On the environment, Ms. Fiorina faults the senator for ignoring pleas from farmers to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to restore water flows to California's Central Valley, which have been restricted by two controversial biological assessments by the government that asserted the local delta smelt was endangered: "I've seen the devastation and massive unemployment that [the water restrictions have] caused."
California's other Democratic senator, Dianne Feinstein, has called for an immediate third-party review of the federal conclusions. Ms. Fiorina notes that Ms. Boxer came into the Senate in 1993 at the same time as her more moderate colleague. "Since then, Dianne Feinstein has been far more productive while Barbara Boxer has been singularly ineffective for the people of California."
On the legislative front, Ms. Boxer chairs the Senate Environment Committee. Her clumsy bobbling of the cap-and-trade bill designed to address global warming has even been criticized by some of her fellow Democrats. Ms. Fiorina has a different take: "Thank goodness she's failed to pass that job-killer, but it shows how little she gets across the finish line."
Ms. Fiorina makes clear she takes the issue of climate change seriously. But she argues that global warming is best addressed through more innovation, new technology and energy efficiency, areas in which California has excelled. The scientific debate on the extent of global warming should continue, she says. Meanwhile, cleaner technologies such as nuclear power should be encouraged.
"We must take advantage of every source of energy," she emphasizes, and forthrightly tackles a taboo subject in a state that has restricted off-shore drilling since the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill. "Technology has fundamentally changed the extraction of oil and natural gas," she says. That means California can protect the environment at the same time it opens up new areas of exploration.
Ms. Fiorina also is fascinated by the political potential of technology. "We need more transparency and accountability in government so that people know how their money is being spent," she says. "That means putting budgets online, putting legislation online." She's convinced that if citizens can play a greater watchdog role it will be easier to keep a check on higher spending and taxes.
In the midst of her enthusiastic comments about high-tech solutions to economic and political problems, Ms. Fiorina pauses to acknowledge that she's fully aware her six-year tenure as the head of HP will be used against her.
"Liberals will say I was let go by my board in 2005 and outsourced some jobs overseas," she says bluntly. "But I took the company through the worst technology recession in a generation and created jobs on a net basis. As for the outsourcing, the tax and regulatory climate made it almost impossible not to do that—which is why we have to change it." Ms. Fiorina claims subsequent revelations—that her successor and the board members who fired her were embroiled in an internal spying scandal—help vindicate her tenure as the first woman to head a Fortune 20 company.
But it's not just Democrats and liberals who will attack Ms. Fiorina. In a recent poll (with most voters undecided), she had only a narrow lead over Republican Chuck DeVore, a state assemblyman who criticizes her as the candidate of the party's establishment. He told reporters earlier this month that the fundamental issue is whether primary voters want "someone who epitomizes Reagan Republicanism or Rockefeller Republicanism."
To some that slam might seem a bit of a reach. Ms. Fiorina insists on her conservative bona fides. Her father was Joseph Sneed, a conservative law professor who served on the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals from 1973 until his death last year. His daughter says she inherited both his ability to work with those he disagreed with and his "common sense" views on issues.
Ms. Fiorina adds that she learned the values of hard work and entrepreneurship after she left Stanford University with a degree in medieval history and philosophy and was "unemployable." She worked as a secretary at a real-estate firm until she joined a management training program at AT&T in 1980. She rose to oversee marketing and sales for the largest division of Lucent Technologies before taking over HP in 1999.
"I will not run away from [conservative] values," Ms. Fiorina says, noting that she has signed the Americans for Tax Reform pledge against higher taxes and voted for Proposition 8 last year, which banned same-sex marriage in the state. On abortion, Ms. Fiorina says she is "proudly pro-life" and a strong opponent of taxpayer funding of abortions.
But her views also carry some nuance. She notes she created a strong program of domestic partner benefits while at HP. As for changing existing laws on abortion, she acknowledges, "I know, as a realist, that not everyone agrees with me. So the common ground we can find is how to reduce abortions."
An issue that will give Mr. DeVore some traction in a primary is that Ms. Fiorina says she "probably" would have voted to confirm Sonia Sotomayor, because most presidential Supreme Court nominees who are qualified deserve a presumption of support. One can argue with that position on substantive grounds, but it's probably smart politics in a general election given that California is 37% Hispanic.
Mr. DeVore has won backing from Rep. Tom McClintock, a conservative California hero, along with South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint. But Ms. Fiorina is supported by stalwart Republican conservative Sens. Tom Coburn and James Inhofe from Oklahoma. She also has support from Maine's Republican moderate Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe.
Can a conservative win in California given the shellacking John McCain, for whom Ms. Fiorina was a top economic adviser, got in the state last year? Her crisp answer is yes, noting that "the timing is now against Boxer" because "Californians are worried about whether they will have a job along with ballooning federal spending and deficits." All recent polls show Ms. Boxer below the 50% support an incumbent should have. Last week's Rasmussen poll gave Ms. Boxer a 46% to 37% lead over Ms. Fiorina, with one in three voters holding a "very unfavorable" view of the Democratic incumbent.
Ms. Fiorina notes that ObamaCare is now supported by only half of the state's voters. This is a sign, she says, that voters increasingly recognize it will raise the cost of health-care premiums and fail to solve real problems in our health-care system.
She has also targeted the proposed federal guidelines restricting the frequency of mammograms on the basis of personal experience. Ms. Fiorina says she found her own breast cancer lump only two weeks after a clear mammogram, and if she had waited two years for another one her cancer might not have been detected. She said on CNN that the federal panel that approved the now-withdrawn recommendations had "no cancer specialists on it, and the panel was explicitly asked to consider cost, not simply science."
Ms. Fiorina recognizes she has a way to go to convince voters to elect a political newcomer, and she makes no excuses for her spotty voting record in recent years. But California has a long tradition of electing outsiders to statewide office—from Ronald Reagan to educator S.I. Hayakawa (to the U.S. Senate) to Arnold Schwarzenegger. In tough economic times, California may well be tempted to elect a former CEO who thinks the Congress needs common-sense people like herself.
Mr. Fund is a columnist for WSJ.com.
-
What Happens When California Defaults?
by Bill Watkins 12/16/2009
The California Legislative Analyst’s Office recently reported that the State faces a $21 billion shortfall in the current as well as the next fiscal year. That’s a problem, a really big problem. My young son would say it was a ginormous problem. In fact, it may be an insurmountable problem.
Our governor and legislature used every trick in their books when they created the most recent budget. They even resorted to mandatory interest-free loans from the taxpayers. Now, they have no idea where to go. The Democrats have declared that they will not allow budget cuts. The Republicans will not allow tax increases. They have probably run out of smoke and mirrors, although their ability to engage in budget gimmickry is enough to make an Enron accountant blush. No one is considering raising revenues by increasing economic activity.
In my opinion, California is now more likely to default than it is to not default. It is not a certainty, but it is a possibility that is increasingly likely.
Then what?
Ideally, we’d see a court-supervised, orderly bankruptcy similar to what we see when a company defaults. All creditors, including direct lenders, vendors, employees, pensioners, and more would share in the losses based on established precedent and law. Perhaps salaries would be reduced. Some programs could see significant changes. This is distressing, but it is better than other options.
Unfortunately, a formal bankruptcy is not the likely scenario. There is no provision for it in the law. Consequently, absent framework and rules of bankruptcy, the eventual default is likely to be very messy, contentious and political.
Other states have defaulted. Nine states defaulted on credit obligations in the 1840s. Most of those states eventually repaid all of their creditors (see William E. English "Understanding the Costs of Sovereign Default: U.S. State Debts in the 1840s," American Economic Review, vol. 86 (March 1996), pp. 259-75.) Unfortunately, the examples in the 1840s are not much help in anticipating the impacts of a modern default. Circumstances are different, and things have changed, a lot.
We’re left with the question: what happens when California defaults?
The worst case would be the mother of all financial crises. According to the California State Treasurer’s office, California has over $68 billion in public debt, but the Sacramento Bee’s Dan Walters has tried to count total California public debt, including that of local municipalities, and his total reaches $500 billion. Whatever the amount, the impact of default could be larger than the debt amount would imply. Other states – New York, Illinois, New Jersey, for example – are in almost as bad shape as California, and they could follow California’s example. The realization that a state could default would shock markets every bit as much as when Lehman Brothers failed. Given the precarious state of our economy and the financial sector, another fiscal crisis would be disastrous, with impacts far beyond California’s borders.
What would a California default look like? In a sense, we’ve already seen California default, when that state issued vouchers. If any company tried that, they would be in bankruptcy court in days. Issuing vouchers didn’t trigger a California crisis because banks were willing to honor the vouchers. If banks refuse to honor the vouchers next time, employees and vendors won’t be paid, and state operations will come to a halt. This could happen if our legislature locks up and is unable to act on the current $21 billion problem.
Another possible California scenario is that the State will try to sell or roll over some debt, and no one buys it. Already, we’ve seen California officials surprised with the interest rates they have had to pay. What happens if no one buys California’s debt? We saw last September what happens when lenders refuse to lend to large creditors.
If we continue on the current path, the worst case is also the more likely case. Bad news keeps dribbling out. One day we find we are paying 30-percent-higher-than-anticipated interest on a bond issue. A few days later, we find the budget shortfall is billions of dollars higher than projected just a short time ago. Every month brings new bad news. The risk that one of those news events triggers a crisis grows with every news event.
Given California’s recent history, it is difficult to believe that the people with the authority and responsibility for California’s finances can act responsibly, but that is what we need. Responsible action would be creating a gimmick-free budget that places California finances on a sustainable path, and provides an environment that allows for opportunity and job creation. But, sadly, Sacramento probably cannot draft an honest balanced budget, and will thus need to plan for California’s eventual default. They need to work with Federal Government and Federal Reserve Bank officials to insure a coordinated plan to limit damage to financial markets. That plan needs to be ready to release when markets go crazy, which is exactly what could happen when participants realize that default is possible. It could be needed sooner than they think.
Bill Watkins is a professor at California Lutheran University and runs the Center for Economic Research and Forecasting, which can be found at clucerf.org.
-
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/05/california-hoist-by-own-petard-on-porkulus-spending/
Tragic.
-
http://townhall.com/columnists/GeorgeWill/2010/01/10/golden_no_longer
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Golden No Longer
by George Will
WASHINGTON -- Dalton Trumbo (1905-1976) was a hero to the American left, partly because of his 1939 anti-war novel "Johnny Got His Gun." Trumbo's title modified the lyric "Johnny get your gun" from the World War I song "Over There." Trumbo's "Johnny" is horribly maimed in that war. Now we need a novel titled "Berkeley Got Its Liberalism." Pending that, we have Tad Friend's report, in the Jan. 4 New Yorker, on maimed Berkeley.
California, a laboratory of liberalism, is spiraling downward, driven by a huge budget deficit. So the University of California system's budget was cut 20 percent. Then the system increased in-state student fees 32 percent to ... $10,302. But that is still 70 percent below student costs at Stanford and other private institutions in California that Berkeley considers no better than it is.
Last September, Friend reports, 5,000 Berkeley employees and students rallied in Sproul Plaza, scene of protests that ignited the 1960s and helped make Ronald Reagan governor. Some protesters, says Friend, were "naked except for signs that read 'BUDGET TRANSPARENCY.'" At an indoor meeting, a "student facilitator" used a projection screen to summarize proposals, which included: "rolling strikes"; "nationalize all universities"; "socialist revolution"; "a tent city in Sacramento"; "create a shadow Board of Regents"; "occupy Wells Fargo Bank in downtown Oakland"; "worker-student control of the university"; "strike in March"; "act now, f--- March"; "capitalism is bad." Toward the end of the seven-hour meeting, participants shouted "General strike! General strike!"
In its impact on the institution, and on students trying to grip the lower rungs of the ladder of social mobility, the UC system's crisis is sad. This academic year, only one-sixth of the normal number of new faculty have been hired at Berkeley. The Cal State system -- a cut below the UC campuses -- will enroll 40,000 fewer students this year than last. But because the professoriate is overwhelmingly liberal, there is rough justice in its having to live with liberalism's consequences, which include this:
Kevin Starr, author of an eight-volume -- so far -- history of the (formerly) Golden State, says California is "on the verge" of becoming something without an American precedent -- "a failed state." William Voegeli, writing in the Claremont Review of Books, tartly says that "Rome wasn't sacked in a day, and California didn't become Argentina overnight." Indeed.
It took years for liberalism's redistributive itch to create an income tax so steeply progressive that it prompts the flight from the state of wealth-creators: "Between 1990 and 2007," Voegeli writes, "some 3.4 million more Americans moved from California to one of the other 49 states than moved to California from another state."
And the state's income tax -- liberalism codified -- intensifies the effects of business cycles on the state's revenue stream: During booms, the stream surges and stimulates government spending; during contractions, revenues dwindle but the new government spending continues. Voegeli says that if California's spending had grown no faster than population growth and inflation from 1992 to 2006, it would have been $65 billion less in 2006, and per capita government outlays then would have equaled not those of Somalia or Mississippi but of Oregon, which is hardly "a hellish paradigm of Social Darwinism."
It took years for liberalism's mania for micromanaging life with entangling regulations to make California's once creative economy resemble Gulliver immobilized by the Lilliputians' many threads. The state, which between 1990 and 2007 lost 26 percent of its factory jobs and 35 percent of its high-tech manufacturing jobs, ranks behind only New York, another of liberalism's laboratories, in the number of outward-bound moving vans.
It took years for compassionate liberalism to make California's welfare menu contribute to the state becoming an importer of Mexico's poverty. It took years for servile liberalism to turn the state into what Voegeli calls a "unionocracy," run by and for unionized public employees, such as public safety employees who can retire at 50 and receive 90 percent of the final year's pay for life.
Friend reports that when the seven-hour meeting ended, the protest moved to the UC president's house. Two buses carried "some hundred Berkeley students and members of AFSCME." Perfect.
The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees is one reason why California's government employees -- their numbers grew 24 percent between 1997 and 2007 -- are the nation's most highly compensated. And why California's economy is being suffocated by the weight of government. And why the state's budget has little left over for Berkeley.
-
""some 3.4 million more Americans moved from California to one of the other 49 states than moved to California from another state."
Well if this is true we must put this in context to the overall population of California. NO ONE who has a brain would suggest the pop of California has gone down between 1990 and 2007.
Looking at the Census of 1990 the population was 29,760,021. In 2000 it was 33,871,648.
A Census estimate for 2008 is 36,756,666. Thus DESPITE NET 3.4 million people moving from California to another state than moving to California from another state the population has gone up roughly 7 million people.
So the conclusion is there are 3.4 million plus 7 million new people or 10.4 million NEW people in this state who must have:
1) been born there
2) come to California from another country
No one disputes the state is in complete financial trouble and on the verge of ruin.
Yet we have the liberal and politically correct crowd who tell us there is a net economic gain (somehow) of immigration (legal and illegal).
How can any rational person reconcile the claims and the facts?
The vast majority of the increase in population in California MUST be from illegals and their offspring. Based on Census own numbers there is no other explanation. I doubt much of the increase is from legal immigration from other countries.
And it is highly unlikely the birth rate of citizens (not including automatic "citizens of those who come here illegally) is high enough to add anything much to the increase in population numbers.
Thus here is evidence that illegals are *contributing* to bankrupting California.
They are not the sole cause but in addition to the liberal government programs that exist and are expanded on State and National levels we have a state that appears to be ready to implode and declare bankruptcy.
I have no problem confiscating 90% if all the wealth of all liberals in show business to pay down the debt.
-
IBD
California's Proposition 71 Failure
Posted 01/12/2010 06:36 PM ET
Bioethics: Five years after a budget-busting $3 billion was allocated to embryonic stem cell research, there have been no cures, no therapies and little progress. So supporters are embracing research they once opposed.
California's Proposition 71 was intended to create a $3 billion West Coast counterpart to the National Institutes of Health, empowered to go where the NIH could not — either because of federal policy or funding restraints on biomedical research centered on human embryonic stem cells.
Supporters of the California Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative, passed in 2004, held out hopes of imminent medical miracles that were being held up only by President Bush's policy of not allowing federal funding of embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) beyond existing stem cell lines and which involved the destruction of embryos created for that purpose.
Five years later, ESCR has failed to deliver and backers of Prop 71 are admitting failure. The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, the state agency created to, as some have put it, restore science to its rightful place, is diverting funds from ESCR to research that has produced actual therapies and treatments: adult stem cell research. It not only has treated real people with real results; it also does not come with the moral baggage ESCR does.
To us, this is a classic bait-and-switch, an attempt to snatch success from the jaws of failure and take credit for discoveries and advances achieved by research Prop. 71 supporters once cavalierly dismissed. We have noted how over the years that when funding was needed, the phrase "embryonic stem cells" was used. When actual progress was discussed, the word "embryonic" was dropped because ESCR never got out of the lab.
Prop 71 had a 10-year mandate and by 2008, as miracle cures looked increasingly unlikely, a director was hired for the agency with a track record of bringing discoveries from the lab to the clinic. "If we went 10 years and had no clinical treatments, it would be a failure," says the institute's director, Alan Trounson, a stem cell pioneer from Australia. "We need to demonstrate that we are starting a whole new medical revolution."
The institute is attempting to do that by funding adult stem cell research. Nearly $230 million was handed out this past October to 14 research teams. Notably, only four of those projects involve embryonic stem cells.
Among the recipients, the Los Angeles Times reports, is a group from UCLA and Children's Hospital in Los Angeles that hopes to cure patients with sickle cell disease by genetically modifying their own blood-forming stem cells to produce healthy red blood cells. Researchers at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center will use their grant to research injecting heart-attack patients with concentrated amounts of their own cardiac stem cells that naturally repair heart tissue.
-
By STEVEN GREENHUT
Sacramento
An old friend of mine has a saying, "Even the worm learns." Prod one several hundred times, he says, and it will learn to avoid the prodder. As California enters its annual budget drama, I can't help but wonder if the wisdom of the elected politicians here in the state capital equals that of the earthworm.
The state is in a precarious position, with a 12.3% unemployment rate (more than two points higher than the national average) and a budget $20 billion in the red (only months after the last budget fix closed a large deficit). Productive Californians are leaving for states with less-punishing regulatory and tax regimes. Yet so far there isn't a broad consensus to do much about those who have prodded the state into its current position: public employee unions that drive costs up and fight to block spending cuts.
Earlier this month, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed a budget that calls for a $6.9 billion handout from Washington (unlikely to be forthcoming) and vows to protect current education funding, 40% of the state's budget. He does want to eliminate the Calworks welfare-to-work program and enact a 5% pay cut for state employees. These are reasonable ideas, but also politically unlikely.
View Full Image
Associated Press
Los Angeles County employees rally for a new contract.
.As the Sacramento Bee's veteran columnist Dan Walters recently put it, the governor's budget is "disconnected from economic and political reality." Mr. Walters suspects what will happen next: "Most likely, [the governor] and lawmakers will, to use his own phrase, 'kick the can down the road' with some more accounting tricks and other gimmicks, and dump the mess on whoever is ill-fated to become governor a year hence."
Mr. Walters' Jan. 10 column was fittingly titled, "Schwarzenegger Reverts to Fantasy with Budget Proposal." Shortly before releasing his budget, the governor and Democratic state Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg held a self-congratulatory news conference. Mr. Steinberg used the spotlight to bemoan what he deemed to be unfair attacks on California. Mr. Schwarzenegger told a hokey story about his pet pig and pony working together to break into the dog's food. It was an example, he said, of how "last year, we here in this room did some great things working together."
Meanwhile, activists are fast at work. For example, the Bay Area Council, a moderate business organization, is pushing for a constitutional convention to reshape California's textbook-sized constitution. The council's aim is to ditch a constitutional provision that requires a two-thirds vote in the legislature to pass budgets. Other reforms being proposed include a plan to institute a part-time legislature and another plan to require legislators to pass drug tests. None of these ideas will ratchet down state spending.
To do that California needs to take on its public employee unions.
Approximately 85% of the state's 235,000 employees (not including higher education employees) are unionized. As the governor noted during his $83 billion budget roll-out, over the past decade pension costs for public employees increased 2,000%. State revenues increased only 24% over the same period. A Schwarzenegger adviser wrote in the San Jose Mercury News in the past few days that, "This year alone, $3 billion was diverted to pension costs from other programs." There are now more than 15,000 government retirees statewide who receive pensions that exceed $100,000 a year, according to the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility.
Many of these retirees are former police officers, firefighters, and prison guards who can retire at age 50 with a pension that equals 90% of their final year's pay. The pensions for these (and all other retirees) increase each year with inflation and are guaranteed by taxpayers forever—regardless of what happens in the economy or whether the state's pensions funds have been fully funded (which they haven't been).
A 2008 state commission pegged California's unfunded pension liability at $63.5 billion, which will be amortized over several decades. That liability, released before the precipitous drop in stock-market and real-estate values, certainly will soar.
One idea gaining traction is to create a two-tier pension system to offer lesser benefits to new employees. That's a good start, but it would still leave tens of thousands of state employees in line to receive lucrative benefits that the state must find future revenues to pay for. Another is to enact paycheck protections that require union officials to get permission from their members before spending union dues on politics (something that would undercut union power).
My hope is that these and other reforms find support in unlikely places. Former Assembly Speaker Willie Brown, a well-known liberal voice, recently wrote this in the San Francisco Chronicle: "The deal used to be that civil servants were paid less than private sector workers in exchange for an understanding that they had job security for life. But we politicians—pushed by our friends in labor—gradually expanded pay and benefits . . . while keeping the job protections and layering on incredibly generous retirement packages. . . . [A]t some point, someone is going to have to get honest about the fact."
State Treasurer Bill Lockyer, another prominent liberal Democrat, told a legislative hearing in October that public employee pensions would "bankrupt" the state. And the chief actuary for the California Public Employees Retirement System has called the current pension situation "unsustainable."
As the state careens toward insolvency, these remarks are the first sign that some people are learning the lesson of the earthworm.
Mr. Greenhut is director of the Pacific Research Institute's journalism center and author of the new book "Plunder! How Public Employee Unions Are Raiding Treasuries, Controlling Our Lives and Bankrupting the Nation" (The Forum Press).
-
Second post:
Why Is California Broke?
Posted: 22 Jan 2010 09:52 PM PST
Inquiring minds are asking "Why Is California Broke?" It's a good question. Please consider ...
California has the 3rd highest state income tax in the nation: 9.55% tax bracket at $47,055 and 10.55% at $1,000,000 - Tax Foundation 2010 State Business Tax Climate Table 2
California has the highest state sales tax rate in the nation by far at 8.25%. Indiana is next highest at 7%. Table 15
California corporate income tax rate is 3rd worst in the nation with a rate of 8.84%. - Table 2 and Table 8
California ranks 13th in property taxes. Table 2
California has the fourth highest capital gains tax 9.55%. - Capital Gains Tax Rates By State
California has the highest gasoline tax as of January 2010, averaging 65 cents/gallon. The national average is 47.4% - API Motor Fuel Taxes
California has one of the highest state vehicle license car taxes, 1.15% per year on value of vehicle, up from 0.65% in 2008. [expired link]
So where's the money going?
1 in 5 in LA County receiving public aid, nearly 2.2 million people as of February 2009. 20% in Los Angeles County receive public aid
California has 12% of the nation’s population, but 36% of the country’s TANF (“Temporary” Assistance for Needy Families) welfare recipients – more than the next 8 states combined. Unlike other states, this “temporary” assistance becomes much more permanent in CA. July, 2009 California has more recipients in key welfare category than next eight states combined.
California prison guards highest paid in the nation. The maximum pay of California's prison guards is nearly 40 percent higher than that of the highest-paid guards in 10 other states and the federal government, according to a study by the California Department of Personnel Administration. Cal-Taxletter
California teachers easily the highest paid in the nation. National Education Association
California now has the lowest bond ratings of any state, two steps above junk. The new rating affects about $72 billion of general obligation and lease-supported bonds. July 15 California bond rating cut again
California ranks 44th worst in “2008 lawsuit climate.” Institute For Legal Reform
California, a destitute state, still gives away college education at fire sale prices. California community college tuition is by far the lowest in the nation. Nationwide, the average community college tuition is 4.5 times higher than California CC’s. This ridiculously low tuition devalues education to students – resulting in a 30+% drop rate for class completion. Moreover, 2/3 of California CC students pay no tuition at all – filling out a simple unverified “hardship” form that exempts them from any tuition payment, or receiving grants and tax credits for their full tuition. [Expired Link]
California offers thousands of absolutely free adult continuing education classes. In San Diego, over 1,400 classes for everything from baking pastries to ballroom dancing are offered totally at taxpayer expense. San Diego Continuing Education
California residential electricity costs 13.81 cents per kilowatthour. The national average is 6.99-8.49. US Department of Energy
It costs 38% more to build solar panels in California than in Tennessee – which is why European corporations have invested $2.3 billion in two Tennessee manufacturing plants to build solar panels for our state. March 5, 2009 More Solar Companies Producing Elsewhere to Sell to California
The above lists reformatted and reordered from a list compiled by Richard Rider, Chairman, San Diego Tax Fighters.
-
http://www.europac.net/externalframeset.asp?id=18340
March 9, 2010
Why California Is Doomed
By Charles Hugh Smith
California is doomed for two simple but profound reasons: the cost structure is too high for most businesses to survive, and a boom-dependent economy.
The dysfunctions crippling California would easily fill a volume: a dysfunctional Legislature that has been gerrymandered to protect virtually every seat; a dysfunctional proposition system which enables special interests to craft Protected Fiefdoms via the ballot box; recalcitrant public unions who don't see anything wrong with public servants getting 90% of top-pay in pensions while still earning big bucks as "contract employees," an enormous population of undocumented workers who pay only sales taxes, and whose employers pay no payroll taxes, either-- and that just scratches the surface.
I want to highlight two systemic, structural causes for California's impending bankruptcy as a state and as an "economy": a crushingly high costs structure and an economy entirely dependent on the next boom.
I know this sounds too simplistic to be meaningful, but I think there is much truth in this statement: Costs are too high because the guy before you paid too much.
In other words, you can't afford the $500,000 mortgage on the $625,000 house you bought in 2008 because the guy before you paid $550,000 for a house which sold for $140,000 in 1997.
These numbers are drawn from reality: our friends bought a small home in a desirable suburb in the San Francisco Bay Area for $140,000 in 1997. Yes, it was a fixer-upper and yes, our friends completely remodeled it. The fair value of the house after renovation was probably in the $175,000 to $190,000 range, tops.
They sold the house in 2005 for $550,000, and that buyer unloaded the house in 2008 for $625,000.
This represents approximately $235,000 of actual value (the $175,000 adjusted for inflation from 1997 to 2010 as per the BLS inflation calculator) and $390,000 of "credit-bubble" excess.
Yet that "bubble valuation" is an actual cost now that somebody borrowed money to pay that grossly inflated price. This mechanism is absolutely key to understanding the California economy's fundamental insolvency: the apartment rent is high because the landlord overpaid, the office rent is high because the landlord overpaid, the house is too high because the previous owner overpaid and his/her lender ponied up the mortgage based on bubble valuations.
You can see the bubble in this chart of median home prices in California:
It even explains why Napa Valley is going bust, as a story submitted by frequent contributor U. Doran called "Vineyard Defaults Surge as Bargain Wines Hurt Napa Valley" reveals.
Wine costs are partly driven by the fact that the last guy grossly overpaid for vineyard land. Now the lenders are scrambling, but it's all too late; bubbles burst, and sadly for the lenders and those who bought at the top of the bubble, there will be no boom to save them.
Hunkering down and awaiting the next boom is a strategy as old as the state itself. When the easily plucked gold in the Sierra Nevada ran out, the economy based on supplying distant mining camps died right along with hundreds of those camps.
But then the Comstock Lode of silver was discovered in Nevada, and California--especially San Francisco--was bailed out by a veritable flood of fresh wealth pouring out of the mines.
More recently, the fall of the Soviet Union in the early 90s gutted the defense industry which had been a mainstay of the California economy since World War II. That "depression" lowered real estate values and caused many bankruptcies, personal and business alike.
But then the biotech and personal computer/software revolution took hold (the Macintosh took off as the laser printer revolutionized desktop publishing, etc.) and the next boom was under way. Tax revenues skyrocketed and Silicon Valley was the envy of the world, sparking wannabe "incubators of wealth" from New York (Silicon Alley) to Malaysia and beyond.
While no boom runs white-hot forever, the residents of California have come to expect a new bubble/boom to arise to fuel rising tax revenues and real estate valuations. Just as the PC revolution peaked (1995's "Start Me Up" Windows launch (as the bumper sticker had it, "Mac 1985, Windows 1995"), then the Internet boom started, triggering a frenzy of overinvestment and bubblicious valuations.
After that bubble burst in 2001, hot-spots in San Francisco and the valley lost some luster, and about 120,000 workers lost their jobs and left Northern California. But once again, a new wave of web-enabled businesses arose: Netflix, the Google juggernaut, Apple reclaimed the crown of global device/software integration innovation, Twitter, etc. etc.
But the current Web 2.0 boom is not generating a flood of new wealth which spreads over the landscape. Twitter has about 100 employees and might double to 200. Apple employs a few thousand people in Cupertino but all its manufacturing is done elsewhere.
What nobody seems to notice is that Web 2.0 is all about leveraging automated software. You don't need 10,000 people to run Twitter or Facebook.
And as I noted yesterday, these Web 2.0 businesses based on advertising revenues are inherently limited to the pool of available advertisers whose adverts are actually generating revenues. You can't reinflate a trillion dollars of real estate with 200 employees.
California is now the world capital of Denial. Everyone from the State legislature to union officials to realtors to small business owners are hanging on, refusing to face the fact that there will be no boom to save them and the state. To survive one more year, they're borrowing money, hiding debts and real valuations, monkeying with the books and playing accounting tricks, borrowing from next year's revenues, selling bonds--anything to maintain the artifice of solvency for 2010 so the next boom (conveniently scheduled for 2011) will lift real estate values, create hundreds of thousands of high-paying jobs and launch entire new industries.
Welcome to the Golden State of Denial. Without another global bubble--for California is a global economy--then California is doomed to insolvency at every level, public and private.
A return to historical levels of real estate valuations will bankrupt every lender and every owner with debts based on bubble valuations. State and local governments are thus doubly doomed, as their property tax revenues dry up and payroll taxes dwindle along with the job count.
California's entire cost structure is based on bubble/boom valuations and the vast tax revenues generated by those bubbles/booms.
The problem in California is everything costs too much: auto insurance costs more, gasoline costs more, taxes are near the top, especially on those households who make more than $100,000 a year, sales taxes are basically 10%, workers compensation insurance, business licenses, vehicle taxes, State Park admission/parking fees, rent, housing, and on and on.
The state and all its local governments have grown fat on endless bubbles and booms, and are now refusing to face the long lean years ahead. California is like the pilgrim who gets saved by a miracle at every turn. The economic miracles can't run out, because we've always been saved before.
As the disclaimer puts it: past performance is not a guide to future performance.
In some ways, California's dependence on bubbles and booms mirrors the nation as a whole; as with so many things, California has just extended the fantasy further.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Hugh Smith is a novelist, commentator, and author of Of Two Minds, Survival+: Structuring Prosperity for Yourself and the Nation, and Survival+ The Primer
-
sizes up why I left years ago woithout looking back.
-
See the clip in my entry of March 21 as to a reason I have stayed this long.
http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=589.0
-
STEVEN GREENHUT
Vallejo Goes for Broke
Can bankruptcy save California’s cities from staggering pension obligations?
31 March 2010
As California cities and counties struggle to fulfill the generous pay and pension commitments that they made to public employees during flush economic times, some politicians have taken comfort in a usually forbidding word: bankruptcy. Top officials in Los Angeles and San Diego have raised the B-word in recent weeks, and almost everyone is paying attention to developments in Vallejo (population 117,000), on the edge of the San Francisco Bay Area. The blue-collar port city filed for bankruptcy in May 2008, after it couldn’t pay its bills. Now, observers are watching to see whether Vallejo—the biggest California city to file for bankruptcy so far—offers a road map out of the mire.
Blame Vallejo’s politics, dominated by public-sector unions, for the city’s sorry fiscal situation. “Police and firefighter salaries, pensions and overtime accounted for 74 percent of Vallejo’s $80 million general budget, significantly higher than the state average of 60 percent,” reported a 2009 Cato Institute study. The study highlighted a shocking level of enrichment: pay and benefit packages of more than $300,000 a year for police captains and average firefighter compensation packages of $171,000 a year. Pensions are luxurious: regular public employees can retire at age 55 with 81 percent of their final year’s pay guaranteed, come hell or a stock-market crash. Police and fire officials in Vallejo, as in much of California, can retire at age 50 with 90 percent of their final year’s pay guaranteed, including cost-of-living adjustments for the rest of their lives and the lives of their spouses. And that’s before taking advantage of the common pension-spiking schemes that propel payouts even higher.
When a city spends so much taxpayer money on retirees, it doesn’t have much left over for services that might actually benefit the public. That’s why Vallejo has been slashing police services and has even warned residents to use the 911 system judiciously. “Since 2005, the number of police officers has dropped from 158 to 104,” a San Francisco Chronicleeditorial about Vallejo pointed out recently. “In 2008, Vallejo had a higher violent crime rate than any other comparable city in California.” And it isn’t just public safety that has suffered. A 2008 Chronicle article reported on a budget plan that “cuts funding for the senior center, youth groups and arts organizations, to the dismay of residents.” Citizens complain about an increasingly decrepit downtown.
All this thrift could go only so far, however. Hence Vallejo’s bankruptcy, which could theoretically remove the city’s crushing obligations to retired employees. Unfortunately, it isn’t clear yet whether the pension promises will actually wind up rescinded. Yes, a judge has ruled that “city labor contracts can be overturned in bankruptcy,” reports Ed Mendell on his well-respected CalPensions blog, but a “ ‘workout plan’ approved by the City Council in December, described as an opening position in labor negotiations, cuts nearly all general fund spending, except for employee pensions.” Though the city eventually voted to reduce firefighter pensions for new hires and to require a larger pension contribution by firefighters, it did not touch existing pensions or pensions for police officers. Vallejo’s avoidance of the pension issue makes it less likely that other cities could declare bankruptcy and then easily dispose of their burdensome pension promises.
That’s unfortunate, because plenty of California cities are in similar straits. For years, local elected officials in Vallejo and throughout the state (and the nation, for that matter) have rapidly fattened pension benefits for public employees, worrying more about the next election cycle than about the ability of their municipalities to make good on all the lush promises. Once these contracts are approved, they become binding and must be fulfilled on the backs of current and future taxpayers.
True, the Orange County Board of Supervisors, which granted massive pension increases twice in the past decade, is making an unusual legal attempt to reduce its pension obligations: it’s pursuing a lawsuit claiming that the retroactive portion of one increase was an unconstitutional gift of public funds. That’s a worthy effort but a long shot. Most California jurisdictions think that bankruptcy is a more feasible alternative if salary and pension costs push them toward insolvency.
The Chronicle editorial, taking Vallejo to task for entering bankruptcy, prescribes two alternatives: more “help” from Sacramento (a nonstarter, given the state’s nearly $21 billion budget deficit) and higher local taxes. That’s certainly what California’s muscular public-sector unions would like to see. They backed legislation that would make it nearly impossible for localities to abrogate their labor contracts in a bankruptcy. Now they’re advocating tax-raising plans and railing against the two-thirds vote requirement to pass budgets and tax increases in the California State Legislature.
Cities across the nation should pay close attention to Vallejo’s workout plan. If bankruptcy isn’t a fix for past profligate spending on public employees, then more debt and higher taxes may be inevitable—a sobering thought in an already-struggling economy.
-
More on Vallejo:
Sunday, March 28, 2010
http://www.globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/
Vallejo's Inept City Council Blows It
I had high hope that a Vallejo bankruptcy would set the tone fore dealing with unions. Sadly, that is not the case. Please considerVallejo's Painful Lessons in Municipal Bankruptcy by Steven Greenhut.
In 2008, Vallejo, Calif., was nearly broke. Faced with falling tax revenues, rising pension costs, and unmovable public-employee unions, the city was unable to pay its bills and declared bankruptcy. Now, as it prepares to emerge from Chapter 9, officials in Los Angeles, San Diego and other cities across the state are looking to see if Vallejo has blazed a trail for them to get out from under their own crushing pension costs. What they're finding is that even bankruptcy may not be enough to break the grip unions have on the public purse.
A report issued by the Cato Institute last September noted that 74% of the city's general budget was eaten up by police and firefighter salaries and overtime along with pension obligations.
The study also found that lavish pay and benefit packages were a root cause of the city's problems. In Vallejo compensation packages for police captains top $300,000 a year and average $171,000 a year for firefighters. Regular public employees in the city can retire at age 55 with 81% of their final year's pay guaranteed. Police and fire officials can retire at age 50 with a pension that pays them 90% of their final year's salary every year for life and the lives of their spouses.
To permanently bring its spending in line with its tax base, however, at some point Vallejo will have to do something about its pensions. U.S. bankruptcy judge Michael McManus, as the National law Journal reported last March, "held the city of Vallejo, Calif., has the authority to void its existing union contracts in its effort to reorganize."
But when it came to voiding those contracts on pensions—a major driver of public expenses—the city blinked. The "workout plan" the city approved in December calls for cuts in services, staff and even some benefits, such as health benefits for retirees. However, it does not touch public-employee pensions. Indeed, it increases the pension contributions the city pays.
This week, the city did approve a new firefighter contract that trims pension benefits for new hires and requires existing firefighters to pay more into their pensions. But that contract doesn't touch existing pensions. Nor does it affect police officers or other city workers. It also leaves the city with a $1.2 million shortfall. "The majority [of council members] did not have the political will to touch the pink elephant in the room—public safety influence, benefits and pay," Vice Mayor Stephanie Gomes told me.
Vallejo will eventually be back in bankruptcy court. Hopefully they will get it right next time.
In the meantime, if you live in Vallejo, I advise voting with your feet. Vallejo's mayor and city council are clearly inept, or alternatively bought and paid by the unions.
Steven Greenhut's Plunder!
I encourage you to read Plunder! How Public Employee Unions are Raiding Treasuries, Controlling Our Lives and Bankrupting the Nation by Steven Greenhut.
Plunder! is a fantastic book. I finished it weeks ago, but have not had time yet to do a review. I will. In the meantime I assure you it is well worth a read. It will open your eyes as to what is happening and why in regard to public unions.
Plunder! is now on my recommended reading list on the left.
Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
-
Don’t Blame Proposition 13
Profligate spending, not property-tax reform, has put California in a hole.
WILLIAM VOEGELI
In 1978, Californians enacted Proposition 13, the famous ballot initiative that rolled back property taxes and made it harder for assessors and legislators to raise taxes in the future. The experts still haven’t forgiven the voters. In 1994, Columbia historian Alan Brinkley ascribed Prop. 13’s passage to Californians who believed that they could get “something for nothing: substantial tax relief without a reduction of services.” In 2009, theWashington Post’s Harold Meyerson blamed the “malign initiative” for “effectively destroying the funding base of local governments and school districts” while empowering Republican “Neanderthals” in the state legislature, who refuse “in good times as well as bad to raise business or other taxes.” Earlier this year, Joe Klein of Time wrote that the proposition had made California “Exhibit A of a public pathology that we’ve inherited from the Reagan Era: the public wants a modified welfare state, excellent schools, a clean environment, low college tuitions . . . but it’s not willing to pay for them.”
You get the picture. According to liberals in politics, journalism, and academia, Proposition 13 is the reason for California’s worsening fiscal nightmare and the declining quality of the state’s public services, and the motives behind it were deplorable. And because Prop. 13 ignited a national tax revolt that remains potent, the Left also blames the measure for much of what it thinks has gone wrong in American political life generally over the past three decades.
Yet no matter how often their moral and intellectual “superiors” denounce them, California taxpayers continue to insist that the problem isn’t their purported stinginess but their government, which makes lousy use of the considerable funds that it continues to receive. On this point, the voters aren’t being stubborn, greedy, or stupid. The voters are right.
The first thing to recognize is that Proposition 13 did not destroy the tax base of California’s local governments. True, the average property-tax rate has fallen from 2.67 percent in 1977 to 1.1 percent today, observes David Doerr of the California Taxpayers’ Association. But the state still brings in a lot in property taxes. By 2007, the year of the most recent Census Bureau data comparing state finances, California’s state and local governments levied $1,141 in property taxes per capita, less—but only 11 percent less—than the corresponding average, $1,288, for the other 49 states and the District of Columbia. Property-tax revenues in the state have increased from $4.9 billion to $47 billion in the 30 years since Proposition 13. Adjust those figures for inflation and population growth, and property-tax revenues in California were 87 percent higher in 2009 than they were in 1979, chiefly because of rising property values.
And even if one tax is limited, others can rise. A recent article in theCalifornia Journal of Politics and Policy by Colin McCubbins and Mathew McCubbins shows that, adjusted again for population growth and inflation, total state and local tax revenues in California were higher ten years after Proposition 13’s enactment than they were just before—and that they were half again as high in 2000 as in 1978. Census Bureau data show that California ranked tenth in the nation in 2007 in terms of per-capita receipts from all state and local taxes (property, income, sales, and excise taxes) paid by individuals and corporations. Per-capita receipts from individual and corporate income taxes were 64 percent higher in California than they were in the rest of the country: $1,764 in California, $1,077 elsewhere. All told, California’s governments received $4,731 per resident from all taxes, 14 percent more than the $4,160 average outside California.
Ah, comes the objection: these numbers unfairly compare California with an aggregate that includes many rural states with low taxes and limited public services. But even if we confine our discussion to the ten most populous states in the nation, home to 54 percent of all Americans in 2009, California remains a high-tax jurisdiction. Its per-capita taxes exceed not only the national average but those of every other high-population state except New York.
Not only is California a high-tax state; it is even more conspicuously a high-revenue state. Things that aren’t taxes, such as fees for government services, often have a high degree of “taxiness,” as Stephen Colbert might say. “Charges and fees have become an integral part of the California budgetary landscape” because they “give the government a revenue stream that is not subject to limitation and hard for voters to track,” the McCubbinses argue. For example, local governments impose assessments on real-estate developers for the infrastructure and public services that a new housing tract’s residents will require. The developers then incorporate those charges into every unit’s sales price. “Home developers estimate that fees, new infrastructure, and other mandated expenses now run to between $30,000 and $60,000 for each new home,” journalist Peter Schrag noted in Paradise Lost, his book on California’s fall from grace since the 1950s.
Thus it is that the Golden State, routinely described as desperately short of funds because of Proposition 13, brought in $12,776 per capita in governmental income from all sources—taxes, fees, federal aid, charges for government-administered insurance, and revenue from government-owned utilities—in 2007. This amount was the fifth-highest in the nation and second (again) only to profligate New York among the ten most populous states (see the chart above).
Californians have good reasons, then, to tune out the incessant lectures about how the state wouldn’t be so screwed up if only they reached deeper into their pockets. And tune out they do. Though California has become one of America’s most liberal states in other regards, Proposition 13 remains “the third rail of California government,” as the Berkeley political scientist Jack Citrin wrote last year. “In the throes of the budget crisis of 2008 and increasing fiscal disarray, there was no serious talk of reforming the property tax system.” A 2008 survey by the Public Policy Institute of California showed that Californians continue to favor Prop. 13 by a two-to-one margin. Even 56 percent of self-identified Democrats said it was “mostly a good thing,” compared with just 31 percent who said it was “mostly a bad thing.”
The Californians who refuse to jettison Proposition 13 have a well-founded suspicion: that the state’s public sector is starving on its high-calorie diet because of mismanagement and capitulations to public-employee unions. Consider public education: California spent $8,909 per pupil in 2007–08, according to the U.S. Department of Education. Twenty-eight states and the District of Columbia spent more; 21 spent less, including Florida and Texas, which are also large Sunbelt states with enormous metropolitan areas and significant immigrant populations. Despite outlays that are in the middle of the scale, however, California students perform miserably on the U.S. Department of Education’s National Assessment of Educational Progress. In reading, California fourth- and eighth-graders rank 48th among all states; in math, fourth-graders rank 45th and eighth-graders rank 46th. (Students in Florida and Texas do significantly better on all counts.)
One reason for California’s poor performance may be that its pupil-to-teacher ratio is the country’s second-highest, behind only Utah. A public school with 1,000 students in California is likely to have just 48 teachers; the large classes that result hamper instruction. That problem stems from the efforts of the powerful unions that have helped make California public school teachers America’s most highly compensated, with an average salary of $66,986, 24 percent higher than the national average. (The statistics, for 2008–09, are from the National Education Association.) Such high salaries prevent California school districts from hiring more teachers and perhaps raising those abysmal test scores.
In fact, California taxpayers find themselves charged exceptional prices for unexceptional public services in one area after another. Not just California’s schoolteachers but state and local employees as a whole receive higher compensation than their counterparts in the rest of the country, Census Bureau data show. A veteran reporter for the Sacramento Bee, Dan Walters, calculates that California’s per-prisoner incarceration expenditures are 65 percent higher than the average for the nation’s ten most populous states, costing the state’s taxpayers an extra $4 billion per year. A recent New Yorker article on the University of California, lamenting its fiscal problems and predictably asserting that Proposition 13 “broke the government,” mentions in passing that the ten UC campuses have 229,000 students and 180,000 faculty and staff—nearly four employees for every five students. And this after what the magazine calls “decades of whittling” in the state’s financial support for UC, culminating in a “starveling” budget!
No one ever accused Milton Friedman of being sanguine about government’s willingness to restrain itself. In hindsight, however, his hopes for Proposition 13 were excessive. Friedman argued at the time that limiting a government’s entire budget, as the proposition did, was the only way to reverse the logic of interest-group liberalism, in which micro-constituencies, each focused intently on supporting a particular government program, invariably prevail against the general public, which lacks the time, awareness, and incentive to oppose those programs one by one. “We are not going to vote anybody out of office because he imposes a $3-a-year burden on us,” Friedman wrote. By reining in the budget, measures like Prop. 13 meant that any “special group that wants a special measure has to point out the other budget items that can and should be reduced”—or so Friedman thought.
Thirty-two years and hundreds of billions of dollars later, it’s clear that government’s manifest destiny to grow won’t be so easy to halt. As furiously as liberals have denounced Proposition 13, conservatives have reason to be disappointed in a political victory that proved the Bunker Hill, not the Yorktown, of the tax revolt. The moral of the story is that expenditure and tax limitations, of which Prop. 13 was the prototype, can serve as valuable first steps but are neither decisive nor self-implementing. To get state and local governments to spend tax dollars reluctantly and for the benefit of the general public—rather than profligately and for the advantage of public officials, employees, and their favored constituencies—will require continuous exertion; episodic interventions in the political process won’t be enough.
William Voegeli is a contributing editor of The Claremont Review of Books, a visiting scholar at Claremont McKenna College’s Salvatori Center, and the author of Never Enough: America’s Limitless Welfare State.
-
This man has an outstanding record in the CA legislature and I gave money to his US Congressional campaign. His words, particularly on CA state issues, carry great weight with me:
cClintock Ballot Recommendations
On the Propositions:
Prop. 13. Seismic Retrofits. YES: Earthquake proofing your house shouldn't trigger a tax increase until you're ready to sell. Any questions?
Prop. 14. Distorted Primary. NO: This was the result of the corrupt deal for the tax increase engineered by Abel Maldonado that included this measure to by-pass party primaries in a manner Maldonado believed would enhance his future election prospects. Instead of voters of each party putting their best candidate forward, this jerry-rigged system is designed to disguise the difference between the parties and force those pesky third parties off the general election ballot entirely.
Prop. 15. Taxpayer Funded Elections. NO: The real purpose of this measure is to allow the legislature to tap taxpayers to finance political campaigns. Jefferson said it best: "To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."
Prop. 16. Utility Elections. YES: Cash-guzzling city governments have been taking over the territory of utilities through eminent domain and PG&E wants to put it to a vote. This measure gives you the choice upon whose mercy your future electricity bills will depend: the monopoly of city hall or the monopoly of your utility. Here's a better idea: restore the freedom of individual consumers to choose among competing providers who actually have to earn their business. Alas, that part was left out by the suits at PG&E.
Prop. 17. Insurance Rates. YES: A simple question: should drivers be able to take their "continuous coverage" discount with them when they change insurance companies? A simpler question: why are our laws such a micro managing mess that we have to vote on something as self-evident as this in the first place?
On the statewide races:
For Governor, Steve Poizner: Steve had the courage to support Arizona's decision to enforce our immigration laws when Meg Whitman cut and ran. He opposes the bank bailouts, rampant borrowing and environmental extremism that Meg Whitman embraces. And unlike Whitman, Steve Poizner was never "a huge fan" of radical leftist Van Jones. This time, let's have a governor from the Republican wing of the Republican Party.
For Lt. Governor, Sam Aanestad: Sam was my seatmate for many years in both the Assembly and the Senate. He never wavered from his devotion to Republican principles of limited government. Abel Maldonado broke his signed taxpayer pledge and bears responsibility not only for the biggest tax increase in California's history, but also the budgets that ran California off the fiscal cliff. No single race on the ballot more clearly defines the difference between the Party of Reagan and the Party of Schwarzenegger.
For Attorney General, John Eastman: I worked with John Eastman at the Claremont Institute – a public policy think tank devoted to restoring American founding principles to the public policy debate. John is a nationally renowned Constitutional advocate and scholar whose leadership is desperately needed in the Attorney General's office. Imagine having an Attorney General who not only respects the Constitution but who understands and reveres it.
For Insurance Commissioner, Anybody But Villines. Mike Villines was another of the sell-out Republican votes on the massive tax increase that crushed what was left of our state's economy last year, after signing a no-new-taxes pledge. Liars don't belong in government.
For U.S. Senate, Chuck DeVore: Chuck is a conservative's conservative who has always stood on principle, even when it has meant standing virtually alone. I've never heard him give a speech without thinking "I wish I'd said that." I rank him up there with Sam Aanestad as one of the finest people I've had the opportunity to serve with in the legislature. He would become an instant leader in the United States Senate.
-
http://www.reuters.com/assets/print?aid=USN2427330520100524
You know what would help California right now? More taxes!
-
Well yeah, and regulations, too.
-
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/05/25/ca-cap-and-trade-will-cost-jobs-economic-growth/
Funny you should mention that....
-
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/05/antioch-california-considers-bankruptcy.html
-
From the previous link:
"Bankruptcy is exactly what public unions deserve."
Refreshing to see 'bankruptcy' presented as a solution, not the problem. Legacy debts of an operation are obligations only so long as the entity is successful and survives. There needs to be some mechanism to clear out the outrageous pension and unrealistic benefit packages approved by previous legislatures who had no governing right to bind future legislatures.
We don't choose forest fire but it does clear out dead wood and let sunlight shine through to the new growth on the forest floor.
People confuse bankruptcy - the positive process of dismantling the failure and starting over - with the failure itself that led to it.
-
ALLYSIA FINLEY
Costa Mesa, Calif.
"I've always voted against taxes. This is important, ladies and gentlemen, because our country is on a precipice. Do you want people to follow through on their promises?" state Assemblyman Chuck DeVore bellows to a rapt crowd this week at the Ayres Hotel in Costa Mesa. More than three hundred people have come to this GOP Senate debate to see the three candidates duke it out in the final push toward the June 8 primary. And Mr. DeVore clearly doesn't plan on playing third fiddle to opponents Tom Campbell and Carly Fiorina.
The rabble-rousing radio talk-show hosts moderating the debate encourage the candidates to "fight it out" as if it were a WWF wrestling match. So when Mr. DeVore goes after former Hewlett Packard CEO Fiorina for supporting a ballot initiative a decade ago that he says "would gut Prop 13," which limits property tax increases, she fires back: "I'm sure it's very frustrating for Chuck DeVore to have so many conservatives endorsing me. Maybe it makes Chuck DeVore, who's sort of dog-paddling at 14% in the polls . . . feel better to belittle other people's conservative credentials."
View Full Image
Associated Press
GOP Senate candidates Tom Campbell (left), Chuck DeVore, and Carly Fiorina.
.Her aggressive defense draws boos and hisses. Mr. DeVore's supporters outnumber his opponents' supporters by about three to one. These are the tea partiers we keep reading about. Many of the people I talk to say this election is the first time they've been involved in politics; they're concerned about their grandchildren's futures. "I'm worried we're turning into Greece with all of our entitlements," says an older DeVore supporter sitting next to me.
After the state's disastrous experiment with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, fiscal conservatism resonates. Mr. Schwarzenegger was swept into power seven years ago on the promise of fiscal responsibility, even though he had no track record to recommend him. Under his predecessor, Democrat Gray Davis, the state budget deficit reached a mammoth $38 billion. Yet during Mr. Schwarzenegger's first four years in office, state spending ballooned to $103 billion from $78 billion. Last year, the state faced a $42 billion deficit.
Though better known and better funded than Mr. DeVore, Ms. Fiorina and Mr. Campbell are struggling to pull ahead in the primary race to take on Sen. Barbara Boxer in the fall. And even though recent polls show Mr. DeVore trailing by double digits, his support has nearly doubled in the last two months to 16% from 8%.
Mr. DeVore's campaign is predicated on convincing conservatives that they can't trust Ms. Fiorina's credentials. At the debate, his volunteers passed out leaflets claiming she supported the stimulus, the Wall Street bailout, cap and trade, ObamaCare and amnesty for illegal immigrants. Though all gross misrepresentations of her positions, they generate anxiety among a distrustful electorate. When I ask people why they can't support Ms. Fiorina, they point to this leaflet.
What these tea partiers don't seem to realize is that by supporting Mr. DeVore, they are splitting the conservative vote and will likely hand a win to the moderate Mr. Campbell. If Mr. DeVore's attacks on Ms. Fiorina are as successful in riling up conservative voters as they are at this debate, come November Republicans will have a choice between Ms. Boxer, who has held the seat for three terms, and a "Barbara Boxer-lite," as Ms. Fiorina called Mr. Campbell in the debate.
Mr. Campbell has locked up the moderate vote because he's pro-choice on abortion and pro-gay marriage. "If we're serious about replacing Boxer, we need to nominate someone who is fiscally conservative and socially moderate," Mr. Campbell says, trying to sell his positions to the socially conservative crowd.
Mr. Campbell is a known quantity, having served 10 years in Congress and worked as Mr. Schwarzenegger's finance director. He was the architect of California's 2005 budget, credited for the state's current financial problems. He has also proposed covering the state's budget gap with a 32 cent per gallon gas tax, and he supported the governor's decision last year to sign a $12.5 billion tax hike.
Ms. Fiorina has used Mr. Campbell's spotty fiscal record to portray him as a "FCINO," or fiscal conservative in name only. Her "demon sheep" YouTube video depicting Mr. Campbell as a wolf in sheep's clothing struck a nerve among Republicans who once supported him because they thought he had the best chance of taking down Ms. Boxer. Now they're not so sure.
But they're not sure about Ms. Fiorina either, though she holds strong conservative positions on just about every issue. During the debate, she silences the pro-DeVore crowd when she speaks fluently about Sarbanes-Oxley (a 2002 federal law that set new accounting standards for publicly traded firms) and the Wall Street bailout in ways her primary opponents—and certainly Ms. Boxer—cannot. She's also run a Fortune 500 company. In short, she could be "the one" California conservatives have been waiting for to finally trample Ms. Boxer. But—and it's this that worries people—she has no legislative voting track record.
Although their movement is sweeping out political insiders across the country, tea partiers in the Golden State are loathe to take a chance on someone who doesn't have political experience. Yet by voting for Mr. DeVore because of his conservative record, they may guarantee Mr. Campbell a spot on the GOP ticket.
Ms. Finley is an assistant editor of OpinionJournal.com.
-
Why is Chritie succeeding where Schwarenegger failed? Perhaps it is timing. People are finally waking up to the dire straits some states are in due to public spending.
New Jersey Governor Defies Political Expectations
By RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑA
Published: July 11, 2010
FRANKLIN TOWNSHIP, N.J. — A momentous deal to cap property taxes was all but done, but Gov. Chris Christie was taking no chances, barnstorming the state to commiserate with squeezed homeowners and keep pressure on the Legislature.
Jodi Hilton for The New York Times
Lawmakers in both parties say Gov. Chris Christie and his team have been smart as well as lucky.
Related
News Analysis: Showdown Over N.J. Budget Is Avoided for Now (June 30, 2010)
Christie, Shunning Precedent, Drops Justice From Court (May 4, 2010)
Times Topic: Christopher ChristieOutside a farmhouse here in central New Jersey last week, buttoned up in a dark suit despite the triple-digit heat, Mr. Christie promised to tackle rising pension costs, transportation financing, municipal spending — all while poking fun at his opponents, the news media and, mostly, himself.
When a reporter suggested that the governor do a rain dance, he said, “Don’t want to miss that, baby.” And in the rare instance of his withholding judgment on an issue, he said he preferred to know something about the issue before opining, although, he added, tongue in cheek, that actual knowledge was not necessarily a requirement.
It was a model taste of Mr. Christie, six months into his term as governor: blunt, energetic, clearly enjoying himself.
And having his way.
Mr. Christie has turned out to be a far more deft politician than his detractors — and even some supporters — had expected, making few compromises as he pursues a broad agenda for remaking New Jersey’s free-spending political culture. So far, polls suggest, the public is giving him the benefit of the doubt.
“The most important thing in public life, in a job like governor, is for the people you’re representing to know exactly where you stand,” Mr. Christie said in an interview on Friday. “People who disagree with me on things at least have a sense of comfort in knowing where I’m coming from.”
In a mostly blue state where Democrats control the Legislature, Mr. Christie, a Republican, won election last year mostly because of the deep unpopularity of his opponent, Gov. Jon S. Corzine. Mr. Christie, a former federal prosecutor known for aggression rather than deal-making, took office to predictions that his hard-charging style would not work in the labyrinth of Trenton, where factions of party, region and interest group would slow him down.
Instead, he confronted the powerful public employees’ unions and won, cutting future pensions and benefits, and persuaded voters to defeat hundreds of local school budgets. He got nearly everything he wanted in the state budget, making the deepest cuts in generations. And the Assembly is expected this week to give final passage to one of his cherished goals: a cap on local property taxes.
The governor has repeatedly used his powers more confrontationally than his predecessors, wading into school budget fights, freezing the actions of semiautonomous public authorities and breaking with tradition by refusing to reappoint a State Supreme Court justice.
“I think we all underestimated his political skill coming in,” said Brigid Harrison, a political science professor at Montclair State University. “You can’t deny that he’s been a tour de force in Trenton. He has managed to control the legislative agenda more than other governors, despite having a Legislature controlled by the opposite party.”
The governor has a direct, pithy speaking style — the sharp rise in property taxes in the past decade, he said, “is not a mystery; it’s a mandate” — often leavened by humor. And he is relentless, willing to hammer any message repeatedly and take on any critic, and he rarely meanders or evades a question.
When a reporter called him confrontational at news conference, Mr. Christie said, “You must be the thinnest-skinned guy in America,” adding that the reporter had never seen him when he was furious.
The few public opinion polls conducted so far show that he has not had the sharp drop in approval that often accompanies serious budget cuts, though most of the pain from those cuts has not yet been felt.
“He’s a much better communicator than we realized, and people seem to be willing to go along with him for now,” said Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute. “He uses clear language, he doesn’t mince words, he’s funny, and he says what he thinks.”
Mr. Christie has become a favorite of conservatives across the country, and some talk of him as presidential material, though he insists, “No way is it going to happen.”
So far, circumstances have worked in Mr. Christie’s favor. The State Senate has a new president, Stephen M. Sweeney, who is seen as less liberal than his predecessor, Richard J. Codey, and more inclined to work with the governor. The recession, rising taxes and New Jersey’s perilous financial situation give persuasive power to the call to rein in government, and give Democrats who might disagree little room to maneuver.
“I think the tough times have dictated straight talk and forceful moves, and that fits him quite well,” said George Norcross III, a Democratic power broker from Camden County.
-
New Jersey Governor Defies Political Expectations
Published: July 11, 2010
But lawmakers in both parties say the governor and his team — a mix of old Trenton hands and people who worked for him in the United States attorney’s office — have been strategically smart as well as lucky. Mr. Christie chose top aides, led by Richard Bagger, his chief of staff and a former legislator, who have been able to smooth private negotiations when people are battling in public.
Related
News Analysis: Showdown Over N.J. Budget Is Avoided for Now (June 30, 2010)
Christie, Shunning Precedent, Drops Justice From Court (May 4, 2010)
Times Topic: Christopher ChristieFrom the start, the governor served notice that he saw the public employees’ unions as a central part of the state’s problems, and that he meant to take them on. His first day in office, he signed an executive order, later struck down in court, to limit their ability to finance campaigns. The first bills he signed limited spending on pensions and benefits. He relished months of verbal sparring with the teachers’ union, and analysts say he got the upper hand.
Mr. Christie said there was no plan to put the unions front and center, though some of his aides say privately that it was quite intentional.
But on controlling local government spending and taxes, he acknowledged that “yes, absolutely,” there was a political strategy to doing things in a particular order. The governor’s budget reduced school aid, leading to predictions that districts would raise property taxes. He blamed the teachers’ union for any increases and proposed capping property tax increases. Now he is using that cap as leverage for a package of bills, which has met union opposition, to help towns and school districts control spending.
The governor even pointed to areas where he might, uncharacteristically, tread lightly rather than face fierce resistance, like banning the holding of two or more government jobs simultaneously, a common practice among legislators.
It remains to be seen how well Mr. Christie will wear on New Jersey voters. Over the next year, people will begin to see the effects of his policies in their schools and towns, in his cut in funds for family planning or, for government workers, in their paychecks. The need to focus on fiscal issues has obscured some other areas where his positions are less popular, like his opposition to abortion.
It is also unclear how he would govern in boom times, when austerity is a harder sell. The governor said he would have preferred not to make some of his budget cuts, but suggested that in any climate he would have pushed for less government.
He said, “It’s more philosophical than a matter of necessity.”
-
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-welfare-20101004,0,5787669.story
More than $69 million in California welfare money, meant to help the needy pay their rent and clothe their children, has been spent or withdrawn outside the state in recent years, including millions in Las Vegas, hundreds of thousands in Hawaii and thousands on cruise ships sailing from Miami.
State-issued aid cards have been used at hotels, shops, restaurants, ATMs and other places in 49 other states, the U.S. Virgin Islands and Guam, according to data obtained by The Times from the California Department of Social Services. Las Vegas drew $11.8 million of the cash benefits, far more than any other destination. The money was accessed from January 2007 through May 2010.
Get breaking news alerts delivered to your mobile phone. Text BREAKING to 52669.
Welfare recipients must prove they can't afford life's necessities without government aid: A single parent with two children generally must earn less than $14,436 a year to qualify for the cash assistance and becomes ineligible once his or her income exceeds about $20,000, said Lizelda Lopez, spokeswoman for the Department of Social Services.
Round-trip flights from Los Angeles to Honolulu on Orbitz.com Sunday started at $419 — more than 80% of the average monthly cash benefit for a single parent of two on CalWorks, the state's main aid program.
"How they can go somewhere like Hawaii and be legit on aid … they can't," said Robert Hollenbeck, a fraud investigator for the Fresno County district attorney's office. "This is money for basic subsistence needs."
The $387,908 accessed in Hawaii includes transactions at more than a thousand big-box stores, grocery stores, convenience shops and ATMs on all the major islands. At least $234,000 was accessed on Oahu, $70,626 on Maui, $39,883 on Hawaii and $22,170 on Kauai.
The list includes $12,433 spent at the upscale Ala Moana shopping center, $3,030 spent at a group of gift shops next to Jimmy Buffett's Beachcomber restaurant on Waikiki Beach and $2,146 withdrawn from ATMs on the island of Lanai, home to a pair of Four Seasons resorts and little else.
"If it's on Lanai, that should trigger an investigation," said Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. "California taxpayers, who are struggling to keep their own jobs, are subsidizing other people's vacations. That's absurd."
Of the nearly $12 million accessed in Las Vegas, more than $1 million was spent or withdrawn at shops and casino hotels on, or within a few blocks of, the 4.5-mile strip. The list includes $8,968 at the Tropicana, $7,995 at the Venetian and its Grand Canal Shoppes, and $1,332 at Tix 4 Tonight, seller of discount admission for such acts as Cirque du Soleil.
Although many Las Vegas casinos block the use of welfare cards in ATMs on gambling floors, more than $34,700 has been spent or withdrawn from the ATM at a 7-Eleven in the shadow of Steve Wynn's new Encore casino and a couple of blocks south of Circus Circus.
-
McClintock, now a congressman, was a very good state legislator. I look to him to help me assess the sometimes bewildering array of initiatives-- many of which are quite deceptive.
Though I most certainly will be voting for the Marijuana initiatve (#19) on the rest I will be following his recommendations:
McClintock on the Propositions
Prop 19: When Worlds Collide. NO. If this simply allowed people to cultivate and smoke marijuana themselves and left the rest of us alone, it would be worth considering. But it goes much further and provides that "no person shall be discriminated against or denied any right or privilege" for pot use, inviting a lawsuit every time an employer tries to require a drug test, for example. If you want to smoke pot in your own world, I don't care. But don't bring it into mine.
Prop 20: Congressional Redistricting. YES. This finishes the work we began in 2008 to get redistricting decisions away from self-interested state legislators and into the hands of a bi-partisan commission. The original reform omitted Congressional districts – this simply adds them.
Prop 21: Highway Robbery. NO. Right now, state park users pay a nominal fee that helps pay for upkeep, assuring that those who use our state parks help pay for them. This measure ends the day-user fee and shifts the cost to the rest of us by imposing an $18 per car tax increase whether we use the parks or not. Stealing money from highway travelers used to be called "highway robbery." Now it's called "Proposition 21."
Prop 22: Hands Off Our Money. YES. This takes a giant leap toward restoring local government independence and protecting our transportation taxes by prohibiting state raids on local and transportation funds. Local governments are hardly paragons of virtue, but local tax revenues should remain local.
Prop 23: Liberation from the Environmental Left. YES. In 2006, Sacramento's rocket-scientists enacted AB 32, imposing draconian restrictions on carbon dioxide emissions (yes, that's the stuff you exhale). They promised to save the planet from "global warming" and open a cornucopia of new jobs. Since then, California's unemployment rate has shot far beyond the national unemployment rate and the earth has continued to warm and cool as it has for billions of years. Prop 23 merely holds the Environmental Left to its promise: it suspends AB 32 until unemployment stabilizes at or below its pre-AB 32 level.
Prop 24: Because Taxes Just Aren't High Enough. NO. This is a predictable entry by the public employee unions to impose an additional $1.7 billion tax on businesses. The problem, of course, is that businesses don't pay business taxes – we do. Business taxes can only be paid in three ways: by us as consumers (through higher prices), by us as employees (through lower wages) and by us as investors (through lower earnings on our 401(k)'s).
Prop 25: Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Fire. NO. This changes the 2/3 vote requirement for the state budget to a simple majority – a reform I have long supported. Experience has shown that the current 2/3 vote requirement for the budget does not restrain spending and it utterly blurs accountability. But such a reform MUST repair the 2/3 vote requirement for all tax increases and restore constitutional spending and borrowing limits. Without these provisions, Prop. 25 would be a disaster for taxpayers and a recipe for bankruptcy.
Prop 26: Calling a Tax a Tax. YES. Under the infamous Sinclair Paint decision, virtually any tax may be increased by majority vote as long as it is called a "fee," gutting the 2/3 vote requirement in the state constitution to raise taxes. Prop. 26 rescinds Sinclair Paint, restores the Constitution, and calls a tax a tax.
Prop 27: OMG. NO. Want to go back to the days when politicians drew their own district lines, literally choosing their own voters? This will get us there.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
McClintock for Congress PO Box 1198 Rocklin, CA 95677
www.helptom.com (530) 613-1188
Paid for by McClintock for Congress
-
http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2010/10/14/is-california-insane/?singlepage=true
One of the famous definitions of insanity is repeating the same mistake over and over again while expecting a different result. Whether that’s a perfect definition is open to debate, but one thing is certain: it’s as accurate a description of the California electorate at this moment in 2010 as you could get.
-
It's a common refrain whenever executives gather: California is tough on business, putting companies here at a competitive disadvantage.
But for all the bellyaching, at least one of the millstones on business — taxes — is not particularly heavy compared with other states, data show.
California takes about 4.7% of what a business produces in taxes — which happens to be the national average. The government take is higher in Alaska (13.8%), New York (5.5%) and Florida (5.3%). Even Texas, known for rolling out the red carpet for business, pocketed more than California — 4.9%.
That's according to an annual study of the tax burdens in all 50 states by the Council on State Taxation, a business-friendly group led by senior executives of Chevron Corp., General Electric Co. and other major corporations.
"California is pretty middle-of-the-pack when it comes to business taxes," said Joseph R. Crosby, the organization's senior director of policy.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-adv-biz-taxes-20101024,0,3837807.story?page=1
-
So all the businesses and productive citizens fleeing California are doing so for no reason?
-
So all the businesses and productive citizens fleeing California are doing so for no reason?
:?
People have left; some have arrived. Sure there are problems in this economy, but CA long term, has, and
will continue due to numerous unique advantages, grow. And when the economy picks up, CA will be
a leader; few really want to leave CA and move to KS or any place else for that matter.
CA for example is number one in High Tech Growth
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/b2fastestgrowing/2007/states/CA.html
As for people,
"California's population growth fell below 1 percent a year in 2009, but it will pick up so markedly that the state will have nearly 41 million residents by 2015, according to the state Department of Finance's demographic unit.
The new projection, based on births, deaths and domestic and foreign in- and out-migration, is that growth, calculated at 0.87 percent in 2009 and 2010, will reach 1.26 percent a year by 2015. California has seen higher growth rates in the past, topping 2 percent in 2000. But with its ever-increasing base, even a 1 percent rate means about 400,000 more Californians every year."
http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2010/05/state-sees-upti.html#ixzz13IMSwC3k
-
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/business/Cost-of-Living-Sucks-Everyone-Leaving-California.html
LOS ANGELES -- Mike Reilly spent his lifetime chasing the California dream. This year he's going to look for it in Colorado.
With a house purchase near Denver in the works, the 38-year-old engineering contractor plans to restart his family's future 1,200 miles away from his home state's lemon groves, sunshine and beaches. For him, years of rising taxes, dead-end schools, unchecked illegal immigration and clogged traffic have sapped the allure of the place writer Wallace Stegner once described as "America only more so."
Is there something left of the California dream?
"If you are a Hollywood actor," Reilly says, "but not for us."
Since the days of the Gold Rush, California has represented a sort of Promised Land, an image that fair or not is celebrated in the songs of the Beach Boys and embodied in the stars that line Hollywood Boulevard. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger calls the state the "golden dream by the sea."
But for many California families last year, tomorrow started somewhere else.
The number of people leaving California for another state outstripped the number moving in from another state during the year ending on July 1, 2008. California lost a net total of 144,000 people during that period -- more than any other state, according to census estimates. That is about equal to the population of Syracuse, N.Y.
The state with the next-highest net loss through migration between states was New York, which lost just over 126,000 residents.
California's loss is extremely small in a state of 38 million. And, in fact, the state's population continues to increase overall because of births and immigration, legal and illegal. But it is the fourth consecutive year that more residents decamped from California for other states than arrived here from within the U.S., according to state demographers.
-
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/companies-270725-california-list.html
Fourteen more companies have moved either jobs or entire facilities out of California, bringing to 158 the number of companies shifting resources out of state in 2010, according to a list compiled by Irvine relocation consultant Joe Vranich.
-
What are those California advantages? Crime, pollution, high taxes, lots of illegal aliens, high cost of living?
-
http://www.chiefexecutive.net/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=59FD13C5177B40B0B2D3EBA9E4384572&AudID=F242408EE36A4B18AABCEB1289960A07
“Texas is pro-business with reasonable regulations,” one CEO respondent remarked, “while California is anti-business with anti-business regulations.” Another commented, “California is terrible. Even when we’ve paid their high taxes in full, they still treat every conversation as adversarial. It’s the most difficult state in the nation. We have actually walked away from business rather than deal with the government in Sacramento.”
Click here to view the full chart
Best and Worst States for Business 2010
“The leadership of California has done everything in its power to kill manufacturing jobs in this state,” observed another CEO. “As I stated at our annual meeting, if we could grow our crops in Reno, we’d move our plants tomorrow.”
How is it that the nation’s most populous state at 37 million, one that is the world’s eighth-largest economy and the country’s richest and most diverse agricultural producer, a state that had the fastest growth rate in the 1950s and 1960s during the tenures of Democratic Governor Pat Brown and Republican Governors Earl Warren and Ronald Reagan, should become the Venezuela of North America?
Californians pay among the highest income and sales taxes in the nation, the former exceeding 10 percent in the top brackets. Unemployment statewide is over 12.2 percent, higher than the national average. State politics seems consumed with how to divide a shrinking pie rather than how to expand it. Against national trend, union density is climbing from 16.1 percent of workers in 1998 to 17.8 percent in 2002. Organized labor has more political influence in California than in most other states. In addition, unfunded pension and health care liabilities for state workers top $500 billion and the annual pension contribution has climbed from $320 million to $7.3 billion in less than a decade. When state employees reach critical mass, they tend to become a permanent lobby for continual growth in government.
Bill Dormandy, CEO of San Francisco medical device maker ITC, summed it up: “California has a good living environment but is unfavorable to business and the state taxes are not survivable. Nevada and Virginia are encouraging business to move to their states with lower tax rates and less regulatory demands.”
-
The California Dream. It's true, it costs more to live here; but then as I mentioned where else do you want to live? KS?
People move to CA because they want to; people leave CA because they are failing like Mike Reilly and have no choice but seek cheaper alternatives.
But for those who leave, new ones arrive or current companies grow especially in the high tech knowledge based industries. Don't worry
about CA; people will always chase there dream and want to be in CA.
"A recurring complaint about California - and one revived again recently - is that states with lower taxes and fewer regulations are luring businesses, and the jobs they generate, out of state. But the reality is that California loses very few jobs to other states. Business relocations are highly visible when they happen but are a misleading guide to the state's economic performance. Businesses rarely move out of or into California, and on balance, the state loses just 11,000 jobs a year. That's just .06 percent of the state's 18 million jobs. Far more jobs are gained or lost because businesses launch, expand, contract and close.
In fact, debates about California's business climate frequently understate the state's strengths. For instance, California consistently scores poorly on national business climate rankings. But these rankings suffer from a definition of "business climate" that's far too limited, focusing primarily on tax and regulatory costs. The skill level of the workforce, availability of capital, support for new business and overall quality of life are important aspects of the state's business climate as well. Focusing on the cost side of the equation fails to explain why California's growth tends to keep up with - or surpass - that of the nation."
-
The mountain west is far more attractive than CA. LA is well on it's way to becoming Detroit with palm trees. But you should should definitely not consider moving, JDN.
-
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/oct/23/business/la-fi-1023-caljobs-20101023
Joe Galvez, 43, was hit with a double dose of government cuts. He lost his job with the Los Angeles County Public Works Department in 2007 and hasn't been able to find steady work since. And, he said his son's high school is so strapped for funding that it has asked parents to donate money for school supplies.
"It's gotten so bad that schools are reaching out to the parents," said Galvez, a single father of three who collects scrap so he can come up with rent for the family's Baldwin Park home. "It's bad, man."
Cities across the state have taken stringent measures to balance their budgets, said Eva Spiegel, a spokeswoman with the League of California Cities.
Oakland laid off 80 police officers and delayed pothole repairs. Fullerton laid off 14 police officers and three firefighters, cut library hours and closed restrooms at several parks. Oceanside laid off 28 police officers and three firefighters, closed a swimming pool and a recreation center and eliminated the city Bookmobile.
"Decreasing sales tax revenues and decreasing property tax revenues mean that a lot of cities have had to do some belt tightening," Spiegel said.
Overall, the state's unemployment rate remained stuck at 12.4%, one of the highest in the nation. The state lost a net 63,600 jobs in September. Local governments shed 32,400 jobs, according to the monthly report from the state Employment Development Department released Friday.
The agency said 13,300 jobs were lost in construction, manufacturing shed 2,000, and even the usually dependable health and education services sector lost 13,600.
More pain is likely to come in government cuts.
-
http://city-journal.org/2010/20_3_california-economy.html
Joel Kotkin
The Golden State’s War on Itself
How politicians turned the California Dream into a nightmare
California has long been a destination for those seeking a better place to live. For most of its history, the state enacted sensible policies that created one of the wealthiest and most innovative economies in human history. California realized the American dream but better, fostering a huge middle class that, for the most part, owned their homes, sent their kids to public schools, and found meaningful work connected to the state’s amazingly diverse, innovative economy.
Recently, though, the dream has been evaporating. Between 2003 and 2007, California state and local government spending grew 31 percent, even as the state’s population grew just 5 percent. The overall tax burden as a percentage of state income, once middling among the states, has risen to the sixth-highest in the nation, says the Tax Foundation. Since 1990, according to an analysis by California Lutheran University, the state’s share of overall U.S. employment has dropped a remarkable 10 percent. When the state economy has done well, it has usually been the result of asset inflation—first during the dot-com bubble of the late 1990s, and then during the housing boom, which was responsible for nearly half of all jobs created earlier in this decade.
Since the financial crisis began in 2008, the state has fared even worse. Last year, California personal income fell 2.5 percent, the first such fall since the Great Depression and well below the 1.7 percent drop for the rest of the country. Unemployment may be starting to ebb nationwide, but not in California, where it approaches 13 percent, among the highest rates in the nation. Between 2008 and 2009, not one of California’s biggest cities outperformed such traditional laggards as New York, Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia in employment growth, and four cities—Los Angeles, Oakland, Santa Ana, and San Bernardino–Riverside—sit very close to the bottom among the nation’s largest metro areas, just slightly ahead of basket cases like Detroit. Long a global exemplar, California is in danger of becoming, as historian Kevin Starr has warned, a “failed state.”
What went so wrong? The answer lies in a change in the nature of progressive politics in California. During the second half of the twentieth century, the state shifted from an older progressivism, which emphasized infrastructure investment and business growth, to a newer version, which views the private sector much the way the Huns viewed a city—as something to be sacked and plundered. The result is two separate California realities: a lucrative one for the wealthy and for government workers, who are largely insulated from economic decline; and a grim one for the private-sector middle and working classes, who are fleeing the state.
-
The mountain west is far more attractive than CA. LA is well on it's way to becoming Detroit with palm trees. But you should should definitely not consider moving, JDN.
The mountain West? You must be kidding. I'll freeze to death, or or I'll die of heat, and worse, I'll die of boredom. It's a wasteland, albeit
in certain parts beautiful for a short visit. Great places for a second home...
Don't worry about my moving; last year in January I went skiing early that morning, and sailing in the afternoon. I can play golf year around (Doug, there are
some advantages here). CA has a greater number of fabulous restaurants, art, music, and overall culture compared to almost any other location. We probably have more quality colleges than any other state in the union. Crime is less than most states. And we have more computer startups and innovative companies. Capital, investment and knowledge is abundant. Among those doing well, almost everyone loves CA. And if you are failing, well, run to Nevada and live in the desert. Vegas is great to visit, but I just don't want to live there. But if you are successful, almost nobody wants to leave CA and everyone wants to be here.
Don't worry too much about CA.
-
The Left Angeles Times, a.k.a. Pravda on the Beach (POTB) says this morning that Prop 23, which would suspend the state's global warming law until unemployment is 5.5% is trailing 48 to 32.
The clusterfcuk continues , , ,
-
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/10/25/cbs-unemployment-situation-still-the-worst-since-the-depression/
Per CBS news, 22% unemployment in California. Think of how great that is for the environment!
-
"The mountain west is far more attractive..."
"I'll freeze to death, or or I'll die of heat, and worse, I'll die of boredom. It's a wasteland"
"in certain parts beautiful for a short visit. Great places for a second home"
--------
The natural beauty in California is amazing, see Crafty's hiking video for one thing, but to move there now one would inherit the man-made disasters with no solution in sight. I for one won't be moving to any higher tax state or looking for a higher cost of living. I have enough problems now.
Must jump in regarding mountain west with what I discovered. Found Lake County Colorado by accident, looking for an affordable place near the greatest ski resorts. Roughly a half hour drive to Copper Mountain - the favorite of Denver skiers, Breckenridge - most popular ski resort in North America, Vail - most variety of any mountain according the current Ski magazine, Beaver Creek - a very high end resort and very beautiful, home of the 'Birds of Prey' steepest downhill on the world cup circuit, all high speed lifts and reasonable season passes, Turquoise Lake - google it for photos(!), Independence Pass, the seasonal shortcut to Aspen, two tallest peaks in Colorado, can hike trails to the peaks with no special gear, rafting the headwaters of 3 rivers including the nation's most popular whitewater river,snowmobile trails, world class golf at the ski resort towns, 10th Mountain manages a system of 29 backcountry huts in the Colorado Rocky Mountains, connected by 350 miles of suggested routes. (see huts.org). Soft powder and warm sunshine - 300 days of sunshine. I came for the skiing, but discovered the summers. Campgrounds everywhere. Rainbow trout on every cast. Sailing on Lake Dillon. 90 minutes to a major metro and get frisked at DIA if you need that.
10,200 feet at the house, highest town in north America. Great for conditioning, home of the 100 mile mountain bike race. Or ride your bike to Steamboat if you have the energy. The golf ball travels farther and curves less. You tend to find zero obesity at the high elevations.
3 out of 4 roads out cross the continental divide. Unbelievable views. http://www.topoftherockiesbyway.org/ National forest in every direction. Zero smog unless pine trees are emitting something.
Property taxes 1/20th of my taxes at home for same size, roughly same condition house.
Bored to death? JDN, you're a skier. Just stay with us 1 day on the mountain for just 7 short hours, 9-4. Wear a helmet and carry a sandwich because we aren't stopping. At the end I'll ask if you were bored. :-)
(http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt114/dougmacg/Leadvilletown.jpg)
-
Sounds truly beautiful!!!
And I like the outdoors, skiing, biking, hiking, sailing, golf, etc.
Even I said, the mountain west is "Great place for a second home."
It sounds like a marvelous vacation recreation spot.
A wonderful place to visit...
But I assume you haven't moved there full time yet? Still live in
Minneapolis? Now that's a great city. A great place to call home
albeit a bit cold. (I've lost my WI blood).
-
http://www.businessinsider.com/calstrs-pension-vote-2010-11
Bombshell Pension Vote Is About To Sink California Hundreds Of Millions Deeper Into The Red
-
Wouldn't the riches of Buffett and Gates alone take care of California'a entire budget deficit. Why don't we just take all their money and pay it down?
Isn't that what the progressives want? Make the rich pay. So here you go. Between Clinton and Gore we could probably get another quarter billion easy.
-
GM:
I would read that as saying that the official numbers would be taking a baby step towards greater honesty/accuracy.
-
Comments written by friends of powerlineblog.com from California while awaiting the results. Interesting that while some may have favored Prop 19 from a libertarian perspective, having it on the ballot likely brought out the people, otherwise non-political, who give you 6 more years of Boxer and a state govt of fiscal madness.
------------
"I expect both Brown and Boxer to win [handily]. This is based on my experience of living here all my life. The population is radically different from what it was in the 1970s. The public employee unions are ultra-powerful, the blacks are solidly Democratic, and the millions of Hispanics are led by leftists, even though the average folks are more moderate. Then you have the Silicon Valley elitists, the Hollywood crowd, and, finally, the gays, many of whom are one-issue voters and rabid liberals. As an aside, when I dropped off my absentee ballot this morning, I realized that, judging from the appearance of the some of the people in line, the heavy turnout in my precinct was likely prompted by Proposition 19, marijuana legalization."
----------------
Same conclusion based on different reasoning:
"After watching (too much) TV, and the overwhelming number of Boxer and Brown ads, [my non-political wife] is convinced that Fiorina and Whitman have just spouted cliches without substance and that they are exploiters of the working class. Fiorina and Whitman have allowed the ads to define them negatively, the Brown ads (painting himself as a born-again Tea Partier) and Boxer ads (painting Fiorina as a ruthless, self-serving protiteer). Neither Whitman nor Fiorina have connected emotionally with the open minded voters."
-
NOT ONE PENNY of federal money to bail out California. They made their fiscal bed, they need to lie in it.
-
Whitman didn't vote for much of her adult life, and her schpiel was pretty much identical to our current disastrous governor-- and delivered as robotically as he read his lines as an actor. No substance there that I could discern, nor much ideological integrity-- just like our current governor.
Fiorina let Boxer paint her with the job-offshoring and the profiteering labels; very stupid. Also she looked pathetic about 10 days before the election when she was repeatedly asked by a FOX interviewer to name ONE spending cut and could not do so.
Amongst the many of our stupidities yesterday was to reject the postponement of our unilateral global warming law.
-
Doug,
What is your take with California? The state that gave us Reagan in the 70's?
Rush was saying Fiorina and Whitman lost because they are "RINOS".
He actually believes a stricter conservative would have won.
I really doubt that but than again we did have Reagan. Though as the above points out this state is defferent than the 70's.
I really don't think the country is massively shifting to libertarianism, conservatism as much as it is the pocketbook issue. Again I reiterate that 50% of the US doesn't pay taxes. Record people on payouts courtesy of those who pay up taxes. Endless immigrant hordes who while conservatives like to point out their family values, religiousness as examples of their "conservatism" I would be very wary expecting that to compete with the DEM strategy of tax the earning class and dole checks out to them.
Who do you think all these maids, grass cutters, nail hammerers, housekeepers, apple pickers are going to vote for?
Rand Paul. :?
The Republicans have to have a better agenda IMO. They need to propose conservative answers to this countries problems AND have the polticial salesmanship to turn the tables on duhbamster. Instead of sitting aournd waiting for him to call them obstructionist, do nothings, the party of no, the Republicans need to lay out an agenda and when he fails to act, point the finger at HIM.
Savage lays out a proposal for repubs in his book though I haven't read it. He says the new "contract" or whatever you want to call it is lame. I think he may be right.
Like it or not I don't think the independents are becoming resoundingly conservative just for ideology.
-
"Amongst the many of our stupidities yesterday was to reject the postponement of our unilateral global warming law."
Once again, more trust in government than in people. People can choose more efficient cars. Companies can choose to build more efficient factories. Families can make older homes more energy efficient. Anybody can buy a solar panel or a wind turbine on eBay any day of the year. None of these voluntary steps cost you more than living under oppressive government. I don't even know the details of the law, but I can tell from what is described that the people of California put their trust in a big, failed government over the free will of the people to do the right thing. Not exactly what the colonists fought for.
-
Not quite sure I see it that way in this case. In my analytical framework, pollution is an external diseconomy and as such is a violation of the natural laws of the free market, hence an area where government action is permissable.
The problem here is:
a) the science of the purported injury is quite dubious,
b) the proffered solution won't have any effect on the problem, and
c) it will destroy a lot of economic activity.
-
I don't know much about "global warming"; I don't think many CA voters do.
Hot one day, cold the next. One "expert" says this, another says that.
But I do remember how the smog in CA 20 years ago would almost choke a horse until CA began
very strict air pollution laws. Clean air (maybe not equal to rocky mountain states) is priceless.
I think that is why CA voted as they did. Clean air is a big issue here.
And I respectfully disagree; individual free people do not always do the right thing.
But the will of the collective free people voted on this one.
-
But the will of the collective free people voted on this one.
And, in doing so, accelerated toward a budget precipice.
-
AGW is not smog. Smog has a direct link to the tailpipe. You can see it, you can follow it, you can measure it. Human caused global warming is closer to the establishment of religion than it is to smog. Crafty, your economic externality point is exactly right if this were smog and the link was established. Since the link between this law and global temperature is not established, the wish to do something good or right in your mind should start with individual free will. We are talking about carbon dioxide, what plants (and oceans) breathe and what animals exhale. And we are talking about 1990s levels. If the link was established, why wouldn't we go back to 1840s levels? Economic curtailment is not an indirect effect of the law, it is what is being directly curtailed, by a thin majority, based on faith.
Will of the collective free people? Good grief. If 51% don't need more than a Prius, is it okay to mandate the Prius - by 'collective free will'? No, it would tyranny of the majority, not collective free will. If 51% are Christian, is it ok to mandate Christianity? No. That would be establishment of religion; we wouldn't allow a 98% majority to do that. But why not? If a majority support it and believe it, why isn't that good enough? Ask a fundamental Christian, they know what is best for you - just like a prop 23 voter. Let's vote. If 51% live within 5 or 10 miles of work, is it okay to limit daily driving to 20 miles for all? No.
The law reeks of unequal protection. Will Californians be restricted from fossil fuel based air-travel, a.k.a. criminal activity that often crosses state lines? Let's end out of state flights and flights to Asia, ban airlines from flying over California too. What about from buying a products made in China while you close your factory in California - and 'decrease California emissions'? End foreign trade, then check in again on unemployment levels. And CO2 levels.
Calif. AB32: http://www.ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Text_of_California_Assembly_Bill_32_%282006%29
No honest scientist on earth can say AB 32 will change CO2 levels or global warming beyond any margin of measurement error. It is all about faith in a link and a majority favor government placing limits on productive economic activity - and trips to visit Grandma, youth soccer tournaments, boy scout camps, etc. I oppose it.
Closing down 90% of state and federal government operations in California would have a larger effect on emissions without tromping on the freedoms of your fellow citizens. If that was what mattered.
-
But the will of the collective free people voted on this one.
70% of the voters in OK in the last election voted for the sharia ban. Funny how your reverence for the will of the people is less than consistent.
-
Trusting California voters is different than trusting Oklahoma voters. Can't you see the difference. :-)
-
Of course. :wink:
California unemployment rate: 12.4%
Oklahoma: 6.9%
-
I said,
"I don't know much about "global warming"; I don't think many CA voters do.
Hot one day, cold the next. One "expert" says this, another says that."
and
"I think that is why CA voted as they did. Clean air is a big issue here."
My point was I don't think the collective California voters understood the issue here; they only focused on
pollution and clean air. And on that basis they voted....
But the will of the collective free people voted on this one.
70% of the voters in OK in the last election voted for the sharia ban. Funny how your reverence for the will of the people is less than consistent.
The collective free people can vote how they want, but as been pointed out, the courts will give it careful scrutiny.
And I predict the Courts will toss it.
It's a "joke".
-
And what legal standing would you argue that the muslim brotherhood's US front has to litigate this constitutional amendment?
-
1) Lets keep the OK Sharia C'l amendment issue on the Sharia thread or the C'l issues thread on the SCH forum.
2) Doug: My intended point was not that AGW is an externality, rather that the structure of the analysis needs to be based around that concept. As I noted
"a) the science of the purported injury is quite dubious,
b) the proffered solution won't have any effect on the problem, "
I think we are on the same page here.
-
http://city-journal.org/2010/eon1103fs.html
Indebted and Unrepentant
New York and California stand virtually alone against the rest of the country.
-
http://city-journal.org/2010/eon1103fs.html
Indebted and Unrepentant
New York and California stand virtually alone against the rest of the country.
Perhaps, but New York and California combined hold some good cards to play...
-
What cards would those be?
-
Tangentially I note that Prop 19, (for which I voted) garnered more votes than either Whitman or Fiorina.
The City-Journal article cited by GM notes the , , , changing demographics of CA. The simple political fact is that the strong Republican support (especially Gov. Pete Wilson) several years ago of Prop 187 (for which I voted, which passed, and which was voided by the Federal Courts) has made the Latino vote a lock for the Democrats.
As we are currently discussing in "The Way Forward" thread, we of the American Creed persuasion need to find a way to connect with the natural aspirations of the hard-working entrepeneurial Latino American people.
-
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-19/california-pension-promises-may-top-taxes-by-fivefold-milken-study-finds.html
California Pension Promises May Top Taxes by Fivefold, Milken Study Finds
By Michael B. Marois - Oct 19, 2010 11:22 AM MT
California, which has the largest U.S. public-pension fund, faces liabilities that may exceed its annual state-tax revenue fivefold within two years unless lawmakers rein in benefits, according to a study.
To keep their promises to retirees, the California Public Employees Retirement System, the biggest plan, the California State Teachers Retirement System, the second-largest, and the University of California Retirement System may have combined liabilities of more than 5.5 times the state’s annual tax revenue by fiscal 2012, according to the study released today by the Milken Institute. Levies are forecast to reach about $89 billion in the year that began July 1.
Debts to government retirees including those in California, the biggest state by population, have grown into a national crisis as pension plans strive to meet obligations to more than 19 million active and retired firefighters, police officers, teachers and other state workers. Fewer than half the plans had assets to cover 80 percent of promised benefits in fiscal 2009, according to data compiled for last month’s Cities and Debt Briefing hosted by Bloomberg Link.
“California simply lacks the fiscal capacity to guarantee public-pension payments, particularly given the wave of state employees set to retire” in future years, said researchers Perry Wong and I-Ling Shen in the Milken report. “Structural shifts, coupled with the financial design and the accounting practices of state pension funds, all point to the fact that reform is imperative.”
-
http://maggiesfarm.anotherdotcom.com/archives/15764-California-state-agencies.html
Tuesday, November 2. 2010
California state agencies
ANY WONDER WHY CALIF. IS GOING BROKE?
California Academic Performance Index (API) California Access for Infants and Mothers California Acupuncture Board California Administrative Office of the Courts California Adoptions Branch California African American Museum California Agricultural Export Program California Agricultural Labor Relations Board California Agricultural Statistics Service California Air Resources Board (CARB) California Allocation Board California Alternative Energy and Advanced Transportation Financing Authority California Animal Health and Food Safety Services California Anti-Terrorism Information Center California Apprenticeship Council California Arbitration Certification Program California Architects Board California Area VI Developmental Disabilities Board California Arts Council California Asian Pacific Islander Legislative Caucus California Assembly Democratic Caucus California Assembly Republican Caucus California Athletic Commission * California Attorney General
Those are just the As. The rest are below the fold.
California Bay Conservation and Development Commission California Bay-Delta Authority California Bay-Delta Office California Biodiversity Council California Board for Geologists and Geophysicists California Board for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors California Board of Accountancy California Board of Barbering and Cosmetology California Board of Behavioral Sciences California Board of Chiropractic Examiners California Board of Equalization (BOE) California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection California Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind California Board of Occupational Therapy California Board of Optometry California Board of Pharmacy California Board of Podiatric Medicine California Board of Prison Terms California Board of Psychology California Board of Registered Nursing California Board of Trustees California Board of Vocational Nursing and Psychiatric Technicians California Braille and Talking Book Library California Building Standards Commission California Bureau for Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education California Bureau of Automotive Repair California Bureau of Electronic and Appliance Repair California Bureau of Home Furnishings and Thermal Insulation California Bureau of Naturopathic Medicine California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services California Bureau of State Audits California Business Agency California Business Investment Services (CalBIS) California Business Permit Information (CalGOLD) California Business Portal California Business, Transportation and Housing Agency California Cal Grants California CalJOBS California Cal-Learn Program California CalVet Home Loan Program California Career Resource Network California Cemetery and Funeral Bureau California Center for Analytical Chemistry California Center for Distributed Learning California Center for Teaching Careers (Teach California) California Chancellors Office California Charter Schools California Children and Families Commission California Children and Family Services Division California Citizens Compensation Commission California Civil Rights Bureau California Coastal Commission California Coastal Conservancy California Code of Regulations California Collaborative Projects with UC Davis California Commission for Jobs and Economic Growth California Commission on Aging California Commission on Health and Safety and Workers Compensation California Commission on Judicial Performance California Commission on State Mandates California Commission on Status of Women California Commission on Teacher Credentialing California Commission on the Status of Women California Committee on Dental Auxiliaries California Community Colleges Chancellors Office, Junior Colleges California Community Colleges Chancellors Office California Complaint Mediation Program California Conservation Corps California Constitution Revision Commission California Consumer Hotline California Consumer Information Center California Consumer Information California Consumer Services Division California Consumers and Families Agency California Contractors State License Board California Corrections Standards Authority California Council for the Humanities California Council on Criminal Justice California Council on Developmental Disabilities California Court Reporters Board California Courts of Appeal California Crime and Violence Prevention Center California Criminal Justice Statistics Center California Criminalist Institute Forensic Library California CSGnet Network Management California Cultural and Historical Endowment California Cultural Resources Division California Curriculum and Instructional Leadership Branch California Data Exchange Center California Data Management Division California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission California Delta Protection Commission California Democratic Caucus California Demographic Research Unit California Dental Auxiliaries California Department of Aging California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control California Department of Boating and Waterways (Cal Boating) California Department of Child Support Services (CDCSS) California Department of Community Services and Development California Department of Conservation California Department of Consumer Affairs California Department of Corporations California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation California Department of Developmental Services California Department of Education California Department of Fair Employment and Housing California Department of Finance California Department of Financial Institutions California Department of Fish and Game California Department of Food and Agriculture California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) California Department of General Services California Department of General Services, Office of State Publishing California Department of Health Care Services California Department of Housing and Community Development California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) California Department of Insurance California Department of Justice Firearms Division California Department of Justice Opinion Unit California Department of Justice, Consumer Information, Public Inquiry Unit California Department of Justice California Department of Managed Health Care California Department of Mental Health California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) California Department of Personnel Administration California Department of Pesticide Regulation California Department of Public Health California Department of Real Estate California Department of Rehabilitation California Department of Social Services Adoptions Branch California Department of Social Services California Department of Technology Services Training Center (DTSTC) California Department of Technology Services (DTS) California Department of Toxic Substances Control California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) California Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVets) California Department of Water Resources California Departmento de Vehiculos Motorizados California Digital Library California Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise Certification Program California Division of Apprenticeship Standards California Division of Codes and Standards California Division of Communicable Disease Control California Division of Engineering California Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control California Division of Gambling Control California Division of Housing Policy Development California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement California Division of Labor Statistics and Research California Division of Land and Right of Way California Division of Land Resource Protection California Division of Law Enforcement General Library California Division of Measurement Standards California Division of Mines and Geology California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources California Division of Planning and Local Assistance California Division of Recycling California Division of Safety of Dams California Division of the State Architect California Division of Tourism California Division of Workers Compensation Medical Unit California Division of Workers Compensation California Economic Assistance, Business and Community Resources California Economic Strategy Panel California Education and Training Agency California Education Audit Appeals Panel California Educational Facilities Authority California Elections Division California Electricity Oversight Board California Emergency Management Agency California Emergency Medical Services Authority California Employment Development Department (EDD) California Employment Information State Jobs California Employment Training Panel California Energy Commission California Environment and Natural Resources Agency California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) California Environmental Resources Evaluation System (CERES) California Executive Office California Export Laboratory Services California Exposition and State Fair (Cal Expo) California Fair Political Practices Commission California Fairs and Expositions Division California Film Commission California Fire and Resource Assessment Program California Firearms Division California Fiscal Services California Fish and Game Commission California Fisheries Program Branch California
-
Floodplain Management California Foster Youth Help California Franchise Tax Board (FTB) California Fraud Division California Gambling Control Commission California Geographic Information Systems Council (GIS) California Geological Survey California Government Claims and Victim Compensation Board California Governors Committee for Employment of Disabled Persons California Governors Mentoring Partnership California Governors Office of Emergency Services California Governors Office of Homeland Security California Governors Office of Planning and Research California Governors Office California Grant and Enterprise Zone Programs HCD Loan California Health and Human Services Agency California Health and Safety Agency California Healthy Families Program California Hearing Aid Dispensers Bureau California High-Speed Rail Authority California Highway Patrol (CHP) California History and Culture Agency California Horse Racing Board California Housing Finance Agency California Indoor Air Quality Program California Industrial Development Financing Advisory Commission California Industrial Welfare Commission California InFoPeople California Information Center for the Environment California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (I-Bank) California Inspection Services California Institute for County Government California Institute for Education Reform California Integrated Waste Management Board California Interagency Ecological Program California Job Service California Junta Estatal de Personal California Labor and Employment Agency California Labor and Workforce Development Agency California Labor Market Information Division California Land Use Planning Information Network (LUPIN) California Lands Commission California Landscape Architects Technical Committee California Latino Legislative Caucus California Law Enforcement Branch California Law Enforcement General Library California Law Revision Commission California Legislative Analyst's Office California Legislative Black Caucus California Legislative Counsel California Legislative Division California Legislative Information California Legislative Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Caucus California Legislature Internet Caucus California Library De velopment Services California License and Revenue Branch California Major Risk Medical Insurance Program California Managed Risk Medical Insurance Board California Maritime Academy California Marketing Services California Measurement Standards California Medical Assistance Commission California Medical Care Services California Military Department California Mining and Geology Board California Museum for History, Women, and the Arts California Museum Resource Center California National Guard California Native American Heritage Commission California Natural Community Conservation Planning Program California New Motor Vehicle Board California Nursing Home Administrator Program California Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board California Ocean Resources Management Program California Office of Administrative Hearings California Office of Administrative Law California Office of AIDS California Office of Binational Border Health California Office of Child Abuse Prevention California Office of Deaf Access California Office of Emergency Services (OES) California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment California Office of Fiscal Services California Office of Fleet Administration California Office of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Implementation (CalOHI) California Office of Historic Preservation California Office of Homeland Security California Office of Human Resources California Office of Legal Services California Office of Legislation California Office of Lieutenant Governor California Office of Military and Aerospace Support California Office of Mine Reclamation California Office of Natural Resource Education California Office of Privacy Protection California Office of Public School Construction California Office of Real Estate Appraisers California Office of Risk and Insurance Management California Office of Services to the Blind California Office of Spill Prevention and Response California Office of State Publishing (OSP) California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development California Office of Systems Integration California Office of the Inspector General California Office of the Ombudsman California Office of the Patient Advocate California Office of the President California Office of the Secretary for Education California Office of the State Fire Marshal California Office of the State Public Defender California Office of Traffic Safety California Office of Vital Records California Online Directory California Operations Control Office California Opinion Unit California Outreach and Technical Assistance Network (OTAN) California Park and Recreation Commission California Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) California Performance Review (CPR) California Permit Information for Business (CalGOLD) California Physical Therapy Board California Physician Assistant Committee California Plant Health and Pest Prevention Services California Policy and Evaluation Division California Political Reform Division California Pollution Control Financing Authority California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo California Postsecondary Education Commission California Prevention Services California Primary Care and Family Health California Prison Industry Authority California Procurement Division California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) California Real Estate Services Division California Refugee Programs Branch California Regional Water Quality Control Boards California Registered Veterinary Technician Committee California Registrar of Charitable Trusts California Republican Caucus California Research and Development Division California Research Bureau California Resources Agency California Respiratory Care Board California Rivers Assessment California Rural Health Policy Council California Safe Schools California San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission California San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy California San Joaquin River Conservancy California School to Career California Science Center California Scripps Institution of Oceanography California Secretary of State Business Portal California Secretary of State California Seismic Safety Commission California Self Insurance Plans (SIP) California Senate Office of Research California Small Business and Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise Certification Program California Small Business Development Center Program California Smart Growth Caucus California Smog Check Information Center California Spatial Information Library California Special Education Division California Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology Board California Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) California Standards and Assessment Division California State Administrative Manual (SAM) California State Allocation Board California State and Consumer Services Agency California State Architect California State Archives California State Assembly California State Association of Counties (CSAC) California State Board of Education * California State Board of Food and Agriculture California Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) California State Children's Trust Fund California State Compensation Insurance Fund California State Contracts Register Program California State Contracts Register California State Controller California State Council on Developmental Disabilities (SCDD) California State Disability Insurance (SDI) California State Fair (Cal Expo) California State Jobs Employment Information California State Lands Commission California State Legislative Portal California State Legislature California State Library Catalog California State Library Services Bureau California State Library California State Lottery California State Mediation and Conciliation Service California State Mining and Geology Board California State Park and Recreation Commission California State Parks California State Personnel Board California State Polytechnic University, Pomona California State Railroad Museum California State Science Fair California State Senate California State Summer School for Mathematics and Science (COSMOS) California State Summer School for the Arts California State Superintendent of Public Instruction California State Teachers Retirement System (CalSTRS) California State Treasurer California State University Center for Distributed Learning California State University, Bakersfield California State University, Channel Islands California State University, Chico California State University, Dominguez Hills California State University, East Bay California State University, Fresno California State University, Fullerton California State University, Long Beach California State University, Los Angeles California State University, Monterey Bay California State University, Northridge California State University, Sacramento California State University, San Bernardino California State University, San Marcos California State University, Stanislaus California State University (CSU) California State Water Project Analysis Office California State Water Project California State Water Resources Control Board California Structural Pest Control Board California Student Aid Commission California Superintendent of Public Instruction California Superior Courts California Tahoe Conservancy California Task Force on Culturally and Linguistically Competent Physicians and Dentists California Tax Information Center California Technology and Administration Branch Finance California Telecommunications Division California Telephone Medical Advice Services (TAMS) California Transportation Commission California Travel and Transportation Agency California Unclaimed Property Program California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board California Unemployment Insurance Program California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission California Veterans Board California Veterans Memorial California Veterinary Medical Board and Registered Veterinary Technician Examining Committee California Veterinary Medical Board California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board California Volunteers California Voter Registration California Water Commission California Water Environment Association (COWPEA) California Water Resources Control Board California Welfare to Work Division California Wetlands Information System California Wildlife and Habitat Data Analysis Branch California Wildlife Conservation Board California Wildlife Programs Branch California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) California Workers Compensation Appeals Board California Workforce and Labor Development Agency California Workforce Investment Board California Youth Authority (CYA) Central Valley Flood Protection Board Center for California Studies Colorado River Board of California Counting California Dental Board of California Health Insurance Plan of California (PacAdvantage) Humboldt State University Jobs with the State of California Judicial Council of California Learn California Library of California Lieutenant Governors Commission for One California Little Hoover Commission (on California State Government Organization and Economy) Medical Board of California Medi-Cal Osteopathic Medical Board of California Physical Therapy Board of California Regents of the University of California San Diego State University San Francisco State University San Jose State University Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy State Bar of California Supreme Court of California Teach California University of California University of California, Berkeley University of California, Davis University of California, Hastings College of the Law University of California, Irvine University of California, Los Angeles University of California, Merced University of California, Riverside University of California, San Diego University of California, San Francisco University of California, Santa Barbara University of California, Santa Cruz * Veterans Home of California
-
And now I know why I pay about $2000.00 a month in taxes. Obviously, the larger portion is Federal, but even still, last year was the first year that I got nothing, save $2.00 back from state.
-
Sacramento is headed for trouble again, and it shouldn't expect a bailout.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703506904575592612400443370.html
-
How Do California and the Titanic Differ?
By Dennis Prager
OK, riddle fans, here's a toughie: What's the difference between California voters and the passengers on the Titanic?
The passengers on the Titanic didn't vote to hit the iceberg.
Most Americans understand that California is sinking. What is almost incredible is that it has voted to sink.
On Election Day, 2010 Californians voted Democrats into every statewide position (one is still undecided). This is the party that singlehandedly has brought one of the world's greatest economies to near ruin. There may well be historical parallels to what Californians did — but I cannot think of any.
A listener called my radio show two days after the elections to tell me that his business is booming — thanks to Californians. His occupation? He's a real estate agent in Phoenix, Ariz.
The middle class has begun to leave California. It is, of course, impossible for most members of such a large group to leave a state; few people leave their family, their friends, their job and their home except under the most dramatic circumstances. But this fact makes all the more noteworthy the exodus from California that has been taking place.
You have to wonder how many businesses and individuals would leave California if their friends and family could also leave, if they could find a comparable job elsewhere and if they could sell their homes without losing money. What you don't have to wonder about is who would stay under those conditions. The state of California would eventually be left largely with those groups who voted Democrat in this election: rich liberals (such as those who live in Nancy Pelosi's Marin County, in the bay area and in West Los Angeles); state and municipal workers (who vote Democrat in as direct a pay-for-vote scheme as a law-based society allows); those who rely on state and city governments for entitlements; and those Latinos who either fall into the last category or who unfortunately identify the Republican Party with anti-Latino sentiments because it opposes illegal immigration.
Those who believe in individual responsibility, the free market and personal liberty are a minority in California. We greet each other as Americans would greet each other meeting in a foreign country.
We watch as one of the greatest places in the world — with its extraordinary natural beauty, almost uniquely beautiful weather and agricultural abundance — wastes all of this as a result of having become a left-wing experiment. What is particularly saddening is to see a state whose success was achieved because it was a Mecca for the adventurous in spirit do everything possible to crush that spirit and drive away those who have it.
There is a silver lining here: clarity. Americans living elsewhere need not elect liberal Democrats to know what will happen if they do. They only need to look at California if they want to see what happens to a state governed by the left (and, for that matter, they can look at Texas to see what happens to a state's finances when governed by the right).
The left and its teachers unions have ruined public education in California. The left and its public service unions have saddled the state with $500 billion in unfunded pension liability. California's left-governed cities have set themselves up as "sanctuary cities" for those who have come into America illegally. And the left passes more and more rules governing the behavior of California citizens. Two examples: San Francisco just banned McDonald Happy Meals because they come with a toy and therefore entice children to eat fattening food; and the Democratic legislature has made it illegal for a California employer — even in a retail operation — to ask a male employee who comes to work wearing a dress to wear men's clothing while at work.
And to render the Titanic analogy even more accurate, Californians voted to retain a law that was described by George Will as one "that preposterously aims to cool the planet by requiring a 30 percent reduction of carbon emissions by 2020."
That law will ensure that California taxes energy use more than any other state. That, in turn, is guaranteed to increase unemployment and the cost of living in the state — one more reason businesses and productive individuals are leaving, but rarely moving, into California.
Environmentalist true believers have free reign in California. They have convinced a majority of the state's voters to believe the increasingly absurd notion that human carbon dioxide emission is heating up the planet to temperatures so high that humanity and the earth will suffer cataclysmic consequences.
To return to our Titanic metaphor, the great difference between that ill-fated ship's crew and California's crew (its voters and the California Democratic Party) is that the Titanic's crew did everything possible to avoid hitting the iceberg; California's crew did everything possible to hit it. Perhaps they believe global warming will melt it before they get there.
-
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/california-politics/2010/11/california-budget-.html
Budget analyst: California deficit reaches a staggering $25.4 billion
November 10, 2010 | 12:22 pm
California faces a far-larger budget shortfall than state officials were projecting only weeks ago. The deficit over the next year and half has soared to $25.4 billion, the state’s chief budget analyst said on Wednesday.
The startling figure means the state faces an even tougher budget challenge than it did leading up to the passage of the current spending plan, which was historically late, as lawmakers wrangled over how to close the gap for 100 days into the new fiscal year. The projected deficit is the equivalent of about 29% of this year’s general fund budget. It projects California continuing to struggle to raise enough revenues to fund basic services as the state experiences a "painfully slow economic recovery."
One main reason the deficit remains so large is that the spending plan signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and approved by legislators 33 days ago relied on billions in accounting gimmicks, rosy assumptions and unlikely handouts from Washington, according to the report from the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office.
The new $25.4-billion shortfall will confront governor-elect Jerry Brown from the moment he is sworn into office in January.
Brown is vacationing this week and was unavailable for comment. The day after his election, the Democratic former and future governor acknowledged the budget gap was “very daunting,” even before the latest report.
“This will take all the know-how that I said I had and all the luck of the Irish as I go forward,” Brown said at the time.
You can read the LAO analysis here.
-- Shane Goldmacher in Sacramento
-
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2010/11/16/california039s_destructive_green_jobs_lobby_245841.html
California's Destructive Green Jobs Lobby
Silicon Valley, once synonymous with productivity-enhancing innovation, is now looking to make money on feel-good government handouts.
By GEORGE GILDER
California officials acknowledged last Thursday that the state faces $20 billion deficits every year from now to 2016. At the same time, California's state Treasurer entered bond markets to sell some $14 billion in "revenue anticipation notes" over the next two weeks. Worst of all, economic sanity lost out in what may have been the most important election on Nov. 2—and, no, I'm not talking about the gubernatorial or senate races.
This was the California referendum to repeal Assembly Bill 32, the so-called Global Warming Solutions Act, which ratchets the state's economy back to 1990 levels of greenhouse gases by 2020. That's a 30% drop followed by a mandated 80% overall drop by 2050. Together with a $500 billion public-pension overhang, the new energy cap dooms the state to bankruptcy.
Conservative pundits have lavished mock pity on the state. But as America's chief fount of technology, California cannot go down the drain without dragging the rest of the country with it.
The irony is that a century-long trend of advance in conventional "non-renewable" energy—from wood to oil to natural gas and nuclear—has already wrought a roughly 60% drop in carbon emissions per watt. Thus the long-term California targets might well be achieved globally in the normal course of technological advance. The obvious next step is aggressive exploitation of the trillions of cubic feet of low-carbon natural gas discovered over the last two years, essentially ending the U.S. energy crisis.
The massive vote against repeal of the California law—62% to 38%—supports an economy-crushing drive to suppress CO2 emissions from natural gas and everything else. In a parody of supply-side economics, advocates of AB 32 envisage the substitution of alternative energy sources that create new revenue sources, new jobs and industries. Their economic model sees new wealth emerge from jobs dismantling the existing energy economy and replacing it with a medieval system of windmills and solar collectors. By this logic we could all get rich by razing the existing housing plant and replacing it with new-fangled tents.
All the so-called "renewables" programs waste and desecrate the precious resource of arable land that feeds the world. Every dollar of new wages for green workers will result in several dollars of reduced pay and employment for the state's and the nation's other workers—and reduced revenues for the government.
Most destructive of all is the bill's stultifying effect on America's and California's most important asset: the venture capital industry, which accounts for the nation's technological leadership, military power, and roughly a fifth of GDP.
Led by Al Gore's investment affiliate, Kleiner Perkins Caulfield and Byers, the campaign to save AB 32 raised $31 million—more than three times the $10 million that the oil companies raised for repeal. Pouring in millions were such promethean venturers as John Doerr and Vinod Khosla of Kleiner Perkins, Eric Schmidt and Sergei Brin of Google, and the legendary Gordon Moore and Andrew Grove of Intel. The campaign even managed to shake down a contribution from the state's public utility, Pacific Gas and Electric, and gained the backing of the GOP's eBay billionaire gubernatorial candidate, Meg Whitman.
What is wrong with California's plutocratic geniuses? They are simply out of their depth in a field they do not understand. Solar panels are not digital. They may be made of silicon but they benefit from no magic of miniaturization like the Moore's Law multiplication of transistors on microchips. There is no reasonable way to change the wavelengths of sunlight to fit in drastically smaller photo receptors. Biofuels are even less promising. Even if all Americans stopped eating (saving about 100 thermal watts per capita on average) and devoted all of our current farmland to biofuels, the output could not fill much more than 2% of our energy needs.
In the past, Kleiner Perkins funded scores of vital ventures, from Apple and Applied Materials to Amazon and Google. But now Kleiner is moving on to such government- dependent firms as Miasole, Amyris Biofuels, Segway and Upwind Solutions. Many have ingenious technology and employ thousands of brilliant engineers, but they are mostly wasted on pork catchers.
Other venturers plunged into solar panel manufacturer Solyndra, which received some $500 million in federal subsidies and a campaign visit from Barack Obama before laying off 17% of its work force and giving up on a new factory that was supposed to create 1,000 green jobs.
Many of these green companies, behaving like the public-service unions they resemble, diverted some of their government subsidies into the AB 32 campaign for more subsidies. Virtually every new venture investment proposal harbors a "green" angle that turns it from a potential economic asset into a government dependent.
A partial solution is a suit by four attorneys general outside of California. They argue that the California law violates the Constitution's interstate commerce clause because of the limits it places on electricity generated by out-of-state, coal-fired power plants. But ultimately the new Congress must act. The Center for American Progress has found that 50 out of 100 or so new Republican congressmen elected earlier this month are "climate-change skeptics." But Republican leaders such as incoming Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor show dangerous gullibility in the face of environmentalist claims.
Co-sponsoring a disgraceful bill introduced in September to force utilities to expand their use of "renewable energy" to 15% by 2021 are Republican Sens. Sam Brownback and Susan Collins. Republican politicians are apparently lower in climate skepticism than readers of Scientific American, which recently discovered to its horror that some 80% of its subscribers, mostly American scientists, reject man-made global warming catastrophe fears.
Republicans may delude themselves that the U.S. can undertake a costly, inefficient and disruptive transformation of the energy economy, estimated by the International Energy Agency to cost some $45 trillion over 40 years, while meeting our global military challenges and huge debt overhang. But the green campaign wastes scarce and precious technological and entrepreneurial resources indispensable to the nation's future. Now it is debauching America's most precious venture assets. It must be defeated, not appeased.
-
There is something wrong with this logic....
Californians object to increasing taxes in order to pare the state's massive budget deficit, and instead favor closing the breach through spending cuts. But they oppose cuts—and even prefer more spending—on programs that make up 85% of the state's general fund obligations, a new Los Angeles Times/USC Poll has found.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-poll-20101118,0,1496673.story
-
JDN: Exactly.
Rarick: Isn't Vegas even more fornicated than we are? Isn't gambling the epitome of discretionary spending?
-
Guro Crafty, I couldn't agree with your statement that "We greet each others as Americans greet each other in a foreign country." That is exactly how I feel living in this state.
-
Around the Nation: Latinos Now Majority in CA Schools
Thanks to an immigration influx and a higher Latino birth rate, the state of California announced last week that Latinos are now an absolute majority among California public school students. That news was greeted by advice for Latino parents by UC-Berkeley professor of education and public policy Bruce Fuller: Their influence will only grow as they realize the schools they attend are underfunded. Leave it to a UC-Berkeley professor to forget, conveniently, that California schools just received an extra infusion of $1.2 billion from the federal government prior to the start of the school year. It's also worth pointing out that only around 60 percent of those Latino parents are currently able to vote, since many are here illegally with their children now attending public schools.
Add in the fact that illegal immigrant children are able to attend California's public university system for just the cost of in-state tuition, and it's small wonder that outgoing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who promised to terminate the $15 billion deficit he was handed in 2004, is leaving behind a budget hole that's grown to more than $25 billion. Of course, it could also have something to do with this list of California agencies sucking the state dry.
Given the state's fiscal disaster and high unemployment, perhaps the main reason Latinos are now the majority in the state's schools is that 5,000 legal American citizens are fleeing the state each week. It's a trend that shows few signs of abating.
-
Arnold Schwarzenegger
Rage against the machine
A case of right man, right ideas, wrong time, wrong voters?
Oct 7th 2010 | sacramento
Did they deserve him?NOWADAYS fewer than one in three Californians think their governor is doing a good job. That puts Arnold Schwarzenegger almost in the same territory as Gray Davis, who was recalled in 2003. During debates his fellow Republican, Meg Whitman, has politely stressed how different she would be, while Jerry Brown argues that bringing in well-meaning amateur politicians, even rich and famous ones, does not work. The left moans that the Governator cut spending, the right that he did not cut taxes enough.
If Mr Schwarzenegger is depressed, he does not show it. Few politicians anywhere exude optimism more physically. Sure, Californian politics is impossible (“There is maze you have to go through, then a minefield, then an obstacle course: you become an athlete”) but from behind his cigar he reels off a set of achievements, from reforming state workers’ compensation to making schools better and building levees. He has managed to keep spending rises below inflation. His main regret is not building more things: he waxes lyrical about visiting South Korea and counting the cranes on the skyline.
So there is a record to defend. The problem has to do with unmet expectations, probably including his own. Back when Mr Schwarzenegger bulldozed his way to the governorship alongside Mr Davis’s recall, the hope was that this cyborg ex machina could change the world’s least governable big economy. It was not just that his celebrity guaranteed him an audience; his brand of hedonistic Republicanism was close to the state’s moderate centre, unlike the partisan, gerrymandered legislature.
Related topics
Arnold Schwarzenegger
Politics
American politics
American state politics
California politics
Since then, as even Mr Schwarzenegger’s friends admit, the system won too often. But was it his fault? California’s governorship is a pretty weak one: the state’s government is a mess of competing districts, counties and cities, with much of the budget mandated by ballot initiatives. The Governator relied on using that referendum system to bypass the legislature. But those centrist voters soon let him down: a series of reforms were easily defeated by the big public-sector unions in 2005. The governor was soon in the sort of slow slugfest his foes excelled at. One Democrat calls him “a Hollywood negotiator”, better at dividing up the spoils than settling down for lengthy line-by-line brawls.
Against this, Mr Schwarzenegger still managed to win re-election in 2006, and he has doggedly clung to the centre. On prisons, for instance, he has defied right-wingers by repeatedly making the case that California locks up too many people. He has kept going on public-sector pensions and this month won a victory of sorts. There is talk of him setting up an institution to campaign for reform. “He doesn’t give things up,” observes one ally.
In retrospect, this supremely lucky man was unlucky in his timing—on two scores. First, his successor will have the advantage of several political reforms he did push through—open primaries and an end to gerrymandering in the state legislature—that should make politics in the near future less loopily partisan. Second, the mood has changed. Seven years ago Californians were furious enough to elect him but not to follow through. Now more of them may realise what a mess their state is in.
-
He is a failure, but no one could be a success with that legislature and those voters. From a couple of posts back (Crafty/Dennis Prager):
What's the difference between California voters and the passengers on the Titanic?
The passengers on the Titanic didn't vote to hit the iceberg.
Our state MN is a similar Blue State, similar voters in terms of well meaning white elites, white blue collar and heavy Dem inner city vote, similar problems on a smaller scale, but a different border. Just elected a complete loser from the left to be Governor (still in recount). What no one noticed or expected with all the governor race polling was that both chambers of the legislature swung from 60% Dem to similar margin to the R. Now we will have a reverse of the divided government we were getting used to. Nothing can get solved, but we can slow the rate of new damage done.
Our voters partially get it that you can't border on states that are advertising for our businesses and have no income tax and keep going up and up and up with penalties on production. But there is no momentum to reduce a huge state government burden either.
Calif voters had the marijuana crowd, the open borders crowd and I assume the gay marriage crowd out in force up against an unfocused Republican message. A note to the libertarians among us. You may not like your political partnership with the conservatives very well, but when you partner with the liberals to try to get things done on so-called social issues, the results on everything else (big government) are not something to crow about.
-
"The passengers on the Titanic didn't vote to hit the iceberg."
good analogy.
NJ has a lot of the liberal stuff of California, and the union stuff. Gov Christie has been able to get past it. I wonder if he would have had a chance in Kalifornia.
Except for her money Whitman was a weak candidate. I can't even say she was a good CEO as much as she had a winning company with a winning idea.
I am definitely a Republican not a Libertarian. I could be a strict conservative but I just don't think it possible in this country of entitlements. I hope I am wrong.
We are fighting a cancer.
-
http://biggovernment.com/gmcgrew/2010/11/25/california-state-pension-system-makes-madoff-proud-video-reveals-gimmicks-used-to-hide-the-decline-in-their-assets/
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgYDVDgIvFg&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]
-
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/12/16/great-news-california-to-adopt-cap-and-trade/comment-page-1/#comments
Great news: California to adopt cap-and-trade
posted at 3:36 pm on December 16, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
California’s unemployment rate has soared to 12.4%, third highest in the nation. For the sixth straight year, it has a net loss of population to other states as employers look to escape the onerous regulatory regimes and high tax rates in the nation’s most populous state. What better time to make energy more expensive and give government even more command control of the economy?
**Invest in U-Haul!**
-
Unfgbelievable , , ,
And here's more:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/255320/two-californias-victor-davis-hanson
-
So, rather than bailing California out, can we constitutionally eject it from the US?
-
http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2010/12/a-california-bankruptcy-dictatorship-and-the-guarantee-clause.html
A California Bankruptcy, Dictatorship, and the Guarantee Clause
Incoming California Governor Jerry Brown has gotten a look at the state budget and concluded that "We've been living in fantasy land. It is much worse than I thought. I'm shocked."
It got me thinking about what would happen if California went bankrupt.
In the absence of a statute, presumably the federal government would conduct some sort of bailout combined with a restructuring. If so, however, who would run the state during the proceeding?
In a commercial bankruptcy, there are two possible approaches. First, there is the bankruptcy trustee. S/he is appointed to liquidate the business and may be empowered to operate the business for a limited period of time. Second, there is the debtor in possession. In the latter case, the debtor remains in charge of the business while the Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding goes forward. For reasons that should be obvious, but which I'll come to in a minute, this would be my least preferred analogy for how to run a state bankruptcy.
In a municipal bankruptcy under Chapter 9 of the Bankruptcy Code, neither the federal government nor the bankruptcy court can order the appointment of a trustee to take over running the municipality. A state, however, can insist upon the appointment of a receiver or trustee as a condition of authorizing the municipality to file for bankruptcy. Indeed, when Orange County went belly up, California consented to the filing of a Chapter 9 proceeding only on condition that a trustee be appointed with all the powers of the Board of Supervisors if the county failed to meet certain conditions.
-
California isn't broken
Critics have suggested the state will default on its debt payments, that it is addicted to spending and that it has a hostile business climate. Not true.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-lockyer-california-outlook-20101220,0,3727492.story
-
**California isn't broken...the state will [not default on its debt payments,is [not] addicted to spending and [does not have] a hostile business climate**
That is good news for everyone. How did they fix it or was it all just a big misunderstanding? lol.
It seems that these expert statisticians cherry pick categories (venture capital funding, not employment, for example) and time frames (GDP rise from 1999 to 2009, not the last 2 years) to make a nice writing and present all the positive data as a percent or comparison to something else.
"...the state's unemployment rate is above the national average, but that is largely due to a bleak time for the construction industry"
Above average? That's it?? It is at 12% of the labor force! Construction down is unique to California? Unemployment is 6.4% in Minnesota with construction stopped, 2.8% in North Dakota where energy production is legal. I can think of other, large factors causing 'above average' unemployment in Calif. Comparing to other states understates the problem when the nation is sick and your fever is among the worst.
Funny what words carefully chosen can do, it is also true that the Great Depression was a period of above average unemployment.
-
"it is also true that the Great Depression was a period of above average unemployment."
In the 30's there were not 20 million illegals here working like there are now.
-
Chowchilla, Calif. has failed to make its January payment on a bond issued to make expensive renovations to its city hall.
We warned you on Tuesday that city was on the brink and could foreshadow similar cases across the country.
Now Chowchilla has crossed the line.
The 11,000-person town got into this situation through a massive collapse in home prices and bad fiscal management, not least of which was an $8 million city hall project. Earlier this year the city posted a technical default by depleting its bond reserve fund to make a payment. And the outlook isn't good. The next step could be moving city operations into the local police department to save on overhead costs or just disincorporating the city.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/chowchilla-default-2011-1#ixzz1AS76EtIj
-
Gov. Brown is off to an interesting start. Apparently he has dissolved some positions including the office of the First Lady and the Secretary of Education-- sensibly noting that it duplicated the work of the Board of Education. This is good!!! Unfortunately I gather that he has replaced those members of this board in favor of school choice with those opposed. This is very popular with his supporter, the Teachers Union. :-P Oh yeah, and apparently he wants Prop 13 repealed. This would be a disaster for the Denny household and could well be the straw that breaks our back for staying in CA.
==============
Odysseus-like, Jerry Brown journeys back to his ancestral home.
Sing in me, Muse, and tell the story of the godlike Jerry Brown,
Who became a political wanderer, skilled in the ways of the campaign,
After he forfeited his father's throne
In an ill-fated bid to take the proud halls of the faraway Beltway.
Begin, Muse, with the electoral rout that drove the son of the infrastructure-rich Pat Brown from his home
When the soft-throated San Diego mayor bested him in pitched battle, and
Made Brown eat small potatoes as he snatched the treasure meant for the Golden's State's lord.
The pop-star-dating pol spent years clinging to his Spartan mattress, his trademark blue Plymouth and even Malathion,
While the much-suffering goddess Minerva looked down at the exploits of those who picked up her shield:
The buttoned-down George Deukmejian, who booted the law-bending Rose Bird from her bench,
Pete Wilson, who told his short-haired troops they were eff-ing irrelevant,
Gray Davis, the gleaming-white warrior who declared that Sacramento was worse than Vietnam,
Even though, Zeus-like, he friggin' kept the lights on,
Until Conan, with his broad arms and flashing savage sword, recalled him.
Having been driven from office, the son of Pat Brown set sail for Japan.
When sated with Zen, he voyaged to Kolkata.
He poured libations for the sick and sat at the feet of the gamma-shaped Mother Theresa.
Buffeted by the fickle gods, he railed against the political machine,
Then he lunged to control that wine-dark apparatus in his yearning to take the helm of the state Democratic Party.
After pitched battle, he defeated the fair-haired Steve Westly
And flexed his fundraising prowess among the glittering swells
Who deride Proposition 13 from their super-size homes atop California's steep hills.
Then an old yearning stirred deep inside him one day.
The Jesuit prince looked into the mirror and said, "You must be, by your looks,
The infrastructure-rich Pat Brown's boy."
Thus spake the wheedling siren who lured him back toward presidential politics.
The wily Jerry Brown then proclaimed an "anti-politics gospel"
With an 800 number and $100 donation limit.
Once again, he tasted the bitter dreck of rejection.
He spent days squatting on his haunches, brooding
Until he found comfort in the soft breast of talk radio
With like-minded listeners who lapped up his honeyed words.
He then governed over Oakland Ecopolis, "both far away and very near,"
Only to battle NIMBYs, Birkenstock-shod and goose-loving scolds --
Fools -- who fought his plan to dot downtown with sleek towers
And wield the sword of eminent domain to pummel Revelli Tire into a parking lot.
On a starry night, his lusty spearman Jacques Barzaghi -- no Nestor he --
Dipped his oar poorly toward the realm where lawyers rule
And moaning, Frere Jacques slipped into the wine-dark sea.
Many years passed, and the quake-shaky Bay Bridge remained unfixed.
The squire of Jack London Square turned his gaze toward Sacramento
And found there bountiful photo opportunities -- Michael Jackson, Anna Nicole Smith, greedy corporations! --
In the office of the attorney general, a worthy perch for a once and future governor.
As he bided his time, bickering lawmakers assembled in their much-greased halls,
Inhaling the smoke of thighbones burnt as an offering to the gods,
They picked their teeth and spoke aloud their private thoughts:
"My word, how voters take elected officials to task!
All their afflictions come from us, we hear,
And what of their own stupid choices on ballot propositions?"
The much-suffering goddess Minerva looked down at the belching louts --
Casting dice, spanking lobbyists and cursing term limits --
And she longed for the day of the son's return, when she would whisper in his ear that he better replace his red-faced official portrait.
Many years passed, and the quake-shaky Bay Bridge remained unfixed.
The wily Jerry Brown, son of the infrastructure-rich Pat Brown,
Laid out the tools he would need to seize the primary in pitched battle --
His winged words, the fey mention of a certain former squeeze,
And other odd bits he could throw at the doglike media.
Without throwing his spear, he smote the ruby-throated Gavin Newsom,
Felled by his own whether-you-like-it-or not boast on his shining city's steps.
Heeding his own counsel, and that of the clear-thinking Anne Gust,
He withstood the calls of his political suitors to hurl all of his coins, and the wealth of many families
Toward the well-oiled army of political mercenaries -- cretins -- who feasted on the carcass of their own Republican Party,
Slain in the service of the maid-eating queen of eBay, butcher of many sheep.
Using winged words both random and cryptic, he emerged the master of debate,
As Meg Whitman's spearmen, weighed down with plunder and spoils, collapsed, quietly spewing foul oaths.
And so the wily Jerry Brown returned to his ancestral home and sat upon his father's and his own erstwhile throne.
-
Crafty,
Get out ASAP. Nothing good is coming to the PRK.
-
Oh yeah, and apparently he wants Prop 13 repealed. This would be a disaster for the Denny household and could well be the straw that breaks our back for staying in CA.
I agree Prop 13 would be a disaster for my family too. However, I have a hard time explaining to my friends why I pay less taxes.
Let's say my house is worth $750,000 or example.
Because I bought the house some years ago my property taxes (roads, education, city services, etc.) this year are "only" $2500.00.
However, if my next door neighbor buys his house today (let's say same house as mine) he would pay $7500.00 in taxes this year versus my $2500.00.
Yet we use the "same" roads, education, police, fire, etc. Why should I only pay one third of what he pays merely because he bought is house
this week and I bought mine and haven't moved ten years ago?
Further, the same "logic" question is also applicable to commercial properties. Bank of America on their building which they bought many years ago pays a much lower tax than a new bank/business who bought the exact same building next door. Is that fair? Right?
-
Absolutely it is fair!!!
1) If you buy a stock, you don't pay a capital gains tax when its market value goes up, you pay the tax when the gain is acutalized.
2) As a general principle, people should be able to buy a home (or a businessman a place of business) and not be driven out of it because inflation, speculative bubbles, or actual gains raises taxes to where they can't stay. Look for example at what drove the creation of the Prop 13 movement: An inflation driven speculative bubble augmented by the State Supreme Court's Wellenkamp decision voiding due on sale clauses in mortgages. Why should someone have to pay more taxes because of that?!?
-
Sent by a not always reliable internet friend, but it sounds plausible:
Drive carefully my friends
California Traffic Tickets Fines Effective 01/06/2011
BE VERY CAREFUL OUT THERE!
THE LOS ANGELES TIMES HAS AN ARTICLE ON THE SUBJECT:
"FLOORING IT ON CAR FINES". PASS IT ON TO YOUR FRIENDS AND ACQUAINTANCES!
HUGE California Traffic Tickets Fines Effective 01/06/2011
Please be extremely careful in your driving and car registration & insurance
matters. State of California is broke and they are trying hard to squeeze
all of us hard to collect money.
Effective immediately, if you do not stop at the red light, be ready to pay
$436 in fines or if you pass a school bus with flashing red signals, you
will be charged $616. The state of California is going for blood, so be
extra careful in driving, You cannot afford messing with them. I have been
hearing that Highway Patrols are under pressure to issue a lot more tickets
than last year with at least 30% increase in fines over 2009, so beware of
radar guns, highway and traffic cameras installed everywhere and the tougher
enforcement of parking rules.
Just for your info, the next time you park in the handicapped zone, even for
a minute, you will be looking at almost $ 1000 in parking tickets , so it'd
better be worth it.
California needs money, so pay close attention to the rules of the road!
Traffic Ticket Fines (Effective 01/06/2011)
VC 12814.6 $214 Failure to obey license provisions.
VC 14600(A) $214 Failure to notify DMV of address change
within 10 days
Note: The fine may be reduced with valid proof of correction.
VC 16028(A) $796 Failure to provide evidence of financial
responsibility (insurance)
Note: This fine may be reduced with proof of insurance on or after the
violation date.
VC 21453(A) $436 Failure to stop at a red signal.
VC 22349 $214 Unsafe speed, 1 to 15 miles over the limit.
VC 22350 $328 Unsafe speed, 16 to 25 miles over the limit.
VC 22450 $214 Failure to stop at a stop sign.
VC 22454(A) $616 Passing a school bus with flashing red signals.
VC 23123(A) $148 Driving while using a wireless phone not
hands free, first offense .
VC 23123(B) $256 Driving while using a wireless phone not
hands free, each subsequent offense.
VC 23123.5 $148 Driving while using a wireless device to
send, read or write text.
VC 23124 $148 Minor driving while using a wireless phone.
VC 22500 $976 Parking in a bus loading area.
VC 22507(A) $976 Violation of disabled parking provisions,
first offense.
VC 22507(B) $1876 Violation of disabled parking provisions,
second offense.
VC 26708 $178 Unlawful material on vehicle windows.
VC 27150 $178 Adequate muffler required.
VC 27315 $148 Mandatory use of seat belts.
VC 27360 $436 Mandatory use of passenger child restraints.
Note: This fine may be reduced by completing a court authorized child seat
diversion program .
VC 27400 $178 Headsets or Earplugs covering both ears.
VC 27803 $178 Violation of motorcycle safety helmet
requirements.
VC 34506 $616 Commercial Driver - Log book violation.
VC 4000 $256 No evidence of current registration.
Note: The fine may be reduced with valid proof of correction.
VC 4159 $178 Notify DMV of change of address within 10
days.
Note: The fine may be reduced with valid proof of correction.
VC 5200 $178 Proper display of license plates.
Note: The fine may be reduced with valid proof of correction.
VC 9400 $178 Commercial weight fees due.
--
Judge a man by his questions rather than his answers. -- Voltaire
-
http://www.snopes.com/politics/traffic/california2011.asp
Kinda, sorta.
-
Thanks for the greater accuracy.
-
The Governor of California is jogging with his dog along a nature trail.
A coyote jumps out and attacks the Governor's dog, then bites the Governor.
1. The Governor starts to intervene, but reflects upon the movie "Bambi" and then realizes he should stop because the coyote is only doing what is natural.
2. He calls animal control. Animal Control captures the coyote and bills the State $200 testing it for diseases and $500 for relocating it.
3. He calls a veterinarian. The vet collects the dead dog and bills the State $200 testing it for diseases.
4. The Governor goes to hospital and spends $3,500 getting checked for diseases from the coyote and on getting his bite wound bandaged.
5. The running trail gets shut down for 6 months while Fish & Game conducts a $100,000 survey to make sure the area is now free of dangerous animals.
6. The Governor spends $50,000 in state funds implementing a "coyote awareness program" for residents of the area.
7. The State Legislature spends $2 million to study how to better treat rabies and how to permanently eradicate the disease throughout the world.
8. The Governor's security agent is fired for not stopping the attack. The State spends $150,000 to hire and train a new agent with additional special training re: the nature of coyotes.
9. PETA protests the coyote's relocation and files a $5 million suit against the State.
OR:
The Governor of Texas is jogging with his dog along a nature trail. A Coyote jumps out and attacks his dog.
1. The Governor shoots the coyote with his State-issued pistol and keeps jogging. The Governor has spent $0.50 on a .45 ACP hollow point cartridge.
2. The Buzzards eat the dead coyote.
And that, my friends, is why California is broke and Texas is not.
-
Californians are accustomed to earthquakes, and are resigned to the possibility of another Big One in coming decades. But scientists now say the state also faces the very real possibility of a catastrophic rainstorm so massive that it could do more damage than any earthquake, submerging one in four California homes under floodwaters and causing $300 billion in damage.
Using improved satellite imagery, scientists have identified “atmospheric rivers”—moisture-laden air currents 200 miles wide and 2,000 miles long—flowing from tropical Pacific waters to the West Coast. Periodically, these rivers can conspire to create monsoon-like rainstorms over California in which 10 feet of rain could fall over just a few weeks. Tree-ring data shows evidence of vast floods in California’s past, and in the winter of 1861–62, enough rain fell to create “an inland sea” 300 miles long and 20 miles wide, from north of Sacramento all the way to Los Angeles.
“We think this event happens once every 100 or 200 years or so, which puts it in the same category as our big San Andreas earthquakes,” Lucy Jones, chief scientist of the United States Geological Survey’s multi-hazards initiative, tells Science Daily. Though experts can’t forecast when the next “superstorm” will hit, Jones says, it could well be within current lifetimes.
-
California Gov. Jerry Brown must rapidly close a $25 billion budgetary shortfall. But right now it seems almost a hopeless task since the state's disastrous budget is a symptom, not the cause, of California's much larger nightmare.
Take unemployment. It currently runs 12.6 percent in California, the nation's second-highest rate. Take livability. A recent Forbes magazine survey listing the most miserable 20 cities in the nation ranked four California municipalities among the index's five worst places to live.
Take education. California public schools test near rock bottom in national math and science scores. Take the business climate. A recent survey conducted among CEOs ranked California dead last for jobs and business growth.
Take taxes. California has the highest gasoline tax in the nation, and its combined sales and local/state income tax rates are among the nation's steepest. California incarcerates the highest number of prisoners in the nation. It costs nearly $50,000 per year to house each one, near the highest per-capita cost in the country.
I could go on, but you get the picture that the newly inaugurated Brown has problems well beyond even a massive budget shortfall..
Perhaps the state's problems are not of its own making, but arise from a deficit of natural riches? Hardly. California has the most fertile soil and most conducive farming climate in the country. Tourists flock to see the beauty of Yosemite, Death Valley and a 1,000-mile coastline. San Diego and San Francisco Bay are among the most naturally endowed harbors in the world. The state is rich in gas, oil, minerals and timber. It has the largest population in the nation at 37 million residents.
OK, but maybe prior generations failed to develop such natural bounty? Again, no. At one time California educators ensured that their tripartite system of higher education was the envy of the world. The Golden Gate and Oakland Bay bridges, along with the Los Angeles freeway system and the complex network of state dams and canals, were once considered engineering marvels far ahead of their time. Visionaries made Napa Valley the world's premier wine-producing center. California's farmers found a way to produce 400 crops and half the nation's fruits, nuts and vegetables, and created the richest food region in the nation. Silicon Valley and Hollywood are still the global leaders in computer innovation and entertainment, respectively.
Perhaps California did not invest in its public workers, skimped on entitlements, and turned away newcomers? Not really. Its teachers and public servants in many comparative surveys remain the highest compensated and best pensioned in the nation. Its welfare system is still the most generous in the nation. Seventy percent of its budget continues to go for education and social services. A state that accounts for 12 percent of the nation's population generously provides for 30 percent of the national welfare load. More than a quarter of the nation's illegal aliens are welcomed into California.
So in truth, the state's problems involve a larger "California philosophy" that is relatively new in its history, one that now curbs production but not consumption, and worries more about passing laws than how to pay for them.
California uses more gasoline than any other state and has the most voracious appetite for electricity. But Californians also enact the most obstacles to producing their own sources of oil, natural gas and nuclear power. State referenda and the legislature have made it the hardest state in the nation to raise taxes and the easiest to pass costly new laws.
The state's mineral and timber industries are nearly moribund. At a time of skyrocketing food prices, more than a quarter-million acres of some of the wealthiest agricultural land in California's Central Valley lie idle due to court-driven irrigation cutoffs -- costing thousands of jobs and robbing the state of millions of dollars in revenue.
Home prices stay prohibitive along the upscale coastal corridor from San Francisco to San Diego, even as millions of acres of open spaces there remain off limits for new housing construction. Most refined Californians who regulate how the state's natural resources are used live on the coast far away from -- and do not always understand -- those earthier people who struggle to develop them.
California does not ask its millions of foreign immigrants to come with legal status, speak English or arrive with high school diplomas, but then is confused when its entitlement and legal costs skyrocket. Billions of dollars in remittances are sent from California to Mexico -- but without the state being curious whether some of the remitters are on some sort of state-funded public assistance.
Somehow, Jerry Brown must not only change the way Californians act, but also the strange way they now seem to think -- convincing the present generation to produce far more private wealth while consuming far fewer public funds. Otherwise, the revenue-strapped and reform-minded governor is little more than a modern Sisyphus -- endlessly pushing his enormous rock uphill, never quite reaching the top.
-
Yesterday a special election was held to fill the position of State Senator for our district. Alerted by an email from the Tea Party Republican candidate for Assembly who just ran a very good but ultimately losing campaign about the vote (which would otherwise have not even crossed my radar screen) Cindy and I formed an opinion about for whom to vote and went to vote. The poll workers told us that about of about 2,500 potential voters, about 76 had voted.
-
Somos Hermanos!
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2011/02/la_mayor_security_wall_getty_house.php
-
By JOHN FUND Sacramento
California has led the nation in so many ways, so it seems fitting that it is now showing the rest of us what the collapse of an overburdened welfare state looks like.
In January, Democrat Jerry Brown returned to the governor's office he left 28 years ago. He assured voters that as a seasoned government hand he wouldn't repeat the mistakes made by his novice predecessor, Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger. Mr. Brown had shown a pragmatic, pro-business streak during the two terms he served as mayor of Oakland from 1999 to 2007. Many Californians hoped that at age 72 Mr. Brown would be the first Golden State governor since before Ronald Reagan without his eye on the presidency—and thus could make tough decisions despite the opposition of entrenched special interests.
The state certainly needs bold action: It faces an immediate $26.6 billion deficit. David Crane, a financial expert who worked for Mr. Schwarzenegger, estimates that the state's public- pension obligations could be as high as half a trillion dollars. California's credit rating is the worst in the country, and it's unlikely to return to pre-recession employment levels until the end of this decade.
Mr. Brown has, at best, a mixed record so far. He won points for keeping a campaign promise and refusing to push for tax increases without having them approved by voters. But his plan to close this year's deficit—with a combination of spending restraint and extensions of temporary tax hikes on income, sales and vehicles—has faltered.
It looks as if the special election to pass this plan, currently scheduled for June 7, will either be delayed or not held at all due to inaction by the Democratic legislature. To get his plan on the ballot, Mr. Brown needs the votes of two Republicans in both the state Assembly and the Senate to satisfy the two-thirds requirement for tax increases. He's unlikely to get official cooperation from the GOP unless he gives on something significant, like pension and regulatory reform. Otherwise, he'll have to target individual Republicans with inducements.
Mr. Brown blames the current impasse on "subversive" Republicans who never met taxes they could support. "Some Republicans want government to break down," he told the Los Angeles Times this week. "They want to blow it up. They're radical. They're not in the mainstream."
But Republicans counter that it's California's bloated government that isn't in the mainstream. "We have 12% of the nation's people, but a third of the welfare case load," GOP Assemblyman Dan Logue tells me. "We have the highest taxes in the nation in many categories, and unemployment that's now higher than Michigan's."
Next month, Mr. Logue will hold a hearing in Texas to learn why so many California companies have relocated to the Lone Star State. He says Mr. Brown could be a hero if he breaks with the public-employee unions that helped elect him and forces them to accept structural reforms in exchange for new tax revenue.
The prospects aren't promising. A group of five Senate Republicans has been meeting with Mr. Brown for weeks. They have suggested the state adopt proposals by the Little Hoover Commission, a cost-saving advisory body, that California create a 401(k)-type defined-contribution pension plan to go along with paring back the defined-benefit plan that government workers currently enjoy.
A new statewide Field poll shows that even liberal voters recognize that pensions must be reined in. It found that two-thirds of Democrats want state and local employees to pitch in more toward their retirement, and a full 50% of Democrats back the Little Hoover Commission's proposal. Republican negotiators are also calling for a relaxation of onerous business regulations and a "hard spending cap" that would restrain future spending increases to inflation and population growth.
The talks stalled this week after Mr. Brown told the Republicans that while he might want to do more, public- employee unions and Democrats are adamantly opposed. Democratic Senate President Darrell Steinberg did say he might consider a temporary spending cap, but only one that lasts as long as the five years that any tax hikes are extended.
That would repeat a fatal error in California history. The state once had a hard spending cap, called the Gann Limit, passed by voters in 1979. It kept California's balance sheet stable for over a decade. In 1990, GOP Gov. George Deukmejian teamed up with unions to narrowly pass a measure that rewrote the spending formulas, effectively emasculating the limit. Had a real Gann limit been in place over the past two decades, California's budget would be balanced now.
Public unions seem dug in against fiscal reform, but Mr. Brown might still corral enough stray Republicans to get his budget package before voters this summer. Yet even with the proposed all-mail ballot he wants to use to gin up turnout, its prospects are iffy. In 2009, two-thirds of California voters turned down an extension of tax increases similar to what Mr. Brown is proposing. Last November, despite Democratic victories up and down the ballot, state voters approved a measure requiring a two-thirds majority for increasing fees, and they rejected a repeal of business tax incentives. Voters even turned down an $18 automobile fee to help keep state parks open.
Should tax increases be blocked from the ballot, or if they're rejected by voters, Mr. Brown pledges to pursue an "all-cuts" budget solution that could devastate services without an accompanying restructuring of state government. The unions may respond with an "initiative war" proposing higher taxes on oil companies, tobacco and commercial real estate. Conservatives may counter with a ballot measure curtailing what unions can spend on politics out of member dues. Some moderates want to revive the findings of a 2009 bipartisan commission that concluded the state needs a simpler, less-onerous tax code.
"There are lots of ideas," says urban analyst Joel Kotkin of Chapman University. "But they all must start with ending policies that have California waging war against its own economy." In other words, Mr. Brown must find a way to get serious about tax reform, spending limits and stifling regulations.
Mr. Fund is a columnist for WSJ.com.
Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit
www.djreprints.com
More In Opinion EmailPrinter FriendlyOrder ReprintsShare: facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Viadeo
Orkut
Yahoo! Buzz
Fark
Reddit
LinkedIn
del.icio.us
MySpace
-
But JDN says California is doing fine, so I'm sure it'll all work out swell.
-
California reelin'
Lessons from a place that combines most of the shortcomings of the modern Western state
Mar 17th 2011 | from the print edition
DON NOVEY does not look like a typical Californian entrepreneur. The grandfatherly, fedora-wearing conservative began his career as a correctional officer at Folsom State prison in the 1970s. But he helped build one of the Golden State’s largest industries.
Thirty years ago, when Mr Novey became president of the California Correctional Peace Officers Association (CCPOA), only 2,600 members walked what he calls “the toughest beat in the state”, and there were only 36,000 inmates in California’s prisons. Now, as Barry Krisberg of Berkeley Law School points out, some 170,000 people are locked up there, and CCPOA has 31,000 members. From the air California can look like an archipelago of prisons.
Mr Novey made CCPOA a dominant force in state politics, and not just by dishing out political contributions in Sacramento, the state capital. He shrewdly formed an “iron triangle” with Republican lawmakers and prison-builders. And he gave it a cause: tougher sentencing for criminals. CCPOA sponsored the “three strikes” law, mandating life imprisonment for three serious felonies, and helped set up victims’ rights groups.
By the time Mr Novey gave up the CCPOA’s presidency in 2002, the state had built 21 new prisons. Some guards now earn more than $100,000 a year (with overtime). Mr Novey negotiated pensions of up to 90% of salary, with retirement starting as early as 50. To many of his members Mr Novey remains a hero—a man who provided good jobs and made them safer. And the taxpayer footed the bill.
Jerry Brown, the Democrat who was recently elected governor, faces a deficit of around $25 billion this year—bigger than the total budget in 1975. That was the year when Mr Brown in his younger “Governor Moonbeam” phase first ran the state. Back then California’s government was widely admired for its highways and its universities, and also as a font of political ideas both on the right (Reaganism) and the left (environmentalism). Now the roads and colleges are crumbling, even though total government spending in the state will reach $230 billion this year (see chart 4). Californian politicians get some of the lowest ratings in the country. Like a paranoid movie star, the state has kept on grasping at miracle cures—from Proposition 13, the tax-cutting ballot initiative, in 1978 to the election of Arnold Schwarzenegger, the cyborg-ex-machina, in 2003.
California is now widely studied as an example of what to avoid. Why is the home of Apple and Google so useless when it comes to running school districts or budgeting, and why have so many clever people settled for such a bad deal? Such questions are worth asking because what happens in California, which is famously like America, only more so, tends to happen elsewhere. And indeed a list of its ailments applies to a greater or lesser extent throughout the Western world.
• A messy structure of government. Look at an administrative map of California and you might assume that a child had scrawled over the design. It is a muddle of thousands of overlapping counties, cities and districts. Beverly Hills and West Hollywood sit in the middle of Los Angeles but are separate cities. The LA school district has 687,000 pupils, but there are 23 others with 20 pupils or fewer. Often voters have little idea what their officials do for their money. Last year the residents of Bell, a poor Latino city of 38,000 people, found their city manager was paid $788,000 and their police chief $457,000 a year.
In Sacramento things are no clearer. Thanks to various voters’ initiatives, as much as 75% of the budget is outside Mr Brown’s control. Proposition 13, which halved and capped property taxes, forced the state to bail out local government. A chunk of the state’s own money comes from the federal government. So cash for health, schools, welfare and much else sloshes backwards and forwards between Sacramento, Washington and various Californian cities. That makes it impossible to hold any Californian politician fully accountable for any part of government.
Some of this stems from specifically Californian afflictions, especially the ballot initiatives. But overlapping areas of responsibility are common throughout the West. In Australia, for instance, the federal government runs primary health care but the states run hospitals. In most European countries taxes are raised centrally but tend to be spent by local or regional government. The European Union increasingly plays the same role that Washington does in America, adding another layer of rules and mandates.
• Out of date. The most recent full redesign of California’s government was in 1879, when the state had only 865,000 people; now it has 37m, and a single state Senate seat represents more people than the whole Senate did then. As California’s pre-eminent historian, Kevin Starr, observes, “it is not surprising that an organisation set up to look after fewer than a million people should have a collective political nervous breakdown when it governs something almost 40 times that size.”
The same argument could be applied to the United States as a whole. Its constitution was designed for a country of 13 states and 4m people, when things like religious tolerance, the right to form militias and preventing people trying to become king mattered a lot. The Founding Fathers had no plans to bring either North Dakota or California into their union, nor could they imagine the ramifications of those two states both having the same voting weight in the Senate even though California’s population is 57 times bigger.
In Europe, thanks in part to two world wars, the state has been redesigned more recently, though many antiquated structures—such as Britain’s House of Lords—have survived. Many of these oddities work well in practice, and Americans revere their constitution. But structure matters. It is hard to think of any successful commercial outfit that has stuck to the same organisational design for 23 years, let alone 230.
• Too much power for vested interests. In “The Logic of Collective Action” (1965), Mancur Olson argued that rational individuals will work hard in a group with a selective aim reserved for its members (prison guards banding together to press for higher wages, for instance); they will expend less energy to push for public goods whose benefits are widely shared. Once entrenched, an interest group is extremely hard to shift. Its members have much to gain by fighting to retain their particular privileges, and would-be reformers have to take on disproportionately large costs to push for a vaguer public good. Californians have moaned about their prison guards’ perks for a while, yet have only recently plucked up the political will to do anything about them.
In rich countries no group has illustrated Olson’s work more clearly than farmers. In California’s Central Valley you can watch Californian tax dollars evaporating before your eyes as farmers guzzle most of the state’s precious water to cultivate crops that were never meant to grow in a desert. In the European Union two-fifths of the budget still goes to agriculture. In Poland farmers are exempt from income tax. Just as with the prison guards, the subsidies keep flowing to farmers largely because of conservative politicians. Although the greediest public-sector unions are firmly allied with the left (see article), the supposedly low-tax right also lavishes money on its own priorities. The new Republican leadership in Washington started its search for waste in the foreign-aid budget by trying to get the biggest recipient of American largesse, Israel, moved to the Pentagon’s budget.
Interest groups work especially well in systems like America’s where money needs to be raised and where party primaries matter. A Republican politician describes how the gun lobby works. If a Republican congressman signs up to the National Rifle Association’s agenda, he gets a little money and some organisational help from vocal supporters. If he does not, the NRA will put a lot of resources behind his opponent in the primary. Going with the NRA is thus a lot easier. Many Democrats would say exactly the same about the teachers’ unions and education reform. Opposing them is not worth the hassle.
Olson’s theory also helps explain why broad-based lobbying by big business has given way to narrower special interests. Fifty years ago California was run by a business elite, keen to keep taxes down and infrastructure spending up but with a broad interest in the well-being of the state. Since then Californian businesspeople have discovered that targeted lobbying can do a lot for their specific business. That has made it harder to get commercial interests to support projects of general benefit such as transport in the Bay area. It has also brought about an increase in regulation as individual businesses have lobbied for rule changes that create barriers to entry for other firms.
• Ever more rules and taxes. A study last year by the Pacific Research Institute said California had the fourth-largest government of all American states, with state and local spending equal to 18.3% of its gross state product. Texas, a state with which California is often compared, chewed up just 12.1% of GSP. It also looked at tax structures, and on that count California came 45th out of 50 states, with its steep income tax being especially damaging. Its tax system has been a mess ever since the dotcom boom when it relied too heavily on capital-gains taxes. As taxpayers have got crosser, the state has tried to tax them as sneakily as possible while adding tax breaks for favoured lobbies.
This points to two endemic problems with government throughout the West. The narrow one is that tax systems are in need of reform. America’s tax code has grown from 1.4m words in 2001 to 3.8m in 2010. Members of the European Union, too, have made their tax systems increasingly complicated—with the heroic exception of flat-tax Estonia. Most economists think taxes should be shifted towards consumption and away from income and investment. But whatever the system, it should be easy to understand.
The broader problem is the growing thicket of regulation—of which taxes are merely the most onerous part. Many of the new laws that have been passed in both Europe and America have admirable aims: better health care, cleaner air, less discrimination against minorities. But as Philip Howard of Common Good points out, they are amazingly cumbersome—Mr Obama’s health bill was over 2,000 pages long—and once on the statute book, they seldom come off again. One solution is to follow Texas’s example and let legislatures meet only occasionally. Another would be to introduce sunset clauses so that all regulations automatically expire after a while.
• The politics of gridlock. Sixty years ago California’s politics were rather cosy. In the early 1950s Pat Brown, Jerry’s father, who was then the Democratic attorney-general, used to share a car from Sacramento to San Francisco on Fridays with Earl Warren, the Republican governor. This year Jerry Brown in his inauguration speech described politics as a primordial battle between “Modocians” and “Alamedans” (Modoc being a rural, conservative Republican county and Alameda a liberal enclave east of San Francisco).
It is fashionable to blame this animosity on the internet and on partisan media channels such as Fox News. But it often has structural causes, such as gerrymandering. California has tended to choose centrists—liberal Republicans or conservative Democrats—in statewide elections, but the legislature’s electoral boundaries have been drawn to produce the biggest number of safe seats. That means primaries are the only real test for most politicians. Here reform may at last be on the way: Mr Schwarzenegger managed to force through an initiative that handed over redistricting to an independent commission.
But at a national level it will be a long time before America has a sensible debate about its budget deficit. George Lodge, a Harvard Business School professor who ran as a Republican against Ted Kennedy in Massachusetts in 1962, argues that many Western countries are now conducting a dialogue of the deaf. Conservatives want to talk about the “macro” vision (a smaller state) but not the “micro” specifics (the unpopular cuts to achieve that). Leftists want to talk about specific micro programmes they want to build up without ever discussing the macro bill for all of them.
• Towards the older middle. Given the fury from the left about bankers and from the right about welfare spongers, you would expect all that extra government spending to have been swallowed by either end of the income spectrum. In fact in California, as in most of the West, the cash has flowed mostly towards those with middle incomes and the old.
Both the rich and the poor do relatively badly out of government. The rich pay for most of it. In California the top 1% by income accounted for 43% of income-tax revenues in 2008 and the top 5% paid 64%. In America as a whole the top 1% paid 38% of federal income taxes and the top 5% paid 58%; their respective shares of national income were 20% and 38%. The wealthy pay the lion’s share in most European countries too. Getting the rich to cough up so much might be a desirable social goal in a time of great inequality, but it is hard to claim that they are not paying their share.
The poor pay virtually no income taxes, and many countries, especially in Europe, have a problem with entrenched welfare dependency. Britain, for instance, has a quarter of a million households in which no one has ever held a formal job. But overall it is not clear that the poor benefit from government transfers and benefits as much as you might expect. In America two-fifths of all “social payments” are made by the private sector through employers’ pension contributions and health plans—both spurred on by tax breaks that go mainly to middle-income Americans.
When you look at overall public spending, the gap widens. Middle-income Californians go to better schools than poor ones do. Their streets often have more policing. They are far more likely to go to a publicly financed university, to claim mortgage relief on their home, to own a farm that collects subsidies or to attend a ballet supported by public funds. Europe is different only in that it subsidises the middle classes less through tax breaks and more through “universal” benefits—things like free bus passes for the old—which often started out being targeted at the poorest but are now given out to all.
That points to another distortion, which is generational. A large number of welfare payments and social transfers are now aimed at the elderly. The huge baby-boom generation that is just about to retire will make these even more expensive. In Christopher Buckley’s political satire, “Boomsday”, America’s young eventually start bribing their self-indulgent parents to end their lives early. In his interesting book “The Pinch”, David Willetts eschews that solution for Britain’s baby-boom generation, but calculates that it will take out nearly 20% more from the system than it has put in. The first budget of the new Tory government, in which Mr Willetts is a minister, still directed money disproportionately towards the old.
Across the rich world, politicians keep on pushing money towards the middle class and the old because that is where elections are decided. People aged 65 and older still account for only 13% of America’s population, but they made up over a fifth of its electorate in 2010. No group is better organised: the AARP (formerly the American Association of Retired Persons) has 40m members.
• The secession of the successful. Hollywood, Silicon Valley or any of the other places where successful Californians gather show a profound contempt for their government. At the most extreme, such people have walled themselves off in gated communities, with their own security, health services and even schools. Their main relationship with the state, at least as they see it, is to write a cheque for their taxes—and their only interest in it is that the cheque be as small as possible. Philanthropy continues, but remarkably little goes into beautifying their environment (Silicon Valley is the ugliest industrial cluster imaginable).
Similar complaints can be heard in other centres of elitism: Wall Street does not do much about the Bronx, and the City of London usually ignores the East End. Both globalisation and the internet have increased this sense of separation. Companies with strong local links have been swallowed up by larger groups. Wells Fargo used to be a powerful force in San Francisco and Security Pacific in Los Angeles; both are now part of bigger empires. The Indian tycoons in Palo Alto feel closer to Bangalore than they do to Bakersfield (and so do many of their American colleagues).
This secession has an effect on government. It makes capital, as well as businesses and talented people, more footloose, so it becomes harder to raise taxes overtly. Worst of all, the secession of the successful means that the most talented brains are largely left out of the mix. One leading California Democrat describes the list of businesspeople prepared to run a public commission as “painfully short”.
• You, yes you, are to blame. California is interesting for one final reason. Throughout most of the West, people are in denial about the consequences of wanting both more government and lower taxes. In California ballot initiatives have actually given voters a direct say. Generally they have made government worse, protecting bits of spending yet refusing to pay for it. Having voted for Mr Schwarzenegger in 2003, they deserted him the moment he tried to introduce structural reforms in 2005.
Interviewed shortly before his exit at the start of this year, the gubernator had two thoughts. One was that his successor would find reform easier because the system is more manifestly bust now than it was in 2003 (and Mr Brown is certainly having a go). The other is that Californians are still determined to get something for nothing. “People here are addicted to improving their lifestyle. They want more and more from their government.”
Is there a better way? Many of those who used to see the future in the Golden State now prefer to look across the Pacific—towards emerging Asia.
About The Economist online About The Economist Media directory Staff books Career opportunities Contact us Subscribe - Site feedback Copyright © The Economist Newspaper Limited 2011. All rights reserved. Advertising info Legal disclaimer Accessibility Privacy policy Terms of use Help
-
http://reason.com/blog/2011/03/18/fired-bribe-taking-calpers-ceo
Reason Magazine
Fired, Bribe-Taking CalPERS CEO: An American Hero
Tim Cavanaugh | March 18, 2011
"If you have been reading Reason about the pension calamity in the works, read this report, because it's worse than Reason has been saying," commenter johnl wrote the other day when I briefly mentioned a new report on hijinx at the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS).
I hear you, johnl! I discussed the report on CalPERS’ use of placement agents with Chris Reed the other day and first reported on this story last summer. But you may want to take a look at the full report before the week is out. Produced at CalPERS’ request by Philip S. Khinda of the D.C. law firm Steptoe & Johnson, it's a striking view of the type of people the nation's largest pension fund and second largest buyer of medical care (after the federal government) attracts to its top positions. CalPERS has the report [pdf] on its site, and the L.A. Times has an annotated version.
The focus of the report is former CalPERS CEO Federico Buenrostro's very energetic campaign to drive CalPERS investments to clients of the placement agent Alfred J.R. Villalobos. Placement agents function more or less as lobbyists, providing money managers with access to people like Buenrostros and the big institutional money they represent.
The wining and dining of Buenrostro and other CalPERS bigshots included the usual battery of hospitality, hosted events, bottles of wine, casino chips, junkets, and a revolving-door job when Buenrostro finally got fired in 2008. The breakout supporting player is Chuck Valdes, a CalPERS board member and serial deadbeat who was unable even to obtain a credit card yet still managed to score trips abroad, a fancy hotel at an Apollo Global Management event in New York, and tickets to the Oscars two years in a row. He didn't even submit receipts.
What did private equity firms -- Apollo, Ares Management, Relational Investors, and others -- get for all this charity?
That part isn't so clear. The real scandal here may be how little value all this influence peddling delivered for Villalobos' paying customers. In fact, part of the reason the Villalobos/Buenrostro scheme unraveled is that Apollo's top lawyer insisted on better disclosure of Villalobos’s role as a middleman – to CalPERS itself. (Don't worry: As part of a new set of reforms, Apollo is being punished for its troubles. )
Caveat lector: On the general topic of actual or apparent conflict of interest by stewards of the public trust, my morality is probably more flexible than your own. It all comes back to the Senate Candy Desk, and the fiction that society can put up some kind of fence to separate raping from pillaging. I would be ashamed to take seriously the idea that you can put officials in charge of multi-billion-dollar public fortunes – all of it by definition taken by force from productive and law-abiding citizens – then expect those officials to behave well because they’re not allowed to accept gifts valued above some arbitrary two-digit dollar figure. As the great libertarian Russell Means once told me, “Of course they steal. That's what they're taught.” If I were Buenrostro’s flack he’d be the hero of this story because on his way to the Gulf junket he apparently flew coach.
So the unsurprising joke is that none of this misrule seems to have made a difference to CalPERS’ excellent investment returns – which have averaged in the 7 percent-to-8 percent annual range for the last two decades. The pork-related damage may have been minimal because the mischief was mostly limited to the fund’s private equity division – which right now makes up only 13.7 percent of CalPERS’ total fund. But the private equity portion alone also seems to have prospered over the last decade, growing from $7 billion to more than $31 billion, according to the report. “We understand,” Khinda writes, “that the fund investment that was made has, to date, fared well.”
High-flyers like Apollo weren’t so much paying to play as paying to block competition and avoid displeasing senior officials at one of the most important players in the U.S. capital market. Most of them had long-established and successful relationships with the fund. They just didn’t want to take a chance on screwing that up. Of course they paid. That’s what they’re taught.
Khinda makes the case that, while the investment performance may have been good, the fees private equity firms charged CalPERS (in some cases while also serving as external managers in partnership with CalPERS – a role with fiduciary duty) may have been higher than what they could have extracted without the leverage of placement agents. But there’s no dollar estimate on that. In any event, that’s how CalPERS intends to solve the problem. Apollo and other firms have already agreed to reduce their fees by $215 million, and Khinda’s recommendations include a move to success-based fees only for external managers in the future. Federal and state investigations are still going on. Several other higher-ups at the fund followed Buenrostro out the door, and CalPERS assures the public all the bad apples in this isolated incident have been removed.
Buenrostro’s antics are entertaining, and you’ll definitely want to check out the narrative from pages 24 to 28 detailing his pasting together of amateurish disclosure forms with fake CalPERS letterhead and “typographical and language errors that one would not expect to see on an easily-reviewed, one-page form purportedly relating to a $1 billion investment transaction.” But some of the evidence against him is, literally, he-said-she-said from his ex-wife and ex-girlfriend.
What stands out isn’t special venality but garden variety political thinking. When Buenrostro pressured the investment staff to give business to Villalobos client Aurora Capital Group, he didn’t make the case that they were successful investors but that Aurora partner Gerald Prosky had recently been named to a state commission. When investigators questioned him about his interference with investments, Buenrostro claimed “his involvement was limited to investment priorities that interested him (environment, diversity and healthcare, for example).” Win the future does any of this have to do with investing? Let’s leave aside the comedy value in seeing CalPERS – which has gotten years of good press for its showboating about “corporate governance” – revealed as the swamp in which Buenrostro and Villalobos grew. The job of a CEO with a quarter-trillion-dollar pool of money is not to make political points or salve his own conscience. He’s there to make the pile of money grow as fast and as large as possible.
But maybe that shouldn’t be the case. Like all too-big-to-fail institutions, CalPERS is a creation of the government. In retrospect, the 1984 decision to give the fund unlimited access to the capital markets was a mistake. CalPERS laid waste its handsome returns with excessive payouts. And as the sad story of the lobbying money managers makes clear, the capital markets suffered too, from having to please another oversized player. If you want to solve this problem you can put CalPERS back into super-safe government debt investments (to the extent even those still exist in the future), and let California’s government employees lower their sights just as those of us in the Social Security system have to do. Or you can accept that influence peddling must occur when the government is paying. But you can’t give people more money than God and expect them to act like saints.
-
Wisconsin's public union fight is the battle of the century in American politics. But while the governors of Wisconsin and Ohio have led the pushback, it's possible that the public-pension battle could shift in the future to California—with or without the participation of its governor, the endlessly recyclable Jerry Brown. Even in this bluest of states, the ground is shaking beneath the unions.
California—a state that spent the 20th century exploding with creativity, growth and wealth—now staggers beneath a $26 billion deficit. But city officials across California, already staring into their own fiscal abyss, aren't waiting for help from hapless Sacramento.
Costa Mesa, in Orange County, just fired half of its work force. Days later, Los Angeles reached a tentative deal in which workers would pay more into pension and health plans. The next day, thousands of L.A. unionists marched against an array of perceived enemies—Wisconsin, corporations, Republicans.
Then there's San Francisco, about the last place in California you would expect to find an official determined to fight the financial weight of its public unions. Even legal thriller-writer Scott Turow couldn't make this up, but the man taking on the unions in San Francisco is its Public Defender, Jeff Adachi.
Mr. Adachi, 52, runs an agency of lawyers who provide legal services to poor people. He is a card-carrying San Francisco Democrat. As he sees it, payments for public pensions and health care are defunding the world he believes in.
"I'm seen as a liberal progressive, a rage against the machine person," he said this past week at his offices downtown. "If you care about social programs or the network of support services, you have to understand that pensions and benefit costs are crowding out all these services."
As a public official, there was nothing he could do about it. So in a kind of Batman moment, Mr. Adachi as a private citizen got up an initiative last year, Proposition B, which would have required current workers to pay more toward pension and health-care costs.
He got financial support from a prominent local Democrat, Mike Moritz of Sequoia Capital. California's most famous living Democrat, former Assembly Speaker and San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, supported him. He collected 76,000 signatures. In November, Prop. B lost by 13 points beneath a mudslide of public union money. Mr. Adachi is retooling his proposition for another vote this November.
Daniel Henninger discusses that serious Californians, on the right and the left, know how much fiscal trouble they're in.
.Podcast: Listen to the audio of Wonder Land here. .It's possible to look at California as the land that time forgot, a place incapable of real reform. But it's also possible that the stubborn pluck that built California is being rediscovered, and in unlikely places.
A few weeks ago, a small group of current and former municipal officials and taxpayer advocates in the San Francisco Bay Area convened to form California United for Fiscal Reform.
Its co-chairs are Mr. Adachi and Stephanie Gomes, the outspoken city council member from Vallejo, famously the largest California city to declare Chapter 9 bankruptcy. Their first meeting this month attracted representatives from Menlo Park, Pleasanton, Contra Costa County, and Sonoma County.
"These costs are a tsunami," says Ms. Gomes. "If we can't rely on the state to fix it, we have to do it locally, and we have to join together, because the unions are joined."
In Orange County, the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility and the Pacific Research Institute recently held a "Pension Boot Camp," where some 175 elected officials and others heard talks such as, "What hasn't Calpers told you?"
What Calpers, the state's public-employee retirement system, has told the cities is that many of their pension payments are constitutionally mandated. That means the lead on major reform would have to come from the mercurial Gov. Brown. He talked about it in his campaign, but not much since.
High-level help for the embattled locals, however, may come from another California official, U.S. Congressman Devin Nunes. Rep. Nunes is building support for his Public Employee Pension Transparency Act, which would require states and municipalities to produce a coherent picture of their pension obligations. Imagine that. The bill says that they can stay opaque if they wish, but failure to disclose would cut them off from the federal tax exemption for muni bonds.
Serious Californians know how much trouble they're in. Last June, the Civil Grand Jury in San Francisco issued a report on pensions, "The Billion Dollar Bubble." Its conclusion: "This report is a warning of a deepening crisis in the City's financial condition. . . . We cannot wait."
A report last month from the state's respected Little Hoover Commission said that California has no choice but to take on the edifice of court decisions mandating pension costs to nowhere.
Every person I talked to in California about this issue, from left to right, agrees they have a common problem: Over the years, the public unions "bought" politicians from the smallest city to the state capital in Sacramento. California is a blue state all right, but it just may be that it is turning blue with rage at the inexorable destruction of its public life.
-
Greeting~
We are launching efforts in California to pick up more Congressional Support. Success and strength will achieved through growing our numbers. Being strong in all 53 of our congressional districts will carry the day. You are invited to join us on a Telephone Conference Call on Wednesday, April 13th, at 7:00 pm. Dial-In Number: (610) 214-0000
Access Code: 960846
This call will provide us with an opportunity to meet and greet, and discuss efforts we are making in the districts to promote Fair Tax. We would of course like to discuss areas where we can help and support. We look forward to hearing from you.
Yours in the cause,
John Wesley Nobles
CA Volunteer State Director
Click here to visit the homepage for this group
If the text above does not appear as a clickable link, you can visit the web address:
http://www.fairtax.org/site/Clubs?club_id=1700&pg=main&s_oo=woCg2GLc1aSK4NZWiMPWtA..
-
Probably dead:
****California's Republicans
Dead, or just resting?
The threat of demography
Apr 7th 2011 | LOS ANGELES | from the print edition
THE Republican Party in California is “already dead. We’re talking about whether it can be revived,” says Allan Hoffenblum, who was a Republican official and consultant for four decades and now produces non-partisan electoral analysis. He is among a growing number of mainly old-fashioned Republicans who think that their party has got on the wrong side of a huge demographic trend, the growth of Latinos and Asians.
This shift forms the backdrop as Republicans and Democrats play chicken with the state budget in Sacramento, rather as their national counterparts are doing with the federal budget in Washington, DC. In both places, all involved are hoping the other side gets more blame when budget negotiations fail.
But Washington’s Republicans are still testing the power they won in November. Sacramento’s, by contrast, are fighting for survival after a season of epic reverses. All eight statewide offices went to Democrats in the last election. And after falling for decades, the percentage of Californian voters who are registered Republican is now less than 31%, far below the 44% who are Democrats and not far above the 20% who decline to state a preference.
Related topics
Sacramento, California
Social and behavioral science
Science and technology
Demography
World politics
Duf Sundheim, chairman of California’s Republican Party between 2003 and 2006, says that the main trend behind these numbers is the disenchantment with both parties, reflected in the rise of unaffiliated voters. But the damage has not been symmetrical. For although the Democrats have their crazies—largely of the green or unionised sort—they have also picked up most of the rising Latino and Asian political talent. And they tend to be moderate, or even conservative. This may help explain why independent voters in California lean Democratic in elections.
Mr Hoffenblum minces no words about what caused this loss for Republicans. It is the “shrillness” of their rhetoric against illegal immigrants, which has “totally turned off Latinos and Asians in this state,” even those who are citizens or legal immigrants. In effect, he says, the Republicans have made themselves “the white man’s party” and “alienated the fastest growing voting block.”
Ahead of the nation in the demographic shift from white to brown, California may thus be a warning for Republicans elsewhere. Already, places like Orange County that used to be very white and reliably Republican are becoming less so as they grow more ethnically diverse. The biggest change is occurring in inland regions such as the Central Valley. After the 2000 census, when both parties shamelessly gerrymandered legislative districts, the Republicans carved out several safe, white rural districts. Since then, the population has grown fast in these areas, but that growth has been among Latinos. So Republicans might actually lose from the trends that have favoured their regions.
So far, they show no sign of acknowledging this. At a recent party convention, the main topic was not how to reach out to independents or Latinos but how to get around new rules for non-partisan primaries that might favour moderates, and how to discipline “traitors” who dared negotiate with the Democratic governor. Mr Sundheim says it’s time to get the board in the water in time for the wave.****
-
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/gangland-violence-comes-to-dodger-stadium/?singlepage=true
Gangland Violence Comes to Dodger Stadium
It was L.A.'s gang culture that killed trendy Westwood Village when a 27-year-old was shot in 1988. Will a recent brutal attack kill a legendary L.A. stadium too?
April 12, 2011 - by Jack Dunphy
In a big city, most crime victims suffer in obscurity. In Los Angeles last year, police investigated 21,241 violent crimes, including 297 homicides, yet who outside their own circle of family and friends could name even a single one of those victims?
But sometimes a crime occurs in such a manner or in such a place that it comes to gain far wider significance than one victim’s misfortune. In 1964, Kitty Genovese was raped and stabbed to death outside her Bronx apartment. Many of her neighbors heard her screaming, yet no one came to her aid and only a few even went as far as to call the police. Her murder is still cited as being symbolic of large cities where people remain unknown to their neighbors and indifferent to their troubles.
In 1988, Karen Toshima, a 27-year-old graphic artist, was shot to death in Westwood Village, an area of shops, restaurants, and movie theaters adjacent to the UCLA campus. Toshima was walking on the sidewalk with a friend when two groups of rival gang members squared off. One of the gangsters pulled a gun and fired two rounds, missing his intended target but hitting Toshima in the head. She died the next day.
Toshima was one of the 736 people murdered in Los Angeles that year, a time when gang violence was on the rise and no one, it seemed, knew what to do about it. It’s fair to say that her death was a catalyst to the battle against L.A.’s gangs, whose violence had until then been confined to the city’s less upscale neighborhoods.
Will Bryan Stow be the Karen Toshima of 2011?
On March 31, Stow, a 42-year-old man from Santa Cruz, Calif., went to L.A.’s Dodger Stadium to attend the opening-day game between the Dodgers and his favorite team, the San Francisco Giants. Near the end of the game, apparently after assessing the behavior of some of the people in the stands, Stow sent a text message to a relative to say he feared for his safety. A paramedic by trade, Stow is a man we may presume doesn’t frighten easily, and indeed his fears were tragically borne out. After the game, as he and two companions walked through the parking lot in search of a taxi, they were set upon by two men who pushed Stow to the ground before beating and kicking him into a coma.
Unlike Karen Toshima, Stow has, at least for now, survived the attack, though he remains in a coma at Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center. But like Toshima, his misfortune at the hands of uncivilized thugs has galvanized the city and shone a spotlight on a problem that has been festering for years.
When Karen Toshima was murdered in 1988, Westwood Village was perhaps the only place in Los Angeles where people from all over the city came into contact with one another. People from the nearby Westside mingled with Angelenos from the San Fernando Valley and from neighborhoods to the south and east as they dined, went to the movies, or simply hung out. Sadly for Toshima, this eclectic mix included gang members from South Central L.A., one of whom brought along a gun he was willing to use on scant provocation.
That bullet didn’t just kill Karen Toshima; it killed Westwood Village. Though gang violence had been on the rise in Los Angeles for years, for most people in the city it remained little more than an abstraction, something that only occurred “down there” and among “those people.” But with Toshima’s murder that violence escaped the rough neighborhoods where it could be easily ignored by the city’s elites. Suddenly even Westwood Village, in the very center of one of the wealthiest neighborhoods in the country, was regarded as unsafe. It wasn’t long before the once-thriving Village became, if not quite a ghost town, a place to be avoided. And even now, 23 years later, the vacant storefronts along Westwood Boulevard offer testimony that it has yet to fully recover.
-
GM,
What California needs is more spending on social programs, education, drug treatment, medical care, food stamps, medicaid, unemployment support, illegals, liberal celebrities, support for single mothers, deadbeat dads, and hollywood celebration of criminals, out of wedlock children, and a culture of dependency. You guys need more Crats, more spending, and more taxation. :roll:
Plain and simple. :wink:
-
CCP, Very funny. They ran into that brick wall of socialism, eventually you run out of other people's money. (m. thatcher)
-
"That bullet didn’t just kill Karen Toshima; it killed Westwood Village." And... "It wasn’t long before the once-thriving Village became, if not quite a ghost town, a place to be avoided." :?
What is he talking about? Westwood Village adjacent to UCLA is a thriving small affluent suburb. You can't find parking and it's always crowded. Karen Toshima's death was shocking;
but after a couple of weeks in 1988 after her death, Westwood was and still is packed especially on the weekends.
Bryan Stow's attack at Dodger Stadium was tragic; truly tragic. I remember Packer - Viking games or Packer - Chicago games. Of course visitors were ribbed and rude comments were tossed out, but
I don't ever remember violence; maybe, and I don't even remember, a tossed beer or a fistfight or two, but never anything truly violent.
But like Toshima's death, I don't think long term, after the politicians and McCourt (please - I wish he would just leave town) finish positioning; in a month or so I expect no lasting impact.
As for CCP, he might be on the right track! :-o
-
Good phrase.
The US version of socialism is:
*the legalized theft of of people's monies used to bribe some voters to keep in power a few hypocritcal benefactors*.
-
JDN,
Click on the link and email Jack Dunphy. He's a currently serving LAPD officer. See what he says.
-
I read the link before I posted; he's wrong. For years I've gone to Westwood and I have friends living in the surrounding area.
The place is booming; it's one of the most crowded and busy areas in LA albeit the economy has sorely affected this area too, but
except for a few short months immediately afterwords, it's "demise" has had nothing to do with Toshima's death. Her tragic death was
an aberration, having little to no impact on Westwood.
As for Dodger Stadium, the Dodgers were number one in attendance in MLB 2011 despite their poor team and noted "violence" problems.
That said, gang violence IS an issue in the greater Los Angeles area that needs to be addressed. But it's not easy...
As a side note, last year a client of mine lost a young female employee (shot dead) at a bus stop in a reasonably nice area (not as nice as Westwood)
because like in the Toshima case, the gang couldn't shoot straight. I almost don't care if they kill each other, but I hate it when then
can't even shoot straight and therefore kill innocent bystanders.
-
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-prison-guards-20110419,0,3637836.story
-
A couple of articles about the fiscal problems facing California and implications for the world. The Econimist writers imply that California's main problem is "extreme Democracy" as they call it. That California's bent for ballot initiatives wherein voters have too much control over the purse strings (legislatures control only 30% of budget.) I find the Economist seems to miss the entire point about a welfare social state as being the main cause of the budget problems in California. And that is why the Economist is always suspect as a liberal rag to me.
They claim the issue is ignorant misinformed or uninformed voters are making huge mistakes and essentially do not know what is best for them. I claim this is misleading and progressive propaganda. The real issue is too many people and their bribed officials voting too much spending on themselves. In any case:
***Lessons from California
The perils of extreme democracy
California offers a warning to voters all over the world
Apr 20th 2011 | from the print edition
CALIFORNIA is once again nearing the end of its fiscal year with a huge budget hole and no hope of a deal to plug it, as its constitution requires. Other American states also have problems, thanks to the struggling economy. But California cannot pass timely budgets even in good years, which is one reason why its credit rating has, in one generation, fallen from one of the best to the absolute worst among the 50 states. How can a place which has so much going for it—from its diversity and natural beauty to its unsurpassed talent clusters in Silicon Valley and Hollywood—be so poorly governed?
It is tempting to accuse those doing the governing. The legislators, hyperpartisan and usually deadlocked, are a pretty rum bunch. The governor, Jerry Brown, who also led the state between 1975 and 1983, has (like his predecessors) struggled to make the executive branch work. But as our special report this week argues, the main culprit has been direct democracy: recalls, in which Californians fire elected officials in mid-term; referendums, in which they can reject acts of their legislature; and especially initiatives, in which the voters write their own rules. Since 1978, when Proposition 13 lowered property-tax rates, hundreds of initiatives have been approved on subjects from education to the regulation of chicken coops.
This citizen legislature has caused chaos. Many initiatives have either limited taxes or mandated spending, making it even harder to balance the budget. Some are so ill-thought-out that they achieve the opposite of their intent: for all its small-government pretensions, Proposition 13 ended up centralising California’s finances, shifting them from local to state government. Rather than being the curb on elites that they were supposed to be, ballot initiatives have become a tool of special interests, with lobbyists and extremists bankrolling laws that are often bewildering in their complexity and obscure in their ramifications. And they have impoverished the state’s representative government. Who would want to sit in a legislature where 70-90% of the budget has already been allocated?
Related items
The people's will
Apr 20th 2011
Direct democracy: Vox populi or hoi polloi?
Apr 20th 2011
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related topics
California
United States
Elections and voting
Government and politics
Politics
They paved paradise and put up a voting booth
This has been a tragedy for California, but it matters far beyond the state’s borders. Around half of America’s states and an increasing number of countries have direct democracy in some form (article). Next month Britain will have its first referendum for years (on whether to change its voting system), and there is talk of voter recalls for aberrant MPs. The European Union has just introduced the first supranational initiative process. With technology making it ever easier to hold referendums and Western voters ever more angry with their politicians, direct democracy could be on the march.
And why not? There is, after all, a successful model: in Switzerland direct democracy goes back to the Middle Ages at the local level and to the 19th century at the federal. This mixture of direct and representative democracy seems to work well. Surely it is just a case of California (which explicitly borrowed the Swiss model) executing a good idea poorly?
Not entirely. Very few people, least of all this newspaper, want to ban direct democracy. Indeed, in some cases referendums are good things: they are a way of holding a legislature to account. In California reforms to curb gerrymandering and non-partisan primaries, both improvements, have recently been introduced by initiatives; and they were pushed by Arnold Schwarzenegger, a governor elected through the recall process. But there is a strong case for proceeding with caution, especially when it comes to allowing people to circumvent a legislature with citizen-made legislation.
The debate about the merits of representative and direct democracy goes back to ancient times. To simplify a little, the Athenians favoured pure democracy (“people rule”, though in fact oligarchs often had the last word); the Romans chose a republic, as a “public thing”, where representatives could make trade-offs for the common good and were accountable for the sum of their achievements. America’s Founding Fathers, especially James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, backed the Romans. Indeed, in their guise of “Publius” in the “Federalist Papers”, Madison and Hamilton warn against the dangerous “passions” of the mob and the threat of “minority factions” (ie, special interests) seizing the democratic process.
Proper democracy is far more than a perpetual ballot process. It must include deliberation, mature institutions and checks and balances such as those in the American constitution. Ironically, California imported direct democracy almost a century ago as a “safety valve” in case government should become corrupt. The process began to malfunction only relatively recently. With Proposition 13, it stopped being a valve and instead became almost the entire engine.
You don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone
All this provides both a hope and a worry. The hope is that California can right itself. Already there is talk of reform—though ironically the best hope of it may be through initiatives, since the push for a constitutional convention died last year for lack of money. There is talk, too, of restoring power and credibility to the legislature, the heart of any representative democracy. That could be done by increasing its unusually small numbers, and making term limits less onerous.
More important, direct democracy must revert to being a safety valve, not the engine. Initiatives should be far harder to introduce. They should be shorter and simpler, so that voters can actually understand them. They should state what they cost, and where that money is to come from. And, if successful, initiatives must be subject to amendment by the legislature. Those would be good principles to apply to referendums, too.
The worry is that the Western world is slowly drifting in the opposite direction. Concern over globalisation means government is unpopular and populism is on the rise. Europeans may snigger at the bizarre mess those crazy Californians have voted themselves into. But how many voters in Europe would resist the lure of a ballot initiative against immigration? Or against mosque-building? Or lower taxes? What has gone wrong in California could all too easily go wrong elsewhere.
from the print edition | Leaders
-
Back in the 70s the Economist was a superior publication, but IMHO it now has deteriorated into smug elitism. This article is the now usual mix of perceptive comments and pompous elitist commentary.
Amongst the many things missed are
a) the consequences of gerrymandering which have created a one party state-- the incumbent party. I must give Schwarzenegger considerable credit for his part in bringing this to a close. With the most recent census and the district lines no longer drawn by the incumbents, there may be hope for genuine democracy
b) the distinction between a republic and a democracy. The United States is a republic, not a democracy, and for durn good reason-- unbridled democracy leads to demogoguery and tomfoolery of the sort we the idiots of CA have voted in via initiative.
Life is tough, and it is tougher when you are stupid. California has been stupid.
-
"now usual mix of perceptive comments and pompous elitist commentary."
Beautifully and correctly stated.
"California has been stupid"
Well, I am not sure it is only California. Thanks to Clinton governing by the polls which in effect is akin to a direct Demcracy is now a high art form and standard procedure.
We are bombarded with polls every single day.
-
"We are bombarded with polls every single day."
I would like to see one that shows when Californians began to understand why they still have 12% unemployment. Seems they have not yet discovered the law of holes - when you find you're in one, stop digging.
-
"Seems they have not yet discovered the law of holes - when you find you're in one, stop digging."
Bringing Moonbeam back into power is like firing up a backhoe.
-
Meg Ryan was an absolutely terrible and completely unprincipled candidate and lot of people simply wanted to bitch slap her for her attitude that she could buy the election. This is not entirely a bad thing.
There are other laws which we here in CA need to learn. For example, just as you cannot repeal the law of gravity, you cannot repeal the law of supply and demand. Nor is there such a thing as a free lunch.
-
Meg Ryan was an absolutely terrible and completely unprincipled candidate and lot of people simply wanted to bitch slap her for her attitude that she could buy the election.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nNhOH4Y0bI[/youtube]
She has my vote! :evil:
-
Alrighty Mr. Smartypants :lol: Meg Whateverthefhernamewas.
-
First a context. When America was the greatest nation, California was the greatest state. Calif still is and always I suppose will be the most important state. There is no perfect fix for the nation that doesn't include turning things around over on the left coast.
This piece is about all states, is titled about Wisconsin surging forward, but if public union reforms in Wisconsin succeed, they can become the road map for Calif and other states...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703730804576313353241550130.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop
States of Business
Wisconsin jumps ahead in a new CEO survey.
The verdict is still out on the political staying power of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's collective bargaining and other reforms. But if the opinion of American business counts for anything, he's already helped the Badger State.
Chief Executive magazine recently completed its annual survey of CEOs on the best and worst states for business. The 500 CEOs graded the states on taxes and regulation, the quality of the work force and living environment, among other categories. Wisconsin made the biggest jump of any state, and one of the largest in the history of the survey, rising to 24th from 41st in 2010 and 43rd in 2009. Louisiana continued its rise, moving up 13 spots to 27th on the basis of its improvements in tax climate and deregulation. Indiana moved up 10 spots to sixth.
The Wisconsin jump is especially notable because Mr. Walker and a new GOP legislature only took office in January. This suggests that Big Labor's attempt to make Mr. Walker a national political target had the ironic result of making Wisconsin more appealing to business executives. "Indiana and Wisconsin's governors have been outspoken about wanting to be more business friendly," says Chief Executive director for digital media Michael Bamberger.
CEOs don't make investment decisions based solely on such impressions, but they can get a state a hearing it might not have previously received. Wisconsin still ranked 33rd among all states for taxation, and its grades on other categories didn't change radically. But a company's relationship with employees was also on CEOs' minds. "Rules that make it hard, if not impossible, to separate from a non-productive employee make companies fearful to hire or locate in a state," one CEO wrote.
Texas led the survey for the seventh straight year, followed by North Carolina, Florida, Tennessee and Georgia. As for the five worst states, you will not be surprised to learn that they are, in descending order, Michigan, New Jersey, Illinois, New York and California. Tax-raising Illinois has dropped 40 places in five years and, as the magazine puts it, "is now in a death spiral."
http://chiefexecutive.net/best-worst-states-for-business
-
Even Left Coasters are beginning to grumble about the Obama Administration's ideological imperative for high-speed rail that defies all common sense.
A couple of weeks ago California's Legislative Analyst's Office issued a withering report calling the state's 500-mile high-speed rail project between Anaheim and San Francisco a fiscal crackup ready to happen. (See "California's Next Train Wreck," May 18.)
The federal Department of Transportation has offered $3 billion of stimulus funds with the catch that the state has to begin construction by 2012 and build the first segment in the Central Valley. A stand-alone segment running through a sparsely populated area couldn't operate without a huge taxpayer subsidy, but a voter-approved ballot measure explicitly prohibits any such subsidies.
At the urging of the state watchdog, the rail authority asked the feds for more flexibility about where and when to start building. Last week the Department of Transportation told them to dream on. In a letter responding to the request for more flexibility, Under Secretary for Policy Roy Kienitz ordered the authority to charge full speed ahead since "once major construction is underway and approvals to complete other sections of the line have been obtained, the private sector will have compelling reasons to invest in further construction." Private sector seems to be the Obama Administration's code for government.
Even some of the state's Democrats are protesting the Administration's mulishness. Democratic state senator Alan Lowenthal told the Los Angeles Times that "there is nothing in the letter saying the federal government would commit $17 billion to $19 billion for the project . . . If it had, we would build the Central Valley segment right now. But the state needs to be financially and fiscally responsible."
Which is why the legislature needs to kill the train now. Once this boondoggle gets out of the station, the state will be writing checks for decades.
-
As someone who doesn't like to fly, at least locally, especially after 9/11 due to the wait and delays,
a high speed rail system has some appeal. I go to Japan often on business. I never take planes once
I'm there; the high speed trains are superb. Not cheap, but the comfort, the speed, and the convenience
is very appealing. One can criticize the cost of subways being built in LA, you can criticize the cost of Metro Link
connecting nearby cities by train to downtown LA, but frankly, I think it's about time. It costs money in
the short term, but long term I think CA will be better off.
-
By JIM CARLTON
SAN FRANCISCO—California's embrace of an independent commission to redraw legislative districts got its first big test Friday as a newly released map of proposed boundaries drew criticism from Republicans and a prominent Latino group.
Many Republicans complained that the proposed new districts would make their party even less competitive in a state already dominated by Democrats. Nineteen of California's 58 congressional districts are held by Republicans while Democrats hold both Senate seats, almost all elected statewide offices and near-full control of the Legislature.
Under the proposed new lines unveiled by the California Citizens Redistricting Commission, legislative districts would have a more compact shape, with few dividing cities or taking snakelike paths to connect similar voting blocs.
Some currently Republican state and congressional districts would be redrawn to include parts of ones now held by Democrats—potentially setting up an election between incumbents that could make it tougher for the GOP member to be re-elected, said Tom Del Beccaro, chairman of the California Republican Party.
"You can make the argument that this has improved the chances of the Democrats statewide, which I don't think is what the voters had in mind," Mr. Beccaro said, referring to ballot initiatives in 2008 and 2010 that took the job of redrawing political boundaries in California out of the hands of the Legislature. California and Arizona are the only states where congressional districts are determined by independent panels. The California commission also is redrawing state legislative districts.
The chairman of the California Democratic Party, John Burton, said he couldn't comment on the map until he had the opportunity to study it further.
Another potential sore point among some voters will be that many districts in heavily Latino areas are being redrawn, said Bruce Cain, a political science professor at the University of California, Berkeley. The biggest changes to congressional districts are occurring in areas including eastern Los Angeles County and San Bernardino County, he said, where the Hispanic population has grown rapidly over the past 10 years.
But Latino activists point out that despite their population gains, they are getting no new congressional districts. That is due in part to the fact that California—for the first time since statehood—received no added district under the 2010 census because its population didn't grow enough.
The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund had requested the number of districts representing mostly Latino areas grow from seven to 11, but it has stayed at seven. "We have extremely serious concerns about that," said Steven Ochoa, a spokesman for the Los Angeles-based advocacy group.
But commission members said they prepared the map with no biases, using only federally mandated criteria such as making sure districts were of equal population. They also said they depended on extensive input from residents at 23 public hearings.
"Our job is to come up with a legal plan and base it all on public testimony," said Cynthia Dai, a commissioner from San Francisco. The maps released Friday will be subject to more hearings before they are finalized Aug. 15.
If California's new redistricting system succeeds, it likely would be followed by other states, Mr. Cain said. He added a likely byproduct from the new California maps, if they hold up, would be heightened competition in congressional races that are now mostly shoo-ins for incumbents. He estimated as many as a third of the districts would be competitive in 2012.
-
http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2011/06/companies-leaving-california-in-record.html
Companies Leaving California in Record Numbers
California currently ranks #49 among U.S. states for "business tax climate" (Tax Foundation) and #48 for for "economic freedom" (Mercatus). It shouldn't be any surprise then that companies are leaving the "Golden State" in record numbers this year (see chart above) for "golder pastures" and more business-friendly climates in other states.
From Joe Vranich:
"Today, California is experiencing the fastest rate of disinvestment events based on public domain information, closure notices to the state, and information from affected employees in the three years since a specialized tracking system was put into place. Out-of-state economic development officials are traveling through the state to alert frustrated business owners and corporate executives to their friendlier business climate versus California's hostility toward commercial enterprises.
•From Jan. 1 of this year through this morning, June 16, we have had 129 disinvestment events occur, an average of 5.4 per week (see chart above).
•For all of last year, we saw an average of 3.9 events per week.
•Comparing this year thus far with 2009, when the total was 51 events, essentially averaging 1 per week, our rate today is more than 5 times what it was then.
Our losses are occurring at an accelerated rate. Also, no one knows the real level of activity because smaller companies are not required to file layoff notices with the state. A conservative estimate is that only 1 out of 5 company departures becomes public knowledge, which means California may suffer more than 1,000 disinvestment events this year.
The capital directed to out-of-state or out-of-country, while difficult to calculate, is nonetheless in the billions of dollars. The top five destinations are (1) Texas, (2) Arizona, (3) Colorado, (4) Nevada and Utah tied; and (5) Virginia and North Carolina tied.
Based on the legislature’s recent rejection of business-friendly legislation and Sacramento’s implementation of additional regulations, signs are that California’s hostility towards business will only worsen. California is such fertile ground that representatives for economic development agencies are visiting companies to dissect our high taxes, extreme regulatory environment and other expenses to show annual savings of between 20 and 40 percent after an out-of-state move."
-
Good piece GM.
Here's this from today's WSJ:
'All My Children" may be off the air, but the soap opera is still running in Sacramento. In the latest installment, Governor Jerry Brown divorced his fellow Democrats by vetoing their budget. Democrats and unions are furious and plotting revenge, while both sides blame the evil Republicans for refusing to sanction a referendum that would give voters a chance to endorse a tax increase.
Where's Susan Lucci when you need her?
Mr. Brown deserves credit for vetoing the Democratic budget that reverted to Sacramento form to close a $9.6 billion deficit, deferring several billion dollars of bills into the future, borrowing from special funds, and raising the state's sales tax and vehicle registration fee without the constitutionally required supermajority vote. Even the Democratic treasurer warned that the state couldn't finance its short-term debt with such a risky plan, and Mr. Brown cashiered it.
View Full Image
Associated Press
California Gov. Jerry Brown
Democrats are now blasting him for suggesting that an "all cuts" budget is the only alternative if Republicans won't agree to allow a vote on a five-year extension of what was supposed to be a temporary income tax surcharge, among other tax hikes. Democrats are frustrated because they expected Republicans to cave months ago. But Republicans have shown laudable discipline, and they know that their relevance in state politics hinges on extracting concessions from employee unions that will reduce the future cost of government.
Mr. Brown needs at least two GOP votes in each chamber to put the tax increases on the ballot. And Republican lawmakers have said for months that they're willing to do so in return for modest pension and regulatory reforms and a hard spending cap.
For instance, they want to cap annual pension benefits at $106,000 per employee. Yup, state workers could still earn a six-figure annual pension from retirement to death. Republicans also want new state workers—not current employees—to have the option of a hybrid pension that includes a less generous defined benefit portion as well as an employer-matched defined contribution plan. That proposal is scaled back from the recommendation of the state independent oversight commission to freeze benefits for current workers and to move everyone into hybrid plans.
Republican lawmakers tell us that Democrats won't agree to a deal unless the government-worker unions give their blessing. But the unions now don't want a special election since recent polls show public support for the tax extensions waning, particularly in light of the state's recent discovery of $6.6 billion in additional revenue as the economy recovers. The unions would rather conserve their resources for the 2012 legislative races in which they hope to elect a Democratic supermajority. Their plan is to postpone dealing with California's budget problems until Democrats can raise taxes without making concessions.
Two other liberal hothouses, New York and New Jersey, are at least trying to clean up their fiscal messes, but the unions that dominate Sacramento think taxpayers will finance their soap opera forever. If Mr. Brown wants his return as Governor to be more than a bad last act, he'll abandon his tax increase hopes and do the hard work he promised to shape up state government.
-
http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/the-metaphysics-of-contemporary-theft/?singlepage=true
The Metaphysics of Contemporary Theft
June 19, 2011 - 6:33 pm - by Victor Davis Hanson
Same Old, Same Old…
Last week was another somewhat depressing chapter in a now long saga of living where I was born. I returned to the farm from leading a European military history tour, and experienced the following — mind you, after a number of thefts the month prior (barn, shop, etc.):
1) I left my chainsaw in the driveway to use the restroom inside the house. Someone driving buy saw it. He slammed on the brakes, stole it, and drove off. Neat, quick, easy. Mind you there was only a 5-minute hiatus in between my cutting. And the driver was a random passer-by. That suggests to me that a high number of rural Fresno County motorists can prove to be opportunistic thieves at any given moment. The saw was new; I liked it — an off-the-shelf $400 Echo that ran well. I assume it will be sold off at a rural intersection in these parts, or the nearby swap meet for about $60. I doubt the thief was a professional woodsman who needed a tool of the trade to survive.
2) On the next night, three 15-hp agriculture pumps on our farm were vandalized — all the copper wire was torn out of the electrical conduits. The repairs to each one might run $500; yet, the value of the wire could not be over $50. I was told by neighbors that reports and descriptions of the law-breakers focused on youthful thieves casing the countryside — in official parlance a “gang,” and in the neighborhood politically-incorrect patois “cholos” — like the fellow who recently drove in, in his new lowered shiny red pickup (hydraulic lifters are not cheap), inquiring about buying “scrap” and “just looking” before I ran him out.
3) A neighbor has a house for sale. It is unoccupied and rather isolated. I saw someone approach it on Friday, and drove over to ensure he was lawful. It was the owner’s assistant, who lamented that someone had just stolen all the new appliances out of the house — carting off the refrigerator, dishwasher, stove, and microwave. But why? Do these miscreants wish a civilization of the sort that all houses must seem occupied all the time, or are otherwise considered “communal property” for the taking? Don’t the appliance thieves have homes, and if so, do they have locks on the doors to protect their investments from the likes of themselves?
These days I sympathize with gloomy St. Augustine, writing after the sack of Rome in 410, and then again contemplating things lost when back home, near death, and besieged by the vandals at Hippo Regius. He died I think convinced that a millennium of culture was about to end. And despite a Belisarius to come, it did.
Reflections on the Redistributive State
I think the public would react in two different ways to the above occurrences — and such a dichotomy explains a lot why the nation has never been more divided.
A majority would believe the thieves took things for drugs, excitement, or to buy things like an iPhone or DVD, rather than out of elemental need (e.g., the thief hawked the chainsaw to purchase the family’s rice allotment for the week). In this view, contemporary American crime arises not so much then from Dickensian poverty, as we see in South America or Africa, but out of a sense of resentment, of boredom, from a certain contempt for the more law-abiding and successful, or on the assurance that apprehension is unlikely, and punishment rarer still. After all, Hollywood, pop music, the court system, and the government itself sympathize with, even romanticize those forced to take a chainsaw, not the old middle-class bore who bought it.
The remedy to address theft would be not more government help — public assistance, social welfare, counseling — but far less, given that human nature rises to the occasion when forced to work and sinks when leisured and exempt. I don’t believe my thieves have worked much; instead, they figured a day’s theft beats tile setting or concrete work beginning at 5 AM.
I conclude that most Americans would agree that chain-sawing a peach tree or pumping irrigation water enriches the nation, while cruising around looking to destroy such activity does not. The latter represents the sort of social parasitism that I read about each Saturday night in our environs (and, in terms of illegal immigration, once wrote about in Mexifornia — a book I seem doomed to relive in Ground Hog fashion each day — nearly a decade ago): gangbanger A shoots up gangbanger B; B goes to emergency room for publicly funded $250,000 worth of surgery and post-op treatment by C, an MD, who otherwise would have been insulted and intimidated by A or B should he have met either earlier in the day. Indeed, C is more likely to be ridiculed or sued by B than thanked. And yet C does not need either A or B; both need the former in extremis.
Where does this all end — these open borders, unsustainable entitlements and public union benefits and salaries, these revolving door prisons and Al Gore-like energy fantasies?
We are left with a paradox. The taxpayer cannot indefinitely fund the emergency room treatment for the shooter and his victim on Saturday night if society cannot put a tool down for five minutes without a likely theft, or a farmer cannot turn on a 50-year old pump without expecting its electrical connections to have been ripped out. Civilization simply cannot function that way for either the productive citizen or the parasite, who still needs a live host.
I will make a wild leap and suggest that a vast majority of Americans are reaching the point where they accept that the blue statist paradigm is reaching its logical end and simply cannot go on any more, given that it is antithetical to human nature itself. There is not always a Germany for every Greece. Let me offer a few examples:
In the American Southwest, open borders, unassimilated illegal immigrants, ethnic and tribal chauvinism predicated on racial solidarity (after all, La Raza, Inc. is not complaining about the deportation of the Korean or Ugandan who overstays his visa or agitating for an open immigration policy with Kenya), a culture of grievance and complaint, all embedded in a contempt for federal law — all that leads to enclaves that resemble more the country abandoned than sought out. In other words the entire therapeutic vision of illegal immigration would lead to a society to which illegal immigrants would not wish to flock. Only assimilation, intermarriage, integration, legality, mastery of English, and acceptance of American culture would ensure the continuance of the sort of society which future illegal aliens would wish to cross into.
The same is true of unions, pensions, and compensation. Highly paid and pensioned California teachers and professors are resembling bishops, knights, or rooks surrounded by a host of part-time, temporary, one-year-contract pawns, lacking the salary, security, and benefits of the kingpins. Yet the liberal establishment in education cannot continue in such an apartheid world of unionized winners and exploited subordinate losers, or public fiefdoms propped up by private toilers. It is a contradiction in terms, and there is no money to pay for it, despite the fiscal logic of its exploitation. The logical conclusion to the blue state would be a handful of six-figured union grandees surrounded by a sea of part-time lackeys (sort of like the CSU system with its blue-chip administrators and tenured faculty propped up by legions of part-time lecturers). Note the surrealism of the European unrest: who are the “they” who “stole” the money that is now no longer there to fund socialism? Did not the socialists at last get what they wanted? The “they” who used to fund it by expanding the economy disappeared a long time ago and now are in the graveyards of Europe.
I went to the warehouse local food store the other day, soaked it all in, and wondered: if everyone is on food stamps (actually computerized government plastic credit cards designed to avoid the old stigma of pulling out a coupon), are there still food stamps? We are nearing 50 million recipients. So what will come next? Food stamp A; food stamp category B? Super food stamps? Can 100 million receive them? 150?
Our California prison system is said to be letting out 30,000-40,000 criminals. If all the court rulings mandating libraries, counseling, second medical opinions, legal help, etc., coupled with the cost of a unionized, highly compensated guild of guards, make prison too expensive, then will we be left with virtual prisons in which trials and sentencing are followed by freedom? If it is cheaper each year to send the felon to UCLA or even Stanford, why then have a prison — a new metaphor for almost everything gone wrong with contemporary American society?
This liberal notion of being careful of what you wish for extends to energy. If Obama promised “skyrocketing” energy prices, and to “bankrupt” coal, and has discouraged almost all new fossil fuel production (a great wonder of the age is how private enterprise keeps finding new gas and oil reserves despite the discouragement of the government), why then he is worried about $4 a gallon gas? Is not $4 or $5 gas the point?
It is near $10 in Europe. So why not soon here the same? If the university president cannot afford to drive his Lexus to campus, if the trial lawyer cannot take his Mercedes to Yosemite, if the professor’s Volvo is too expensive to drive to the postmodern lit conference, have we reached nirvana or chaos?
Watching the tastes, the behavior, the rhetoric, the appointments, and the policy of this administration suggests to me that it is not really serious in radically altering the existing order, which it counts on despite itself. Its real goal is a sort of parasitism that assumes the survivability of the enfeebled host. That does not mean it has not done a lot of damage and will not do even more in the next two years; only that it never quite wanted to see cap and trade legislation enacted, blanket amnesty, Guantamo shut down, or Predators ended; these were simply crude slurs by which to demonize Bush, ways of acquiring power and influence, but not a workable plan of living. Note that Obama is now zealous on just those issues which he could have easily rammed through his Democratically controlled congress in 2009-10 when he had large majorities, such as amnesty and cap and trade.
You cannot fly to Costa del Sol on solar panels. The light switches might not go on at Vail without coal burning somewhere. The Holder or Obama children might not be safe in the Stockton or Parlier city schools. Some right-wing nut in the Dakotas is still necessary to pump the oil to refine the gas for Air Force One; there is no golf without an irrigation system and a supply of either ground or surface water.
In short, the currently insulted class is necessary and Obama knows it.
If I were not flying economy today for eight hours to speak on the other side of the country, and did not write this reflection, cramped up on the plane, there would soon be no more chainsaws or copper wire for the oppressed in my region to steal.
-
http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2011/07/secession-from-sf.html
Secession from SF
Not a bad idea:
Riverside County Supervisor Jeff Stone ... said in a statement late Thursday that Riverside, Imperial, San Diego, Orange, San Bernardino, Kings, Kern, Fresno, Tulare, Inyo, Madera, Mariposa and Mono counties should form the new state of South California.
The creation of the new state would allow officials to focus on securing borders, balancing budgets, improving schools and creating a vibrant economy, he said.
“Our taxes are too high, our schools don’t educate our children well enough, unions and other special interests have more clout in the Legislature than the general public,” Stone said in his statement.
But only if they take Los Angeles with them. Getting out from under the nitwits in San Francisco (and don't get me started on Marin) would be a major plus.
-
http://money.cnn.com/2011/06/28/news/economy/California_companies/index.htm?iid=Lead
California companies fleeing the Golden State
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Buffeted by high taxes, strict regulations and uncertain state budgets, a growing number of California companies are seeking friendlier business environments outside of the Golden State.
And governors around the country, smelling blood in the water, have stepped up their courtship of California companies. Officials in states like Florida, Texas, Arizona and Utah are telling California firms how business-friendly they are in comparison.
Companies are "disinvesting" in California at a rate five times greater than just two years ago, said Joseph Vranich, a business relocation expert based in Irvine. This includes leaving altogether, establishing divisions elsewhere or opting not to set up shop in California.
"There is a feeling that the state is not stable," Vranich said. "Sacramento can't get its act together...and that includes the governor, legislators and regulatory agencies that are running wild."
The state has been ranked by Chief Executive magazine as the worst place to do business for seven years.
-
I was really irked the other day on the gay propaganda starting in grade school bill that Gov. Brown is about to sign. :x :x :x
-
Crafty,
It's well past the point where you should pack up and move to America.
-
Isn't this the Crafty seat?
Barack won it by 31 points. Harman won it by 37 points. Republican Craig Huey tried for an upset. Lost yesterday by 10 points: 55-45%:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20079052-503544.html
That loss of support matches polling losses in other key groups, young people, Jewish voters, Hispanics etc of about 20 points since Nov 2008.
-
I am profoundly disappointed to hear that. Huey made a real effort and there were LOTS of yard signs for him and a lot of hard work by his team. This is a real disappointment. The Dem winner is a second or third generation LA Dem hack.
-
Look at the bright side Crafty. You get another shot at the same seat next year, and redistricting should only help you cause.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-election-congress-20110714,0,6272022.story
As for moving, where are you going to go? Yes, CA has it's problems, but the weather and diversity are hard to beat. I can't think of
anyplace I'ld rather live year around although WI is very pretty in the fall.
-
Look at the bright side Crafty. You get another shot at the same seat next year, and redistricting should only help you cause.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-election-congress-20110714,0,6272022.story
As for moving, where are you going to go? Yes, CA has it's problems, but the weather and diversity are hard to beat. I can't think of
anyplace I'ld rather live year around although WI is very pretty in the fall.
People might want to live in a free state without crushing debt and a place where the rule of law still has some authority.
-
GM, it is a free state for probably more than 50%. :|
-
GM, it is a free state for probably more than 50%. :|
True. It's the land of milk and honey for illegal aliens and the leech community.
-
.....will be a financial one. Get out while you can.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-cap-money-20110804,0,1443947.column
Capitol Journal: U.S. budget ax hangs over California
Much of California's funds come from Washington, D.C. Now, that's shaky ground.
-
12% unemployment. Only Nevada is higher.
-
12% unemployment. Only Nevada is higher.
It's ok, Gov. Oldbeam will soon tax and spend you into prosperity!
-
FWIW, my initial impression is that in some ways he is acting like an adult. I don't envy him the clusterfcuk he has inherited.
-
The clusterfcuk he and his kind created?
-
All of them, most certainly including we the idiots who elected them and voted for moronic borrowings of billions of dollars (E.g. stem cell research? Gimme a fg break!)
-
We are cutting tons of stuff left and right but it appears we are in the process of signing for subsidies to illegals to go to college , , ,
-
California regulating babysitters out of business
Posted on September 1, 2011 by PoliPunditWith millions of people fleeing the once-Golden State, California is focusing on what’s really important:
The nanny state impulse runs strong in the Golden State, where the State Assembly has passed a bill that would virtually regulate babysitting out of business. After 2 hours of babysitting, a mandatory 15 minute break must be give, meaning that a stand-by babysitter must be present. Then there are the paperwork requirements, and the severe penalties that kick in for any parents who fail to dot the i’s and cross the t’s. State Senator Doug LaMalfa writes:
The bill has already passed the Assembly and is quickly moving through the Senate with blanket support from the Democrat members that control both houses of the Legislature – and without the support of a single Republican member. Assuming the bill will easily clear its last couple of legislative hurdles, AB 889 will soon be on its way to the Governor’s desk.
Under AB 889, household “employers” (aka “parents”) who hire a babysitter on a Friday night will be legally obligated to pay at least minimum wage to any sitter over the age of 18 (unless it is a family member), provide a substitute caregiver every two hours to cover rest and meal breaks, in addition to workers’ compensation coverage, overtime pay, and a meticulously calculated timecard/paycheck.
-
http://www.newgeography.com/content/002415-the-golden-state-is-crumbling
The Golden State Is Crumbling
by Joel Kotkin 09/04/2011
The recent announcement that California's unemployment again nudged up to 12 percent—second worst in the nation behind its evil twin, Nevada—should have come as a surprise but frankly did not. From the beginning of the recession, the Golden State has been stuck bringing up a humbled nation's rear and seems mired in that less-than-illustrious position.
What has happened to my adopted home state of over last decade is a tragedy, both for Californians and for America. For most of the past century, California has been "golden" not only in name but in every kind of superlative—a global leader in agriculture, energy, entertainment, technology, and most important of all, human aspiration.
In its modern origins California was paean to progress in the best sense of the word. In 1872, the second president of the University of California, Daniel Coit Gilman, said science was "the mother of California." Today, California may worship at the altar of science, but increasingly in the most regressive, hysterical, and reactionary way.
California's dominant ruling class—consisting of public-employee unions, green jihadis, and Democratic machine politicians—has no real use for science as Coit saw it: as a way to create prosperity for its citizens. Instead, the prevailing credo of the state has been how to do everything possible to return to its pre-settlement condition, with little regard for what that means to the average Californian.
Nowhere was California's old technological ethos more pronounced than in agriculture, where great Californians such as William Mulholland, creator of the Los Angeles Aqueduct, and Pat Brown, who forged the state water project, created the greatest water-delivery system since the Roman Empire. Their effort brought water from the ice-bound Sierra Nevada mountains down to the state's dry but fertile valleys and to the great desert metropolis of Southern California. Now, largely at the behest of greens, California agriculture is being systematically cut down by regulation. In an attempt to protect a small fish called the Delta smelt, upward of 200,000 acres of prime farmland have been idled, according to the state's Department of Conservation. Even in the current "wet" cycle, California's agricultural industry, which exports roughly $14 billion annually, is slowly being decimated. Unemployment in some Central Valley towns tops 30 percent, and in cases even 40 percent.
And now, notes my friend, Salinas Mayor Dennis Donohue, green regulators are imposing new groundwater regulations that may force the shutdown of production even in areas like his that have their own ample water supplies.
Salinas was the home town of John Steinbeck, author of The Grapes of Wrath and great chronicler of Depression-era California. Today for many in hardscrabble, majority-Latino Salinas, home to 150,000 people, The Grapes of Wrath is less lyrical than real. "California," notes Donohue, a lifelong Democrat, "remains intent on job destruction and continued hyper-regulation."
California's pain is not restricted to farming towns. The state's regulatory vigilantes have erected a labyrinth of rules that increasingly makes doing almost anything that might contribute to increased carbon emissions—manufacturing, conventional energy, home construction—extraordinarily onerous. Not surprisingly, the state has not gained middle-skilled jobs (those requiring two years of college or more) for a decade, while the nation boosted them by 5 percent and archrival Texas by a stunning 16 percent over the same time period.
There is little chance that the jobs lost in these fields will ever be recovered under the current regime. As decent blue-collar and midlevel jobs disappear, California has gone from a rate of inequality about the national average in 1970, to among the most unequal in terms of income. The supposed solution to this—Gov. Jerry Brown's promise of 500,000 "green jobs"—is being shown for what it really is, the kind of fantasy you tell young children so they will go to sleep.
Many Californians who aren't slumbering are moving out of the state—and not only the pathetic remains of the old Reaganite majority. According to the most recent census, those leaving the state include old boomers, middle-aged families, and increasingly, many Latinos as well. Outmigration rates from places like Los Angeles and the Bay Area now rival those of such cities as Detroit. In the last decade, California’s population grew only 10 percent, about the national average, largely due to immigrants and their offspring. Population increases in the Bay Area were less than half that rate, while the City of Los Angeles gained fewer new residents—less than 100,000—than in any decade since the turn of the last century!
Increasingly, California no longer beckons ambitious newcomers, except for a handful of the most affluent, best educated, and well connected. Through the 1980s and even through the late '90s, the aspirational classes came to California. Now they head to other, more opportunity-friendly places like Austin, Houston, Dallas, Raleigh-Durham, even former “dust bowl” burghs like Des Moines, Omaha, and Oklahoma City. Meanwhile, Golden California, particularly its expensive, ultragreen coast, gets older and older. Marin County, the onetime home of the Grateful Dead and countless former hippies, is now one of the grayest urban counties in the country, with a median age of 44.
Of course, the self-described "progressive" mafia that runs California will point to Silicon Valley and its impressive array of startups. But for the most part, firms like Google, Twitter, and Facebook employ only a small cadre of highly educated workers. Overall, during the past decade the state's high-tech employment fell by almost 4 percent, while Texas's science-based employment grew by a healthy 11 percent. The sad reality is that turning T-shirt-wearing kids like Mark Zuckerberg into multibillionaires doesn't do much to reduce unemployment, which even in San Jose—the largely blue-collar "capital" of Silicon Valley—now hovers around 10 percent.
Magazine cover stories and movies cannot obscure the fact that entrepreneurial growth—the state’s most critical economic asset—has now stalled. In fact, according to a study by Economic Modeling Specialists Inc., last year the Golden State ranked 50th among the states in creating new businesses.
California remains rich in promise, home to spectacular scenery; a great Pacific location; leading firms like Apple and Disney; and a still-impressive residue of talented, diverse, entrepreneurial, and ingenious people. But the state will never return until the success of the current crop of puerile billionaires can be extended to enrich the wider citizenry. Until the current regime is toppled, California's decline—in moral as well as economic terms—will continue, to the consternation of those of us who embraced it as our home for so many years.
This piece originally appeared at The Daily Beast.
Joel Kotkin is executive editor of NewGeography.com and is a distinguished presidential fellow in urban futures at Chapman University, and an adjunct fellow of the Legatum Institute in London. He is author of The City: A Global History. His newest book is The Next Hundred Million: America in 2050, released in February, 2010.
-
Here is what it covers.
(b) California’s domestic workers, which includes housekeepers,
nannies, and caregivers for children, persons with disabilities, and
the elderly, work in private households to care for the health, safety,
and well-being of the most important aspects of Californians’ lives:
their families and homes.
The purpose of this statute is to drive persons who employ domestic workers to go to agencies for their needs. No more hiring on their own.
1.5 years, and I expect to be gone from this state.
=====================
If passed, will the law also apply to gardeners and handymen? Notgood atall. ---j
==============================
wrote:
This only applies to babysitters who are 18 or older, so the title of the article is a bit misleading, since it's not too hard to find younger babysitters. But what it will really kill is the nanny industry and the house cleaning industry and domestic help industry in general. Workers comp insurance is at least $2000 per year, and having a standby nanny every two hours is simply absurd. Worse still, the law gives enormous power to the domestic employee, since they can sue their employer for any alleged infraction of the law and the employer is obligated to pay all legal expenses for the employee.
No matter how you look at it, it is a job killer, and it's not just about babysitters.
-
http://www.vanityfair.com/business/features/2011/11/michael-lewis-201111#gotopage1
California and Bust
The smart money says the U.S. economy will splinter, with some states thriving, some states not, and all eyes are on California as the nightmare scenario. After a hair-raising visit with former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who explains why the Golden State has cratered, Michael Lewis goes where the buck literally stops—the local level, where the likes of San Jose mayor Chuck Reed and Vallejo fire chief Paige Meyer are trying to avert even worse catastrophes and rethink what it means to be a society.
**Read it all.
-
Apparently CA has $9B, raised through infrastructure bonds on which we are paying interest, sitting around unused.
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-cap-jobs-20111017,0,7245554.column
-
http://www.vanityfair.com/business/features/2011/11/michael-lewis-201111#gotopage1
California and Bust
The smart money says the U.S. economy will splinter, with some states thriving, some states not, and all eyes are on California as the nightmare scenario. After a hair-raising visit with former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who explains why the Golden State has cratered, Michael Lewis goes where the buck literally stops—the local level, where the likes of San Jose mayor Chuck Reed and Vallejo fire chief Paige Meyer are trying to avert even worse catastrophes and rethink what it means to be a society.
**Read it all.
:-D
-
City Journal.
Heather Mac Donald
Less Academics, More Narcissism
The University of California is cutting back on many things, but not useless diversity programs.
14 July 2011
California’s budget crisis has reduced the University of California to near-penury, claim its spokesmen. “Our campuses and the UC Office of the President already have cut to the bone,” the university system’s vice president for budget and capital resources warned earlier this month, in advance of this week’s meeting of the university’s regents. Well, not exactly to the bone. Even as UC campuses jettison entire degree programs and lose faculty to competing universities, one fiefdom has remained virtually sacrosanct: the diversity machine.
Not only have diversity sinecures been protected from budget cuts, their numbers are actually growing. The University of California at San Diego, for example, is creating a new full-time “vice chancellor for equity, diversity, and inclusion.” This position would augment UC San Diego’s already massive diversity apparatus, which includes the Chancellor’s Diversity Office, the associate vice chancellor for faculty equity, the assistant vice chancellor for diversity, the faculty equity advisors, the graduate diversity coordinators, the staff diversity liaison, the undergraduate student diversity liaison, the graduate student diversity liaison, the chief diversity officer, the director of development for diversity initiatives, the Office of Academic Diversity and Equal Opportunity, the Committee on Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation Issues, the Committee on the Status of Women, the Campus Council on Climate, Culture and Inclusion, the Diversity Council, and the directors of the Cross-Cultural Center, the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Resource Center, and the Women’s Center.
It’s not surprising that the new vice chancellor’s mission is rather opaque, given its superfluity. According to outgoing UCSD chancellor Marye Anne Fox, the new VC for EDI “will be responsible for building on existing diversity plans to develop and implement a campus-wide strategy on equity, diversity and inclusion.” UCSD has been churning out such diversity strategies for years. The “campus-wide strategy on equity, diversity and inclusion” that the new hire will supposedly produce differs from its predecessors only in being self-referential: it will define the very scope of the VC’s duties and the number of underlings he will command. “The strategic plan,” says Fox, “will inform the final organizational structure for the office of the VC EDI, will propose metrics to gauge progress, and will identify potential additional areas of responsibility.”
What a boon for a taxpayer-funded bureaucrat, to be able to define his own portfolio and determine how many staff lines he will control! UC Berkeley’s own vice chancellor for equity and inclusion shows how voracious a diversity apparatchik’s appetite for power can be. Gibor Basri has 17 people working for him in his immediate office, including a “chief of staff,” two “project/policy analysts,” and a “director of special projects.” The funding propping up Basri’s vast office could support many an English or history professor. According to state databases, Basri’s base pay in 2009 was $194,000, which does not include a variety of possible add-ons, including summer salary and administrative stipends. By comparison, the official salary for assistant professors at UC starts at around $53,000. Add to Basri’s salary those of his minions, and you’re looking at more than $1 million a year.
UC San Diego is adding diversity fat even as it snuffs out substantive academic programs. In March, the Academic Senate decided that the school would no longer offer a master’s degree in electrical and computer engineering; it also eliminated a master’s program in comparative literature and courses in French, German, Spanish, and English literature. At the same time, the body mandated a new campus-wide diversity requirement for graduation. The cultivation of “a student’s understanding of her or his identity,” as the diversity requirement proposal put it, would focus on “African Americans, Asian Americans, Pacific Islanders, Hispanics, Chicanos, Latinos, Native Americans, or other groups” through the “framework” of “race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexuality, language, ability/disability, class or age.” Training computer scientists to compete with the growing technical prowess of China and India, apparently, can wait. More pressing is guaranteeing that students graduate from UCSD having fully explored their “identity.” Why study Cervantes, Voltaire, or Goethe when you can contemplate yourself? “Diversity,” it turns out, is simply a code word for narcissism.
UC San Diego just lost a trio of prestigious cancer researchers to Rice University. Rice had offered them 40 percent pay raises over their total compensation packages, which at UCSD ranged from $187,000 to $330,000 a year. They take with them many times that amount in government grants. Scrapping the new Vice Chancellorship for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion could have saved at least one, if not two, of those biologists’ positions, depending on how greedily the new VC for EDI defines his realm. UCSD is not disclosing how much the VC for EDI will pull in or how large his staff will be: “We expect that [budget/staffing] will be part of the negotiation with the successful candidate at the end of our search process,” says Senior Director of Marketing and Communications Judy Piercey. Since the new UCSD vice chancellor will be responsible for equity, inclusion, and diversity—unlike the Berkeley vice chancellor, who is responsible only for equity and inclusion—the salary at UCSD will presumably reflect that infinitely greater mandate.
UCSD is by no means the only campus bullish on the diversity business, despite budgetary shortfalls hitting the UC system everywhere else. In 2010, Berkeley announced the UC Berkeley Initiative for Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, funded in part by a $16 million gift from the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund. The “new” initiative duplicates existing “equity” projects, not least the Berkeley Diversity Research Initiative, established by Berkeley chancellor Robert Birgeneau in 2006. This latest initiative boasts five new faculty chairs in “diversity-related research”—one of which will be “focused on equity rights affecting the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community,” according to the press release, and “will be one of the first endowed chairs on this subject in the United States.” (Sorry, Berkeley, Yale got there first.)
The main purpose of the UC Berkeley Initiative for Equity, Diversity and Inclusion seems to be to buy for the academic identity racket the respectability that no amount of campus mau-mauing has yet been able to achieve. “Area studies such as ethnic studies, queer studies and gender studies tend to be marginalized and viewed as less essential to the university than such fields as engineering, law or biology,” glumly noted the press release. (The use of the term “area studies” to refer to the solipsist’s curriculum is a novel appropriation of a phrase originally referring to geopolitical specialization.) According to a campus administrator on the Berkeley Diversity Research Initiative’s executive committee, the new initiative will change the character of Berkeley’s area studies by “asserting [sic] them squarely into the main life and importance of the campus.”
Conferring academic legitimacy on narcissism studies is apparently a superhuman task deserving of superhuman remuneration. The salary and expense account of the likely new director of the UC Berkeley Initiative for Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, John Powell—who is currently the executive director of the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity at Ohio State University’s law school—will likely dwarf anything seen so far among diversocrats, according to inside sources.
UCLA’s diversity infrastructure has likewise been spared the budgetary ax. In the pre-recession 2005–06 academic year, UCLA’s associate vice chancellor for faculty diversity reported up the bureaucratic ladder to a vice chancellor for academic personnel, herself reporting to an executive vice chancellor and provost, who in turn reported to the university chancellor. Today, that associate vice chancellor for faculty diversity has been transformed into a vice provost position, while the vice chancellor for academic personnel above her has been eliminated. The new vice provost for faculty diversity will not be lonely; she can pal around with UCLA’s associate director for diversity research and analysis, its associate vice provost for student diversity, its associate dean for academic diversity, its director of diversity outreach, and its director of staff affirmative action.
The one observable activity performed by these lavishly funded diversity bureaucrats is to pressure academic departments to hire more women and minorities. (Even that activity is superfluous, given the abundant pressure for race and gender quotas already exerted by campus groups, every accrediting agency, and external political bodies.) Should a department fail to satisfy—as it inevitably will in every field with low minority participation—only one explanation is possible: a departmental or campus “climate” hostile to diversity, which then requires more intercessions from the diversity bureaucracy. The fact that every other college and university in the country is scouring the horizon for the identical elusive cache of qualified female and minority hires is not allowed into the discourse. Even less acceptable is any recognition of the academic achievement gap between black and Hispanic students, on the one hand, and white and Asian students, on the other, which affects the pool of qualified faculty candidates in fields with remotely traditional scholarly prerequisites. Student admissions offices are under the same pressure, which in California results in the constant generation of new schemes for “holistic” admissions procedures designed to evade the ban on racial and gender preferences that California voters enacted in 1996.
UC San Diego’s lunge toward an even more costly diversity apparatus was inspired in part by one of those periodic outbreaks of tasteless adolescent humor that every diversity bureaucrat lives for (and whose significance is trivial compared with the overwhelmingly supportive environment that today’s universities provide all of their students). But it was hardly out of character on a campus presided over by a chancellor fond of “social justice” rhetoric. And UC’s other campuses are equally committed to bureaucratic diversity aggrandizement, even without a pretext for accelerating those efforts.
This week, in light of a possible cut of $650 million in state financing, the University of California’s regents will likely raise tuition rates to $12,192. Though tuition at UC will remain a bargain compared with what you would pay at private colleges, the regents won’t be meeting their responsibility to California’s taxpayers if they pass over in silence the useless diversity infrastructure that sucks money away from the university’s real function: teaching students about the world outside their own limited selves. California’s budget crisis could have had a silver lining if it had resulted in the dismantling of that infrastructure—but the power of the diversity complex makes such an outcome unthinkable.
Heather Mac Donald is a contributing editor of City Journal and the John M. Olin Fellow at the Manhattan Institute.
-
second post of the day:
It may be time for California to formally apply for membership in the European Union. Its taxing, borrowing and regulatory policies are already more in line with the southern tier of Euroland than with other U.S. states, and the Golden State has taken another lurch in the Euro-direction by becoming the first jurisdiction in the nation to adopt a full-scale cap-and-trade tax to combat global warming. The new taxes and regulations will require a nearly 30% reduction in carbon emissions from power plants, manufacturers, cars and trucks by 2020.
This green tax was signed into law in 2006 by then-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger when the state's economy was flying high. California was going to be the green role model for other states. Now no one believes that fantasy. Ten states in the Northeast entered a regional cap and trade compact to limit greenhouse gases in 2008, but that market is now dying if not dormant and states (recently New Jersey) are dropping out.
In 2006 it also seemed plausible that the federal government would establish national carbon caps. But in 2010 the Democratic Senate killed cap and trade, and there is no chance anytime soon this tax will be implemented in Washington.
So California will go it alone on cap and trade, and the economic fallout won't be pretty. Nearly every independent analysis agrees that water, electricity, construction and gas prices inside the state will rise. The only debate is about how much.
A 2009 study by the California Small Business Roundtable estimated costs of $3,857 per household by the end of the decade. Gasoline prices, already near the highest in the nation, could rise by another 4% to 6%. An analysis by the state's own Legislative Analyst's Office found that the higher costs of doing business would mean "leakage of jobs," with the California economy "likely adversely affected in the near term by implementing climate change policies that are not adopted elsewhere."
Now even unions are catching on to the damage. The Los Angeles Times reports that the California Air Resources Board (CARB) gave final approval to the new scheme two weeks ago after listening to "scathing comments from union workers fearful of losing their jobs." Hard-hat union members from the steel, concrete and oil and gas industries were among the opponents. Charles McIntyre, president of an association of the glass workers union and companies, told the CARB hearing that "these manufacturers are spending millions of dollars every year to meet different requirements and different standards. Well, this is starting to cost us a lot of jobs."
The Western States Petroleum Association calculates the new law could cost its members up to $540 million in higher costs in the first two years alone. When a spokesman from Conoco Phillips told the CARB hearing about its higher costs, Mary Nichols, the CARB chairman, responded that a company with $14 billion in profits shouldn't complain but rather "should do something about the problem of global warming." Sounds like a candidate to be President Obama's next jobs czar.
Ms. Nichols also said that "our society is going to have to use less gasoline"—a remark that reveals the elites-know-best impulse that animates much of the anticarbon energy movement.
The tragedy is that this economic harm is being inflicted for nothing but environmental symbolism. A single state's policies can't possibly alter the planet's temperature given the huge carbon footprint elsewhere, as even the CARB has acknowledged.
Notwithstanding their bouts of carbon imperialism (see below), even some Europeans are having cap-and-trade second thoughts. "There is a trade-off between climate-change policies and competitiveness," concludes a recent EU commission report. "Europe cannot act alone in an effort to achieve global decarbonization."
But evidently high-minded California—with 2.1 million people already out of work and with the nation's second highest jobless rate at 11.9%—will. The job cost will be paid not in the tony salons of Hollywood but in the working class neighborhoods of Torrance and Fresno.
-
God help the left coast:
***Clean energy in California
On its own sunny path
As in so much else, the Golden State’s energy plans look distinctly un-American
Oct 29th 2011 | Los Angeles | from the print edition
Happily soaking up solar
JERRY BROWN started talking about solar power in the 1970s, when he was California’s governor for the first time. He was lampooned for it, but the vision gradually became attractive in a state that is naturally sunny and, especially along the coastline, cares about the environment. So in 2006, under a Republican governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, California set a goal to reduce its greenhouse-gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. This year Mr Brown, governor once again, signed the last bits of that goal into law. And this month the state’s air-quality regulators unanimously voted to adopt its most controversial but crucial component: a cap-and-trade system.
More complex and less elegant (but politically easier) than a simple carbon tax, a cap-and-trade system limits the emissions of dirty industries and puts a price on their remaining pollution so that market forces, in theory, provide an incentive for reductions. In California’s case, starting in 2013 the government will “cap” the amount of gases (such as carbon dioxide) that industry may emit, and gradually lower that cap. It will also issue permits to companies for their carbon allowance. Firms that reduce their emissions faster than the cap decreases may sell (“trade”) their permits and make money. Firms that pollute beyond their quota must buy credits.
To Europeans, Asians and Australians, this may seem nothing much. After all, the European Union already has a similar emissions-trading market, and a carbon tax is now wending its way through the Australian legislature. Even India and China have adopted versions of carbon taxes or emissions trading. But California is in America, which has taken a sharp turn in the opposite direction. Congress debated a cap-and-trade system in 2009, but then allowed it to die. Republicans attacked it as “cap-and-tax”, and increasingly deny that climate change is a problem at all. Some even point to the bankruptcy of Solyndra, a Californian maker of solar panels which had received lots of federal money, as proof that renewable energy is a wasteful pinko pipe-dream.
But California is staying its course. Besides cap-and-trade, its climate-change law calls for lower exhaust-pipe emissions from vehicles and cleaner appliances, and requires the state’s utilities to use renewable energy for one-third of the state’s electricity by 2020. In the Californian mainstream the controversy is not whether to do this, but how.
Some firms are building vast fields of mirrors in the Mojave desert to focus the sun onto water boilers and use the steam to spin turbines. But this also requires costly power grids to carry the electricity to the distant cities. Unexpectedly, it has also drawn the ire of some environmentalists, who love renewable energy but hate the mirrors (or wind farms) that ruin landscapes. In the Mojave they fret about a species of tortoise. Elsewhere they have gone to court for the blunt-nosed leopard lizard and the giant kangaroo rat.
The progress of the other main kind of solar technology, photovoltaic (PV) solar cells, looks stronger. The price of PV panels has dropped in recent years, and there are plans to simplify the paperwork for Californians who want to put them on their own roofs, whence the electricity can be fed into the grid where it is needed. “Solar trees” are beginning to shade parking lots, their panels beautifully tilting to face the sun as it moves.
There are doubters, of course. The cost of electricity may rise, and some polluters may flee the state, taking jobs away. But California already has one in four of America’s solar-energy jobs and will add many more. Sun, wind, geothermal, nuclear: “We need it all,” says Terry Tamminen, who advised Mr Schwarzenegger. The state is setting up an “interesting experiment”, he thinks. “California goes one way, the United States another.”
from the print edition | United States
-
Craig Huey was the Rep. congressional candidate in my district, which is heavily Dem. He almost won.
http://www.dailybreeze.com/ci_19149415
-
Speaking of California governance, it seems to me that Calif. could not afford the 8 lost years of Arnold, the disappointing Republican Governor who made things worse by leaving things the same, reforming nothing. People had high hopes for this outsider with guts to move people and change the course, and he didn't. Calif. might actually have been better served with 4 or 8 years of the same failure under a liberal regime so that the pendulum could begin swinging back the other way by now.
I have a political theory that the politics of the wife/spouse matters. Under my theory, it is too bad for the state and for the nation that Arnold's philandering wasn't known to his wife 8 years sooner and left him sooner so that he could have been free to be the political bad boy on spending and regulatory reforms without having to appease a liberal Democratic wife everyday in addition to the legislature and the bizarre electorate. Just a thought.
-
I love living in CA, but enough is enough. Something needs to be done...
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-cox-malanga-california-business-20111114,0,1011551.story
-
re-posting this here
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-discipline-reversed-20111114,0,7958658.story
-
The first unbelievable thing is no one apparantly evens knows the number. Well lets say it is somewhere between 240 and 500 billion dollars. The next unbelievable thing is what I read below. Now correct me if I read this wrong. But Jerry Brown wants to raise the retirement age from 55 to 67. He wants to have the empolyees contribute to their plans (like the private sector). He wants to end abuses like pretending one is disabled to squeeze/con more money out of the "system" (or from the taxpayer).
Yet even these changes will only save *11 billion* over thirty years! Do I read this right. A measly 11 billion saving on unfunded 240 to 500 billion? Folks if these numbers are true the debt is so staggering I don't understand how there can possibly be any hope of preventing a crash. What with the population getting older and living longer and soaking out more from system. I know from what I see in my job that many of these people still go and get under the table cash paying jobs. So they continue to get from the system and pay nothing into it. Some for many decades. All I can say is "Greece we are right behind you!":
*****California’s public pensions
Not so retiring
The state with the biggest pension problem is stumbling toward a solution
Nov 12th 2011 | LOS ANGELES | from the print edition
JERRY BROWN, aged 73, likes to joke that he is not only California’s governor but also its “best pension buy”. After all, he has spent much of his life in public service (including a first stint as governor from 1975 to 1983), but neither draws a public pension nor plans to, if he can get himself re-elected. Nonetheless, his commitment to fixing California’s daunting public-pension problem has been in doubt. A Democrat, he was elected one year ago in a race against a self-financed Silicon Valley billionaire, largely with the help of independent spending by public-sector unions. The question has been whether he can stare down his own allies, those unions, and pass the necessary reform.
Mr Brown has now released a plan. Initial reactions suggest that he may pass his test: the unions were outraged, many Democratic legislators (often beholden to the unions) felt awkward, and several Republican legislators were supportive. But now everything is in flux, as all parties choose their tactics for the fight.
The main changes Mr Brown proposes concern new employees of state or local governments. They would have to wait till 67 to retire, whereas many current government workers can retire at 55 or even earlier. They would also have hybrid plans, with part of the traditional defined-benefit pension replaced by a defined-contribution plan of the sort common in the private sector. Mr Brown also wants to make current as well as new employees contribute half of the cost of funding their pension (today, many pay nothing). And he wants to end sneaky ways of upping benefits (called “spiking”) and other abuses.
This is all eminently sensible. Indeed, it is remarkably similar to the demands a handful of Republican legislators were making in June, when Mr Brown was begging for their votes to reach the necessary two-thirds majority to let Californians vote in a ballot measure to extend some tax increases. (He did not get those votes, and ended up with an all-cuts budget he doesn’t like.)
Even so the proposal still falls short, says David Crane. He is a Democrat who advised Mr Brown’s Republican predecessor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and who was a gadfly on one of the large pension-plan boards for 11 months. California’s unfunded pension liabilities are staggering, he points out; they have been estimated at between $240 billion and $500 billion. Plugging that hole will increasingly crowd out other things that Democrats care about, such as schools, parks and courts. But Mr Brown’s plan might save at best $11 billion over 30 years.
Which is why Mr Brown’s plan may not be the final one. This month, a group led by several eminent Republicans filed two versions of what may become a ballot measure in next year’s general election. With a nod to Mr Brown’s effort, one alternative is somewhat more aggressive, the other a lot more. The main difference is that current workers would start paying much more of the cost of their pensions.
This Republican plan, in whichever form, might end up helping Mr Brown: either by showing the unions how bad the alternative is, so that they support him after all; or by allowing him to tell them that he tried to be considerate, but now has to endorse the tougher Republican plan as part of a package of other ballot initiatives. In that scenario, the state just might achieve the grand bargain that seems to be eluding the rest of the country.******
-
"Jerry Brown wants to raise the retirement age from 55 to 67. He wants to have the empolyees contribute to their plans (like the private sector). He wants to end abuses like pretending one is disabled to squeeze/con more money out of the "system" (or from the taxpayer)."
Still, not a bad start for a liberal Democrat Governor. :-D
-
JDN agreed. This is already more than the exterminated cartoon Governor you had. But just look at those numbers.
Isn't it over for California?
The numbers are STAGGERING!"
-
"Isn't it over for California?
The numbers are STAGGERING!"
CCP, Nothing wipes out debt and unfunded liabilities like a good bankruptcy. Bankruptcy, like a forest fire once it stops burning, is a new beginning not just an ending. Little plants can sprout on the forest floor where before they could find no sunlight.
The previous Governor Ahnold is a lesson for conservatives in the age old struggle of centrism vs. principles. In this case, what possible good did it do for conservatism to have an R next to his results of escalating spending, taxing and regulating to the point of economic collapse. On the flip side, reforms like a massive change of retirement age would be barbaric if proposed by a conservative, are now courageous.
The numbers are staggering and one element of reform won't solve it. But if that one reform got done, I would agree - a good start.
-
While I acknowledge your point about the cleansing and rejuvenating benefits of Bankruptcy, I don't think States are entitled to declare Bankruptcy. Private Companies and Municipalities can, but States..."
Further, I am not sure the CA Constitution will allow Pensions that have already been promised and agreed to, not to be paid...
-
"On the flip side, reforms like a massive change of retirement age would be barbaric if proposed by a conservative, are now courageous."
Yes. :cry:
-
This doesn't really answer the question to my total satisfaction. Suppose the Kaliflower legislatures simply stop paying the pensioners. The pensioners will sue but so what. If the money ain't there it ain't there. Except for the endless chirade of "borrowing Paul to pay Peter" game of bonds and more debt. They have at this time decided to simply keep doing this forever and look the other way. Is borrowing forever in the Kaliflower child's constitution? Because this IS what they are doing without end. Otherwise, they are de facto bankrupt already, no?:
****Answers to your questions about the news. Can California Declare Bankruptcy?
What about Greece?
By Christopher Beam|Posted Monday, March 8, 2010, at 5:01 PM ET
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger California passed a gas tax last week to help make up for its nearly $20 billion budget gap, the latest in a series of measures to right the state's teetering economy. The country of Greece is in even worse shape, with accumulated debt higher than 110 percent of GDP, set to reach 125 percent this year. Can a state declare bankruptcy? Can a country?
No and no. Chapter 9 of the U.S. bankruptcy code allows individuals and municipalities (cities, towns, villages, etc.) to declare bankruptcy. But that doesn't include states. (The statute defines "municipality" as a "political subdivision or public agency or instrumentality of a State"—that is, not a state itself.) For one thing, states are said to have sovereign immunity, as protected by the 11th Amendment, which means they can't be sued. In other words, they don't need any protection from angry creditors who would take them to court for failing to pay their debts. As a result, states can simply borrow money ad infinitum.
Say the state can't make its debt payments, and no one will lend it any more money. In that case, the federal government can step in and put the state into receivership. This would involve the assignment of an accountant to manage the state's debt, overseen by a judge. It would be a lot like bankruptcy, except instead of following a structured set of steps—informing creditors, appointing creditors' committees, a 120-day window to file a plan, etc.—a receiver has the authority to force creditors to renegotiate loans in a speedy fashion. However, the accountant in charge would not have the power to make decisions about the state's budget, such as which programs needed to be cut and which taxes had to be raised. (No state has ever gone into receivership.)
Greece is in a slightly different situation. There's no international bankruptcy court for countries that can't pay their debts. Instead, other EU countries that depend on Greece's solvency, such as Germany or France, would have to agree to bail it out. (When the economy of one member of the Eurozone sinks, it drags the euro down across the continent.) In return for loans, Greece would agree to implement austerity measures, such as hiking the price of gas, freezing government salaries, and raising the retirement age, to steer the country toward solvency. Whichever countries bail out Greece may not get their money back. But at the very least, Greece wouldn't pull the European economy down with it. Another option would be a bailout funded by the International Monetary Fund or the World Bank, which have stepped in when the economies of Ecuador, Russia, and numerous African countries have tanked. But their leaders seem reluctant. Worst-case scenario, the EU could expel Greece—Greece's deficit is already four times higher than what the EU allows. But that could hurt the euro as well by signaling to investors that the EU is unstable and thus a risky bet.****
-
I didn't know states cannot declare bankruptcy. Of course not, under federal law the 'states are sovereign'. Try saying that aloud without laughing or crying - the states are sovereign - I know about 9 people I would like to forward that to! These states and these pensions, however, have been highly involved in interstate commerce...
When I sold products and services to a similar state, all long term funding contracts required a "funding out clause". One legislature cannot in law bind future legislatures; it fails the most basic tenet: consent of the governed. We are not governed by the people who were elected 20 years ago by different people in a different time. What right and what power did they think they had to decide what our budget will be today. The only money the state can disburse it what the legislature with the Governor say can be spent. Obviously they will choose to pay the interest on the bonds and reauthorize everything else reasonable and prudent, but is there a legal requirement to do so? I don't know and my experience was not in Calif.
The California constitution will be the key. It will define the process of what monies go out. Requiring pension obligations be paid would seem contradictory. The constitution hopefully spells out how that gets resolved, but it sounds like it that was set in precedent, not necessarily in specific constitutional language. Something this large should be done with a supermajority anyway, so you might as well do that through the amendment process to the Calif. constitution, and write exactly what is needed.
I don't see how you can make people pay when you can't make them stay.
When the tax rate becomes 100% and pensions are taxed, pensioners aren't receive anything anyway. :-(
-
Sovereignty is rather interesting. I've done some work on Indian Reservations. They too are "sovereign" yet they are just a few miles down the road. It was rather complicated I thought.
"funding out clause". Hmmm I'm not sure how that could apply to a Pension Plan. For that matter, while I think I understand your "consent of the governed" let's
say I sold your State a building and I carried back the paper for 30 years. Are you saying 20 years later, or even two years later (a legislator's term) they can void that sale? And stop paying me?
When I retire, theoretically, I have completed my part of the contract. The State should/must keep theirs. At my retirement, the State is merely making payment for services
already provided; the issue is not funding for future services. It is now a debt obligation. If the State wishes to alter future pension benefits for current employees henceforward, that's fine, but it's not right or legal to do it retroactively when there was a written contract in place.
As I mentioned, as long as there is one dollar coming in, pension obligations will be near the top of what will be paid. Money for schools, fire, police, roads, jails, etc. are all discretionary. Given that most
on this site believe in the sanctity of a contract, including myself, I'm surprised that you would consider retroactively voiding contracts because money is short.
By the way, pensions ARE taxed in most instances.
PS I'm not saying that future public pensions shouldn't be drastically altered. Gov. Brown is on the right track.
-
So, if California has only money to pay pensions and no money left for actual state services, that's ok?
I'm willing to bet it won't play out like that.
-
I don't know it "that's ok", it isn't - I think the retirement/disability plans for all public employees are too rich, but I do bet the State will not cut those individuals already on pensions to pay for State services.
We have a severe Federal deficit, but I notice no one is proposing that we cut/reduce Social Security payments to those already retired. Future retirees, well that's different.
In this case, the State has a legal obligation. In contrast, there is no binding legal "contract" that my trash is picked up weekly, that x number of police/fire/sheriff's/teachers/etc.
are hired or retained, roads fixed, buses repaired, etc.; frankly, many services and people may need to be cut, and I know, God forbid, taxes raised, but yeah, I bet contractual obligations will be paid.
And they should be.
-
Do you have an actual signed contract in hand?
-
Do you have an actual signed contract in hand?
I don't but they do. :-) So let the cuts in public services begin....
Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution prohibits any state from passing a "law impairing the obligation of contracts." As with the constitutions of some other states, the California Constitution also prohibits the legislative branch of California's government from passing any law impairing the obligation of contracts. These clauses are known as the "Contract Clauses" of the U.S. and State Constitutions, respectively.
Provides Certain Protections Concerning Public Employee Retirement Benefits. In various instances over the past century, California governments have made attempts to alter or reduce pension benefits for current and past employees and to reduce payments to pension systems. In a number of cases, California courts have held that such actions violated the Contract Clauses of the U.S. and/or State Constitutions. In a number of cases, California courts have held that a public employee's pension constitutes "an element of compensation," that a "vested contractual right to pension benefits accrues upon acceptance of employment," and that such a pension right "may not be destroyed, once vested, without impairing a contractual obligation of the employing public entity." California courts have ruled that allowable modifications to pension systems for current and past employees, when they result in a "disadvantage to employees," generally must be accompanied by "comparable new advantages." For example, a reduction of one part of the benefit must be accompanied by some other "advantage" to the employee or retiree. The contractual protections apply to various aspects of the pension benefit and also have applied to certain commitments of governments to contribute to pension systems each year. In general, this means that California courts have declared that it is difficult to modify or alter public employee pension benefits to reduce governmental costs unless that change is accompanied by comparable new advantages for affected public employees and retirees.
-
I'll bet at some point the courts will decide that indeed there is no such contract. I say this as a vested state employee from another state with similar prior court rulings.
Meaning, when there ain't no money, there ain't no money.
At least you fed, educated and provided illegal aliens with medical care with the money you would have retired with.
So you got that going for you.....
-
California pension crisis tops the country’s debt at a whopping $612 billion
Kimberly Dvorak
, San Diego County Political Buzz Examiner
October 26, 2011
A new PEW study puts California at the top of the pension debt crisis with at least $612 billion in obligations followed by New Jersey at $183 Billion and Illinois with a $150 billion.
The shocking new PEW study projected the country is on the hook for approximately $2 trillion dollars for all states, says Capoliticalnews.
“Using the higher pension gap number, State Budget Solutions said California is in the biggest financial hole — with total debt of more than $612 billion. New York follows with $305 billion of debt, and then Texas, with total debt of $283 billion. Vermont has the lowest amount of total debt at just over $6 billion,” a story from Bloomberg reported.
California’s State Controller John Chiang explains California’s state pension crisis is causing big headaches for state politicians. According to the state’s latest money projections, “the State ended last fiscal year with a cash deficit of $8.2 billion. The combined current year cash deficit stands at $17.6 billion. Those deficits are being covered with $12.2 billion of internal borrowing (temporary loans from special funds) and $5.4 billion of external borrowing).”
When it comes to unemployment, 11.9 percent, California will borrow the most in the country to cover its unemployment benefit checks- $8.6 billion.
Keeping these financial concerns in mind California’s Governor, Jerry Brown will address state legislators on the pension tsunami flooding the state.
“Given the paramount importance of pensions to both taxpayers and public employees, it is absolutely critical that we carefully examine our current assumptions and practices,” Brown stated in a letter to Gloria Negrete McLeod (D-Chino), and Assemblyman Warren Furutani (D-Gardena). “We have to do our best to make sure that we have a system that is fair and truly sustainable over the long time horizon that our pension and health systems require.”
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/
..
Continue reading on Examiner.com California pension crisis tops the country’s debt at a whopping $612 billion - San Diego County Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/california-pension-crisis-tops-the-country-s-debt-at-a-whopping-612-billion
-
So I think California needs to tax the rich until they fix the budget hole, right?
It's not like they'll leave or anything.....
-
I have no answer as to why we fed and educated illegal aliens. We even recently gave them instate tuition rates for college. I don't get it.
You are here illegally from a foreign country and you pay instate rates, but you are from PA and you pay double tuition. :?
But as for "contracts" "no money" means no services, not voiding contracts. At least I hope not. A contract is a contract. It's rather clear.
You can't complain later.... because you don't like the deal.
That said, "vested" is different than already retired. A vested person's benefit can be frozen at current value. You are only "vested" in current benefits.
Future benefits can be legally changed. Final payout will be a conglomeration of benefits. But if you are already retired and receiving benefits, well that's a
firm contract that cannot be changed. You might not get cost of living increases, if not contractually called for, but you will receive your basic (rich) pension
plan.
-
Simple fix. Raise taxes on the retirees until you've gutted the payments. After all, there is no restriction on the state powers of taxation, right?
On paper, you get what you were promised, but then the taxes are imposed.....
Bummer.
-
Trouble Brewing: The Disaster of California State Pensions
California has promised its public employees lavish pensions and retiree health benefits without setting aside nearly enough money to pay for those benefits. As a result, California already admits to a $75.5 billion shortfall in paying for these promises to public employees -- $40.5 billion for the teachers' retirement plan (California State Teachers' Retirement System, or CalSTRS) and $35 billion for the California Public Employee Retirement System (CalPERS), says Stuart Buck, a Distinguished Doctoral Fellow in the Department of Education Reform at the University of Arkansas.
Unfortunately, the situation is actually far more dire than is currently admitted.
The actuarial valuations mentioned above took place as of June 30, 2008 and both pension systems have had substantial losses in their investments since that date.
As of the most recent information available, CalPERS' assets had dropped to a reported $200 billion, and the teachers' retirement system's assets had dropped to $134 billion; these losses would add another $44 billion in unfunded liabilities.
But it gets even worse, says Buck.
When the California pension systems set aside money for future pension payments, they rosily assume that their investments are going to earn a steady 7.75 percent or 8 percent return year after year.
But that assumption is clearly too optimistic -- especially after a decade of zero stock market growth -- and does not match the bond-like nature of pension obligations.
Re-estimating California's pension obligations using a discount rate approximating what private pensions are allowed to use, Buck finds the gap between existing plan assets and the present value of benefits accrued by participants actually reaches $282.2 billion, a figure that rises to $326.6 billion when current market values are taken into account. On top of that, the California Controller estimates that retiree health benefits are currently underfunded by $51.8 billion. The total of these actuarial obligations thus reaches $378.8 billion.
Source: Stuart Buck, "Trouble Brewing: The Disaster of California State Pensions," Foundation for Education Choice, October 2010.
For text:
http://www.edchoice.org/CMSModules/EdChoice/FileLibrary/587/Trouble-Brewing---The-Disaster-of-California-State-Pensions.pdf
For more on Tax and Spending Issues:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=25
-
So maybe they should Gov. Brown's suggestion and increase the retirement age and reduce pensions/disability payments henceforward for current employees.
Sounds good to me.
But you can't alter retirees.
-
"let's say I sold your State a building and I carried back the paper for 30 years"
Many differences there, if payments quit the title stays with the seller on a contract for deed. Put the other way you have to make all the payments to complete the transfer of the sale. Payment over time makes perfect sense because the usage is over time. It just has to be reauthorized every budget cycle until the government is the owner.
Pensions are payments for work done back then. They should have been funded with money collected back then, for the schools, police, fire, etc. Instead we were funding ... ... ... . I have no idea how to fix now what we all know was irresponsible back then.
-
But you can tax them, right JDN?
Tax the pensioners until the books balance. Problem solved.
-
But you can tax them, right JDN?
Tax the pensioners until the books balance. Problem solved.
But not as a specific class...
I think the "problem solved" would be to spend a LOT less. Reduce benefits for future; nothing wrong with retiring at 65 or 67 versus the current 20 years i.e. often age 45 with full pension.
And no offensive, maybe raise taxes a little.
As for Doug, perhaps you are right, perhaps they should have been funded with money collected back then, but they weren't; pay as you go. It's not easy to fix now. As a side note, many private
pension plans are in the same boat although defined benefit plans are dying fast in private enterprise.
Of course there are differences, but I still like my analogy of the building. Like a building each contract for current employees had to be acknowledged/approved by each legislature. It just has to be reauthorized/ignored (OR REDUCED - they never did) before the employee retires. After he retires, there is a contract in place guaranteeing a certain benefit.
-
But not as a specific class...
What? Didn't you want a president who wanted to spread the wealth around? Why should the 99% who don't get pensions from the state pay for yours?
Tax the rich! Guess that means you.
-
I wish. :-)
-
Rich is relative. Compared to many, you are rich.
Are you claiming there is some legal concept that protects your pension from being taxed?
Gotta spread that wealth around!
-
Rich is relative. And as I get older, it becomes less important to me. You might be richer than me. It's been a bad three - four years.
And unlike you, you being a public employee, there is no legal concept to protect my self employed pension. Or tax money to fund it.
Then again, that's fair; it's up to me. Therefore I'm focusing on lowering expenses. So should our government.
But if you want to spread your guaranteed retirement wealth around (I'm not imply yours is not well deserved), email me and I'll give you my address. :-)
-
NJ appears to be at the top. If it has 8 million people and Kali-FORNA 35 million than jersey's 186 nillion is per capita more than the left coast state.
Doesn't totally surprise me.
NJ is the epitome of the OWS types. Demand free checks, soak and abuse the system, nepotism, cronism, organized crime, regulation, big government, politicians mostly all getting fabulously rich with side deals, payoffs etc.
And of course their answer is always let the rich pay their fair share! Now there certainly are many rich who are crooks but lets go after them for being crooks and not for being rich per se.
We sure do live in a strange new world. How could there not be a big crash coming?
Didn't one Dem recently get quoted as saying debt got us into this mess, debt will have to get us out of it.
I agree with Doug. Only bankruptcy can get us out of this. Yet as the articles posted and JDN points out that may not even be an option.
-
Promised benefits must be paid; period. While this article/decision primarily refers to future health benefits being promised, retirement benefits are clearly promised in the employee handbook.
Therefore, retiree pension benefits cannot be cut. Services, whatever they may be, will be cut first.
"This decision says that when you are in the process of doing public employee pension reform, you have to respect the rights of current retirees," said Ernest Galvan, a lawyer who represented more than 5,000 Orange County retirees and their family members.
"If you promised them a particular benefit when they were working and promised that would be part of their retirement, then that is a promise you have to keep."
http://www.latimes.com/health/la-me-1122-health-benefits-20111122,0,7003079.story
-
Whatever some lawyer says about this *must be done* etc doesn't mean much. Of course this guy will say this.
But what is the law/consitution and the entire legal analysis. Try getting an objective opinion without everyone's agenda right of left involved.
-
CCP; I take it you didn't have time to read the article.
The title was "Retired public workers can count on promised benefits", the CA Supreme Court has ruled.
It's not just "some lawyer". It's the law and our State Constitution.
-
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2011/12/tax-cpa.html
Tax Practitioner Flees California for Nevada
Tax practitioner and blogger Russ Fox is fleeing California for Nevada:
My tax bite is roughly 10% to California. For every dollar I make, ten cents goes to Sacramento. (Yes, I get a benefit from that in that state income tax is deductible on federal tax. However, because of the Alternative Minimum Tax even that benefit is capped.) For the past few years I’ve considered if I could move my business to a friendlier environment. Earlier this year, I decided to do so.
I’ve sold my house in Irvine, and am in the process of purchasing a home in the Las Vegas area. I will be in a much friendlier business environment, with a lower cost of living. The home I’m purchasing is nearly double the size of my current home and costs almost 50% less than what I sold my current home for.
There comes a point where decisions are forced on you. With the growth of my business, I looked at possibly hiring another tax accountant in 2010. When I ran the numbers, I found that I would lose money by hiring a productive tax accountant. That’s because of all the regulations and costs that I would immediately incur if I had an employee. I’m not stupid: If I lose money by hiring someone, I’m not going to do it.
Yet my business was (and is) growing, and I had to do something. ... As of a week from now, I will have executed my own Escape from California.
Tax Update Blog:
Russ doesn't say that taxes are the only reason he is leaving California. He is saying that high taxes are a significant part of why California is business-hostile. When things are bad enough to drive a growing business from the perfumed air and divine weather of Orange County to the desert wastes of Nevada, that's saying something.
-
Speaking of desert wastelands, isn't Las Vegas about to run out of water one of these days?
-
About the same time Southern California does.
-
Las Vegas Running Out of Water Means Dimming Los Angeles Lights
By John Lippert and Jim Efstathiou Jr. - February 26, 2009 00:01 EST
Feb. 26 (Bloomberg) -- On a cloudless December day in the Nevada desert, workers in white hard hats descend into a 30- foot-wide shaft next to Lake Mead.
As they’ve been doing since June, they’ll blast and dig straight down into the limestone surrounding the reservoir that supplies 90 percent of Las Vegas’s water. In September, when they hit 600 feet, they’ll turn and burrow for 3 miles, laying a new pipe as they go.
The crew is in a hurry. They’re battling the worst 10-year drought in recorded history along the Colorado River, which feeds the 110-mile-long reservoir. Since 1999, Lake Mead has dropped about 1 percent a year. By 2012, the lake’s surface could fall below the existing pipe that delivers 40 percent of the city’s water.
As Las Vegas’s economy worsens, the workers are also racing against a recession that threatens the ability to sell $500 million in bonds so they can complete the job.
Patricia Mulroy, manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority, is the general in this region’s war to stem a water emergency that’s playing out worldwide. It’s the biggest battle of her 31-year career.
‘We’ve Tried Everything’
“We’ve tried everything,” says Mulroy, 56, who made no secret of her desire to become secretary of the U.S. Interior Department before President Barack Obama picked U.S. Senator Ken Salazar of Colorado in December.
“The way you look at water has to fundamentally change,” adds Mulroy, who, after 20 years of running the authority, said in January she’s ready to start thinking about looking for a new job, declining to say where.
Across the planet, people like Mulroy are struggling to solve the next global crisis.
From 2500 B.C., when King Urlama of Lagash diverted water in the Tigris and Euphrates Valley in a border dispute with nearby Umma, to 1924, when Owens Valley, California, farmers blew up part of the aqueduct that served a parched Los Angeles, societies have bargained, fought and rearranged geographies to get the water they need.
Mulroy started her push with conservation. She’s paying homeowners $1.50 a square foot (0.09 square meter) to replace lawns with gravel and asking golf courses to dig up turf. That helped cut Las Vegas’s water use by 19.4 percent in the seven years ended in 2008, even as the metropolitan area added 482,000 people, bringing the total to 2 million. It wasn’t enough.
Paul Bunyan
So she’s planning a $3.5 billion, 327-mile (525-kilometer) underground pipeline to tap aquifers beneath cattle-raising valleys northeast of the city. She’s even suggested refashioning the plumbing of the entire continent, Paul Bunyan style, by diverting floodwaters from the Mississippi River west toward the Rocky Mountains.
If Mulroy’s ideas are extreme, one reason is that the planet’s most essential resource doesn’t work like other commodities.
There’s no global marketplace for water. Deals for property, wells and water rights, such as the ones Mulroy must negotiate to build the pipeline, are done piecemeal. As the world grows needier, neither governments nor companies nor investors have figured out an effective and sustainable response.
“We have 19th-century ways of utilizing water and 21st- century needs,” says Brad Udall, director of Western Water Assessment at the University of Colorado at Boulder.
Unyielding Pressure
Water upheavals are intensifying because the population is growing fastest in places where fresh water is either scarce or polluted. Dry areas are becoming drier and wet areas wetter as the oceans and atmosphere warm. Economic roadblocks, such as the global credit crunch and its effects on Mulroy’s attempts to sell bonds, multiply during a recession.
Yet local governments that control water face unyielding pressure from constituents to keep the price low, regardless of cost. Agricultural interests, commercial developers and the housing industry clash over dwindling supplies. Companies, burdened by slowing profits, will be forced to move from dry areas such as the American Southwest, Udall says.
“Water is going to be more important than oil in the next 20 years,” says Dipak Jain, dean of the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, who studies why corporations locate where they do.
No Cheap Water
Even before the now decade-long drought began punishing Las Vegas, people used more than 75 percent of the water in northern Africa and western Asia that they could get their hands on in 2000, according to the United Nations.
In 2002, 8 percent of the world suffered chronic shortages. By 2050, 40 percent of the projected world population, or about 4 billion people, will lack adequate water as entire regions turn dry, the UN predicts.
“We can no longer assume that cheap water is available,” says Peter Gleick, editor of The World’s Water 2008-2009 (Island Press, 2009). “We have to start living within our means.”
Over the Sierra Mountains from Las Vegas, Shasta Lake, California’s biggest reservoir, is less than a third full because melting snow that fed it for six decades is dwindling. A winter as dry as the previous two may mean rationing for 18 million people in Southern California this year, says Jeffrey Kightlinger, general manager of the Metropolitan Water District.
-
While water is an issue CA actually has a surplus this year compared to past years due to a a last year's wet winter.
-
Sent by a friend. I leave in his prefacatory comments.
======
So let me get this straight. A business can't spend its advertising money where it chooses? Political groups and legislators can force them to spend it where they don't want to? Ahhhh, California slips deeper into the void where idiocy meets lunacy.
jvs
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/11/california-senator-threatens-boycott-after-lowes-pulls-ads-from-muslim-american/?test=latestnews
California Senator Threatens Boycott After Lowe's Pulls Ads from Muslim-American Reality Show
Published December 11, 2011
In this undated image provided by Discovery, Nawal Aoude, a pediatric respiratory therapist, left, and her husband Nader go for a walk in a scene from the TLC series, "All-American Muslim."
LOS ANGELES – A state senator from Southern California was considering calling for a boycott of Lowe's stores after the home improvement chain pulled its advertising from a reality show about Muslim-Americans.
Calling the retail giant's decision "un-American" and "naked religious bigotry," Sen. Ted Lieu, D-Torrance, told The Associated Press on Sunday that he would also consider legislative action if Lowe's doesn't apologize to Muslims and reinstate its ads. The senator sent a letter outlining his complaints to Lowe's Chief Executive Officer Robert A. Niblock.
The retail giant stopped advertising on TLC's "All-American Muslim" after a group called the Florida Family Association complained the show was "propaganda that riskily hides the Islamic agenda's clear and present danger to American liberties and traditional values."
The program premiered last month and chronicles the lives of five families from Dearborn, Mich., a Detroit suburb with a large Muslim and Arab-American population.
"The show is about what it's like to be a Muslim in America, and it touches on the discrimination they sometimes face. And that kind of discrimination is exactly what's happening here with Lowe's," Lieu said.
The Florida group sent three emails to its members, asking them to petition Lowe's to pull its advertising. Its website was updated to say that "supporters' emails to advertisers make a difference."
Suehaila Amen, whose family is featured on "All-American Muslim," said she was disappointed by the Lowe's decision.
"I'm saddened that any place of business would succumb to bigots and people trying to perpetuate their negative views on an entire community," Amen, 32, told The Detroit News on Sunday.
Lowe's issued a statement Sunday apologizing for having "managed to make some people very unhappy." The North Carolina-based company did not say whether it would reinstate advertising on the show.
The apology doesn't go far enough, Lieu said. The senator vowed to look into whether Lowe's violated any California laws and said he would also consider drafting a senate resolution condemning the company's actions.
"We want to raise awareness so that consumers will know during this holiday shopping season that Lowe's is engaging in religious discrimination," he said.
In addition to an apology and reinstatement of the ads, Lieu said he hoped Lowe's would make an outreach to the community about bias and bigotry.
A call to Lowe's headquarters seeking comment about the boycott threat was not immediately returned Sunday.
"Individuals and groups have strong political and societal views on this topic, and this program became a lightning rod for many of those views," the company's statement said. "As a result we did pull our advertising on this program. We believe it is best to respectfully defer to communities, individuals and groups to discuss and consider such issues of importance."
Lieu's office said a decision was expected Wednesday or Thursday on whether to proceed with the boycott.
Dawud Walid, Michigan director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said his group felt "extreme disappointment" at Lowe's "capitulation to bigotry."
Walid said he has heard expressions of anger and calls for a boycott by Muslims but said a key to resolving the Lowe's advertising controversy will be how non-Muslim religious leaders and others react to Lowe's decision.
"I will be picking up the phone tomorrow to some of our friends and allies to explain the situation to them," Walid said Sunday.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/11/california-senator-threatens-boycott-after-lowes-pulls-ads-from-muslim-american/?test=latestnews#ixzz1gIChE0pS
-
The kafir must submit.
-
By VAUHINI VARA
SAN FRANCISCO—California's ambitious plan for a high-speed rail system hit a big roadblock Tuesday, as an independent panel urged lawmakers to deny authorizing the issuance of $2.7 billion in bonds to kick off the $98.5 billion project.
The California High-Speed Rail Peer Review Group—which the state legislature appointed to analyze funding for the rail system—questioned the California High-Speed Rail Authority's plan to start construction without any assurance of future funding from the federal government, among other factors.
Moving ahead "represents an immense financial risk" for California, the group said in its report, echoing concerns from critics who say the project could leave state taxpayers on the hook for billions of dollars in future costs. The panel appeared to leave the door open to supporting state funding in the future, if the rail authority addresses its concerns. While the report isn't binding, it puts pressure on California lawmakers as they decide whether to release billions of dollars in state bonds for the project.
Mark DeSaulnier, chairman of the California State Senate Transportation and Housing Committee, said the report is "not good news" for the high-speed rail plan.
"I definitely think the state needs a very robust but realistic rail plan, and high-speed rail will hopefully be part of it, but the way we're going now it looks like it's not going to happen," the Democrat said in an interview, adding that if the decision to appropriate funds for the current plan "came in front of us right at this moment, I would most likely vote against it."
The proposed plan, which has attracted the support of Gov. Jerry Brown, called for breaking ground this year by spending $6 billion in federal and state funds to lay track for high-speed trains in the rural Central Valley, as an initial step in a broader project for a bullet train linking San Francisco to Southern California.
A spokesman for Mr. Brown, Gil Duran, reiterated the governor's support for the rail plan, saying the report "does not appear to add any arguments that are new or compelling enough to suggest a change in course."
Under the plan, the Central Valley track could be incorporated into existing Amtrak service until more funding becomes available to extend the high-speed rail line.
The federal government has already provided $3.3 billion of the $6 billion required for the Central Valley construction. For the remaining $2.7 billion, the California High-Speed Rail Authority has asked the state legislature to appropriate bond funds early this year.
The legislature's decision could have far-reaching consequences, not only for the state funds but also for the federal funds already earmarked for the project. The federal government requires that its portion be used by September 2017 or else forfeited, and the rail authority estimates that work must begin in fall 2012 for the funds to be used in time.
The rail authority sharply criticized the independent panel's report. The group failed to consider the risks of not proceeding with the rail plan, such as "lost opportunities for funding" and "the even greater costs of meeting the state's mobility needs in the absence of high-speed rail," Thomas J. Umberg, chairman of the rail authority, wrote in a rebuttal sent to legislators.
California's bullet-train effort got its start in 2008, when 53% of voters approved a bond measure that authorized the state to sell nearly $10 billion in general-obligation bonds to finance high-speed rail, which would be made available when appropriated by the legislature.
Since then, public opinion has cooled, partly because of a rising price tag for the overall project and questions about the plan's viability.
The Field Poll, a research group primarily active in California, found in a December survey that 59% of Californians would reject the bond package if the vote were held again.
The proposed California system—with trains racing from San Francisco to Los Angeles in two-and-a-half hours, compared with driving time of about six hours with no traffic—has taken center stage in the debate over bringing high-speed rail to the U.S. Proponents argue that high-speed rail would bolster the nation's aging transportation infrastructure and would be better for the environment than relying on cars.
President Barack Obama has sought to use the California effort as a showcase, in hopes of gaining support for similar projects around the country.
But another high-profile rail plan in Florida fizzled out last year after Republican Gov. Rick Scott rejected federal funds in a much-publicized move. And Republicans in Congress have pushed back against more funds for high-speed rail as part of a broader resistance to increased government spending. That has raised questions about whether enough funding will materialize for bullet trains in California, which had earlier planned to rely largely on federal funds, and elsewhere.
-
California Governor Jerry Brown has a big dream about a very expensive train—$98.5 billion to be precise, running from San Francisco to Los Angeles. Neither the ballooning cost of building it, nor growing public opposition, nor a string of negative expert assessments have cooled the Governor's ardor. So that leaves the California legislature to derail this boondoggle.
The case for the bullet train was iffy from the start and is now beyond salvation. A withering report this week from a state-appointed panel ought to drive the last nail in. The California High-Speed Rail Peer Review Group, asked to judge the project, declared it "not financially feasible." It said the rail route's first leg, in the Central Valley between Merced and Bakersfield, would be especially noneconomic. And it asked the legislature not to approve Governor Brown's plans to issue the first $2.7 billion batch of bonds this month to start construction on the 520-mile network.
The panel blew up just about every assumption offered about California's answer to the French TGV. The current cost estimate, already triple what was sold to voters in 2008, will likely come in even higher. Federal, much less private, financing won't be forthcoming. Projections for passenger traffic and revenues are unrealistic. The state auditor, the inspector general, California's watchdog Legislative Analyst's Office, the U.S. House Transportation Committee, among others, arrived at similar conclusions.
Four years ago, when they approved a $9 billion bond issue, California's voters backed the project based on false advertising. If the referendum were held today, according to a Field poll last month, they'd vote it down by a two-to-one margin. Two-thirds of Californians want another say. The Golden State seems to flirt with bankruptcy every year, and voters appear to understand better than their politicians that a huge infrastructure project of dubious value may not be a good idea.
Governor Brown won't hear of such fiscal realities. His spokesman said the peer review study "does not appear to add any arguments that are new or compelling enough to suggest a change in course."
Let's not forget that his supporters in the unions, who picked up the tab for the 2008 bond campaign, love this Solyndra on rails. So does the Obama Administration, which wants to make an high-speed rail example out of California. The Golden State would merely burnish an unfortunate reputation for fiscal lunacy unless legislators, who are at last starting to raise doubts, get off this ride.
-
When taking the economic pulse of California, one of Groucho Marx's best lines comes to mind: Either this state is dead or my watch has stopped. Any sign of life is welcome news in the once Golden State, and a bit arrived last week in the form of a state Supreme Court decision, which sounded a rare note of economic sanity in this overtaxed, overregulated state.
The court said the legislature was entitled to pull the plug on some 400 local redevelopment agencies, which long have used state money to subsidize all manner of building schemes. The decision is being hailed as a big win for Democratic Governor Jerry Brown, who wanted the development agencies defunded. The decision frees some $1.7 billion to fill big holes in California's budget this year. Mr. Brown says this money can be better used on schools and basic local services, which includes the courts.
The bigger story here is what this tussle says about how California struggles to keep its public and private economies afloat under so many burdens.
As Governor Brown points out, the localities relied on property taxes generated from these development projects to pay off the bonds behind the projects, in turn diverting tax revenue away from basic services, whose costs end up in the state budget.
True enough, but consider the challenge from the point of view of local officials. In the absence of the kind of viable development that naturally emerges from a dynamic private economy, officials turn to schemes like this to force-feed new real estate into their communities.
California, the bluest of blue Democratic states, often justifies its costly and convoluted public policies as an acceptable price to help its poorer citizens. But the irony is how hard these development-agency subsidies often are on poor and working-class people.
Typically, the agencies designate neighborhoods as "blighted" in advance of eminent-domain property takings on behalf of projects to build condominiums, shopping centers, sports stadiums, convention centers and the like. Too often, the original residents are small businesses or residents without the resources to defend against these takeovers.
One court decision won't cure the tax-and-spending ills that beset California. It should, however, open more eyes in the state to the reality that Rube Goldberg economic schemes don't work.
-
second post of day
By VAUHINI VARA
California Gov. Jerry Brown proposed Thursday to close the state's projected $9.2 billion budget gap in the next fiscal year with cuts to social services and with expected revenue from a temporary tax increase he hopes to pass in November.
Every January, California forecasts its deficit for the coming fiscal year, which starts in July. This year's deficit figure is the narrowest the state has predicted since a forecast for the 2008 fiscal year, before the recession battered the construction industry and sent the state's tax revenue slumping.
California's fortunes have recently improved, as a gradually brightening economic picture has boosted tax revenue.
The proposal—which typically serves as a template as legislators wrangle over the budget for the following fiscal year—calls for $4.2 billion in cuts to programs such as welfare and in-home supportive services, along with tax measures and other changes that would boost revenue by $4.7 billion.
Mr. Brown, speaking at a news conference in Sacramento, called his plan "an honest budget" that "will eliminate the budget deficit, finally, after years of kicking the can down the road."
Among Mr. Brown's proposed cuts are a $946 million reduction for CalWORKs, the state's welfare program, and an $842 million cut to California's Medicaid program known as Medi-Cal.
The bulk of the extra revenue of $4.7 billion in Mr. Brown's proposal, $4.4 billion, would come mainly from temporarily increasing the personal income tax on people making $250,000 or more by up to two percentage points, and by raising the sales tax by half a percentage point—a measure that Mr. Brown is asking voters to pass in November. If the measure fails, Mr. Brown has earmarked other cuts to make up for the lost revenue, including in education.
.Republicans criticized the governor's proposal. Tom Del Beccaro, chairman of the state Republican Party, said the plan "lacks innovation as well as any meaningful structural reforms."
Mr. Brown's Democratic allies took a more cooperative tone. "The governor's budget plan reflects the fact that even though California's economic recovery is gaining strength, we still face a year of difficult choices," said Assembly Speaker John Pérez. "His plan underscores the need for new revenues to avoid cuts that will be a major drag on the recovery."
The budget situation in the most populous state mirrors the national picture, said Todd Haggerty, an analyst at the National Conference of State Legislatures, a clearinghouse for state lawmakers. Like other states, California anticipates a narrower budget gap than it has seen in years—and yet, the slow economic recovery and continuing concerns about the future mean budget woes persist.
"State fiscal conditions continue to improve at a slow pace," Mr. Haggerty said.
Any legislative wrangling over Mr. Brown's budget is likely to be less severe than in past years. That is because, for many years, passing a budget in California required the support of two-thirds of the state legislature. But in 2010, voters passed a ballot measure that now allows budgets to be passed with the support of a simple majority.
Last year, Mr. Brown sought Republican help because he wanted to extend an earlier tax increase—and tax measures still require the approval of a two-thirds majority.
But this year's tax measure won't require legislative approval, which means Democrats, who control the statehouse, can pass this year's budget without Republican input.
Mark Baldassare, president of the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California, a think tank, called Mr. Brown's tack of relying partly on voters' passage of his tax measure "unusual."
Typically, governors work with legislators to come up with budget plans, but Mr. Brown has said he doesn't want to negotiate with Republican lawmakers on taxes this year, after his failure last year to gain GOP support to extend some expiring tax hikes.
Given that the budget calls for cuts to education, among other areas, if the tax measure fails, Mr. Brown's approach "tests voters' willingness to pay for services they want," Mr. Baldassare said.
-
Eventually California will be asking for Federal aid like Greece telling Germany to bail them out:
***Greek fury at plan for EU budget control
By Peter Spiegel in Brussels and Kerin Hope in Athens
Greece’s finance minister angrily rejected a German plan for the eurozone to impose a budget overseer onto Athens in return for a new €130bn bail-out, saying it would improperly force his country to choose between “financial assistance” and “national dignity”.
Evangelos Venizelos said the proposal to create a European Union “budget commissioner” with the power to veto Greek tax and spending decisions, revealed by the FT, “ignores some key historical lessons”. He added EU lenders already had sufficient monitoring safeguards in place in its bail-out programme.
Mr Venizelos’s comments came as talks in Athens shifted from the weeks-long negotiations over restructuring its privately held debt to the question of which public institutions will have to pay to fill a widening gap in Greece’s budget figures.
According to officials involved in the discussions, negotiators representing Greek bondholders largely completed a deal with Athens at the weekend which would cut the long-term value of privately held bonds by just over 70 per cent.
But the formal signing of the agreement has been delayed amid disagreement over whether a remaining budget shortfall will be filled by further Greek austerity measures, additional loans from EU governments, or by the European Central Bank, which is facing pressure to give up profits on the €40bn in Greek bonds it holds.
A deal is essential to finalising the new Greek bail-out, which must be completed before a €14.4bn bond comes due on March 20 or Greece would become the first developed economy to default in nearly 60 years.
“If the process is not completed successfully, we will be faced with the spectre of bankruptcy that would have grave consequences for society, and especially for the poor,” Lucas Papademos, the Greek prime minister, said after meeting Greek political leaders on Sunday.
EU and International Monetary Fund officials have already presented the Greek government with a 10-page list of “prior actions” Athens must take before being granted the new bail-out. The list, obtained by the Financial Times, includes cutting 150,000 public sector jobs within three years and cutting this year’s budget deficit by a further 1 per cent of economic output.
To get Greece’s debt down to 120 per cent of economic output by 2020, the IMF has insisted more must be done. A senior EU official said that talks which focused on whether European lenders or the ECB would shoulder that burden were now expected to stretch into mid-February.
Eurozone leaders, led by Germany’s Angela Merkel, want Monday’s summit in Brussels to focus on agreeing a new treaty to enshrine fiscal discipline across the bloc. Finance ministry officials will resume talks on Greece later this week.
The German plan, which was circulated on Friday and would also force Greece to pay its debt obligations before spending any money on normal government expenditures, caught Mr Papademos and other eurozone governments by surprise. Officials said it was unlikely to be adopted.
“The Germans have a lot of influence but that goes a little beyond the limits the outer member states could support,” said a senior official involved in the discussions. “If you went with that model you’d do away with the normal democratic decision-making in a member state.”***
-
Written by Roger Hedgecock
Wednesday, 25 January 2012
I live in California . If you were wondering what living in Obama’s second term would be like, wonder no longer. We in California are living there now.
California is a one-party state dominated by a virulent Democrat Left
Enabled by a complicit media where every agency of local, county, and state government is run by and for the public employee unions. The unemployment rate is 12%.
California has more folks on food stamps than any other state, has added so many benefits and higher rates to Medicaid that we call it "Medi-Cal." Our K-12 schools have more administrators than teachers, with smaller classes but lower test scores and higher dropout rates with twice the per-student budget of 15 years ago. Good job, Brownie.
This week, the once and current Gov. Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown had to confess that the "balanced" state budget adopted five months ago was billions in the red because actual tax revenues were billions lower than the airy-fairy revenue estimates on which the balance was
Predicated.
After trimming legislators' perks and reducing the number of cell phones provided to state civil servants, the governor intoned that Drastic budget reductions had already hollowed out state programs for the needy, law enforcement and our schoolchildren. California government needed more money.
Echoing the Occupy movement, the governor proclaimed the rich must pay their fair share. Fair share? The top 1% of California income earners currently pays 50% of the state's income tax.
California has seven income tax brackets. The top income tax rate is
9.3%, which is slapped on the greedy rich earning at least $47,056 a year. Income of more than $1 million pays the "millionaires' and billionaires'" surcharge tax rate of 10.3%.
Brown's proposal would add 2% for income over $250,000. A million- dollar income would then be taxed at 12.3%. And that's just for the state.
Brown also proposed a one-half-cent sales tax increase, which would bring sales taxes (which vary by county) up to 7.75% to as much as10%. Both tax increases would be on the ballot in 2012.
The sales tax increase proposal immediately brought howls of protest from the Left (of Brown!). Charlie Eaton, a sociology grad student at UC Berkeley and leader of the UC Student-Workers Union, said, "We've paid enough. It's time for millionaires to pay."
At least five other ballot measures to raise taxes are circulating for signatures to get on the 2012 ballot in California . The governor's proposals are the most conservative.
The Obama way doesn't end with taxes.
The governor and the state legislature continue to applaud the efforts of the California High Speed Rail Authority to build a train connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco . Even though the budget is three times the voter-approved amount, and the first segment will only connect two small towns in the agricultural Central Valley. But hey, if we build it, they will ride.
And we don't want to turn down the Obama bullet-train bucks Florida and other states rejected because the operating costs would bankrupt them. Can't happen here because we're already insolvent.
If we get into real trouble with the train, we'll just bring in the
Chinese. It worked with the Bay Bridge reconstruction. After the 1989 earthquake, the bridge connecting Oakland and San Francisco was rebuilt with steel made in China . Workers from China too. Paid for with money borrowed from China. Makes perfect sense.
In California, we hate the evil, greedy rich (except the rich in Hollywood, in sports, and in drug dealing). But we love people who have broken into California to eat the bounty created by the productive rich.
Illegals get benefits from various generous welfare programs, free medical care, free schools for their kids, including meals, and of course, instate tuition rates and scholarships too. Nothing's too good for our guests.
To erase even a hint of criticism of illegal immigration, the California Legislature is considering a unilateral state amnesty. Democrat State Assemblyman Felipe Fuentes has proposed an initiative that would bar deportation of illegals from California.
Interesting dilemma for Obama there. If immigration is exclusively a federal matter, and Obama has sued four states for trying to enforce Federal immigration laws he won't enforce, what will the President do to a California law that exempts California from federal immigration law?
California is also near fulfilling the environmentalist dream of de-industrialization.
After driving out the old industrial base (auto and airplane assembly, for example), air and water regulators and tax policies are now Driving out the high-tech, biotech and even Internet-based companies that were supposed to be California 's future.
The California cap-and-trade tax on business in the name of reducing CO2 makes our state the leader in wacky environmentalism and guarantees a further job exodus from the state.
Even green energy companies can't do business in California. Solyndra went under, taking its taxpayer loan guarantee with it.
No job is too small to escape the regulators. The state has even banned weekend amateur gold miners from the historic gold mining streams in the Sierra Nevada Mountains .
In fact, more and more of California’s public land is off-limits to recreation by the people who paid for that land. Unless you're illegal.
Then you can clear the land, set up marijuana plantations at will, bring in fertilizers that legal farmers can no longer use, exploit illegal farm workers who live in hovels with no running water or sanitation, and protect your investment with armed illegals carrying guns no California citizen is allowed to own.
The rest of us only found out about these plantations when the workers’ open campfire started one of those devastating fires that have killed hundreds of people and burned out thousands of homes in California over the last decade.
It's often said that whatever happens in California will soon happen in your state.
You'd better hope that's wrong.
******************************************************
Roger Hedgecock is the former mayor of San Diego and a nationally
syndicated radio talk show host.
-
Overall, I think Brown is doing a good job, given the difficult situation. Taxes are high in CA, but then so are deductions. The rich seem quite happy here.
Yes, Hedgecock lives in CA and is a nationally syndicated conservative radio host. He was even mayor of San Diego once.
Hedgecock to Resign as San Diego Mayor Friday
October 12, 1985|BARRY M. HORSTMAN | Times Staff Writer
SAN DIEGO — Mayor Roger Hedgecock, whose 2 1/2 years at City Hall were marked first by a heady popularity and later by criminal accusations, Friday announced plans to resign as a result of his conviction on 13 felony counts.
City Atty. John W. Witt has said that Hedgecock faced automatic ouster from office on Nov. 6, when he is to be sentenced by Judge William L. Todd Jr. on his conviction last Wednesday by a Superior Court jury of conspiracy and 12 perjury counts, all felonies.
http://articles.latimes.com/1985-10-12/news/mn-14434_1_mayor-roger-hedgecock
-
I must say I differ in my assessment but I must also say I had completely forgotten that about RH!
-
http://news.investors.com/article/604210/201203131827/california-drives-out-more-businesses.htm
States: "You can check out any time you like," the Eagles said of California, "but you can never leave." Somebody forgot to tell businesses. They keep leaving the Golden State in growing numbers.
In 2011, more businesses (254) quit California than the year before (202), which was a high-water mark over 2009 (51). Last year, roughly five businesses left in any given week, one more than left in each week of 2010 when the average was 3.9.
At one time, California was truly the land of opportunity. But the business climate has turned hostile.
According to Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, and John Kabateck, executive director of the National Federation of Independent Businesses, the state's business tax climate is the second worst in the nation. The corporate income tax rate is 8.84%, the highest west of the Mississippi and eighth highest in the country.
California's income tax, which is the tax many small-business owners pay, is the nation's third highest; the 9.3% rate kicks in at $46,349 in annual income for those who file as individuals, and the 10.3% rate applies to income over $1 million a year.
Then there's the highest sales tax (7.25%, plus local levies in some areas) in the country, the fourth-highest capital gains tax (9.3%) and the second-highest gasoline tax (an average of 65 cents a gallon).
There's also the vicious regulatory environment that businesses have to negotiate.
"California's anti-business climate is worse than ever because many politicians are making a career out of treating businesses as an object of scorn vs. a resource to be appreciated," says Joe Vranich, an Orange County relocation expert who tracks business movement out of the state and provided the exit numbers cited above.
Subscribe to the IBD Editorials Podcast
"Hence, we see efforts to increase taxes, regulations, fines and fees on businesses."
The benefit of leaving California is immense. Vranich says businesses save 20% to 40% a year in costs after their out-of-state moves are completed.
One company executive who left told Vranich that "we compete globally and we can't compete with California's costs." Another told him that California "is the worst state in the country to do business in. . .. There doesn't seem be any improvement on the horizon."
-
(http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/files/2009/09/theo3.gif)
http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2012/03/14/and-now-for-news-of-fresh-disaster-california-style/?singlepage=true
Shortly before heading back to New Jersey this past Thursday for a few days, I started rounding up the latest reports of California’s myriad woes. Ready to survey the train wreck? First up, in the Wall Street Journal, Michael J. Boskin and John F. Cogan flip Thomas Friedman’s memorable headline in the New York Times last year on its head. “Can Greeks Become Germans?,” Friedman queried. Boskin and Cogan write that California has become America’s Greece:
The state’s progressive tax-and-spend experiment is broken, threatening basic services, from courts and parks to education and health care for its most vulnerable citizens. Mr. Brown’s tax initiative only exposes the state to an ever more dangerous roller-coaster ride.
No wonder many Silicon Valley CEOs say they won’t expand in California because of high taxes and burdensome regulation. And no wonder net migration has recently reversed, with hundreds of thousands of workers and their families leaving the state in search of better opportunities.
California still ranks first in technology, agriculture and entertainment among the 50 states. But it is near the bottom in business and tax climate and state bond ratings. It’s a complex picture, but at its core is the high-tax welfare state run amok.
Many Americans fear the federal fiscal train wreck will turn us into Greece. But, barring major change, they need look no further than California to see what this future portends. Relying on ever-higher taxes to fund payments to an outsized population of benefit recipients is a recipe for exporting prosperity. That is one California trend that other states emulate at their peril.
Part of California’s woes is that this once more-or-less Red State has devolved into a self-contained world of Blue and Bluer. So much so that, as Victor Davis Hanson asks at NRO, “In California, Whom Will They Blame?”
Here in California, students just marched on Sacramento in outrage that state-subsidized tuition at the UC and CSU campuses keeps climbing. It is true that per-unit tuition costs are rising, despite even greater exploitation of poorly paid part-time teachers and graduate-student TAs. But the protests are sort of surreal. The California legislature is overwhelmingly Democratic. The governor is a Democrat. The faculties and administrative classes are largely Democratic. Who then, in the students’ minds, have established these supposedly unfair budget priorities?
Sales, income, and gas taxes are still among the highest in the nation (and are proposed to rise even higher) — prompting one of the largest out-of-state exoduses of upper-income brackets in the nation. The state budget is pretty much entirely committed to K–12 education (whose state-by-state comparative test scores in math and science hover between 45th and 49th in the nation), prisons, social services, and public-employee salaries and pensions. Whom, then, can the students be angry at?
Are students angry at public-union salaries and pensions that are among the highest in the nation? Do they think the many highly compensated retired Highway patrol officers have shorted students at UC Davis? Are they mad at the 50,000 illegal aliens in the California prison system that might have siphoned off scholarship funds from CSU Monterey Bay? Or is the rub the influx of hundreds of thousands of children of illegal aliens who require all sorts of language remediation and extra instruction in the public schools, and so might in theory divert library funds from UC Santa Cruz?
Perhaps the students don’t want billions to be committed to high-speed rail that might rob Berkeley of needed funding, or environmental efforts to introduce salmon into the San Joaquin River, in which the $70 million spent so far in studies and surveys might have come from nearby CSU Fresno? Are they mad at state social services, whose medical expenses have skyrocketed to address the health-care needs of millions of illegal aliens, and thus in theory could curb the choice of classes at CSU Stanislaus? Are they angry that some $10–15 billion a year probably leaves the state as remittances to Mexico?
If one cannot blame the wealthy for “not paying their fair share” (the top 1 percent of Californians now pay about 37 percent of all income-tax revenue — and their numbers have decreased by one-third in recent years, as the state has come to rely on the income tax for half its revenue), or Republican majorities in government, who, then, is left to blame?
But then, that’s been the problem with the Occumutants from the start, and not just in California: they loathe Wall Street — which supported Obama in 2008 and formed his fiscal brain trust. They loathe their student loans — and yet the university system is as blue as it gets. And they themselves can’t or won’t protest President Obama, making themselves the first protest fighting for the establishment status quo.
**Read it all.
-
Good talking point in there about how the Dems are in charge of everything-- the Dems are so cranial-rectal interface that they fuct up California!!!
-
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/13/exodus-california-tax-revenue-plunges-by-22
Exodus: California Tax Revenue Plunges by 22%
by Chriss W. Street
State Controller John Chaing continues to uphold the California Great Seal Motto of “Eureka”, i.e., 'I have found it'. But what Chaing is finding as Controller is that California’s economy as measured by tax revenues is still tanking. Compared to last year, State tax collections for February shriveled by $1.2 billion or 22%. The deterioration is more than double the shocking $535 million reported decline for last month. The cumulative fiscal year decline is $6.1 billion or down 11% versus this period in 2011.
While California Governor Brown promises strong economic growth is just around the corner, Chaing proves that the best way for Sacramento politicians to hurt the economy and thereby generate lower tax revenue, is to have the highest tax rates in the nation.
California politicians seem delusional in their continued delusion that high taxes have not savaged the State’s economy. Each month’s disappointment is written off as due to some one-time event.
The State Controller’s office did acknowledge that higher than normal tax refunds for February might have reduced the collection of some personal income taxes. Given that 2012 has an extra day in February for leap year, there might have been one day more of tax refunds sent out. But the Controller’s report shows personal income tax collections fell by $325 million, or 16% versus last year. Furthermore, leap year would have added another day for retail sales and use tax collection, but those revenues also fell during February-by an even larger $813 million, 25% decline from 2011.
The more likely reason tax collections continue falling is that businesses and successful people are leaving California for the better tax rates available in more pro-business states.
**Read it all.
-
GM, It is interesting that they have the highest marginal rates in the nation and yet revenues are tanking, but stay tuned. Rapid economic growth is right around the corner... lol.
We heard the opposing view expressed that tax rates and over-regulation at the margin do not have a noticeable on economic activity or growth. (I asked for data to back up that view - it should be coming shortly. :wink:
The rich simply use the higher rate to calculate their new tax bill and have no interest, motive or option of altering their behavior, to either invest less or invest elsewhere. That view unfortunately requires a complete denial of the definition of what it means to be rich.
One of the economists used to track the one-way, UHaul, medium sized truck price movement index to estimate the speed of assets leaving California.
The economic loss of once-great Calif to the rest of this nation is not like Europe losing Greece.
-
The economic loss of once-great Calif to the rest of this nation is not like Europe losing Greece.
Very good point. Havinging Germany turn into Greece is more like it, which in the long run, Germany will, due to demographics.
-
"We heard the opposing view expressed that tax rates and over-regulation at the margin do not have a noticeable on economic activity or growth. (I asked for data to back up that view - it should be coming shortly."
JDN should have it any day now....
Pay no attention to the economy crumbling around us, we just need to raise taxes a bit more and it'll all be unicorns and rainbows, and great government healthcare for everyone!
-
It's hard to believe now, but Jerry Brown once ran for President as a reformer who favored a flat tax with a 13% top federal rate. That was 1992. Nowadays in his second stint as Governor, he's running to give California alone a higher top income-tax rate.
The incredible shifting Governor recently agreed to adjust his November ballot initiative to include an even higher top tax rate. Previously he favored an increase to 12.3% from 10.3% today. But the government-unions that live off tax revenues had threatened to sponsor their own ballot measure raising the top rate even higher.
The Governor feared that divided support might doom both. So he and the unions agreed to back only one initiative with a top rate of 13.3%. The measure would also raise the state sales tax by a quarter of a percentage point to 7.5%, or more than 9% including the sales tax in some cities. Oh, and instead of lasting five years, the income-tax increase would last for seven.
All of this is said to be necessary to balance a $9.2 billion budget deficit. So what else is new? Mr. Brown expects about $9 billion in added revenue, up from $7 billion in his first package. But the state Legislative Analyst's Office has already told Mr. Brown that he's hallucinating to think he can get that much money from a corner of the taxpayer base.
The top 1% in California pay between one third and half of all state income tax revenues, depending on the condition of the economy. California already has the fourth highest income tax in the nation, behind Hawaii and Oregon at 11% and New York City at nearly 13%. The national average for the top income tax rate is under 6%. Nine states have no income tax.
So for the privilege of living in California, a millionaire would pay close to $125,000 a year more in income tax than someone in Nevada, Texas or Florida. A Californian earning $10 million would pay an extra $1 million or more than if she moved to a state without an income tax, or nearly $500,000 than an average tax state.
Even Mr. Brown, in one of his saner moments earlier this year, said that relying on millionaires to pay the bills causes "more volatility" in revenue collections, which has meant "a more or less constant state" of deficits. He was right. Capital gains collections collapsed to $734 million in 2009-10 from $1.6 billion in the boom years. So why would Mr. Brown make that problem worse?
One of the last states to have a tax rate as high as California is proposing was Delaware in the 1970s. Its rate hit 19.8%. Then-Governor Pete du Pont cut the rate to 10.3% in 1979 and later to 5.95%, and after five years the state's revenues had nearly doubled and its credit rating went from the worst to one of the best.
None of these facts matter to Mr. Brown or his allies because the tax increase is simply about the political power to deliver money to the interests that live off government. Mr. Brown's budget raises spending in 2013 by 7% and by roughly 5% on average over the next four years. Every dollar of higher taxes is accompanied by roughly a dollar increase in spending. If the revenues don't materialize as promised from this tax increase, they'll raise taxes again—and again, and . . . .
California voters will have to decide whether to ratify this welfare-state redistribution one more time, or finally force the state to confront the limits of tax and spend politics.
-
Good grief GM where have you been? Then again, you probably figured out most of us in CA already have Mad Cow disease so what's the big deal huh? :-)
Haven't you been saying this all along about us?
"In people, symptoms of the disease include psychiatric and behavioral changes, movement deficits, memory disturbances and cognitive impairments."
:-)
http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/24/health/california-mad-cow/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
-
At a restaurant a husband committed the faux pax of ordering for himself before his wife. He ordered steak. Then he saw his wife's irritated glare.
The waiter asked, "Aren't you worried about Mad Cow?"
"Nah, she can order for herself."
And then the fight started , , ,
-
It would a long way to explaining things......
Good grief GM where have you been? Then again, you probably figured out most of us in CA already have Mad Cow disease so what's the big deal huh? :-)
Haven't you been saying this all along about us?
"In people, symptoms of the disease include psychiatric and behavioral changes, movement deficits, memory disturbances and cognitive impairments."
:-)
http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/24/health/california-mad-cow/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
-
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/04/27/as-california-collapses-obama-follows-its-lead.html
As California Collapses, Obama Follows Its Lead
Apr 27, 2012 4:45 AM EDT
California’s slow-motion tragedy could end up as a national one, warns Joel Kotkin.
Barack Obama learned the rough sport of politics in Chicago, but his domestic policies have been shaped by California’s progressive creed. As the Golden State crumbles, its troubles point to those America may confront in a second Obama term.
From his first days in office, the president has held up California as a model state. In 2009, he praised its green-tinged energy policies as a blueprint for the nation. He staffed his administration with Californians like Energy Secretary Steve Chu—an open advocate of high energy prices who’s lavished government funding on “green” dodos like solar-panel maker Solyndra, and luxury electric carmaker Fisker—and Commerce Secretary John Bryson, who thrived as CEO of a regulated utility which raised energy costs for millions of consumers, sometimes to finance “green” ideals.
Obama regularly asserts that green jobs will play a crucial role in the future of the American economy, but California, a trend-setter in the field, has yet to reap such benefits. Green jobs, broadly defined, make up only about 2 percent of jobs in the state—about the same proportion as in Texas. In Silicon Valley, the number of green jobs actually declined between 2003 and 2010. Meanwhile, California’s unemployment rate of 10.9 percent is the nation’s third highest, behind only Nevada and Rhode Island.
When Governor Jerry Brown predicted a half-million green jobs by the end of the decade, even The New York Times deemed it “a pipe dream.”
President Barack Obama speaks at the University of Iowa Field House, Wednesday, April 25, 2012, in Iowa City, Iowa. , Charlie Neibergall / AP Photo
Obama’s push to nationalize many of California’s economy-stifling green policies has been slowed down, first by the Republican resurgence in 2010 and then by his reelection considerations. But California’s politicians, living in what’s become essentially a one-party state, have doubled down on green orthodoxy. As the president at least tries to cover his flank by claiming to support an “all-in” energy policy, California has simply refused to exploit much of its massive oil and gas resources.
Does this matter? Well, Texas has created 200,000 oil and gas jobs over the past decade; California has barely added 20,000. The state’s remaining energy producers have been slowing down as the regulatory environment becomes ever more hostile even as producers elsewhere, including in rustbelt states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, ramp up. The oil and gas jobs the Golden State political class shuns pay around $100,000 a year on average.
“
When Governor Jerry Brown predicted a half-million green jobs by the end of the decade, even The New York Times deemed it “a pipe dream.”
”
Instead, California has forged ahead with ever-more extreme renewable energy mandates that have resulted in energy costs roughly 50 percent above the national average and expected to rise substantially from there. This tends to drive out manufacturing and other largely blue-collar energy users.
Over the past decade the Golden State has grown its middle-skilled jobs (those that require two years or more of post-secondary education) by a mere 2 percent compared to a 5.3 percent increase nationwide, and almost 15 percent in Texas. Even in the science-technology-engineering and mathematics field, where California has long been a national leader, the state has lost its edge, growing just 1.7 percent over the past 10 years compared to 5.4 percent nationally and 14 percent in Texas.
A recent Public Policy of California study shows that since the recession, the gap between rich and poor has widened more in California than in the rest of the nation. Lower-income workers have seen their wages drop more precipitously than those of the affluent. And the middle class is proportionately smaller and has shrunk more than elsewhere. Adjusted for cost of living, it stands at 47.9 percent in California compared to nearly 55 percent for the rest of the country.
Meantime, many Californians have been departing for more affordable states, with a net loss of four million residents to other states over the past 20 years (while continuing, of course, to attract immigrants.) Of those who remain, nearly two-in-five Californians pay no income tax, and one in four receive Medicaid.
There are some people are prospering in California, including many of the affluent supporters who Obama courts on his frequent fundraising forays here. Tenure-protected academics from the University of California constitute his third-largest donor base, while Google ranks fifth and Stanford twelfth, according to Open Secrets.
Silicon Valley may emerge as the biggest source of campaign cash for Obama and the Democrats in the years ahead. After losing 18 percent of its jobs earlier in the decade, the Valley has resurged, along with Wall Street, aided by the cheap-money-for-the-rich policies of Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. But while California’s high-tech job growth, largely in software, has been significant, the rate of increase has been less than half that of key competitors such as Utah, Washington, and Michigan.
The IPO-lottery, Hollywood, and inherited-wealth crowds can afford the state’s sky-high costs, especially along the coast, but most California businesses can’t. Under Brown and his even less well-informed predecessor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, the official mantra has been that the state’s “creative” entrepreneurs would trigger a state revival. This is very much the hope of the administration, which trots out companies like Facebook, Apple, and Google as exemplars of the American future. “No part of America better represents America than here,” the president told a crowd at the Computer History Museum in Mountain View last fall.
Yet Silicon Valley represents just a relatively small part of the state’s economic base. Although the Valley—particularly the Cupertino to San Francisco strip—has recovered from the 2008 market meltdown, unemployment in the blue-collar city of San Jose hovers around 10 percent. The Oakland area, just across the Bay, ranked 63rd out of 65 major metropolitan in terms of employment trends, trailing even Detroit according to a recent analysis done by Pepperdine University economist Michael Shires. Other major California metros, including Los Angeles, Orange County, Riverside-San Bernardino, and Sacramento all ranked near the bottom.
The newer companies that can afford the sky-high costs of coastal California, and can pay their employees adequately to do the same—places like Google, Apple, Facebook, and Twitter—employ relatively few people compared to older, manufacturing-oriented technology firms such as Hewlett-Packard and Intel. While cherry picking highly educated professionals, the new firms create few local support positions that would spread some of the wealth. What middle-income jobs they do create tend to be located in lower-cost, more business-friendly American cities like Salt Lake City or Austin, or, increasingly, overseas.
Elite institutions like Stanford still thrive, but the state’s once-great educational system is creaking under reduced funding, massive bureaucracy, and skyrocketing pensions. Once among the best-educated Americans, Californians are rapidly becoming less so. Among people over 64, California stands second in percentage of people with an associate degree or higher; among those aged 25 to 34, it ranks 30th.
For devoted Californians, accustomed to seeing their state as a national and global exemplar, these trends are deeply disturbing. Yet the key power groups in the state—greens, public employees, and rent-seeking developers—seem intent on imposing ever more draconian regulations on energy and land use, seeking for example, to ban construction of the single-family houses preferred by the vast majority of Californians.
The increasingly delusional nature of the state’s politics is best captured by the urgent political push to build a fantastically expensive—potentially costing as much as $100 billion—high-speed rail line that would eventually connect the Bay Area, Los Angeles and the largely rural places in between. Obama has aggressively promoted high-speed rail nationally, but has been pushed back by mounting Republican opposition. Yet in one-party California, Jerry Brown mindlessly pushes the project despite the state’s huge structural deficits, soaring pension obligations, and decaying general infrastructure. He’s continued doing so even as the plan loses support among the beleaguered California electorate.
It’s hard to see how these policies, coupled with a massive income tax increase on the so-called rich (families, as well as many small businesses, making over $250,000), can do anything other than widen the state’s already gaping class divide. Yet given the power of Californian ideas over Obama, one can expect more such policies from him in an electorally unencumbered second term. California’s slow-motion tragedy could end up as a national one.
Like The Daily Beast on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for updates all day long.
Joel Kotkin is a Presidential Fellow in Urban Futures at Chapman University and a contributing editor to the City Journal.
For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.
-
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/04/30/california-by-the-numbers/
California by the numbers
posted at 4:04 pm on April 30, 2012 by J.E. Dyer
The weekend produced a spate of dang-this-is-bad articles on the economic situation in California. Steven Greenhut’s for the Orange County Register is entitled “California to middle class: drop dead.” At The Daily Beast, Joel Kotkin laments that “As California Collapses, Obama Follows its Lead.” (H/t – and a “Read it, people!” shout-out – to Ed Driscoll at PJM.)
But what does all this look like in terms of numbers? What’s the how much and where and whom of the Golden State collapse? Perhaps the most interesting and telling thing is that it really is as bad as it looks. And the reasons are pretty much what you’d expect. Here’s the California story, in numbers.
According to a March 2012 report, 855,000 is how many private-sector jobs California has lost since the recession started four years ago. (H/t: California Political News & Views.) The state today enjoys an unemployment rate of 11%, compared with the official national average of 8.3%
Texas, by contrast, has added 139,800 jobs, posting the biggest absolute gain among the 50 states. (California’s is the biggest absolute loss.) Texas’ unemployment rate is 7.1%. Number 3 on the job-growth list? The District of Columbia, with 21,000 added private-sector jobs. Government is big business.
But we were talking about California. How does California rank in terms of the average state and local tax burden? According to the Tax Foundation, in 2009, California had the 6th heaviest tax burden in the nation, at 10.6%. (New Jersey was #1, followed by New York at #2.) That’s the in-state tax burden, of course. Federal taxes are on top of that.
Of course, business climate comprises more than the average individual tax burden. The Tax Foundation looks at five forms of taxation – corporate tax, individual income tax, sales tax, property tax, and unemployment insurance tax – to index the business climates of the 50 states. By this combined measure, the Tax Foundation ranks California 48th in business climate. (New York is 49th, and New Jersey 50th.)
State regulatory environment? George Mason University’s Mercatus Center ranks the Golden State 48th in the nation. New Jersey and New York are numbers 49 and 50, respectively.
How about other business costs? California had the 5th highest state premium ranking for worker compensation insurance costs in 2010 (although the state’s position improved slightly in 2011 due to other states raising their state premiums).
California ranks 7th highest in electric utility costs, with Hawaii being the highest, followed by Connecticut and Alaska.
According to the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council, California has the third-highest per-gallon gasoline tax (Connecticut and New York are #1 and #2) and by far the highest tax on diesel, at 52.5 cents per gallon. (Some numbers below also come from the SB&EC report.)
California perennially has the second-highest gasoline prices at the pump (Hawaii is #1), although the state has regularly been ranked 3rd or 4th in oil production in recent years. (In the past week the statewide average was $4.15 for a gallon of regular, down from $4.36 a month ago.) In spite of having the third largest oil and gas reserves of any state in the nation, California is ranked dead last among all US jurisdictions for global oil investment. The fact that California hasn’t issued a new offshore drilling permit for over 30 years is undoubtedly a factor, as is the fact that the Monterey Shale Oil Field, which holds 64% of all the recoverable shale oil in the United States, is hamstrung by lawsuits, a typical condition in the state for both drilling and refining operations.
In spite of the state’s natural bounty, California produces only 37% of its statewide oil consumption. The rest comes from other states and countries, at added expense.
In terms of the employer burden of health-insurance mandates, California is 9th among the 50 states and the District of Columbia. (Rhode Island, Maryland, and Minnesota have the highest burdens.)
Meanwhile, California ranks 4th highest in state and local government spending per capita. The District of Columbia is the highest, followed by Alaska, Wyoming, and New York.
Ah, yes, state spending. California has by far the largest debt of any US state, at around $612 billion with state and local debt and pension liabilities included. In terms of raw numbers, New York posts a pathetic second place with only $305 billion. The size of California’s population allows the Golden State to slip to only 7th place in terms of per capita state and local debt. The District of Columbia walks off with another prize in this category, having on the books 85% more debt per capita than the 50-state average.
The California debt spiral is due in part to the steep decline in state tax revenues. The 22% year-on-year decline observed in February 2012 doesn’t tell the whole story either; California had already posted dramatic revenue losses in business and property taxes between 2007 and 2010. Business-tax revenues dropped 18% in that period, and property-tax revenues fell 30% due to the real estate market crash.
Let’s talk population trends. Many readers are familiar with the arresting Golden State statistics cited by a Wall Street Journal article in March:
From the mid-1980s to 2005, California’s population grew by 10 million, while Medicaid recipients soared by seven million; tax filers paying income taxes rose by just 150,000; and the prison population swelled by 115,000.
The net gain in tax filers includes the author: I was added as a tax-paying filer to the California income tax rolls in 2004. Apparently there are another 149,999 of us, and I’m thinking we need a T-shirt. (And yes, alert readers, I understand that this was a net gain, reflecting both additions to and subtractions from the tax rolls over time. Just having some fun with these sad little numbers.)
California also has the distinction of having 12% of the US population and 33% of the nation’s welfare recipients. Governor Jerry’s Brown’s 2012-13 budget proposal includes $100 billion for health and human services, which, on an annualized basis, is more than all the state and local spending in 27 of the 50 states.
In California, meanwhile, the tax code is steeply progressive. Prior to the recession, the state got 45% of its income tax revenues from the top 1% of filers. As the Wall Street Journal pointed out last year, the incomes of filers in that top 1% — which in California starts at $490,000 – are more volatile than the incomes of other filers. California, New York, Connecticut, and Illinois are some of the states most dependent for revenue on the top 1%, and they have opened up the biggest state deficits during the recession.
How many businesses are leaving California? In 2011, 254 businesses left California, or an average of 5 per week. 202 left in 2010, 51 in 2009. Even “green” businesses are leaving California. The business environment is that overregulated, and costs are that high. A business saves, on average, between 20% and 40% on costs by moving out of California. (Even the lower figure is astounding for a move within the same nation.)
But according to a 2011 report, 2500 employers ceased operations in California between 2007 and 2011. The great majority of them simply went out of business. (I can certainly vouch for the observability of that trend in my area of Southern California. Besides small businesses closing – I can’t seem to keep a dry cleaner for longer than 6 months – we’ve had a number of big chain businesses pull out, leaving gigantic empty stores and parking lots. The last time I stocked up on household supplies at the local Wal-Mart, there were no greeters at the doors. An ominous portent.) How did California’s real GDP growth rank in 2011? 34th in the United States.
As of January 2012, which state had the highest average mortgage debt per household? California, with $313,000. California has had the second highest foreclosure rate of any state throughout the recession (Nevada has the highest). In terms of the state’s percentage of underwater mortgages, California ranks only 6th (Nevada, again, is #1). But that’s a little deceiving, since the value of the underwater mortgages in California is over $544 billion. That sum represents nearly 30% of total mortgage debt in California, which is $1.94 trillion – or 22% of all mortgage debt in the United States.
Well, but which state had the highest tuition hike for its state university system in 2011? That would be California, with a tuition jump of 21%. (This hike mitigated somewhat the advantage of in-state tuition for those here illegally, which California offers along with 11 other states.)
Oh, and California has far and away the most endangered animal species, with 111. No other state comes close. Hawaii has California beat on endangered plant species, however, with 273 to the Golden State’s 178.
J.E. Dyer’s articles have appeared at The Green Room, Commentary’s “contentions,” Patheos, The Weekly Standard online, and her own blog, The Optimistic Conservative.
-
California is the 8th largest economy in the World. Figure it out; CA is and will always do fine, especially if you have a little money. As for innovation, well that's CA too.
We have a climate that is unmatched. Our ports are gateways to Asia. Etc.
I'm not concerned.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_California
-
Complete denial of a problem?
Didn't they use to be the 5th largest economy in the world? 1984-1985. Now smaller than Italy.
http://econpost.com/californiaeconomy/california-economy-ranking-among-world-economies
Amassing a small fortune. By starting with a large one.
-
JDN:
For those stilling living in the remaining sweet spots, that may be so, but I find it hard to be sanguine about the state as a whole.
Indeed, but for the unique role of LA in martial arts my family and I would be out of here.
indeed
-
JDN:
For those stilling living in the remaining sweet spots, that may be so, but I find it hard to be sanguine about the state as a whole.
Indeed, but for the unique role of LA in martial arts my family and I would be out of here.
Yes, I agree, it is difficult to always be cheerful about this states future. We do have our problems. That said, in some ways I am glad so many are leaving. The successful
usually don't leave.
"California's population growth has slowed dramatically over the past several years, meaning the state likely won't reach 50 million residents until 2046 -- 14 years later than previously expected, according to a USC study released Tuesday.
Researchers said the slow-down in population growth should be viewed as a positive sign by policy-makers struggling to balance budgets.
"This is surely good news for local governments and taxpayers who are struggling to keep up with the costs of growth," according to study co-author Dowell Myers, professor of urban planning and democracy at the USC Price School of Public Policy. "These projections suggest there is more time to plan a much better future for California."
According to the study, the reduced growth rate is largely caused by slowing immigration rates. Researchers found that the percentage of Californians who were born out of the country is expected to remain at 27 percent through 2030. That's an abrupt change from the 1980s and 1990s, when the rate was increasing sharply, the report found."
As you run along the sand dunes watching the sunset over the ocean, ask yourself where you would be more happy.
We lead the nation in so many areas. I can't think of another place in America that I would rather live than California.
-
JDN writes,
"Yes, I agree, it is difficult to always be cheerful about this states future. We do have our problems. That said, in some ways I am glad so many are leaving."
I recall reading in the Economist that if California stopped every government service they offer the debt is so large in wouldn't evn make a dent.
JDN's post is a certainly proof that socialism/liberalism/progressive or what ever label they want to call themselves to hide who they are is a disease. A cancer without end. Not you personally JDN , but your politics.
Don't worry be happy. The rich can pay for all of us.
-
Without a doubt California is a beautiful place and JDN's pride is a positive thing. It is more than a coastline but plenty of the rest is beautiful and abundant too. Plenty of human assets with great universities and historically great businesses. As CCP suggests, the point of the criticism is that it is a very badly governed place and more than a warning to the rest of us. So bad that a moderate Republican couldn't turn the corner, nor now can a moderate Dem. Like CCP says, the spending is so large and out of control there is no faucet any more for lawmakers to even slow the spending.
Personally I don't understand how leaving future voters and taxpayers to pay legacy costs of past workers work in the form of pensions and healthcare passes any test of consent of the governed.
The migration out is huge phenomenon. JDN argues that the successful are the ones staying. I don't believe that but if true, look at what problems they are exporting to the other 49.
Victor Davis Hanson often writes interesting personal stories from living on a family farm in one of California's poorest areas in the country http://www.fresnobee.com/2008/08/26/824848/valley-counties-still-rank-among.html to commuting to Stanford in one of the world's richest areas. VDH blog: http://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/
This excerpt is from a post about Europe:
Munich and Athens in California February 12th, 2012
"I drive each week from one of the poorest areas in the U.S. to one of the wealthiest. A man from Mars after walking in west Selma and then downtown Menlo Park could tell you exactly why the gap is not three hours, but more like three centuries. One-quarter mile from my house about 30 people live in wrecked trailers behind a farmhouse with an assortment of barn animals wandering about the premises; about 100 yards from my tiny studio apartment in Palo Alto, Facebook zillionaires bid upwards of $2 million for a tiny house worth about $70,000 in Fresno.
But both these extremes at least share common laws — in theory a common language, the same constitution, and an identical popular culture. In contrast, when I go from the Peloponnese to the Rhine I see about the same vast economic divide, but one in which different histories, languages, cultures, and ethnicities acerbate — not mitigate — the gulf. In fact, if I were to dream up a way of having central, rural California go to war against the wealthier coastal strip from San Diego to San Francisco, I would simply have them first craft a EU-like arrangement for a few years."
-
"in some ways I am glad so many are leaving. The successful usually don't leave."
Certainly the one percent have good reason to stay-- CA itself is an awesome place-- and many are leaving due to lack of success.
That said, and I think this a central point, many of the successful are leaving as well. Indeed, the ratio of the successful to those on the dole I think must be declining rather sharply, though off the top of my head no citations come to mind.
As for me, I would much rather stay-- but the high unemployment rate and the closely related decline in discretionary income with its attendant decline in discretionary spending-- which unfortunately for me is how most wives see martial arts-- are really hitting the portion of my income based upon local spending.
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/03/us/change-in-lapd-policy-has-immigrants-hoping-for-more.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120503
LOS ANGELES — The weekend checkpoints set up along intersections here were always meant to catch those who had had too much to drink. In an operation intended to be equal parts deterrent and enforcement, the police would stop every car, testing drivers suspected of being under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
A driver being detained in 2010 for not having a license in San Jose, where an impound policy is less strict than in many cities.
But for years, advocacy groups have complained that the checkpoints unfairly targeted illegal immigrants, who cannot get driver’s licenses, ensnaring far more unlicensed drivers than drunken ones. And in March, the Los Angeles Police Department decided that it would no longer automatically impound the vehicles of drivers without licenses.
The change was a significant shift here in the country’s second-largest city, home to thousands of illegal immigrants who, like many other residents, see driving as the only viable way to move around a sprawling metropolitan area larger than Delaware and Rhode Island combined. And it is in marked contrast to debates in other places around the country where local governments are cracking down harder on illegal immigrants living within their borders.
cont.
-
Wisconsin Recall Amnesia WSJ excerpt:( Subscribe half price at http://wallstreetsubscriptionsoffer.com/)
Why aren't Democrats running against Scott Walker's union reforms?
Remember the Greek-style protests in Madison, the union sit-ins, the lawmakers who fled to Illinois to avoid voting on Scott Walker's collective-bargaining law last year? Now that the recall election of Mr. Walker is in full swing, Big Labor must be wondering where the outrage went.
Since last summer, unions have been throwing millions at defeating the man who reformed collective bargaining for government workers and required union members to pay 5.8% of their paychecks toward pensions and 12.6% of their health insurance premiums, modest contributions compared to the average in private business. As the May 8 Democratic recall primary nears to determine who will run against Mr. Walker on June 5, this should be their rhetorical moment ne plus ultra.
So, let's see. Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, the front-runner, has focused his campaigns on jobs, education, the environment and "making communities safer." One of Mr. Barrett's ads singles out "Walker's War on Women," with nary a mention of collective bargaining. Former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk is heavily supported by union groups, but even her issues list makes only passing reference to collective bargaining.
No wonder. Since Mr. Walker's reforms went into effect, the doom and gloom scenarios have failed to materialize. Property taxes in the state were down 0.4% in 2011, the first decline since 1998. According to Chief Executive magazine, Wisconsin moved up four more places this year to number 20 in an annual CEO survey of the best states to do business, after jumping 17 spots last year.
The Governor's office has estimated that altogether the reforms have saved Badger State taxpayers more than $1 billion, including $65 million in changes in health-care plans, and some $543 million in local savings documented by media reports. According to the Wisconsin-based MacIver Institute, Mayor Barrett's city of Milwaukee saved $19 million on health-care costs as a direct result of Mr. Walker's reforms. Awkward turtle.
Some of the good news has been in the schools, because districts have been able to avoid teacher layoffs and make ends meet because of flexibility created by the changes. In the Brown Deer school district, savings created by pension and health-care contributions from employees allowed the school to prevent layoffs and save some $800,000 for taxpayers.
In Fond du Lac, school board president Eric Everson says the district saved $4 million as a result of last year's reforms, including $2 million from the changes in employee contributions to their pensions.
Another 52 schools across the state saved an average of $220 per student thanks to the ability to introduce competitive bidding for health insurance, rather than automatically going through WEA Trust, the favored provider of the Wisconsin Education Association Council. If the savings are even half as large as the Governor's surveys indicate, they are still enormous.
All of this is making an impression on Wisconsin voters. According to a Marquette University Law School poll released Wednesday, only 12% of Wisconsin voters say "restoring collective bargaining rights" is their priority, which explains the Democratic decision to fight on other issues.
...
Mr. Walker's reforms were a modest but necessary response to the state's fiscal problems, and the proof is in the emerging results. The union reaction was so ferocious because the reforms reduced Big Labor's clout over state and local taxpayers and thus its ability to milk taxpayers year after year without challenge.
Democrats and unions will still do all they can to recall Mr. Walker to prove to would-be reformers nationwide that unions can't be crossed. But it speaks volumes that Democrats are running on everything except their real goal—which is to restore the political dominance of government unions.
-
As a former Wisconsinite I don't disapprove of what Walker did, it's how he did it. What happened to the sanctity of a contract? Further his hypocrisy not to include the Fire and Police because their Unions voted for Walker also seems wrong.
That said CA needs to do something about it's public unions. The waste and fat is beginning to smell.
-
My daughter told me this morning that she hopes we will be able to stay in CA. She likes being able to go to the beach every day in the summer. So likes being able to ride horses 2x a week 20 minutes away, etc.
-
There is a LOT to be said for CA. I would never move especially the older I get.
-
"My daughter told me this morning that she hopes we will be able to stay in CA."
There are other beaches and plenty of places to keep horses, but it is very hard to pack up and move kids away from their friends depending on their age and other factors.
-
I take the liberty of moving PC's post in Liberal Fascism thread to here:
===============
Woof,
Socialism has scored yet another milestone in it's bid to destroy America.
California's budget deficit has swelled to a projected $16 billion — much larger than had been predicted just months ago — and will force severe cuts to schools and public safety if voters fail to approve tax increases in November, Gov. Jerry Brown said Saturday.
The Democratic governor said the shortfall grew from $9.2 billion in January in part because tax collections have not come in as high as expected and the economy isn't growing as fast as hoped for. The deficit has also risen because lawsuits and federal requirements have blocked billions of dollars in state cuts.
"This means we will have to go much farther and make cuts far greater than I asked for at the beginning of the year," Brown said in an online video. "But we can't fill this hole with cuts alone without doing severe damage to our schools. That's why I'm bypassing the gridlock and asking you, the people of California, to approve a plan that avoids cuts to schools and public safety."
Brown did not release details of the newly calculated deficit Saturday, but he is expected to lay out a revised spending plan Monday. The new plan for the fiscal year that starts July 1 hinges in large part on voters approving higher taxes.
The governor has said those tax increases are needed to help pull the state out of a crippling decade shaped by the collapse of the housing market and recession. Without them, he warned, public schools and colleges, and public safety, will suffer deeper cuts.
"What I'm proposing is not a panacea, but it goes a long way toward cleaning up the state's budget mess," Brown said.
Democrats, who control the Legislature, have resisted Brown's proposed cuts so far this year. Republican lawmakers criticized the majority party for building in overly optimistic tax revenues.
"Today's news underscores how we must rein in spending and let our economy grow by leaving overburdened taxpayers alone," said Assembly Republican leader Connie Conway in a statement.
The governor pursued a ballot initiative because Republican lawmakers would not provide the votes needed to reach the two-thirds legislative majority required to raise taxes.
Assembly Speaker John Perez, D-Los Angeles, acknowledged that lawmakers have "limited and difficult choices left to solve the deficit." Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, said he wasn't surprised by the deficit spike given that state tax revenue have fallen $3.5 billion below projections in the current year.
"We will deal with it," Steinberg said Saturday. "And we know that more cuts are inevitable but we will do our very, very best to save more than we lose, especially for those in need."
Under Brown's tax plan, California would temporarily raise the state's sales tax by a quarter-cent and increase the income tax on people who make $250,000 or more. Brown is projecting his tax initiative would raise as much as $9 billion, but a review by the nonpartisan analyst's office estimates revenue of $6.8 billion in fiscal year 2012-13.
Supporters of the "Schools and Local Public Safety Protection Act of 2012" say the additional revenue would help maintain current funding levels for public schools and colleges and pay for programs that benefit seniors and low-income families. It also would provide local governments with a constitutional guarantee of funding to comply with a new state law that shifts lower-level offenders from state prisons to county jails.
A second tax hike headed for the November ballot is being promoted by Los Angeles civil rights attorney Molly Munger, whose initiative would raise income taxes on a sliding scale for nearly all wage-earners to help fund schools.
Anti-tax groups and Republican lawmakers say both tax increases will hurt California's economic recovery. State GOP Chairman Tom Del Beccaro has embarked on a statewide campaign to discuss alternatives to Brown's tax hikes.
The governor is expected to propose a contingency plan with a list of unpopular cuts that would kick in automatically if voters reject tax hikes this fall. In January, he said they would result in a K-12 school year shortened by up to three weeks, higher college tuition fees and reduced funding for courts.
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
P.C.
-
For residents of this U.S. state, things just got a whole lot worse
Monday, May 14, 2012
From The Economic Collapse:
Why does the state of California seem to be so incredibly hopeless? These days, California can't seem to do anything right, and if you live in California, things just got a whole lot worse.
Governor Brown has announced that the state budget deficit for this year is going to be much larger than projected, that more government services are going to be cut, and that voters are going to vote on another round of tax increases in November.
Meanwhile, unemployment is sitting at 11 percent and extended federal unemployment benefits for workers in the state are ending. Because California is one of the worst places in the nation to conduct business, there has been a steady flow of companies leaving the state. Those companies have taken a whole lot of good jobs with them.
Due to the lack of jobs and a steady stream of impoverished immigrants coming in from Mexico and other countries, poverty in the state has exploded and crime is rapidly increasing. California may be the land of "endless sunshine," but for the California economy, there are only dark clouds on the horizon. The state is coming apart at the seams, and there is not much hope that things are going to turn around any time soon.
These days, California is very similar to Greece in many ways...
Read full article...
More on California:
Sixteen reasons to get out of this popular state immediately
Outrageous report shows California is desperate for cash any way it can get it
Wall Street Journal op-ed: California is making the same insane mistakes as Greece
-
second post of day
Allysia Finley writing May 15 in the Journal's online Political Diary:
California Gov. Jerry Brown's revised 94-page budget isn't exactly a scintillating read, but literati might appreciate its irony. Just take the governor's narrative explaining why his January revenue forecast was $4.3 billion off the mark.
While overall personal income tax collections have increased modestly, capital gains revenues are down by 5% (after growing by 92% in 2010), and corporate returns have fallen by 14% over the past year. That's "atypical," the budget notes, because capital gains usually only slip in recessions, and national corporate profits are growing smartly. Mr. Brown, a Democrat, attributes the economic aberration to a "sudden and unexpected increase in the use of tax credits."
Of course, what he really means is that corporations are exploiting loopholes that legislators have carved out for their favored industries (solar being the biggest). Many businesses wouldn't play in California otherwise. High-income individuals, meanwhile, are likely seeking shelter from the state's confiscatory tax regime, which takes 10.3% of every dollar they earn. That could be in Texas or tax-exempt investments.
-
From the deficit crisis and the Christy Brown comparison and comments that Calif is different on 'Decline, Fall, and Resurrection of America' and discussions that we should be having about Scott Walker's reforms in Wisconsin, the question I would pose to JDN and all California centrists is: what should Calif be doing to fix itself?
What spending should be cut if any, what spending should be off the table. What rates should your property be taxed at. What income tax changes would actually bring in more money instead of chasing it away. Which regulations are excessive and ripe for repeal? What reforms should voters support and their representatives enact?
----
It's an easy question for conservatives (spend less, make the taxes and rules friendly again to business and wealth creation), but Calif is not populated with conservatives. To me it all comes down to basic principles of governance. You cannot control spending while you operate in an environment where most voters think that costs will be borne by someone else.
Passing it all on to the next generation only works if you close the exits.
-
Doug, I'll try to answer IMHO.
First, I don't know exactly what should be cut, but frankly even I agree there is a lot of waste and inertia. For example, I often take a class for enrichment at the local Community College. It's an excellent school with outstanding teachers. But the administration is bloated. Nearly everyone, who is anyone, has a full time secretary or even two in some instances. Now I did too when I got out of college, but in this day of computers, emails, etc. why does everyone need a secretary? Further, teachers are paid on seniority. Only at a college would a 10 year physical education aerobic instructor get paid $75,000 plus an absolutely huge benefit package for working nine months of the year. And at the same institution, the 10 year Math/Science/Computer teacher is paid the same. And, neither one can be fired for incompetence unless they commit some heinous act. Is that any way to run a business?
That said, I am a big proponent of education. And given the diverse population and incomes of CA it's not easy. Further, I truly believe that education is a doorway to better income, that in the end, a better educated population will contribute more, pay more taxes and commit less crime.
As for taxes, indirectly as I have said before, I have no problem with lowering taxes, but take off the deductions that usually favor the rich. You mentioned property taxes. CA charges 1.00%. A fair rate I think. BUT, and it's a big but, because of Proposition 13 which passed years ago and now requiring a super majority to repeal it, current property owners only pay 1.00% on their cost basis. What this means is if you bought a property 20 years ago for $100,000, today you are still paying only $1000 in property taxes (plus a few add on fees everyone pays). Compare this to your neighbor, who bought the exact same property yesterday for $500,000. He will pay $5000 in property taxes this year. Is this fair? Worse, if you buy another house, or transfer it to a relative, etc. the cost basis AND the tax is often transferred at the same low rate. Why? This matter is even further exacerbated because it extends to Commercial properties. Bank of America I'm sure bought their HQ many years ago. Why should they pay far less property tax than some new corporation who bought the exact same building next door? Plus commercial buildings turnover much slower than residential, and/or they do transfers versus sales, so this artificial low rate seems to stay on the books until perpetuity.
Remember, property tax, like in NJ is used to fund a multiple of benefits; police, fire, schools, roads, etc. We ALL use these; why should someone who has owned their property longer pay less? Truly, in many cases is a huge difference. Prop. 13 was a good idea on paper, but in my opinion, CA started going downhill thereafter.
To be fair, I have no problem exempting old people, poor people, I'm not looking to drive someone from their home, but enough is enough.....
I say take away these boondoggles. Take away the numerous deductions. And yes, then lower income taxes. And yes, cut spending. A combination of all of the above seems best in my opinion.
But each group has it's own advocates. It's own lobbyists. Easier said than done..... And politics today is not about reconciling our differences.
But some day, as you point out, we can't keep passing it on to the next generation. Something has to give.
-
JDN, That is really a good answer. On the first part, how to simplify it and get it done? Basically you need to start paying public sector employees market based compensation - whatever it takes in the marketplace to get the right person to do a necessary job well. In the pay plan or out of it, the employee can buy heathcare and retirement plans like everyone else. Isn't that better than bankrupcy and financial collapse.
How you chop excessive administration in the public sector? As you say, run it like a business. Apply careful scrutiny and pressure to every function, every job, every department, every budget line item. In the private sector when it is failing, you cut at the top, you cut at the bottom, but you can't cut much at the level where the work gets done. If you fire or layoff the people who do the main work, you still have to get the work done. In education as you point out, that is the teacher in the classroom. Not the staff diversity awareness coach or the Director of interdepartmental communications or whatever these other people do.
On the property tax question, You make a good point. My suggestion would be a hybrid calculation, not solely based on runaway market values and not solely based on obsolete purchase price data. Prop 13 was a great idea but it is so extreme that it locks people in place. like a welfare dependency. At the other extreme, we have no protection like that. Before the current correction I had the bad luck of seeing my value go up 8-fold. Same house, same location, a couple of decades more worn out and the taxes go up roughly 8-fold - for the privilege of being able to see new construction for the wealthy. That isn't right either. My ability to pay doesn't change with my new neighbors income. I shouldn't get a free pass on my value increase but I also shouldn't be forced out because of it. 'Fairness' is some balance in between.
On taxes in general:
"I have no problem with lowering taxes, but take off the deductions that usually favor the rich."
"Take away the numerous deductions. And yes, then lower income taxes."
Not to be anal on this, but please train yourself to distinguish always between taxes and tax rates. Calif for sure needs revenues to go up, question is how to get there. No ones knows exactly where, but there is a point where the higher rates bring in no additional revenue. If a lower rate can bring in nearly the same revenue, that means income, especially take home. More take home pay has a multiplier effect; everyone connected gets a potential bump up too from the contact, a restaurant, a waitress, the martial arts school, your motorcycle mechanic, etc. It is not trickle down, it is interconnectedness.
Another way to think of it is in terms of velocity of money. If you tax capital less, if you tax each transaction less, if you tax labor less, etc. money is free to move around better, easier, faster. At lower rates of taxation - and regulation, transactions happen that otherwise wouldn't, and things get done faster. Money gets paid and spent again sooner. The same money at the end of the year has generated more income. Revenues to the US or Calif treasury won't ever go up without rising incomes.
Cut spending first, you can cut out deductions that have no justification as you say, better yet cut regulations, but it is the marginal rate of what is kept that pushes earning, spending and Job creating investment forward, even on the left coast! :-)
-
You are not being anal; your point is well taken. I should distinguish between "taxes" and "tax rates". There is a difference.
Oddly enough, in spite of my "liberal" reputation here, I 95% agree with what your wrote. If Romney could articulate it so well he would have my vote.
-
I disagree on Prop 13.
First of all, if I am not mistaken, there is an adjustment mechanism limited to 2% a year.
Second, and more importantly in my opinion, is the notion that someone should be buy a property knowing what the taxes on it will be and not be driven off it should the market value of the property go up.
In my case I bought my home in 1997. It went up over 100% in the next 11 years. Had the taxes gone up concomittently, I would have been forced to sell, which would have incurred me capital gains taxes, broker commissions, title search fees, etc etc etc and I would have been forced to leave my neighborhood-- with attendant disruptions on the lives of my family (e.g. children would have had to change school) and me.
Prop 13 makes perfect sense to me. Just as I don't pay capital gains tax when the value of a stock I hold goes up, nor should I pay more when the value of my home goes up.
-
I respectfully disagree. Or as Doug suggested, perhaps there is a hybrid solution.
For no other investment do you know what your taxes will be 11 years out. Heck, for most matters, I don't know what my tax rate will be next year, much less a decade from now. Further, you now use the same services like the neighbor next to you who bought the exact same house 11 years later and now pays double the taxes. You use the same schools, the same roads, the same social services. Why should you get a 50% discount merely because you lived their longer? Also, as you know, since you live in your house, you receive a $500,000 capital gains boon, i.e. no tax on the first $500,000 of profit (a benefit I would also eliminate - why is a house any different than selling something else for a capital gain?). It's social engineering using tax money. On most issues everyone here agrees that is bad. Why is an exception ok for homeowners who live in affluent communities? Why should others be forced to subsidize your high standard (living in an expensive community) of living?
No offense, but more fair to require that you either pay your fair share or take your $500,000 tax free profit and move. I would give breaks to old people on fixed income and truly poor people (exemptions already exist) but for able bodied people, they should pay their fair share.
But back to the hybrid idea. Why in the world are businesses covered? I suppose you could say Prop. 13 supports home ownership, I suppose that's good although I don't like using taxes to do social engineering, but why give this break to businesses? Further, the original idea was that there would be turnover, once sold the house would change to the new tax rates, but commercial property turns over at a much lower rate than residential thereby enabling businesses to keep year after year a ridiculous tax break.
____
What is Proposition 13?
Proposition 13, passed in 1978, established the base year value concept for property tax assessments. Under Proposition 13, the 1975-1976 fiscal year serves as the original base year used in determining the assessment for real property. Thereafter, annual increases to the base year value are limited to the inflation rate, as measured by the California Consumer Price Index, or two percent, whichever is less. A new base year value, however, is established whenever a property, or portion thereof, has had a change in ownership or has been newly constructed.
Under Proposition 13, the property tax rate is fixed at one percent of assessed value plus amounts required to repay any assessment bonds approved by the voters.
-
"For no other investment do you know what your taxes will be 11 years out."
Not so. You know that if you don't sell a stock, you won't pay taxes on it. You know that, barring a change in the law, what the tax rates are on the dividends, the capital gains, etc.
Putting aside the social engineering/capital gains issue, there is still the matter of barriers to exit and entry imposed by broker commissions and other transactional costs, having to move one's family, etc. Why should people be driven from their homes because property values have changed?!?
The depreciation schedule for a property is set by its book value; following the logic you are using we should be saying that the allowed depreciation deduction for the property should go up when the property's value goes up-- but we don't do that.
-
"For no other investment do you know what your taxes will be 11 years out."
Not so. You know that if you don't sell a stock, you won't pay taxes on it. You know that, barring a change in the law, what the tax rates are on the dividends, the capital gains, etc.
But tax laws do change. And I'm not suggesting that you pay capital gains each year. Rather, since you are receiving benefits in the community, it's more like a dividend. And you do pay taxes each year on a dividend. And as the dividend rises, your tax cost rises too.
Putting aside the social engineering/capital gains issue, there is still the matter of barriers to exit and entry imposed by broker commissions and other transactional costs, having to move one's family, etc. Why should people be driven from their homes because property values have changed?!?
You cannot put aside the social engineering issue. In a free market, you have the choice to earn more money and thereby remain in your home. Why should I subsidize your affluent life style merely because you have lived there longer? You always have the choice to take your $500,000 tax free capital gain and move. Sure there are inconveniences and costs, but then a lot of people who want to move to your community have costs and/or can't move to your community because of the high price. They too lose. Life is not always fair. This site seems to emphasis the Darwinian ideas; why are property owners (already a rich class compared to renters) exempt? I bet you are against rent control; how is that any different?
The depreciation schedule for a property is set by its book value; following the logic you are using we should be saying that the allowed depreciation deduction for the property should go up when the property's value goes up-- but we don't do that.
No because capital gains are not taxes until the property is sold. And even then you get a windfall; an absurd $500,000 tax free exemption. Look upon property taxes as a user tax; you are using the services of a community the same as your next door neighbor who bought his house yesterday. Why should he pay double your user tax?
And finally, as a compromise, as our mayor has suggested, why not eliminate Prop 13 for businesses?
-
"You cannot put aside the social engineering issue."
I was withdrawing my assertion about incurring capital gains as a barrier to exit.
"In a free market, you have the choice to earn more money and thereby remain in your home. Why should I subsidize your affluent life style merely because you have lived there longer?"
It is NOT a subsidy! As I have pointed out a number of times already, I am paying taxes by the same principles applied elsewhere in the tax code. Why is it not unequal taxation when the depreciation schedule on a commercial property is defined by its book value when the market value has actually gone up?
"Rather, since you are receiving benefits in the community, it's more like a dividend. And you do pay taxes each year on a dividend. And as the dividend rises, your tax cost rises too."
Ummm , , , Nope. It is not necessary that services rise with market values.
"And finally, as a compromise, as our mayor has suggested, why not eliminate Prop 13 for businesses?"
As a matter of political compromise, I suppose so, but really, as has been frequently noted in this thread, CA is heavily overtaxed already. The value of the property is inversely affected by tax rates, so eliminating Prop 13 for business will affect commercial property values negatively. Not only will rents go up (perhaps driving some businesses out of their current locations, perhaps driving some over the edge into bankruptcy) but so to will the ratio of non-performing mortgages for banks.
The law of unintended consequences cannot be repealed.
-
"Why should people be driven from their homes because property values have changed?!?"
Let's start with that point.. Amen!
If 2% is not the right escalator limit then the answer is 3% or 4, not double digits compounded continuously.
Regarding the rest of the budget problem, go back to the spending arguments. After Prop 13, it was unfair for Calif to raise property taxes so much on the others, when they can't assess them evenly. Another example inefficient taxation. Also, irresponsible to spend what you don't have the tax base to collect.
The capital gains on your house is a point well taken. Most people can get a one time exclusion on that. Also I think one main difference is that there at least is money to pay the tax with at the time of the sale of the asset, whereas a residential property tax taxes you for existing, the money has to come and keep coming from somewhere else. On the cap gains tax on a home, you are mostly taxing an inflationary, illusory gain. The asset didn't change much; it was the value of the dollar received back at the tail end that has changed. In the case of a stock sale or a dividend, the capital gains tax is generally an additional two layers (state and federal) of taxation on an after-tax distribution of income that has already been taxed twice (state and federal).
Meanwhile, while Calif contemplates more income tax rate hikes (as do other high tax rate states in trouble), they still have to compete with: Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, Wyoming, New Hampshire and Tennessee, all with no individual income tax on ordinary income?? How do all of those do that? North Dakota is looking at repealing their income tax too, because of oil boom revenues. Too bad that California lacks natural resources...
-
In order to truly raise taxes on the rich, you must first bar the exits.
http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/california-356374-state-billion.html
Editorial: Still heading for exits from California
Tax group finds 125,000 more people left California than arrived in most recent period.
THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
The 1996 Kurt Russell movie "Escape from L.A." might be remade as "Escape from California." New data show record numbers of Californians "outmigrating" to other states. The state's population is still growing, although at a slower rate, because of in-state births and immigration from other countries. However, recent immigrants generally have lower incomes than citizens, thus lowering the tax base.
The figures come from a new calculator created by the Tax Foundation, a taxpayers' rights group. It's online at: interactive.taxfoundation.org.
During 2009-10, the latest period available, 406,833 Californians migrated to other states, while 281,521 people came here. Net outmigration: 125,312. Lost economic activity from those who left: $10.6 billion. Given that state and local taxes take about 10 percent, that comes to about $1.6 billion in lost tax revenue – for just one year.
Let's calculate the past decade, 2000-10. During that time, 4.9 million left the state, 2.5 million came in. Net out-migration: 1.4 million. Yearly lost economic production: $146 billion. Lost tax revenues, about $14.6 billion a year. That's almost twice the $8.5 billion Gov. Jerry Brown seeks in his tax increase on the November ballot.
(Much more at the link)
-
In order to truly raise taxes on the rich, you must first bar the exits.
Actually, the rich aren't leaving CA. They have the money they want and they love CA. Do you really think the rich are going to migrate to Iowa, the state the article uses
as an example? :-o And for 2.00% more in State taxes, they still won't leave CA.
-
While you were asking how they could possibly leave with the condescension that no state in the heartland is livable after living in California, $10.6 billion of lost economic activity left. Much of Calif FYI is not on the beach.
The idle ivory tower, liberal think tank, second and third generation, never-built-a-company wealth might never leave. Those striving for future wealth are leaving in droves.
The article isn't about whether I think people could possibly out-migrate; it is about the part that is already happening.
Let's try asking another way about the desirability of building products in California. Of all the great products made by great California companies (like Apple, Intel, Standard Oil of Calif and all the rest) what portion of those products are made in California employing another generation of Californians? None??
-
Actually, I can't imagine moving to Iowa from CA and I don't live at the beach.
As for those striving for future wealth, just look at Apple, Oracle, Google, Facebook, and the thousands of successful high tech start ups. I'll compare CA to Iowa any day if you trying to identify "those striving for future wealth."
The ones that can't cut it are leaving. The brilliant ones are doubling down. And for sure, they aren't going to Iowa. :-o
-
"I can't imagine moving to Iowa from CA"
The post was empirical, not imaginary. It didn't say you would move; it said others already have. A serious rebuttal would be to quote a study to the contrary or point out what is wrong with their methodology. Nothing but silence on those scores.
JDN's reaction to be called out on condescension for the heartland is to pile on more of it. What a shame. Iowa jokes are big here. Keyword is joke, not just snobbery - like you and the bitter clingers guy. What part of half the unemployment rate and friendlier to business (and cleaner air, cleaner water, better education and lower crime rate) don't you get? http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm That only applies to people out of work? Okay, but by that definition it still applies to millions of people. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/06/californias-long-term-une_n_1489918.html Of course they are too poor or too stupid to matter? What wealth do unemployed people have is just more snobbery. One thing each unemployed, willing-to-work person has is perhaps 1-5 million dollars or more of future earnings.
It is no joke here in the Twin Cities that the income tax rate across the border in South Dakota is zero. Look at what they don't have culturally that we do... still jobs leave. Not all jobs leave but some do. 3M (Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing) fought for years with the state government over taxes, then expanded in a lower tax state: http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3M/en_US/Austin/Plant/
We've had this discussion before. That you won't admit what happens at the margin is CRUCIAL in economics, doesn't mean it isn't so. There is a force pulling economic activity out of California. That doesn't mean all economic activity leaves. But a net out-migration of productive human resources is a force large enough to prevent you from solving your state budget mess without having to do even more painful root canal work. Keep in mind you do not have to leave Calif to make some of your US income taxable in other states. http://www.google.com/about/datacenters/locations/council-bluffs/
Another choice for Californians besides leaving or ignoring what is wrong or mocking those who govern responsibly would be to fix what is broken. Good luck solving your problems without admitting them, or caring.
Unemployment rates by state, April 2012, BLS, link above
Rank State Rate
1 NORTH DAKOTA 3.0
2 NEBRASKA 3.9
3 SOUTH DAKOTA 4.3
4 VERMONT 4.6
5 NEW HAMPSHIRE 5.0
5 OKLAHOMA 5.0
7 IOWA 5.1
8 WYOMING 5.3
9 MINNESOTA 5.6
9 VIRGINIA 5.6
11 UTAH 6.0
12 KANSAS 6.1
12 MONTANA 6.1
14 HAWAII 6.3
14 MASSACHUSETTS 6.3
16 MARYLAND 6.7
16 WEST VIRGINIA 6.7
16 WISCONSIN 6.7
19 DELAWARE 6.8
20 ALASKA 6.9
20 NEW MEXICO 6.9
20 TEXAS 6.9
23 LOUISIANA 7.1
24 ALABAMA 7.2
24 ARKANSAS 7.2
24 MAINE 7.2
27 MISSOURI 7.3
28 OHIO 7.4
28 PENNSYLVANIA 7.4
30 CONNECTICUT 7.7
30 IDAHO 7.7
32 TENNESSEE 7.8
33 COLORADO 7.9
33 INDIANA 7.9
35 WASHINGTON 8.1
36 ARIZONA 8.2
37 KENTUCKY 8.3
37 MICHIGAN 8.3
39 NEW YORK 8.5
39 OREGON 8.5
41 FLORIDA 8.7
41 ILLINOIS 8.7
41 MISSISSIPPI 8.7
44 SOUTH CAROLINA 8.8
45 GEORGIA 8.9
46 NEW JERSEY 9.1
47 NORTH CAROLINA 9.4
48 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 9.5
49 CALIFORNIA 10.9
50 RHODE ISLAND 11.2
51 NEVADA 11.7
-
"I can't imagine moving to Iowa from CA"
The post was empirical, not imaginary. It didn't say you would move; it said others already have. A serious rebuttal would be to quote a study to the contrary or point out what is wrong with their methodology. Nothing but silence on those scores.
JDN's reaction to be called out on condescension for the heartland is to pile on more of it. What a shame. Iowa jokes are big here. Keyword is joke, not just snobbery - like you and the bitter clingers guy. What part of half the unemployment rate and friendlier to business (and cleaner air, cleaner water, better education and lower crime rate) don't you get? http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm That only applies to people out of work? Okay, but by that definition it still applies to millions of people. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/06/californias-long-term-une_n_1489918.html Of course they are too poor or too stupid to matter? What wealth do unemployed people have is just more snobbery. One thing each unemployed, willing-to-work person has is perhaps 1-5 million dollars or more of future earnings.
It is no joke here in the Twin Cities that the income tax rate across the border in South Dakota is zero. Look at what they don't have culturally that we do... still jobs leave. Not all jobs leave but some do. 3M (Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing) fought for years with the state government over taxes, then expanded in a lower tax state: http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3M/en_US/Austin/Plant/
Doug, you started this conversation with the lead line, "In order to truly raise taxes on the rich, you must first bar the exits." That's a silly joke; or as you like to say, a "straw" something or another, and I pointed that out. That is the sentence with which I disagreed. The rich, the successful aren't leaving California. High Tech brilliant people are moving into CA. And many are getting rich. Few if any are leaving. CA is a fabulous place to live if you are smart and successful.
Yes, those unemployed represent "future earnings" but for now, they represent a negative drain. And the fact that they are unemployed, many for a long time says obviously they are not the cream. So.....
Nothing wrong with Iowa I guess; I grew up in Wisconsin. But better I think than Iowa. :-)
And if I lived in the Twin Cities (lovely area/state - best of both; nature and culture) I can't imagine moving to Iowa or South Dakota unless they doubled or tripled my salary if even then. But maybe that's it. When you are unemployed, no one wants you, doubling or tripling is easy to do.
That said, I'm not looking for a fight (discussion). :-) CA has it problems. I have pointed out public employees need to be reigned in. I agree regulations and wastage need to be addressed. I have pointed out taxes need to be changed, not just for the rich, but for everyone, i.e. Prop 13. You can't afford a house because the property taxes are too high; well that is because you are subsidizing the people who have lived here for a long time. Ridiculous. MN's property taxes are complicated, I'm sure you know far far more than me, but in summary it looks like over 1.5%. It doesn't sound like much, but an additional .5% or more of total property value is a lot; especially when it's applied to every building, it's definitely a lot more than CA at 1.00% and worse, an even much much lower percentage for people who have lived in their home for a while. Is that fair? No wonder new housing is hurting in middle and lower class neighborhoods; they are subsidizing the long term residents. We could have lower income state taxes if long term homeowners and business, in comparison to new homeowners and new business, paid their fair share.
-
JDN, Of course Calif is beautiful, so is Greece. Solving the economic problems is a matter of moving things in the right direction in terms of business climate and productive investment. California needs robust growth going forward to survive, not a gradual erosion of its economic greatness, Silicon Valley, etc. Those other states are doing something right. Calif, not Wisconsin or Iowa, leads this nation economically, at the moment it is in the wrong direction. Calif can't survive having so many factors moving against them, lower workforce participation rates, out migration of workers, business investment out or down, (still) increasing regulations on business, failure to develop natural resources, inflationary capital gains taxed at very high ordinary income rates, the worst corporate tax rate in the developed world, etc. etc.
Remember the economic greatness of Japan and how it stalled. At the start of the stall, it was said (WSJ I believe) that what Japan's economy needed was bold action on a number of policy fronts, and that what Japan's political system was incapable of is bold action.
California's economic problems today are far worse. Long term unemployment is undermeasured at 10-11%, underemployment at 20%, workforce non-participation rate dropping toward 50%, and productive resources in a net-outflow direction? What they need (MHO) and are incapable of is a sharp turn toward red-state style governing, Scott Walker style public sector reforms, sharp public spending cuts, sweeping deregulation (the excessive ones, not pollution, corruption etc.) and tax rates competitive with its neighbors and competitors. JDN, you may support some of this but really these ideas are not even on the table.
---
Here is a different example of a net in-migration solving budget problems, my daughter's outer ring suburban school district. They have conservative governing principles, a strong academic focus, a 99% graduation rate and a 93% on-to-college rate, and put out color glossy annual reports and advertising to tout it. That shouldn't matter in the public sector but MN has a public school open enrollment policy so kids (parents) can choose their school district without moving if the district has the space to accept them. Roughly 10k/year of state funding follows the kid to the district. The net inflow to the good districts allows them to fully utilize existing resources and hold the line against new tax levies. With a class size close to 30, $10,000 per kid per year is a revenue stream of close to 300k per classroom, enough to hire a teacher, a smartboard and pay for quite a bit of overhead (hockey arena, domed stadium, orchestras, foreign language immersions, college programs etc. In Mpls OTOH, they probably have far better diversity training, Head Start participation and other programs, friendship camps etc. but the graduation rate is 50%, the outflow of students and money in massive, the cost is double at 20k/yr/student and the budget situation is a mess. When they closed North high, hardly anyone noticed because the enrollment was a fraction of what it once was. It isn't just the out-migration that is killing them (or Calif), it is that the underlying causes of that movement keep going unaddressed and unsolved.
-
"You can't afford a house because the property taxes are too high; well that is because you are subsidizing the people who have lived here for a long time."
Forgive me, but how utterly ass backwards-- and Orwellian. What don't you understand about the concept of book value and basing taxes upon it? It what we do for depreciation schedules after all. Why aren't you calling for increasing the depreciable value of a property when values rise? The concept would be the same after all. The answer is that this would cut against the state taking ever greater sums from we the people.
Prop 13 was passed in reaction to the property bubble of the late 70s-- which was driven in great part by property rights theft of the the progressive CA Supreme Court's "Wellencamp" decision which voided "due on sale" clauses in mortgages (a.k.a. trust deeds) -- in conjunction with the Carter inflation.
The State was happy to reap the unearned revenues of the property bubble, not giving a flying fcuk about all the people being driven from their homes-- until we the people passed Prop 13-- which limits increases to 2% a year.
Oh the horror! The outrage! The indignity! The disrespect to the all-powerful, all knowing State of having to live with 2% revenue increases a year!
The fg problem is that spending in CA increases far, far, far faster than population plus inflation. The solution is not the profound arrogance of driving people from their homes. The solution is living within one's means.
-
Doug, I understand and agree with you comments about CA's problems. Some are on the table, but they seem to be swept away as if they don't exist. In reality, they do; a day or reckoning will come. In the interim, to defend Brown, or whomever is Governor, they have one hand tied behind their back trying to fix the problem. But something does need to be done and it's not to raise taxes (although I am in favor of the 2% on the rich, it's a bandaid on a serious wound, that will not make much of a splash nor does it address the true issues as you pointed out).
On your education post (last paragraph) I'm undecided. Like your daughter, I too went to a public high school in the suburbs here in LA. It is rated in the top 3 public high schools in CA and is among the best in the country. 100% go on to college. People beg, use their uncle's address, they do anything to send their kids to this school district. Yes, the children benefit, and indirectly since the school district gets money from the state, it benefits too from increased enrollment.
But what about the schools in the inner city. The poorer areas? Who wants to go to those schools? Who wants to work at those schools? And if you take the cream, what's left? Sure it costs double; I would want double to teach there. I have friends who teach in my old area; the students are bright, polite and attentive. It's an "easy" job. In the inner city, I also have friends who teach, God bless them. Rapes on campus happen, one friend was physically threatened if she didn't give a better grade, etc.....
But public policy has to take care of the good AND the bad. The suburbs and the inner city. I don't know the solution, LA Unified School District is trying under a new Superintendent, but it's not easy.
-
I leave the underlying problems of the inner city for another thread and my views are out there. The analogy point was that in-migration / out-migration at the margin matter immensely at balancing a public budget. You need all these factors moving in the right direction - and then some. And they aren't. I agree that Gov. Brown cannot solve problems without the electorate and the assembly on the right track. I have not followed Brown closely, but my guess is that if all he has proposed were enacted it would not improve or solve things.
I don't know how to say it more persuasively, but another 2% tax (20% tax increase on job creators) won't bring in another 2%. Experience says it will bring in about the same amount or less and if investment leaves, jobs leave. The rich adjust their behavior; they are already paying all of what they are willing to pay.
Both Brown and Schwarznegger were mavericks at one point in their own parties with the potential to do some straight talk and push for sweeping change. None of that to my knowledge is happening.
You're entitled to your own state governance. My problem is that I don't see how America gets healthy with California in hospice.
-
Agency Closings Pinch California Cities
By BOBBY WHITE
HERCULES, Calif.—Cities across California are grappling with the economic fallout from the state's closure of redevelopment agencies, the municipal organizations that try to turn around blighted areas. The shutdowns—aimed at aiding the cash-strapped state—have resulted in layoffs, lawsuits and the loss of millions of dollars in municipal tax revenue.
The pain is evident in Hercules, an old industrial city of about 26,000 people located 25 miles northeast of San Francisco.
For years, the Hercules Redevelopment Agency bought land and launched real-estate projects to attract restaurants and stores, financing the efforts by selling bonds. Any new property-tax revenue these projects generated went to the agency.
But Gov. Jerry Brown ordered the agencies shut last year and directed that the property-tax revenue they created be spent elsewhere. That prompted Hercules to lay off more than 40% of its city staff, or about 100 workers.
The closure left Hercules in a fiscal bind: Its redevelopment agency had racked up more than $300 million in debt to finance projects, leaving the city on the hook for about $20 million in annual debt payments.
"Now we're left with picking up the pieces," said Steve Duran, the Hercules city manager. In March, the city narrowly escaped default on its bond payments.
.California had 425 local redevelopment agencies, which employed as many as 40,000 workers, according to state officials. Redevelopment financing generated nearly $6 billion annually for the agencies, according to an audit last year by the state controller's office.
Critics of the redevelopment agencies contend some cities used the bodies as a financial crutch and not solely for their intended purpose. "The state did not conduct audits [of redevelopment agencies], never asked for any real financial details," said Mike Oliver, a longtime municipal-finance consultant and former city manager of San Leandro.
Donald Fraser, a municipal-finance consultant in Roseville, northeast of Sacramento, said some redevelopment agencies were too aggressive with their projects and didn't take into account how those deals would be hurt by a drop in property values. He said some agencies experienced a 30% to 40% drop in revenue because of the housing collapse in recent years, and they now struggle to repay their debts.
"Some cities are down to just barely making debt payments and are staring at very troubling balance sheets," said Mr. Fraser, who estimates that 10% of the state's redevelopment agencies fit this category.
In Hercules, city officials were forced last year to unwind a $20 million youth stadium deal financed with redevelopment money after the drop in property values meant the agency no longer could afford the deal. The project experienced further trouble after city officials signed an agreement with the stadium developer without first securing the land needed to build the sports complex.
But supporters of the agencies point to redevelopment successes, including San Francisco's Yerba Buena Center for the Arts, a popular cultural venue that helped revitalize a struggling neighborhood; Los Angeles's Plaza Pacoima, a retail complex created from a former factory site; and the overhaul of downtown districts in Pittsburg and Richmond.
The demise of California's redevelopment agencies is being watched by municipalities nationwide, which say they now may be better able to attract businesses to their redevelopment projects.
With California no longer a redevelopment player, "that gives a big boost to other states and cities," said Bob Marcusse, chief executive of the Kansas City Area Development Council, an agency that serves parts of Kansas and Missouri.
California granted its municipalities the authority to operate redevelopment agencies in the late 1940s. The agencies were allowed to keep any increase in property-tax revenue resulting from their improvements, rather than send the money to the state.
In 2010, Mr. Brown faced one of California's recurring budget deficits. He argued that the money cities dedicated toward redevelopment and the tax revenue from those projects should be used for public safety and schools instead—helping offset state funding of those activities. He proposed axing redevelopment agencies last year, and the legislature approved the move.
The pain from the closures is spreading. In Westminster, about 25 miles south of Los Angeles, the city is preparing to lay off nearly 30% of its staff, according to officials. The entire city of about 10 square miles was declared a redevelopment zone and used redevelopment money on salaries for police, managers and administrators.
"We're standing on very shaky ground," said Mark Lauderbach, an officer with the Westminster Police Department.
Meantime, many cities are attempting to unwind deals involving properties they had planned to redevelop, potentially losing money because they purchased the land when property prices were at a premium last decade.
In San Jose, about 45 miles south of San Francisco, officials plan to sell nearly three dozen properties that had been slated for redevelopment, including a vacant hotel and a parking garage. The city has a real-estate portfolio worth as much as $60 million, which city officials said they hope will help pay down the $4 billion in debt its redevelopment agency amassed. Mayor Chuck Reed said San Jose may have to sell some property at a significant loss since real-estate prices have fallen.
"We've been left with very few options to deal with this very big problem," said Mr. Reed.
Write to Bobby White at bobby.white@wsj.com
-
The State was happy to reap the unearned revenues of the property bubble, not giving a flying fcuk about all the people being driven from their homes-- until we the people passed Prop 13-- which limits increases to 2% a year.
Oh the horror! The outrage! The indignity! The disrespect to the all-powerful, all knowing State of having to live with 2% revenue increases a year!
The fg problem is that spending in CA increases far, far, far faster than population plus inflation. The solution is not the profound arrogance of driving people from their homes. The solution is living within one's means.
I think we agree to disagree, but I can't help think your attitude might be different if you weren't directly and substantially benefiting from Prop 13. It has nothing to do with depreciation. It's a simple tax to support the city and state in which you live. Nearly every other state in America taxes residential and commercial property equally regardless of time of ownership. If you want to live in a million dollar plus home neighborhood, great, but one should pay their fair share; don't ask the new neighbors to subsidize you and expect them to pay a lot more property taxes on exactly the same home you have just because they moved in after you. If you can't afford to live there, don't.
Texans on average pay more than double CA's property tax rate. A lot of states pay double our tax rate.
http://www.creditsesame.com/blog/property-taxes-07072011/
Worse, people who have lived in their home AND businesses who have owned their building for a long time (or transferred it using a trust) don't even pay the average amount. I bet if we raised our property taxes to the nations average, more important taxed every building the same percentage, we could lower our state income tax rate quite a bit. Following the logic of some here, that might even generate new taxes....
I agree, if a person is old and poor, offer an exemption or discount. But I know people who are quite wealthy, but since they have lived in their homes for a long time,
they pay far far less than their new neighbor. It's often a subsidy for people who often don't need it. Somehow, you think that's fair?
-
I understand that different states have different ways and different mixes of taxes. What I object to is calling operating with the concept of book value a "subsidy". It is a "subsidy" if someone holds a stock which has appreciated a lot without taxing them on the appreciation?
-
"Texans on average pay more than double CA's property tax rate. A lot of states pay double our tax rate.
http://www.creditsesame.com/blog/property-taxes-07072011/"
The argument pro and con over Prop 13 is important, but comparing property tax rates to a zero income tax state is quite a bit misguided IMO. Also missing in the "double" argument is that property tax is roughly the same percentage of income in Texas (3.65%) as in California (3.59%) - and they have no income tax.
Tax issues are interesting but IMHO there is no tax rate solution for that level of excess spending.
"I bet if we raised our property taxes to the nations average, more important taxed every building the same percentage, we could lower our state income tax rate quite a bit."
No. If you could tax more, spending would go up even further. Look at the record. State and local spending up 250% in the last 18 years? http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/california_state_spending.html
-
I understand that different states have different ways and different mixes of taxes. What I object to is calling operating with the concept of book value a "subsidy". It is a "subsidy" if someone holds a stock which has appreciated a lot without taxing them on the appreciation?
It IS a subsidy. You get the same public benefits/services as someone who buys their house this year, yet because you bought you home years ago, you pay much much less. Worse, IMHO this applies to businesses as well. It has nothing to do with "book value". Everywhere else in America, it's an annual percentage tax on current value to pay for public benefits like roads, schools, police, fire, etc. Each entity pays their proportional share based on current values; that's why we have assessors. This holds true in every state except CA.
However, your analogy of a stock is different; if you want to talk capital gain tax, the same applies to your house; or it should. When you decide to sell it, you should pay a capital gains tax, yet in most instances (under $500,000 gain) it's tax free. That too is another albeit different "subsidy".
-
"It IS a subsidy. You get the same public benefits/services as someone who buys their house this year, yet because you bought you home years ago, you pay much much less."
No. You are playing with words here. Your property tax is not a usage fee. Property tax is theoretically based on your ability to pay. Your school tax does not depend on whether or not you have school age children. Your fire cost does not change with brick vs. wood construction, we don't charge welfare recipients for using welfare services, etc. Arguably original purchase price is a better benchmark for ability to pay than current market value when market values run wild, and 'current market values' have proven to be grossly overinflated and false.
The person paying on a 20 year old value is still probably paying in more than his cost for government services, just not more than his share of total costs.
All rates need to be lower so that equalizing the rates will not put families out of their homes.
It frankly would be fairer to base your tax assessment on the way you vote than where you live.
-
I changed it for you...
_____
The person paying on a 20 year old value is still probably paying in more than his cost for government services, just not his share of total costs.
-
The fact that others do it differently does not make this a subsidy. As I have already shown more than once is that what we do here in CA is done here is well within the conceptual constructs applied elsewhere in our tax code(s).
A very large majority vote passed Prop 13, and a large majority supports it still. Why would this be the case if your accusation of "subsidy"! were true?
Time to move forward.
-
While reading an article on a different subject (see below) I came across this number; amazing or at least I was amazed..... It's a huge number.
"With roughly 11% of the state’s budget dedicated to incarceration, Maharaj said it made sense to commit more resources to the beat."
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-ford-foundation-los-angeles-times-20120517,0,4607187.story
-
"With roughly 11% of the state’s budget dedicated to incarceration,"
There is a theory that the welfare culture plays a contributing role turning the lives of men in particular toward crime and incarceration. See writings by Thomas Sowell, or books by George Gilder including 'Wealth and Poverty' and 'Men and Marriage'. The government and the welfare system takes the place of what used to be the role of the husband and father as the provider. Under our system it is primarily the female with child/children who get most assistance. For every woman or girl with a baby who take public support, not as a temporary assist but as a way of life, the male is then free of that responsibility, free to impregnate elsewhere, and to pursue a life of survival, recreational drugs and crime on the streets. He can shack up with a single woman on assistance and not be bound by rent, mortgage, healthcare payments, buying groceries and not have to get up and go to work on a regular basis. The theory holds that the adult human male needs the responsibility of family or is otherwise prone to fill that void with less responsible pursuits. The people operating outside of our productive economy are available for other diversions like drug or gang activity which tend to be outside of the law and many eventually experience incarceration.
Of course we also incarcerate fully employed white collar criminals too, embezzlers, insider traders, etc. family men, but I don't think that is where the numbers are. It would be interesting to know what portion of the 11%, a huge budget item in Calif, is indirectly an offshoot of our big hearted, good intentioned welfare system.
It is quite old fashioned, but there used to be a culture that the man did not get to have sex with the pretty girl unless he committed to take care of her and any young ones until death do they part. Men would not only agree to that but be better off for it. Not so much anymore.
-
I am thinking for voting FOR the expansion of term limits from 6 to 12 years; the idea being that 6 years is not enough for the development and transmission of institutional memory with the result that the elected official tends to be even more at the mercy of his staff and lobbyists.
-
By MICHAEL BOSKIN AND JOHN COGAN
California's fiscal and governance crisis careens from bad to worse. The latest blow: a 70% increase in the state's projected budget deficit in Gov. Jerry Brown's revised budget, to $16 billion from $9 billion. Meanwhile, S&P warns of a downgrade to the state's bond rating, already the lowest of any state, and the latest CEO survey ranks California's business climate dead last.
Caught in the symbiotic financial embrace of special interests—teacher and other public-employee unions, trial lawyers and environmental extremists—Mr. Brown and the state legislature repeatedly nibble around the edges of the budget broken by costly, ineffective programs, financed by an uncompetitive, volatile tax system.
Mr. Brown colorfully but correctly calls the budget, riddled with earmarks and creative accounting, a "pretzel palace of incredible complexity." He and the state legislature are choking on the pretzel. They've lost credibility by offering hopelessly optimistic projections; diverting revenue earmarked for other purposes (such as funds meant to help homeowners from the national bank-mortgage settlement) to the general fund; and gambling on Silicon Valley to produce more revenue from capital gains and stock options. Call it casino budgeting.
The governor describes his budget and November tax-hike ballot initiative as "real increased austerity" while calling on voters to "please increase taxes temporarily." Cutting through the shifting numbers and fanciful assumptions, what is actually proposed is closer to a permanent tax hike and modest temporary budget cuts to fund a permanent spending increase.
Mr. Brown's original bad idea, raising the state's top marginal tax rate of 10.3% to 12.3% for five years, is now even worse: a highest-in-the-nation 13.3% on individuals and small businesses for seven years retroactive to Jan. 1, 2012, and a small increase in the sales tax for next year.
While the governor proposes cuts in social services, higher education and the courts, total spending nevertheless goes up to $91.4 billion in fiscal year 2013 from $86.5 billion in 2012, a 6% increase. Spending on K-12 education alone rises beyond constitutional requirements to $38.5 billion from $34 billion, a 13% increase.
In the past, Californians have supported more education spending on the assumption it would improve education outcomes. It hasn't. Sadly, the state has an elementary and secondary school system that ranks in the bottom fifth of all 50 states in math scores, and a high-school dropout rate that's soared relative to other states, especially for African Americans and Hispanics.
The prison system spends $45,000 per year per inmate—about equal to the median take-home pay of American families. Welfare and MediCal (the state's Medicaid program) caseloads are vastly in excess of national averages.
Mr. Brown does have some good proposals. He's bringing the state's welfare-to-work program in line with federal rules, and he's called for small Medicaid co-pays, which the Obama administration foolishly blocked. But his bad ideas far outweigh the good, including restricting the use of private contractors on public projects and a $68 billion high-speed rail proposal that would drain revenues from higher priorities for decades.
The governor's one innovative program is "realignment" between the state and counties, especially of the state's overburdened prison system. But counties worry that costs of the permanent shift of convicts from state prisons to county jails will eventually fall to them.
Unlike other governors from both parties who pushed overdue reforms, opposed by public-employee unions, through their legislatures—Wisconsin's Scott Walker, New Jersey's Chris Christie and New York's Andrew Cuomo, to varying degrees—Mr. Brown has not even pressed the Democratic-controlled legislature to pass his own sensible pension proposal.
He is seeking a deal with the unions that only temporarily reduces wages and work hours by 5% each, saving 0.4% of the budget. Usually a pay cut refers to working the same hours for less pay, not a forced, unpaid vacation. Mr. Brown has not made it clear whether the reduction is for one year or longer, or even whether the compensation would be paid back later (if so, it amounts to a paid vacation, not a pay cut).
The governor has reduced the workforce by 2% and proposed further, gradual reductions. But this represents a failure of imagination. The state should replace half of the sizable number of workers who will retire in the next 10 years with technology and at the same time institute performance pay, saving a bundle and improving service delivery.
Meanwhile, Mr. Brown forges ahead with his proposal for higher taxes despite considerable evidence that states with lower tax rates grow faster than states with high tax rates. Higher marginal tax rates will speed the exodus from the state, which has a 10.9% unemployment rate, the country's third-highest.
California's casino-like budget reflects its highly volatile revenue system. In good times it collects almost half its income taxes from the top 1% of the population, relying heavily on capital gains, taxed at ordinary income rates, and stock options. This exposes the state to dramatic revenue collapses during recessions and stock market declines.
The state lurched from income tax growth of 54% in the two years from 1998-2000—money that was spent and built into the permanent budget base line—to a collapse that erased these revenue gains the next two years. This dysfunctional swing was repeated in the recent housing bubble and bust. Mr. Brown's tax initiative would exacerbate the volatility.
To remedy this and other problems, two recent bipartisan California Tax Reform Commissions, one on which we served in 2008-09, recommended the state combine a broader tax base of economic activity with much lower marginal tax rates, modeled on the landmark 1986 tax reform of President Ronald Reagan and Sens. Bill Bradley and Bob Packwood—the exact opposite of Mr. Brown's proposal.
Absent real reform, there is little likelihood the long-run budget will be balanced, and a high likelihood the "temporary" tax hikes will not only become permanent but form the new base from which even higher taxes are demanded.
California still leads the world in technology, agriculture and entertainment, but politicians in Sacramento are headed in the opposite direction from growth, prosperity and effective, affordable government. They have so far refused to live up to the demands of, let alone seize, the moment. Instead, like their counterparts in Greece and other bankrupt European nations, they seem intent on continuing the broken high-tax-and-spend welfare state experiment as long as they remain in office.
Messrs. Boskin and Cogan are, respectively, professors of economics and public policy at Stanford University, where they are both senior fellows at the Hoover Institution.
-
Government reformers notched several victories on Tuesday, including two in California, of all places. Voters in San Diego and San Jose—the state's second and third largest cities—overwhelmingly approved two of the most aggressive pension reforms the country has seen in recent years by a more than two-to-one margin.
Both cities have laid off hundreds of workers in recent years to pay their soaring pension bills, and bankruptcy is possible without reining in benefits. Voters in San Diego sought to avert insolvency by shifting new hires to defined-contribution plans, which will take taxpayers permanently off the hook for future workers' pensions. San Jose's ballot measure created a bigger splash because it reduces benefits for current workers; most state and local pension reforms have only affected new hires. Employees will have to choose between accepting a lower level of benefits going forward or paying up to 16% more of their salary to keep their current plans.
Because the unions couldn't stop these reforms at the ballot box, they'll try to block them in court. The unions argue that reducing the pensions of current employees violates California's constitution, which forbids governments from impairing contracts. What is unclear under state law is whether workers' contracts include their unaccrued benefits in addition to those they've already earned. No other California city has recently tried to scale back unearned benefits, so the lawsuit will help clarify state law.
Voters had to take matters into their own hands because Democrats in Sacramento won't even bring Democratic Governor Jerry Brown's pension proposals to a vote. Once again the Golden State's referendum process has proved its democratic worth by letting voters leap over union special interests.
-
I wonder what Schwarzenegger is thinking watching the events in Wisconsin and with regard to these two recent local events in kALIFORNia.
Didn't he lose big to the public unions 4 years ago or so - even while spending lots of his own money?
After that he made a huge left turn in governance.
I wonder if the outcome would be different today in Commifornia.
-
I remember that. He got some very good ideas onto the ballot (anti-gerrymandering measure being another IIRC) but apparently did not realize the firestorm of opposition from the unions that would result or the disproportionate effect of union mobilization in elections where major offices are not in play and voter turn out is less.
I agree, he lost all fighting spirit after the defeat of these measures.
-
Actually, I always liked him. In today's political climate, I think he would be a great governor of CA. He would have some momentum on his side. Something needs to be done besides just raising taxes.
-
JDN,
"Something needs to be done besides just raising taxes."
Wow JDN.
You just hit a triple.
If you said something needs to be done instead of raising taxes that would have been a homerun. :-D
-
NJ Revenue shortfall.
***Sports betting
Gambling man
Can New Jersey do what it wants?
Jun 2nd 2012 | NEW YORK | from the print edition
..CHRIS CHRISTIE, New Jersey’s Republican governor, is a recent recruit to the cause of gambling. In early 2011 he kept quiet when Ray Lesniak, a state senator, tried to challenge the federal Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), which limits sports betting to the four states that had already legalised it by 1992. A court threw out the case. Mr Christie also vetoed a bill that would have legalised online gambling, saying it would violate the state constitution’s requirement that wagers should originate in Atlantic City.
But much has changed in the past year. In particular, Mr Christie faces a fiscal crunch: on May 23rd the legislature’s budget officer predicted that taxes in 2012-13 would bring in $1.3 billion less than forecast. Levies on sports bets could be a rich new source of revenue.
The next day Mr Christie completed his conversion to pro-gambling politician. After voters approved a non-binding referendum backing sports betting, and the legislature legalised it, he announced he would authorise it in time for it to take effect this autumn, directly violating PASPA. “If someone wants to stop us, let them try to stop us,” he said.
Many powerful actors will take up his challenge. The National Football League (NFL) has long opposed gambling for fear of match-fixing. In 2009 it joined other sports leagues to sue Delaware, after the state tried to allow betting on individual NFL games. Delaware is one of the four states that are allowed to host sports gambling. But PASPA limited the four only to the specific forms of sports betting they allowed before 1992; Delaware was naughtily trying something new.
Mr Christie is likely to make this a states’-rights issue. Since the bets would have to be placed in person—federal law bans gambling using telecommunications—the business would take place entirely in New Jersey, and commerce has to cross state lines in order to be regulated by Congress. Moreover, even if a court does affirm federal control over sports gambling, it still might require all states to be treated equally, ending Nevada’s privileged status.
Despite such arguments, Mr Christie faces an uphill legal battle. His best chance probably lies with lobbying Congress to overturn PASPA, rather than hoping a judge will throw it out.***
-
Wrong thread for that.
-
JDN,
"Something needs to be done besides just raising taxes."
Wow JDN.
You just hit a triple.
If you said something needs to be done instead of raising taxes that would have been a homerun. :-D
Well, at least I'm in scoring position. :-).
But like baseball, going for the fence is not always the best idea. Compromise (a dirty word I know most here think) is in order. I'm glad that term limits were extended, giving CA legislators time to develop relationships and work on solutions, rather than only focusing on partisan politics. I acknowledge that their is waste. Further, benefits for all public employees including police and fire need to be reigned in. I think it's wrong for take away benefits already earned, but for the future..... I'm old enough to remember when working for IBM or BofA meant you had a job for life. Well, that's not true anymore. Times change. Business have been leaner and more productive. Government needs to do the same. Just throwing money at the problem is NOT a solution. That said, sometimes additional money is necessary.
-
Broken record, but "... sometimes additional money is necessary" is true but additional money means raising tax revenues which are tied to growing the economy, not raising nominal, marginal tax rates on some guy hiding behind a tree.
Growing the economy also would alleviate some spending burdens.
I've yet to see a study even out of California that ties disinvestment to positive economic growth.
-
Around the Nation: Regulations for Thee, but Not for Me
California Democrat Gov. Jerry Brown has discovered one way to cut into the projected $100 billion price tag of his cherished high-speed railroad through the Central Valley: forgoing the very same environmental regulations he enforced as the state's attorney general. In order to get the project underway early next year, Brown is calling on California's legislature to limit the legal challenges environmentalists can throw at the project, which would simply replace carbon-belching automobiles and aircraft traveling up and down the state with trains powered by electricity created in fossil fuel-burning power plants. Key among these revisions to normal environmental review is allowing the state to make changes without going through the entire review process again.
Predictably, environmental groups gave Brown's proposal a chilly reception. "Environmental review is not going to slow this project," claimed Sierra Club California director Kathryn Phillips. She also chided the "ineptitude" of the California High-Speed Rail Authority over the last four years.
One is led to wonder, though, why more projects and development can't qualify for expedited treatment and waivers in a state crying for jobs. Brown used a similar environmental approach on a proposed football stadium in Los Angeles, saying the shortcuts were necessary to "get people working." Taxpayer-funded boondoggles aren't the only needed infrastructure in the Golden State, and those Central Valley farmers who can't get water because of the sanctity of a nondescript two-inch fish probably wonder how they ended up on the wrong side of the tracks.
Patriot Post
-
By Anthony York, Los Angeles Times
June 13, 2012
SACRAMENTO -- Gov. Jerry Brown demanded Tuesday that lawmakers cut deeper into state spending, and welfare in particular, before they move a budget to his desk.
As majority Democrats presented their spending plans in both the Assembly and Senate, the governor released a statement declaring, "We're not there yet, " and said the proposal being pushed through the Legislature is fiscally irresponsible.
"The Legislature has agreed to some tough cuts, but the budget before the committees today is not structurally balanced and puts us into a hole in succeeding years," Brown's statement said. "We need additional structural reforms to cut spending on an ongoing basis, including welfare reform that's built on President Clinton's framework and focused on getting people back to work."
Lawmakers have a June 15 constitutional deadline to pass a budget. Under a law approved by voters in 2010, legislators' pay will be docked for every day after that until a budget is passed.
Legislative leaders and the governor are also eager to show voters they can get their work done on time and responsibly in a year when they will be hitting up California voters for billions of dollars in tax increases on the November ballot.
The major difference between the two sides remains Brown's proposal to cut welfare benefits by $880 million. Democrats in the Legislature have balked at the governor's call to reinstitute and tighten work requirements for some welfare recipients with young children, which were suspended two years ago in a cost-saving move.
They also bristle at Brown's call to reduce some monthly welfare checks by as much as 27% for a single parent with two children.
Senate leader Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) called Brown's focus on welfare "a surprising and odd choice of an issue to stake your ground on," and said the governor's proposed changes would devastate some of the state's neediest.
"Reform that encourages people to go back to work is great," he said. "But reform that hurts middle-class and poor people living on the edge is not what we should be doing."
Republicans, meanwhile, are siding with the governor.
"He's wanting to change the culture from just welfare to more of a culture of work," said Sen. Bill Emmerson (R-Hemet) of Brown. "I just don't understand Democrats for not supporting the governor on this one."
Steinberg reiterated Democratic lawmakers' pledge to pass a budget by week's end, whether or not they reach a deal with Brown. He said the state's books could be balanced without the welfare reductions.
"Over the last few years, cuts have been a necessity," he said. "They are not a virtue."
-
The devil is going to be in the details. This will be interesting.
-
California leads U.S. in immigrant entrepreneurship, study finds
Immigrants own 33% of California's small businesses, the highest share in the U.S., and make up 27% of the state's population.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0615-immigrant-business-20120615,0,3694166.story
-
The devil is going to be in the details. This will be interesting.
Unfortunately (I say this only because I had hoped for a workable solution instead of smoke and mirrors) you are right.
"Lawmakers barely make the deadline to pass a state budget before their pay was affected, but details on cuts to social services still need to be worked out."
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-state-budget-20120616,0,1794728.story
-
Oy fg vey!
California OKs funding for high-speed rail line
By JUDY LIN
Associated Press
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- California lawmakers approved billions of dollars Friday in construction financing for the initial segment of what would be the nation's first dedicated high-speed rail line connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco.
The state Senate voted 21-16 on a party-line vote after intense lobbying by Gov. Jerry Brown, Democratic leaders and labor groups.
The bill authorizes the state to begin selling $4.5 billion in voter-approved bonds that includes $2.6 billion to build an initial 130-mile stretch of the high-speed rail line in the Central Valley. That will allow the state to collect another $3.2 billion in federal funding that could have been rescinded if lawmakers failed to act Friday.
"The Legislature took bold action today that gets Californians back to work and puts California out in front once again," Brown said in a statement. He later celebrated with Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg of Sacramento, a fellow Democrat.
Brown pushed for the massive infrastructure project to accommodate expected population growth in the nation's most populous state, which now has 37 million people. He said the project is sorely needed to create jobs in a region with higher-than-average unemployment. The bill, which passed the state Assembly on Thursday, now heads to Brown for his signature.
The first segment of the line will run from Madera to Bakersfield. The final cost of the completed project from Los Angeles to San Francisco would be $68 billion.
Senate Republicans blasted the decision, citing the state's ongoing budget problems.
"It's unfortunate that the majority would rather spend billions of dollars that we don't have for a train to nowhere than keep schools open and harmless from budget cuts," Sen. Tom Harman, R-Huntington Beach, said in a statement.
Sen. Ted Gaines, R-Granite Bay, said the project would push California over a fiscal cliff.
"It will require endless subsidies and will blast a massive hole into our budget," Gaines said in a statement.
The Bay Area Council, a group of business leaders from the San Francisco Bay and Silicon Valley areas, cheered the vote. The council backed the 2008 statewide bond measure regarding the rail line and had been working to sway legislators in support of the project in recent weeks.
"This is a courageous step forward for California's future," said its president and CEO, Jim Wunderman. "California has grabbed a golden opportunity to build the nation's first high-speed rail system, create the backbone of a new, clean 21st century transportation system and support our future economic growth."
Dan Richard, chairman of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, which is managing the project, said California would have lost billions of dollars in federal aid if the Senate fails to pass the bill before adjourning Friday for a monthlong recess.
Richard said California entered a contract that called for the federal government to provide money for building the Central Valley segment if the state also put up its share.
California was able to secure more federal aid than expected after Florida, Ohio and Wisconsin turned down money.
Before the vote, at least half a dozen Democrats in the 40-member Senate remained opposed, skeptical or uncommitted. Some were concerned about how the vote would impact their political futures, while others were wary about financing and management of the massive project.
One dissenter, Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, said public support had waned for the project, and there were too many questions about financing to complete it.
"Is there additional commitment of federal funds? There is not. Is there additional commitment of private funding? There is not. Is there a dedicated funding source that we can look to in the coming years? There is not," Simitian said.
In recent days, Democratic leaders included more funding to improve existing rail systems in an effort to entice support for the bullet train. The bill now allocates a total of $1.9 billion in bonds for regional rail improvements in Northern and Southern California. The upgrades include electrifying Caltrain, a San Jose-San Francisco commuter line, and improving Metrolink commuter lines in Southern California.
-
http://www.lasentinel.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9300:california-homeowner-bill-of-rights-passes-legislature&catid=44:news&Itemid=135
Patrick wrote:
This may be the one time that CA has legislated something that will help my business, especially if LDR is proven to work. Highlights of the bill:
1. No more dual track foreclosures, meaning that a servicer cannot foreclose while the borrower is being considered for a modification. (Good thing.)
2. A single point of contact for homeowners who are attempting a modification. (Good thing.)
3. If a Trustee Sale is postponed, the borrower must be contacted and advised of the new sale date. (Good thing.)
4. No late fees or application fees charged while being considered for a loan mod.
5. Upon permanent approval of loan modification, Notice of Defaults will be rescinded. (This is already the practice generally. It will just ensure greater compliance
-
How Insider Politics Saved California's Train to Nowhere The high-speed rail line may never be built, but it will save a few Democratic seats.
By ALLYSIA FINLEY Environmentalism may be religion to some on the left, but its high priests aren't all pure and righteous. Consider the not-so-immaculate conception of California's bullet train.
Last week, the state's legislature authorized $4.7 billion in bonds to start construction on high-speed rail, which had been stalled in Sacramento for more than a decade due to logistical and political malfunctions. This train is now out of the station—though it's almost certain to break down soon.
The project's godfather is Democratic Congressman Jim Costa, who as a state senator in the 1990s wrote legislation creating California's High-Speed Rail Authority and helped plan the 500-mile route between San Francisco and Anaheim. Before being elected to Congress (in 2004), he also authored a $10 billion state bond initiative to finance the project. Lawmakers in Sacramento postponed that initiative until 2008, fearing that California's recurring budget crises would make it a hard sell.
But sell it they did. The rail authority promised voters that the train wouldn't require a subsidy and that the feds and private sector would pick up most of the $33 billion tab. Expecting a free ride, voters leapt on board and approved the initiative in November 2008. Not long afterward, the authority raised the price to $43 billion.
Investors refused to plunk down money without a revenue guarantee—that is, a subsidy—from the state, which wasn't forthcoming. California's attorney general, whom we now call Gov. Jerry Brown, declined to investigate the bait-and-switch.
As soon as he took office, President Obama tried to help the state with $2.4 billion in stimulus money. A year and a half later—and two weeks before the 2010 midterm elections—the White House offered an additional $900 million, provided that the $3.3 billion sum be spent in the sparsely populated Central Valley. That is, in the congressional districts of Mr. Costa and fellow Blue Dog Democrat Dennis Cardoza, both of whom had provided critical votes for ObamaCare in March 2010 and were then in political peril.
The congressmen rode the subsidy train to re-election, flogging the 135,000 jobs that the construction would supposedly create in the Central Valley. To be sure, Mr. Costa denies trading his ObamaCare vote for high-speed rail money: "That's not something I do," he tells me. Besides, he says, the train "had already become unpopular by [the 2010 election]," so it couldn't have accounted for his victory.
Actually, the train's popularity didn't plunge until 2011, when costs exploded to nearly $100 billion and the California Legislative Analyst's Office (among others) warned that the first 130-mile segment would become a train to nowhere. Since congressional Republicans promised to zero out federal funding for high-speed rail, analysts noted, the state wouldn't have enough money to electrify the tracks, let alone build out.
Meanwhile, many parties—farmers in the Central Valley and governments in the Valley's Kings County and the tony liberal cities of Palo Alto, Menlo Park and Atherton—were suing the rail authority for not adequately addressing the train's environmental impacts. Gov. Brown proposed shielding the train from such environmental lawsuits but abandoned the idea after the Sierra Club threw a tantrum.
The more people read and heard about the train, the more they disliked it. A string of Field and Los Angeles Times polls this year have shown that voters would block the train by a two-to-one margin if it were put up for a referendum. In 2008, 55% of voters approved the rail bond.
Enlarge Image
CloseAssociated Press/Paul Sakuma
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood (left) with California Gov. Jerry Brown last year.
.Souring public opinion started to give some Democratic legislators—particularly in the Bay Area and Los Angeles—cold feet. They threatened to waylay the train if their grievances weren't addressed, chief among them that the rail authority and White House weren't giving them their fair share. They wanted to milk the bullet train for whatever Democratic leaders thought their votes were worth.
But in Washington, Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood had different plans. Two months ago, he threatened to claw back federal funding if Sacramento didn't green-light construction before summer's end. "We can't wait," he said. And why not? Because Republicans were threatening to claw back the money if they took the White House and Senate in November.
Mr. Brown used that threat to demand that legislators authorize $2.7 billion in state bonds before they adjourned this week. He sweetened the deal for Bay Area and L.A. legislators by adding $2 billion for regional rail projects. Included was $700 million to bail out—"modernize"—Silicon Valley's insolvent Caltrain.
The governor rounded up just enough Democratic votes for passage. Four Democratic senators demurred, including Ventura County's Fran Pavley, author of the state's 2006 cap-and-trade law. She and two others faced tough re-election challenges.
The fourth nay vote came from Palo Alto's Joe Simitian, who has sat on a high-speed rail subcommittee. He tells me he knew better since he "had ample opportunity to probe deeply" into the project. And other Democrats? "I'm sure they all felt fully informed," he says unpersuasively.
"The whole thing was carefully staged to allow [dissenting Democrats like Mr. Simitian] to speak about their no votes just before their vote was taken. But Brown knew he had his 21 votes in his pocket," says Bay Area economic analyst Bill Warren. Democrats gave their OK, he says, because they wanted money for local rail projects and construction jobs. "I doubt if any of them actually believe in their hearts that the rail system will ever be completed."
Indeed, environmental lawsuits could block construction in the Central Valley or at least delay it for several years. The White House will no doubt send its regrets to Rep. Costa.
Regardless, the Bay Area and L.A. will likely get their pound of taxpayer flesh. Next year taxpayers will have to start paying interest on the rail bonds—about $380 million annually for the next 30 years—assuming investors bite. That's nearly as much as the governor is proposing to cut from higher education if voters don't approve his millionaires' tax initiative in the fall.
This plundering of higher education should serve as a warning to voters who think that approving the millionaires' tax will somehow save them from one day becoming sacrificial lambs on the government's altar. Nothing is sacred.
Ms. Finley, a Californian who loves her state unconditionally, is assistant editor of OpinionJournal.com.
-
"San Bernardino [California] has an annual budget of $258 million; it is running a budget deficit of $45 million. Where does that money go? To the unions, largely. About three-quarters of the general fund goes to personnel; 78 percent of that 75 percent goes to public safety employees, the most lucratively compensated of all government workers. The city retirement fund amounts to 13 percent of the general fund. ... The statistics are strikingly similar in Stockton. Sixty-eight percent of the general budget each year goes to city retirees and compensation for workers. Their budget deficit was $26 million; the year before, it was $37 million; the year before that, $23 million. Retirement costs constituted some 17.5 percent of the budget. ... Then there's Los Angeles. Los Angeles faces a $238 million shortfall; it faces a grand total of $27 billion in unfunded pension liabilities. How much of the budget do union pensions consume? A full 15.4 percent of city expenditures. ... Noticing a pattern? Deficits as far as the eye can see. Rotten economic situations. And union pensions that take up a substantial chunk of the budget. ... This is what liberalism wreaks on cities. No city has ever gone bankrupt from spending too little cash. ... California is going the way of Stockton and San Bernardino. The only difference is that when the state does go bankrupt, the federal government will undoubtedly try to step in. But what happens when the federal government goes bankrupt for pursuing Californian policies?" --columnist Ben Shapiro
-
....We’re Mississippi and Massachusetts—All in One
In California, it is also the best of times and the worst of times. Jerry Brown just announced we are short $16 billion, not $9 billion, as he does his best to promote his massive tax increases on “them” on the June ballot. Yet it is still hard to kill off California.
Due to the globalized rise of Asia, there are now a billion new consumers in China, India, Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea, with money to buy California fruits, nuts, beef, and fiber. And while the state’s students have never been more unprepared in science and math, California high tech farming—run by just a few thousand entrepreneurs—has never been more sophisticated and ingenious. Never have there been so many new hybrid species of trees, vines, and row crops, never so much mechanization and replacement of manual labor, never so much sophisticated computerized irrigation and fertilization. Just when I think no more production can be squeezed out of an acre, no more markets can be found for yet another 1,000-acre block of almonds or pistachios, no more new machines can figure out how to eliminate labor, prices keeps soaring and the profit margins keep growing—and in a government induced depression no less.
New Carthage, Circa AD 400
Yet amid the good news, the wealthy agribusiness baron does not put his kid in the school next to his sprawling acreage. He factors into his expenses the serial theft of copper conduit from his pumps and the daily vandalism as the cost of doing business. He knows better than to drive a rural road after 10 PM when shootings, drunk driving, and violent crime will leave their detritus for the morning clean-up.
Most big FARMERS live in northeastern Fresno or Clovis for the ambiance and the schools, and then drive out to their goldmines in the outback in my environs. In some sense, rural central California has never been more lucrative for a few, and never more foreboding for the rest of us. I was reminded of this the other day, when an agribusiness man at a lecture I gave, offered me some wise, if cynical advice: “you have it backwards, Mr. HANSON. You’re supposed to live in a good place and drive out to lots of your farmland, not live right on top of very little of it.”
http://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/change-and-some-hope/?singlepage=true
-
NY Times
LOS ANGELES — This would seem a moment of great opportunity for California Republicans. The state has become a national symbol of fiscal turmoil and dysfunction, the Legislature is nearly as unpopular as Congress and Democrats control every branch of government.
But instead, the state party — once a symbol of Republican hope and geographical reach and which gave the nation Ronald Reagan (and Richard M. Nixon) — is caught in a cycle of relentless decline, and appears in danger of shrinking to the rank of a minor party.
“We are at a lower point than we’ve ever been,” said Representative Kevin McCarthy, the No. 3 Republican in the United States House of Representatives. “It’s rebuilding time.”
Registered Republicans now account for just 30 percent of the California electorate, and are on a path that analysts predict could drop them to No. 3 in six years, behind Democrats, who currently make up 43 percent, and independent voters, with 21 percent.
“It’s no longer a statewide party,” said Allan Hoffenblum, who worked for 30 years as a Republican consultant in California. “They are down to 30 percent, which makes it impossible to win a statewide election. You just can’t get enough crossover voters.”
“They have alienated large swaths of voters,” he said. “They have become too doctrinaire on the social issues. It’s become a cult.”
There is not a single Republican holding statewide office. Democrats overwhelmingly control the State Assembly and Senate. In interviews, Republicans were unable to come up with any names of credible candidates preparing to run for statewide office. By contrast, the Democratic bench is bustling with ambitious younger politicians who are waiting for their moment. It is a giant turnaround since 2003, when Arnold Schwarzenegger knocked out the Democratic governor, Gray Davis, in a recall election and set out to build a more moderate Republican Party.
Republicans said their problems were made worse this year by the emphasis during the Republican presidential primaries on social issues, particularly tough immigration measures and opposition to abortion rights. That focus could make it tougher to win independent voters who are crucial to any Republican resurgence in California.
“The national party is becoming a party of very enthusiastic social conservatives driven by Southerners,” said Bill Whalen, a fellow with the conservative Hoover Institution at Stanford University. “It’s a problem if you’re an independent voter in California. If you think about the Republican Party, what national figure comes to mind? George W. Bush or Newt Gingrich.”
Republican leaders say they are hopeful that they can turn things around because of the troubles befalling Gov. Jerry Brown and the Democratic-controlled Legislature.
“You can only have 11 percent unemployment for so long before the populace gets tired of the people in power,” said Tom Del Beccaro, the Republican Party chairman. “The Democrats are in a lot of trouble because they’ve had the governorship, the Assembly and the Senate, and the budget is way out of balance; unemployment is third-highest in the nation.”
“They don’t have any plans related to these problems, other than higher taxes,” he said. “And the issues are coming our way because the biggest issues are budget and taxes.”
Mr. McCarthy said the Republican Party would be able to turn itself around if it recruited stronger candidates and presented an alternative agenda for the state.
“I actually believe in the next two and a half years the Republican Party is going to become much stronger,” he said. “What we have to do is build candidates who look for solutions, so you can talk about our conservative solutions, but you can’t just say no.”
The party’s decline in California has occurred even as Republicans have prospered elsewhere. In 2010 — when Republicans made huge gains across the nation — they were wiped out here in races for governor and the Senate. In 1994, the last time Republicans enjoyed a national sweep, Pete Wilson, a Republican, was elected governor by a large margin, but Senator Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat, barely won re-election.
“The institution of the California Republican Party, I would argue, has effectively collapsed,” said Steve Schmidt, a Republican consultant who was a senior adviser to Mr. Schwarzenegger. “It doesn’t do any of the things that a political party should do. It doesn’t register voters. It doesn’t recruit candidates. It doesn’t raise money. The Republican Party in the state institutionally has become a small ideological club that is basically in the business of hunting out heretics.”
“When you look at the population growth, the actual party is shrinking,” Mr. Schmidt said. “It’s becoming more white. It’s becoming older. “
Over the past decade, Republicans have turned to wealthy business executives like Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina to run for statewide office. But the party’s troubled demographics, as well as the history of these self-financed candidates getting roughed up by the political process, may give pause to other wealthy Californians, party officials said.
The slide began in 1994, when Republicans rallied around a voter initiative, Proposition 187, that would have made it illegal for the government to provide services for undocumented aliens. That campaign created a political rupture with Hispanics at the very moment when their numbers were exploding.
“The manner in which immigration is handled nationally presents a challenge to Republicans in California,” Mr. Del Beccaro said.
Republicans said they feared becoming further marginalized in November should President Obama win the state by a big margin, sweeping Democratic candidates into office in the Assembly and Senate. (There is one bright spot: Republicans seem poised to lose fewer seats than once feared in the state’s Congressional delegation.)
Kimberly Nalder, a political science professor at California State University, Sacramento, says Republicans in California are still too closely identified with socially conservative positions — on immigration, the environment, abortion and gay rights — that have put them outside the mainstream in a changing electorate.
“They’re just blind to the future,” she said. “We’re passing the tipping point now, and they are not realizing that.”
This year in San Diego, Nathan Fletcher, a Republican state assemblyman, quit the party to run, unsuccessfully, as an independent for mayor. “There are a series of issues where I am just fundamentally out of line with the current Republican Party in California — reasonable environmental protection, equal rights and marriage equality, immigration,” he said. “And it’s not a party that is welcoming of dissent on those issues.”
What is frustrating for many Republicans is that this should be a moment when they can step in. Though voters might have diverged from Republican Party orthodoxy on social issues, they have, almost without exception, voted against initiatives on the ballot to raise taxes over the past decade. Two weeks ago, Democrats pushed through approval of nearly $9 billion in financing for a high-speed rail project from Los Angeles to San Francisco that polls suggest has grown increasingly unpopular since it was approved by voters in 2008.
“While there are always woes in California, now is worse than ever,” said Connie Conway, the Assembly minority leader. “Now the majority party in the Legislature has decided that this train to nowhere is a good idea. A lot of people are really questioning that these days. Californians are waking up.”
-
I read through that without seeing the source, NY Times. It looked like pretty good reporting except for having the main story line upside down. For all I can tell reading through, the R. party may have its policies just right and it is the voters choosing the death spiral. Or as I was calling it 'Decline by Design'. The implication is that the last 30% should surrender. More likely they will leave.
Yes, the 1994 Prop 187 effort drove a big wedge between Hispanics and Republicans, but remember that a California Republican President (Reagan) already signed a 'comprehensive' bill establishing both amnesty and border security (lol) in 1986. If those kinds of policies worked, why would there be a serious issue with illegals using too many public services in 1994?
The article keeps making R's sound extreme yet they keep offering up moderates for office as I see it. Whitman and Fiorina the latest, but look at that fiscal wuss Arnold. Didn't he cave on every fiscal and reform issue like a good moderate while he already agreed with liberals on every social issue? What good did that do for the state or the party?
California needs pro-growth policies that they aren't about to vote for.
This isn't unique to California, all the large decaying cities have the same political problem, Detroit, Chicago, Minneapolis come to mind. How are the Republican parties doing within those city limits? Mpls city council has 12 Dem and 1 green. There were no Republican candidates for either Mayor or any City Council post in a recent election, with one Republican running for Library Board, according to Wikipedia. Minneapolis has shrunk 25% from its peak down to its size of 90 years ago; fewer than 1 in 8 in the metro choose Minneapolis. It would be bankrupt if not held up by an otherwise prosperous county and state. Detroit lost 25% in a decade. About that loss , Detroit's Republican Mayor said .... just kidding, Dems have run Detroit since the (other) Great depression. HuffPost says Obama won Detroit by 97-3%?! http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/22/michigan-primary-unlikely-detroit-voters_n_1294624.html Now the 'real' unemployment rate is around 45%. But the unemployed make good Dem voters - if they stay - and if someone else will pay for the services.
-
Doug:
POTH is my humour insult of a name for the NYT -- Pravda on the Hudson. Also, the first line of the post says "NY Times".
Anyway, I think your answer quite good and on the mark.
-
California: The Road Warrior Is Here
July 29, 2012 - 10:56 pm - by Victor Davis Hanson Where’s Mel Gibson When You Need Him?
George Miller’s 1981 post-apocalyptic film The Road Warrior envisioned an impoverished world of the future. Tribal groups fought over what remained of a destroyed Western world of law, technology, and mass production. Survival went to the fittest — or at least those who could best scrounge together the artifacts of a long gone society somewhat resembling the present West.
In the case of the Australian film, the culprit for the detribalization of the Outback was some sort of global war or perhaps nuclear holocaust that had destroyed the social fabric. Survivors were left with a memory of modern appetites but without the ability to reproduce the means to satisfy them: in short, a sort of Procopius’s description of Gothic Italy circa AD 540.
Sometimes, and in some places, in California I think we have nearly descended into Miller’s dark vision — especially the juxtaposition of occasional high technology with premodern notions of law and security. The state deficit is at $16 billion. Stockton went bankrupt; Fresno is rumored to be next. Unemployment stays over 10% and in the Central Valley is more like 15%. Seven out of the last eleven new Californians went on Medicaid, which is about broke. A third of the nation’s welfare recipients are in California. In many areas, 40% of Central Valley high school students do not graduate — and do not work, if the latest crisis in finding $10 an hour agricultural workers is any indication. And so on.
Our culprit out here was not the Bomb (and remember, Hiroshima looks a lot better today than does Detroit, despite the inverse in 1945). The condition is instead brought on by a perfect storm of events that have shred the veneer of sophisticated civilization. Add up the causes. One was the destruction of the California rural middle class. Manufacturing jobs, small family farms, and new businesses disappeared due to globalization, high taxes, and new regulations. A pyramidal society followed of a few absentee land barons and corporate grandees, and a mass of those on entitlements or working for government or employed at low-skilled service jobs. The guy with a viable 60 acres of almonds ceased to exist.
Illegal immigration did its share. No society can successfully absorb some 6-7 million illegal aliens, in less than two decades, the vast majority without English, legality, or education from the poorer provinces of Mexico, the arrivals subsidized by state entitlements while sending billions in remittances back to Mexico — all in a politicized climate where dissent is demonized as racism. This state of affairs is especially true when the host has given up on assimilation, integration, the melting pot, and basic requirements of lawful citizenship.
Terrible governance was also a culprit, in the sense that the state worked like a lottery: those lucky enough by hook or by crook to get a state job thereby landed a bonanza of high wages, good benefits, no accountability, and rich pensions that eventually almost broke the larger and less well-compensated general society. When I see hordes of Highway Patrolmen writing tickets in a way they did not before 2008, I assume that these are revenue-based, not safety-based, protocols — a little added fiscal insurance that pensions and benefits will not be cut.
A coarsening of popular culture — a nationwide phenomenon — was intensified, as it always is, in California. The internet, video games, and modern pop culture translated into a generation of youth that did not know the value of hard work or a weekend hike in the Sierra. They didn’t learn how to open a good history book or poem, much less acquire even basic skills such as mowing the law or hammering a nail. But California’s Generation X did know that they were “somebody” whom teachers and officials dared not reprimand, punish, prosecute, or otherwise pass judgment on for their anti-social behavior. Add all that up with a whiny, pampered, influential elite on the coast that was more worried about wind power, gay marriage, ending plastic bags in the grocery stores — and, well, you get the present-day Road Warrior culture of California.
Pre- and Post-Modern
I am writing tonight in Palo Alto after walking among nondescript 1,500 square-foot cottages of seventy-year vintage that sell for about $1.5-2 million and would go in a similar tree-shaded district in Fresno or Merced for about $100,000. Apparently, these coastal Californians want to be near Stanford and big money in Silicon Valley. They also must like the fact that they are safe to jog or ride bikes in skimpy attire and the general notion that there is “culture” here amid mild weather. I suppose when a car pulls out in front of you and hits your bumper on University Avenue, the driver has a license, registration, and insurance — and this is worth the extra million to live here. My young fellow apartment residents like to jog in swimming suits; they would last one nanosecond doing that on De Wolf Avenue outside Selma.
Survival?
Meanwhile, 200 miles and a world away, here are some of the concerns recently in the Valley. There is now an epidemic of theft from tarped homes undergoing fumigation. Apparently as professionals tent over homes infested with termites, gangs move into the temporarily abandoned houses to burrow under the tarps and loot the premises — convinced that the dangers of lingering poisonous gas are outweighed by the chance of easy loot. Who sues whom when the gangbanger prying into the closet is found gassed ? When I get termites, I spot treat myself with drill and canisters; even the professional services warn that they can kill off natural pests, but not keep out human ones.
No one in the Central Valley believes that they can stop the epidemic of looting copper wire. I know the local Masonic Hall is not the Parthenon, but you get the picture of our modern Turks prying off the lead seals of the building clamps of classical temples.
Protection is found only in self-help. To stop the Road Warriors from stripping the copper cable from your pump or the community’s street lights, civilization is encouraged to put in a video camera, more lighting, more encasement, a wire protective mesh — all based on the premise that the authorities cannot stop the thieves and your livelihood is predicated on the ingenuity of your own counter-terrorism protocols. But the thief is always the wiser: he calculates the cost of anti-theft measures, as well as the state’s bill in arresting, trying, and rehabilitating him, and so wagers that it is cheaper for all of us to let him be and just clean up his mess.
Reactionary Dreaming
In around 1960, rural California embraced modern civilization. By that I mean both in the trivial and fundamental sense. Rural dogs were usually vaccinated and licensed — and so monitored. Homes were subject to building codes and zoning laws; gone were the privies and lean-tos. Streets were not just paved, but well-paved. My own avenue was in far better shape in 1965 than it is now. Mosquito abatement districts regularly sprayed stagnant water ponds to ensure infectious disease remained a thing of our early-20th-century past. Now they merely warn us with West Nile Virus alerts. Ubiquitous “dumps” dotted the landscape, some of them private, ensuring, along with the general code of shame, that city-dwellers did not cast out their old mattresses or baby carriages along the side of the road. It seems the more environmental regulations, the scarcer the dumps and the more trash that litters roads and private property.
I walk each night around the farm. What is the weirdest find? A nearby alleyway has become a dumping place for the rotting corpses of fighting dogs. Each evening or so, a dead dog (pit bulls, Queensland terriers) with a rope and plenty of wounds is thrown up on the high bank. The coyotes make short work of the remains. Scattered about are several skeletons with ropes still around their necks. I suppose that at about 2 a.m. the organizers of dog fights drive in and cast out the evenings’ losers. I have never seen such a thing in 58 years (although finding plastic bags with dead kittens in the trash outside my vineyard was a close second). Where is PETA when you need them? Is not the epidemic of dog- and cock-fighting in central California a concern of theirs? (Is berating in Berkeley a corporation over meat-packing a bit more glamorous than running an education awareness program about animal fights in Parlier?)
Education, Education, Education…
The public schools were once the key to California’s ascendance. Universal education turned out well-prepared citizens who were responsible for California’s rosy future — one based on an excellent tripartite higher education system of junior colleges, state colleges, and universities; sophisticated dams and irrigation systems; and a network of modern freeways and roads. In the private sphere, the culture of shame still prevailed, at least in the sense that no one wanted his 16-year-old son identified in the papers (with his home address no less) as arrested for breaking and entering. And such crime was rare. Rural California was a checkerboard of 40- and 80-acre farms, with families that were viable economic units and with children who worked until dark after school. It is hard to steal when you must disc ten acres after baseball practice.
I think it is a fair assessment to say that all of the above is long past. Since about 1992, on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) testing, California ranks between 41 and 48 in math and science, depending on the year and the particular grade that is assessed. About half of the incoming freshmen at the California State University system — the largest public university in the world — are not qualified to take college courses, and must first complete “remediation” to attain a level of competence that was assumed forty years ago in the senior year of high school. The students I taught at CSU Fresno were far better prepared in 1984 than those in 2004 are; the more money, administrators, “learning centers,” and counselors, the worse became the class work.
I finally threw out my old syllabi last month: the 1985 Greek Literature in Translation course at CSU Fresno seemed to read like a Harvard class in comparison to my 2003 version with half the reading, half the writing, and all sorts of directions on how to make up missed work and flunked exams. It wasn’t just that I lost my standards, but that I lost my students who could read.
Life in the Whatever Lane
Does any of that matter? Well, yes. Those who are not educated soon inherit the reins of public responsibility. In practical terms, the symptoms are everywhere. I now expect that my county property tax returns will have common errors, from the spelling of my name or address to the particular acreage assessed.
When entering the bank, I expect people not just to not speak English, but occasionally not to write any language, and thus put a mark down, in Old West fashion, to cash their checks.
When I deal with a public agency, I assume the person on the opposite end of the counter or phone will not to be able to transact the requested service, or at least not be able to transact any other service other than the narrow one trained for. Calling any public agency is to receive a recording and then an incoherent order to press numerous buttons that lead to more recordings. Woe to the poor fool who walks into a Department of Motor Vehicles office on an average day, seeking to obtain a copy of his pink slip or find a registration form. The response is “get a number,” “make an appointment,” “get in line,” “wait,” or “see a supervisor.”
Cocooning
I quit not just riding a bike on the rural avenues where I grew up, but walking upon them as well. Why? There is a good chance (twice now) of being bitten not just by a loose dog without vaccination, but by one whose owner is either unable to communicate or vanishes when hunted down. And then there are the official agencies whose de facto policy is that our ancestors did such a good job eradicating rabies that we can more or less coast on their fumes.
Forty years ago I assumed rightly that cars parked along the side of the road were out of gas or needed repair. Now? I expect that the cars are much more reliable, but the owner of any car parked outside my house is either stealing fruit, casing the joint, using drugs, or inebriated. Last week I explained to a passer-by why he could not steal the peaches from my trees; he honestly thought not only that he could, but that he almost was obligated to.
What makes The Road Warrior so chilling a metaphor is the combination of the premodern and postmodern. While utter chaos reigns in rural California, utter absurdity reigns inside the barricades, so to speak, on the coast. So, for example, San Franciscans will vote on whether to blow up the brilliantly engineered Hetch Hetchy water project (I bet they won’t vote yes), more or less the sole source of water for the San Francisco Bay Area. The National Park Service debates blowing up historic stone bridges over the Merced River in Yosemite Valley — as hyper-environmentalists assume that they have so much readily available power and water from prior generations at their fingertips that they have the luxury of dreaming of returning to a preindustrial California. Of course, they have no clue that their romance is already reified outside Madera, Fresno, or Bakersfield.
High-Speed Madness
Take the new high-speed rail project, whose first link is designated to zoom not far from my house. An empiricist would note there is already an Amtrak (money-losing) line from Fresno to Corcoran (home of Charles Manson). There is now no demand to use another lateral (getting nowhere more quickly?). There is no proof that California public agencies — from universities to the DMV — can fulfill their present responsibilities in such a way that we would have confidence that new unionized state workers could run such a dangerous thing as high-speed rail (e.g., if we can’t keep sofas and washing machines out of the local irrigation ponds, why do we think we could keep them off high-speed rail tracks? Do we think we are French?).
If one were to drive on the 99, the main interior north-south “highway” from the Grapevine to Sacramento, one would find places, like south of Kingsburg, where two poorly paved, potholed, and crowded lanes ensure lots of weekly accidents. Can a state that has not improved its ancestors’ highway in 50 years be entrusted to build high-speed mass transit? Can a state presently $16 billion in arrears be expected to finance a $100 billion new project? Can a state that ranks 48th in math field the necessary personnel to build and operate such a postmodern link?
We Are Scary
One of the strangest things about Road Warrior was the ubiquity of tattooed, skin-pierced tribal people with shaved heads and strange clothes. At least the cast and sets seemed shocking some thirty years ago. If I now sound like a reactionary then so be it: but when I go to the store, I expect to see not just the clientele, but often some of the workers, with “sleeves” — a sort of throwback to red-figure Athenian vase painting where the ink provides the background and the few patches of natural skin denote the silhouetted image. And stranger still is the aging Road Warrior: these are folks in their forties who years ago got pierced and tattooed and aged with their sagging tribal insignia, some of them now denoting defunct gangs and obsolete popular icons.
I am not naïve enough (as Horace’s laudator temporis acti ) to wish to return to the world of my grandfather (my aunt was crippled for life with polio, my grandmother hobbled with the scars and adhesions from an unoperated-on, ruptured appendix, my grandfather battled glaucoma each morning with vials of eye drops), when around 1960, in tie and straw hat, he escorted me to the barber. The latter trimmed my hair in his white smock and bowtie, calling me at eight years old Mr. Hanson.
Like Road Warrior, again, what frightens is this mish-mash of violence with foppish culture, of official platitudes and real-life chaos: the illiterate and supposedly impoverished nonetheless fishing through the discounted video game barrel at Wal-Mart; the much-heralded free public transit bus zooming around on electrical or natural gas power absolutely empty of riders, as the impoverished prefer their Camrys and Civics; ads encouraging new food stamp users as local fast-food franchises have lines of cars blocking traffic on the days when government cards are electronically recharged; the politician assuring us that California is preeminent as he hurries home to his Bay Area cocoon.
On the Frontier
I find myself insidiously adopting the Road Warrior survival code. Without any systematic design, I notice that in the last two years I have put a hand pump on my grandfather’s abandoned well in the yard and can pump fresh water without electricity. I put in an outdoor kitchen, tied into a 300-gallon propane tank, that can fuel a year of cooking. I am getting more dogs (all vaccinated and caged); for the first time in my life I inventoried all my ancestors’ guns in all the closets and found shotguns, deer rifles, .22s etc.
I have an extra used pickup I chose not to sell always gassed in the garage. For all sorts of scrapes and minor injuries, sprains, simple finger fractures, etc., I self-treat — anything to avoid going into the local emergency room (reader, you will too, when Obamacare kicks in). And the more I talk to neighbors, the more I notice that those who stayed around are sort of ready for our Road Warrior world. At night if I happen to hear Barack Obama on the news or read the latest communiqué from Jerry Brown, the world they pontificate about in no way resembles the world I see: not the freeways, not the medical system, not the educational establishment, not law enforcement, not the “diversity,” not anything.
Hope and Change
Yet I am confident of better days to come. Sometimes I dream of the booming agricultural export market. Sometimes hopes arise with reports of gargantuan new finds of gas and oil in California. At other times, it is news of closing borders, and some progress in the assimilation of our various tribes. Sometimes a lone brave teacher makes the news for insisting that her students read Shakespeare. On occasion, I think the people silently seethe and resent their kingdom of lies, and so may prove their anger at the polls, perhaps this November.
One looks for hope where one can find it.
-
http://pjmedia.com/zombie/2012/08/02/a-typical-day-in-berkeley/?singlepage=true
-
"2,000 upper-income Californians are leaving per week" ??!!
There Is No California
By Victor Davis Hanson - August 16, 2012
Driving across California is like going from Mississippi to Massachusetts without ever crossing a state line.
Consider the disconnects: California's combined income and sales taxes are among the nation's highest, but the state's deficit is still about $16 billion. It's estimated that more than 2,000 upper-income Californians are leaving per week to flee high taxes and costly regulations, yet California wants to raise taxes even higher; its business climate already ranks near the bottom of most surveys. Its teachers are among the highest paid on average in the nation, but its public school students consistently test near the bottom of the nation in both math and science.
The state's public employees enjoy some of the nation's most generous pensions and benefits, but California's retirement systems are underfunded by about $300 billion. The state's gas taxes -- at over 49 cents per gallon -- are among the highest in the nation, but its once unmatched freeways, like 101 and 99, for long stretches have degenerated into potholed, clogged nightmares unchanged since the early 1960s.
The state wishes to borrow billions of dollars to develop high-speed rail, beginning with a little-traveled link between Fresno and Corcoran -- a corridor already served by money-losing Amtrak. Apparently, coastal residents like the idea of European high-speed rail -- as long as noisy and dirty construction does not begin in their backyards.
As gasoline prices soar, California chooses not to develop millions of barrels of untapped oil and even more natural gas off its shores and beneath its interior. Home to bankrupt green companies like Solyndra, California has mandated that a third of all the energy provided by state utilities soon must come from renewable energy sources -- largely wind and solar, which presently provide about 11 percent of its electricity and almost none of its transportation fuel.
How to explain the seemingly inexplicable? There is no California, which is a misnomer. There is no such state. Instead there are two radically different cultures and landscapes with little in common, each equally dysfunctional in quite different ways. Apart they are unworldly, together a disaster.
A postmodern narrow coastal corridor runs from San Diego to Berkeley, where the weather is ideal, the gentrified affluent make good money, and values are green and left-wing. This Shangri-La is juxtaposed to a vast impoverished interior, from the southern desert to the northern Central Valley, where life is becoming premodern.
On the coast, blue-chip universities like Cal Tech, Berkeley, Stanford and UCLA in pastoral landscapes train the world's doctors, lawyers, engineers and businesspeople. In the hot interior of blue-collar Sacramento, Turlock, Fresno and Bakersfield, well over half the incoming freshman in the California State University system must take remedial math and science classes.
In postmodern Palo Alto or Santa Monica, a small cottage costs more than $1 million. Two hours away, in premodern and now-bankrupt Stockton, a bungalow the same size goes for less than $100,000.
In the interior, unemployment in many areas peaks at over 15 percent. The theft of copper wire is reaching epidemic proportions. Thousands of the shrinking middle class flee the interior for the coast or nearby no-income-tax states. To fathom the state's nearly unbelievable statistics -- as the state population grew by 10 million from the mid-1980s to 2005, its number of Medicaid recipients increased by 7 million during that period; one-third of the nation's welfare recipients now reside in California -- visit the state's hinterlands.
But in the Never-Never Land of Apple, Facebook, Google, Hollywood and the wine country, millions live in an idyllic paradise. Coastal Californians can afford to worry about the state's trivia -- as their legislators seek to outlaw foie gras, shut down irrigation projects to save the 3-inch delta smelt, and allow children to have legally recognized multiple parents.
But in the less feel-good interior, crippling regulations curb timber, gas and oil, and farm production. For the most part, the rules are mandated by coastal utopians who have little idea where the gas for their imported cars comes from, or how the redwood is cut for their decks, or who grows the ingredients for their Mediterranean lunches of arugula, olive oil and pasta.
On the coast, it's politically incorrect to talk of illegal immigration. In the interior, residents see first-hand the bankrupting effects on schools, courts and health care when millions arrive illegally without English-language fluency or a high school diploma -- and send back billions of dollars in remittances to Mexico and other Latin American countries.
The drive from Fresno to Palo Alto takes three hours, but you might as well be rocketing from Earth to the moon.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/08/16/there_is_no_california_115128.html
-
Searching around to find out why Victor Hanson wrote this:
"2,000 upper-income Californians are leaving per week"
I found this story below from Bloomberg Jan 2012 with a different measurement covering the years 2007-2009.
Previously in the thread I argued that to raise revenues with higher marginal rates on the rich you would first have to lock the exits. Even that of course would not work because the phenomenon of income mobility is not limited to people improving their also applies high earners and achievers choosing not to continue their medical practices or pursuing new business enterprises and just move their assets into less productive uses. For answer on another thread I pose this question on income inequality, are the rest of us really better off when the rich are in decline?
--------------------
http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-11/california-s-top-earners-dwindling-as-brown-counts-on-their-higher-taxes
Governor Jerry Brown’s plan to balance the state budget in part with higher taxes on the wealthy depends on a group of top earners that shrank by one-third from 2007 to 2009.
Tax returns with adjusted gross incomes topping $500,000 fell to 98,610 in 2009, the latest year available, from a recent peak of 146,221 two years earlier, according to data from the Franchise Tax Board, the state agency that collects income and corporate taxes.
-
Doug, actually it's mostly the poor and lower middle class who move out; the rich stay; they love California.
If the poor want to leave; well, good riddance.
http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/jtf/JTF_LeavingCAJTF.pdf
-
The statistic I posted wasn't about the poor leaving and expletive to you for not caring about them. What the two posts demonstrated is that wealth is leaving and therefore so is leaving your ability to tax it. Do you have a Plan B?
-
Doug, many on this forum post that Social Welfare Programs should be cut and cut again; now you are indignant that I suggest a few welfare recipients move to another state if they are not happy?
My post is hard numbers versus broad generalizations clearly points out that it is NOT the rich leaving in droves; rather it's the poor; the ones who ar a drain on the CA system. The rich love it here; they are happy to pay another 3% for the pleasure of living here. It's not coincidence that many most of the brilliant new startups are in CA. Yes, many live near the coast; why not? I bet up state New Yorker's average income is a lot less as is their property worth less than Manhattan residents.
There are over 750,000 millionaires in CA. We are number one in having the number of millionaires among all states; or perhaps New York. And they are not leaving; rather Hanson is right; they love it here along the high tech cosmopolitan coasts. More come to start a high tech business everyday. Many are successful and they pay a lot of taxes. Immigration gets put down here, but frankly there are a lot of Asian millionaires coming with cash to LA and CA in general as well. As Hanson also points out, there is no real real estate disaster in the affluent areas of the state. In a lot of areas, a million dollars won't buy you a 2000 sq. ft. home.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/pf_article_113718.html
So yeah, Plan B is to raise taxes on millionaires, but make CA an even more exciting, clean, and desirable place to live. Then even more millionaires will come. And if a few lower income, uneducated groups want to move; well that's ok too. Maybe to MN?
-
Once you admitted you're a liberal it's okay to say "good riddance" to the poor because people know you care. The real
My 2012 story is from 2009 data, the latest available. More important is that it is after more tax increases. Your 2009 story is from pre-crash 2007 data. One point overlooked is that income disappearing does not mean the people moved, just changed course in terms of career, business or investments, either by choice or by consequence. Weren't you the one worried about offshore and a Swiss bank account for Romney? Why? Because it might escape taxation and not create jobs here, whether it would be Massachusetts or California.
A third of high income earners vanished since your data was collected, if that does not concern you then you are not the intended recipient of that post. (Is there an emoticon for hands over eyes and ears like the see no evil guy?)
No question California was the best place on earth. No question Texas for one is kicking their ass in terms of economic growth and has worse weather and fewer idle millionaires.
The poke at MN means nothing; we try to fly under the radar. MN was the number one state on Gallup's latest ranking on economic confidence and no one is moving their business here. Native Minnesotans have a work ethic that overcomes high taxes. The Twin Cities unemployment rate before Pelosi-Reid-Obama was about 2%. Our incoming poor come from failing midwest cities like Detroit and Chicago; they like the shorter welfare lines and better customer service. Property values on Lake Minnetonka are just like you described for good areas there. Summers are glorious and winters are survivable with more indoor tennis courts and hockey arenas per capita than anywhere in the world. It is easier to work or study late when it is dark and cold. One of the yellowest states nationally (DBMA banned the red-blue designation) but the people don't trust the DFL (Dem machine) with anything more than divided state government, even tried rule by a wrestler. The budget is balanced and the streets get plowed before you wake up. Sky-blue freshwater everywhere you can see.
------
On a conciliatory note, we will be investigating the regional differences more thoroughly when my daughter comes out to visit the distressed coastal area of Santa Barbara this coming week. If you want to tell a midwesterner all the greatness of Calif maybe you can drive her there from LAX on Monday, but not on your motorcycle! )
-
Doug, my poke at MN was done tongue in cheek. I've only heard good things about MN and the Twin Cities. My father when he lived there loved it,
as did my former girlfriend (her father was president of Target). I too remember the state fondly, although it's been a long time since I have been there.
As for CA, as Mr. Hanson siad, the coast is NOT distressed. Rather, Santa Barbara is like visiting MN in the fall; it defies criticism. It is truly a lovely area. While UCSB is an excellent school (a very good friend of mine's daughter goes there) I thought your daughter had decided on a local MN college? As for me providing transportation for your daughter from LAX to SB on Monday, at least one way, it might be possible, depending upon the time. I'll need to rearrange a few things. Another suggestion might be the train. It's a nice trip. At minimum, I would be happy to pick her up and take her back (both ways) to the airport from the Train Station which is downtown LA (30-40 minutes away). Or maybe I could drive her up and she could take the train back to LA when she is done visiting?
The time together would give me an opportunity to fill her head with liberal propaganda. :-)
If you are serious, sent me personal email.
-
http://reason.com/archives/2012/08/31/police-unions-cross-line-while-bullying
-
LOS ANGELES — First came a competing save-our-schools ballot initiative, backed by a wealthy lawyer who proved more persistent than Gov. Jerry Brown had hoped. Then came a summer of minor financial embarrassments that handed Mr. Brown’s opponents a narrative to use against him.
Molly Munger, a civil rights lawyer, supports Proposition 38, which would increase income taxes for nearly all wage earners.
Now comes a nagging question: Against that backdrop, is Mr. Brown’s $8-billion-a-year proposed tax increase in trouble?
On Nov. 6, California voters will face their usual thicket of ballot measures, 11 in all this time around, ranging from a further crackdown on human trafficking to the mandatory labeling of genetically engineered food. But the most prominent by far is a budget-easing measure being pushed by Mr. Brown, who wants voters to approve tax increases to head off even more cuts to the state’s already decimated education system — a loss would automatically set off about $5.5 billion in cuts from public schools and $500 million from the state’s public colleges.
Proposition 30, as the measure is called, would increase statewide sales taxes by one-fourth of a cent and impose an income tax surcharge on Californians who earn more than $250,000 annually. The sales tax increase would expire after four years, and the income tax component would last for seven years. Some of the new money would go to public safety programs, like the supervision of parolees.
Stepping up his campaign for the initiative on Aug. 15, Mr. Brown, 74, framed his argument in biblical terms, telling a crowd gathered at a Sacramento high school, “To those who much has been given, much will be required,” a reference to the Gospel of Luke. The week before last, campaigning in San Diego, he said that students would see “real suffering” if voters rejected the plan.
A defeat could have consequences for the state and for Mr. Brown even beyond forcing deeper cuts in a school system that already ranks 47th in the nation in per-pupil spending. So strenuously has the governor pushed the measure, and so closely has he become linked to it, that a defeat would most likely curb his influence, and might even invite a primary challenge from a younger generation of Democrats. As Mr. Brown approaches the end of his career, his broader legacy is also in play.
“This initiative has been defined as seminal to his governorship,” said Dan Schnur, director of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at the University of Southern California.
But Proposition 30, supported by California’s teachers’ unions, has run into two snags, both of which are out of Mr. Brown’s control.
One is a rival education measure, Proposition 38, which is backed by Molly Munger, a civil rights lawyer who is the daughter of Charles Munger, the billionaire vice chairman of Berkshire Hathaway. Ms. Munger’s initiative would raise income taxes on nearly all wage earners, although wealthy Californians would bear most of the burden.
Her measure would raise about $10 billion a year, with the bulk going to schools and some going to pay down state debt. It would expire after 12 years and is supported by the California State PTA.
Mr. Brown made various attempts to eliminate competing ballot measures; some political experts say multiple tax-related measures could confuse voters, or at least make them weary of tax issues. But Ms. Munger refused to back off, and she has so far poured $19 million into her campaign. “There’s room for more than one idea about how to fix our schools, and on a topic this important, voters deserve a chance to choose,” Ms. Munger said in an e-mail.
Nathan Ballard, a spokesman for Proposition 38, added, “Our TV campaign, focused on making sure voters know Prop 38 is the only one that sends money directly to schools, will now start rolling out aggressively.”
Ace Smith, the campaign manager for Mr. Brown’s proposition, said Ms. Munger’s tax initiative was of little consequence to the governor’s plan, calling the theory that voters shut down when presented with multiple tax measures “stale conventional wisdom.” If anything, Mr. Smith contended, Ms. Munger’s ads will give Mr. Brown’s measure a lift. (If both measures pass, the California Constitution stipulates that the one with the greatest number of votes takes effect.)
Mr. Brown’s tax increase may also be threatened by a series of minor spending scandals that undermine his carefully devised message that voters can trust Sacramento with more of their money.
Recent months have brought the disclosure of pay raises to hundreds of legislative staff members, many already making six figures. In a bigger setback, state parks administrators acknowledged that employees kept a budget surplus of nearly $54 million hidden even as the park system faced cutbacks and dozens of closings. Such missteps — along with Mr. Brown’s support of a $68 billion high-speed rail project at a time when the state supposedly does not have money for schools — have invigorated opponents like the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.
“What else are they keeping from us?” Jon Coupal, the president of the taxpayers’ group, says in a radio ad that has been running lately.
Mr. Brown had no comment, but Mr. Smith said support for Proposition 30 showed “a real steady progression” over the summer in various polls, which indicated support at about 54 percent. “I just don’t see any evidence for the supposition that these things are hurting Prop 30,” he wrote in an e-mail.
Still, Mr. Schnur said Mr. Brown’s tax increase, which once seemed to have a good chance of winning despite California’s antitax history (voters have rejected the last eight tax increases on the ballot), is now “very vulnerable.”
“The poll numbers show it passing, but with a level of support in the low 50s, which is considered shaky ground,” Mr. Schnur said.
Mr. Brown has a few things going his way. Polls show that voter support for Ms. Munger’s initiative is weaker, and Mr. Brown won a legal battle in July for his proposition to appear first on the ballot.
Ms. Munger may have a fat checkbook, but Mr. Brown has done all right himself, with supporters raising about $11 million. Support has been particularly strong from businesses — Indian casinos, soft drink companies, oil — worried that they could become targets for additional taxes if Proposition 30 fails. Meanwhile, opponents have struggled to raise money.
Two weeks ago, the Legislature gave Mr. Brown some help, pushing through an overhaul of state workers’ pensions that will save taxpayers billions and giving the governor a way to prove to voters wary of a tax increase that he is working to reduce government spending.
A potential pitfall remains that expensive high-speed rail project that Mr. Brown has championed. But some political analysts say it might give him a card to play. If the campaign is a close one, “his best chance for getting Prop 30 across the finish line is by announcing that he’s postponing action on the rail project,” Mr. Schnur said. “At some point over the coming weeks, Jerry Brown may have to decide what he wants most, the ballot measure or the train.”
Ian Lovett contributed reporting.
-
http://www.kcet.org/news/ballotbrief/ballot-measures/california-propositions-guide-2012-cheat-sheet.html
-
SB 1476 is on the Governor's desk. This bill allows a child to have more than two legal parents. The proponents of this bill are aiming to extend parental rights to a child's biological parent's same-sex partner. This is yet another attempt to break down the traditional definition of the family and normalize same-sex unions. This is very harmful to children.
SB 1172 limits counselors on how they are legally allowed to counsel those struggling with sexuality, especially minors. "The attack on parental rights is exactly the whole point of the bill because we don't want to let parents harm their children," Senator Ted Lieu told the Orange County Registrar. Senator Lieu just admitted what we all knew to be true, that this was nothing more than a bold attack on parental rights. We must stop the legislature from stripping parents of their right to seek the help they think appropriate for their children.
AB 1856 requires foster parents to be trained in cultural competency and sensitivity related to LGBT lifestyles. Foster parents do not need to attend training on LGBT lifestyles to be able to provide adequate care and love for foster children. This bill is another way for legislators to force their radical agenda.
-
A Message From the City That Went Bankrupt
Creditors seem not to realize that in Stockton, Calif., we can't simply dissolve ourselves and sell off assets. .
By BOB DEIS
Stockton, Calif.
How did the city of Stockton, Calif. (pop. 300,000) go bankrupt in June? It's not the simplistic story that so many pundits claim. And I'd know: I'm Stockton's city manager—effectively a CEO who reports to the City Council.
Bankruptcy is a costly, undesirable process, but sometimes it's the only way to keep a city viable and continue providing for public health and safety. This was the case in Stockton after California's Central Valley was hit hard by the recession. Over the past four years, the city's property values have fallen 70%, unemployment has been as high as 22% (now 17.2%), and household income is 20% below the state average.
All the while, payments for debt issued from 2003-09 started increasing—so much so that in fiscal year 2012 we owed 600% of what we paid in 2007, before the recession. This is because debt had been "back-loaded" on the mistaken assumption that revenues would increase over time—a risky fiscal structure, but one the financial markets blessed as they extended credit to the city.
Stockton's reform-minded City Council hired me in July 2010 to get the city's fiscal house in order. Since 2009, the council has cut police officers by 25%, fire staffing by 30% and other "General Fund" workers by 43%, while cutting employee pay by 9%-23%. It added unpaid furlough days and required the city's 1,420 employees to contribute more toward their health care. Such changes were unprecedented but still not enough.
By early 2012, it was clear that Stockton was insolvent and needed to pursue drastic action. In February, pursuant to state law, the city initiated mediation with its largest creditors to try to avoid bankruptcy. It identified three main areas for potential cost-cutting: retiree health benefits, debt service and labor. Simply dissolving the city and selling all assets to pay creditors isn't an option, since we have to continue providing services to residents. Ultimately we renegotiated contracts with eight out of nine labor groups. But there were no changes with our capital-market creditors and the overall savings were inadequate, so bankruptcy became necessary to force restructuring.
This set off much uninformed commentary. Moody's opined in July that Stockton's "willingness to pay may be eroding," yet the rating agency still hasn't responded substantively to my request that it back up this assertion. Bond insurer Assured Guaranty, which is obligated to protect certain Stockton bondholders against various risks (including bankruptcy), has offered no counteroffer in response to our restructuring proposal—only two press releases and the assertion that the "City Council had failed to make politically tough decisions."
Anyone who thinks that should view the emotional video of the June 26 meeting when the council slashed funding for retiree health care. Over the next two years, city-paid retiree health benefits will be completely eliminated, wiping out this inherited $540 million unfunded liability.
Also painful is our public safety situation. We are the 10th-most violent city in America. Rates of violence are increasing by double digits, with our murder rate on track to surpass last year's record of 58 murders. We have the second-lowest police staffing levels in the country for a large city, and often Stockton Police can respond only to "in-progress" crimes. Oakland, a nearby city with similar crime challenges, has 44% more police officers per capita. With high poverty rates and gang activity, we cannot turn our back on public safety due to creditor pressure.
Nor can we leave the CalPERS state pension system. CalPERS should be reformed, but if Stockton didn't offer an industry-standard pension plan, we simply would not be able to staff an already challenged police department.
It is unrealistic for creditors to posit that Stockton reject existing pension obligations. The city is fiercely competing for qualified individuals, particularly police officers and senior management, and since reducing our compensation we have already lost 45 officers to other cities. We cannot just pluck people from the unemployment lines—the requirements to be a police officer are demanding and 99% of applicants do not qualify or, if hired, wash out.
Stockton's restructuring proposal doesn't single out any creditors disproportionately. Considering the city's cost-cutting actions, citizens, employees and retirees have endured far more cuts—and created far more savings—than the capital-market creditors.
Our City Council has shown courage and developed a plan, unlike other levels of government. It has reduced services and employee compensation and has faced retiree health-care costs head on. We are trying to be responsible in dealing with our creditors, but in the process we cannot destroy a community and its hope for the future.
Instead of challenging this bankruptcy from corporate offices, our creditors should stay in Stockton for a hot summer week with their windows wide open.
Mr. Deis is city manager of Stockton, Calif.
-
http://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2012/09/27/crazifornia-how-california-is-committing-suicide/?singlepage=true
-
The Quiet Californians
October 1, 2012 - 7:51 pm - by Victor Davis Hanson
No state has suffered the last four years as much as has California — given that its progressive governor and legislative majorities serve as force multipliers for the Obama national agenda. We live in a 2X Obama state. And it is desirous for twelve or sixteen, not just four, more years in Washington.
The bluest state is polling at a 20 to 24 point lead for Barack Obama. Who cares that it is struggling with nearly 11% unemployment and facing a $16 billion budget shortfall? What does it matter that its public schools rated variously from 45th to 49th in the nation and that it is home to one-third of the nation’s welfare recipients, forty percent of the nation’s illegal aliens, and the largest prison population in the country? If Ohio supposedly has a million Obama-phones, I shudder to wonder how many are in California.
Bleak? But such stats do not necessarily translate into the bad life for those Californians who vote — a least in comparison, I suppose, to Minnesota’s winters, Mississippi’s rate of welfare payouts, Baltimore’s streets, or Mexico’s police. We are living on the fumes of natural wealth and a century of prior investment by some pretty hard-working and far-sighted long dead Californians; and it takes a long time to screw all that up.
Indeed, the state’s voting population accepts the status quo: the growing underclass expects entitlements always to grow even greater; state employees are more than happy with in-the-future-unsustainable benefits and packages; and the coastal elite have enough money that they do not care whether they have to pay a bit more to subsidize others and create tranquility in their anointed souls. Meanwhile, California is clear and 78 degrees without humidity — in late September.
Fiddling While…
In other words, we are a happy-go-lucky, sunny Greece around 2004 before the fall — a Mykonos or Rhodes with a German ATM machine. Those sourpusses in the private sector who are not happy and not rich either have left or contemplate leaving — or hide and hope the scanning, red-eye gaze of Sauron in the dark tower at Sacramento passes them over, at least on this latest sweep. As one of my local critics told me, “Get over it!” and “You’re just jealous” — and, my favorite, “Why not leave, then?”
Two miles away someone found a corpse a while back in a small Selma park that was once lovely; in high school I once helped to plant trees there. The murdered? No biography, no name, no details of the deceased. I suppose someone brought him to the morgue, and some next of kin went to the coroner’s office. End of story. Forty years ago it would have been front-page news; today it is not even a footnote. The anonymous and unknown killer? I suppose I pass him often on the way into town. The point is that corpses now just show up out here, cars are found abandoned in vineyards, and dogs wander around without owners, all as the new normal. The quietist tiptoes around it — given that those who caused the conditions who spawned the chaos are usually far away in the Berkeley Hills or Newport Beach.
More Money
This November the California voting public is poised to raise state income taxes on the top earners to over 12%, ensuring that the state’s rates top both Hawaii’s and Oregon’s. With sky-high sales and gas taxes, Californians are already the highest-taxed in the nation. The state’s schools and infrastructure are among the very worst. In the old days, one might write, “Despite high taxes, California public schools are poor.” But we are getting to the point in California where quietists say, “Because of high taxes, schools are.…” Or: “Due to high taxes, schools are….” More money, not reform, is always the answer and therefore there is never reform.
When the UC chancellor writes alumni that without a new tax hike “higher education itself is imperiled,” don’t assume that he means the UC diversity czar and his horde of $100,000 per year assistants are slated for lay-offs. He means instead that students will pay more fees and the French or classics department may be shut down. (And no, reader, there is no irony here: the targeted French professor never makes the connection that his job is in the cross-hairs because there is a new bureaucracy to figure out how Berkeley is racist by having Asians “overrepresented” four-fold, whites slightly underrepresented, and Latinos in much smaller numbers on campus than their percentages of the state population.)
Failure Is Very Much an Option
We know what would save the state’s public schools — a return to grammar and syntax, reading, history, math, science, and the elimination of the entire therapeutic, multicultural, and politically correct curriculum. But we, the quiet ones, also know that to reset schools would evoke such outcry that it is not worth the effort — take the Wisconsin mess and treble it here. The rich who designed and hence ruined the K-12 public schools avoid them; the middle class seeks to staff and run them; the poor both suffer in them and do their own smaller part to make things worse. (Cannot we also blame the gang-banger who sneers at the teacher while he uses his cell phone in class, or the 15-year-old girl who needs prenatal counseling, or the graffiti artist who destroys the bathroom?)
Why the disconnect between abject political failure and overwhelming public support for what is destroying the state? Silicon Valley is booming. Apple may become the wealthiest company in history. Google, Sun Microsystems, Intel, Yahoo, eBay, and Hewlett-Packard rack up billions in worldwide revenue. Chevron still has lots of oil and gas wells, and is redeveloping them at record prices. The California Rule: Liberals are quite conservative in the way they make money. Apple cuts costs. Google lays off employees. Intel demands results. In an odd Obama-way, California businesses have an advantage: because they vote so liberally, they can do almost anything they please.
As long as someone wants an iPhone in Lima, and another in Mumbai sprinkles almonds on his rice, or a cash-flush Chinese provincial governor sends his only son to Caltech, things in California can go on for some time.
Quietism
How do sane people, without great wealth that might provide exemption from all this, cope? They tune out. They psychologically drop out, in the manner of the ancient quietists of Athens in the 4th-century B.C. (the apragmones in search of hesuchia) who learned that one cannot fight the mob, but only seek to escape it. I bump into and talk with these latter-day quietists quite often. They are generally happy folk but have developed a certain psychological protocol by which to survive. The quietist trusts more the ancient wisdom in hallowed texts that warns democracy implodes when the masses finally assume absolute control and vote themselves entitlements that even the shrinking rich can no longer sustain. So they don’t get in the way between the mob and their entitlements.
Look on the Bright Side
If the state idles farm land, puts drilling off limits, and drives out business, the quietist accepts that those who do such things do them because they never affect the authors directly, and when in the future they do, they will cease and desist — and it will be mostly too late. He assumes that the whiners at the $4 a gallon gas pump never make the equation that there may be 30 billion barrels in untapped oil 150 miles away, right off the California shore. (Instead, “they” rigged the prices.) The quietist assumes that few connect the horrific highways to an incompetent state whose highest gasoline taxes in the nation have translated into some of the country’s worse roads, or to the drivers who customarily lose brush, limbs, and mattresses from their trucks, shutting down lanes for hours.
No matter – the quietist adjusts and drives at weird hours, as if he were some owl or nocturnal beast; it is not that hard to live a life pretty much opposite of what the majority does. There are plenty of quietists who can advise you. They are experts on how to navigate in a beautiful but otherwise insane state. Ask a tree-cutter, small garage owner, custom tractor driver, or self-employed tile setter — they all have advice on how to survive. Usually, however, they end with something like, “Of course my kids should get a state job.” In 1960, rare state employees were noble folk who were willing to make less for job security and a sense of public service; today they are lotto winners who hit the jackpot.
Empty States within a State
The Coast Ranges and the vast Sierra — outside a Yosemite or Tahoe — are as empty as Alaska. For all the Sierra Club protestations, few Marin County lawyers visit the upper San Joaquin River. They just wish no one else would as well. Although the mountain beauty is within an hour of greater Fresno’s million, apparently the Hondas and Camrys of the deprived poor can’t make up the grade, so the Sierra remains a haven for the quietist. In fact, one can drive to Cayucos on the coast, or Florence Lake in the High Sierra, or anywhere above Sacramento, and see almost no one. And to prevent insanity, the quietist keeps reminding himself, “Is such beauty, such weather, such solitude not worth a 12% premium on your income, or an hour a night to teach your child what she did not learn in school, or a little vigilance to mostly avoid what Los Angeles has become?” I am currently computing the cost of losing copper wire in all my pumps versus seeing the sun all of October. In California, one comes at the expense of the other.
The quiet Californian assumes that each year a new regulation, a new tax, a new something will seek him out. I read the “State Franchise Tax Board” print as I do the hate letters or emails I receive — incoherent, threatening. This year I got a letter from the state explaining that based on my income they “estimated” that I must have used the Internet to buy x-amount of things and therefore did not pay state sales taxes. Thus, they suggested that I should pay them around, say, $600.
Another such letter came from the Ministry of Revenue yesterday. The state says I have a house in the mountains and therefore may some day require auxiliary state fire protection and therefore should send them, say, $150 — or else!
Note that I pay local taxes to fund county and municipal police and fire. I give generously to the local volunteer fire department. (Would the state send someone in East L.A. some such letter, saying that because they live in an area that often requires the intervention of state law enforcement and SWAT teams, they should send in $150 protection money?) There is never any contract, warning, law — only a need for cash that justifies such confiscation.
So quietist Californians expect about every six months a new fee, dreamed up by a government employee who is paranoid that the state retirement system is broke, and with it his pension. The state employee is now entrepreneurial: without a certain number of traffic tickets written, without a certain number of new fees dreamed up, salaries and benefits dry up. I touch my rural mailbox as I do metal after skidding on a new carpet — a sort of static feeling of anxiety about what new state directive is inside.
I pick up the local paper: it has become a litany of rapes, murders, gang shootings, and molestations, peppered with drunk-driving fatalities and the uninsured and unlicensed who maim and kill routinely. The lurid tales of crime seem almost as if they come from a Sao Paulo suburb or the outskirts of Johannesburg. Yet the more violence, the more worry about insensitivity. So there is a general rule: the name of the driver, the killer, the robber, or the rapist arrested is rarely initially disclosed, much less his biography or photo — as if these are just random stats that can offer no higher wisdom. No worry — there is an answer to our world of Mad Max. Governor Brown will borrow $200 million for high-speed rail.
I note that an exception in California is the marquee universities.
A Stanford, for example, is home to elites and therefore it must be crime-free, so they often send out life-saving “alerts” that pop up in your email when a male has groped, attacked, or threatened a co-ed on campus. Oddly, the descriptions are graphically explicit: even though we are dealing with suspects — not the arrested. And so the appearance, size, and ethnic profile of the supposed attacker are provided in great, politically incorrect detail. One thing about liberalism: it takes care of its own.
Quietists of the State, Unite!
The quietist assumes that his vote for president does not matter and won’t in the state for the next century. He assumes that whom he votes against for governor will win, and that his legislator will either be opposed to everything he believes or, if he is not, will be equally as irrelevant — and yet in homage to the state, he keeps voting religiously and laughing about it with other quietists.
Quietists have become bystanders, now marginalized to be sure, but also convinced that the relevant ones are, in history’s cruel calculus, quite unhinged. I have a confession: I like the quietists of California. I see them every day. They keep chugging away — and their spirits keep me going.
-
http://www.dailybreeze.com/opinions/ci_21853879/opinion-so-california-lawmakers-are-sneaky-and-incompetent
Opinion: So California lawmakers are sneaky AND incompetent
Posted: 10/25/2012 11:34:27 AM PDT
October 25, 2012 6:49 PM GMTUpdated: 10/25/2012 11:47:24 AM PDT
California learned a couple of things about its state legislators this week. One, they make a shockingly frequent practice of changing their votes in the official record after bills have passed or failed. And two, they'd rather be seen as incompetent, lazy and spineless than seen as conniving.
All of this came out in research by the Associated Press, which reports finding about 5,000 examples this year of members of the state Assembly making changes or additions to their votes.
This is permitted as long as a change doesn't alter whether a bill advances or dies.
It could be assumed lawmakers do this purely for political advantage, to make their voting records more attractive to voters or to avoid angering party leaders. Most of the time, this presumably is the reason.
One example: AP quotes Santa Clarita Assemblyman Cameron Smyth saying he and other Republicans are hesitant to raise the ire of GOP hardliners by voting for "something that even looks like a tax increase" unless they're certain the bill will pass. So they vote no, and then change to yes only after they're certain they aren't standing out from the crowd.
This is disturbing enough to suggest the practice of vote-switching should be abolished.
As bad is the other excuse that lawmakers give for doing it -- the excuse they seem to prefer constituents hear. As AP puts it: "Some lawmakers say the vote changing is a sign of absentmindedness, such as when they accidentally vote the wrong way, follow others in their party without carefully examining legislation or misunderstand the intent of a bill. Others note that they are sometimes unable to be on the floor when legislation comes up for a vote and want to add their voice for or against it later."
Absentmindedness? Accidentally voting the wrong way? Blindly following their party mates instead of doing their homework?
Burbank Democrat Mike Gatto, who changed 59 votes this year (a lot, but far behind Norwalk Democrat Tony Mendoza's Assembly-leading 223), talks about a time when four absent Republican members of the Assembly asked a colleague to push their voting buttons -- but the colleague pushed the wrong buttons.
We'd almost prefer to think our lawmakers are sneaky than think they don't know how to push a button.
Here's a list of the Assembly members who changed or added the most votes this year. Leading offenders from the Los Angeles area include Mendoza, Chris Norby, Isadore Hall III, Felipe Fuentes, Gil Cedillo and Smyth.
-- Opinion page staff
-
Jerry Brown's Tax Cliff
The second most important election next Tuesday. .
The most important single vote in America next Tuesday, after the Presidential race, is Governor Jerry Brown's attempt to stick Californians with another giant tax increase. Mr. Brown and his labor allies say Proposition 30 will fix the state's budget deficit and ward off education cuts. But the real choice before voters is whether to issue Sacramento's incorrigible spendthrifts another blank check.
Two years ago the Governor staged a bow to democracy by pledging that he wouldn't raise taxes without a vote of the people. The truth is he couldn't pick off enough Republicans in the legislature for a tax increase without delivering significant pension reforms, which government unions won't allow. Thus the last-ditch resort to the ballot box.
The Brown-union plan includes a "millionaire's tax" that kicks in at $250,000, three new income brackets for high earners and an increase in the top rate to 13.3% from 10.3% for individuals and many small business owners making more than $1 million. This would give California the highest income tax in the country, leaping over Hawaii's 11%. Oh, and by the way, these higher rates would be retroactive to this year.
Mr. Brown's initiative would also increase the state sales tax by a quarter-of-a-cent to 7.5%, though this is principally to foster the illusion of "balance," to quote the Zen-master Governor. The sales tax would generate only about $1 billion of the $6 billion in new revenue that the Legislative Analyst's Office projects for the tax increase.
As the Analyst cautions, due to huge swings in the investment incomes of top earners and "the uncertainty of their responses to the rate increases, the revenues raised by this measure are difficult to estimate."
No kidding.
Nearly everyone who has examined California's chronically unbalanced budget has recommended flattening its steeply progressive tax code to create a more stable revenue stream. Mr. Brown himself campaigned for President in 1992 as a flat-taxer. But Democrats in the legislature won't lower tax rates because they love the revenue windfalls they get when times are good and they can boost spending.
Then when markets crash, they can cry havoc and lobby for still-higher taxes. That's what the teachers unions did as recently as 2008, claiming that cuts that would have merely returned education spending to pre-bubble levels would cripple schools. Caving to the union pressure, a handful of Republican legislators in 2009 walked Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's plank and voted for a $13 billion sales and income tax increase. Schools received less money over the next two years anyway—while spending on entitlements and union retirement benefits grew.
Democrats are now back at the same stand. Mr. Brown has threatened to "trigger" $5.9 billion in education cuts if his initiative fails, but he'd make less than $100 million in other trims. How's that for balance?
Such "trigger cuts" could easily be re-configured with a modicum of political will in Sacramento. Instead of slashing $500 million from higher education, Democrats could kill their quixotic bullet train, which will cost about $360 million this year alone in debt service, and chop $100 million in tax credits to their Hollywood friends (who are bankrolling the tax campaign).
Or they could restructure retirement benefits, which cost $6.5 billion this year—up from about $1.4 billion in 1999. There's millions more to be found in modifying current workers' pensions and retirees' cost-of-living adjustments as nearly a dozen states have done. In Rhode Island such reforms have cut the state's pension liability by half.
Barring such reforms, pension costs will continue to balloon and eat up all new revenues. The California State Teachers' Retirement System has projected that it will need between $3.5 billion to $10 billion annually over the next 30 years to stay solvent. So any money allocated to schools will merely backfill the teachers' pension fund.
Illinois's laboratory of kleptocracy provides an instructive lesson. In January 2011 Democrats in Springfield raised the state's income tax by 67% and corporate rate by 46%. Over the next eight months unemployment surged to 10.2% from 9.4%. So in December lawmakers handed out tax breaks to their corporate friends who were threatening to flee to more business-friendly states.
Springfield last year spent all $7 billion in new revenues on retirement benefits and closed out the last fiscal year with another $8 billion deficit. Lawmakers increased the cigarette tax in May to raise an additional $400 million for Medicaid. Meanwhile, Governor Pat Quinn is wondering why lawmakers haven't moved on his pension reform plan.
The only way California can escape its recurring fiscal Frankenstorms is through reform and economic growth. The former would stimulate the latter while the Governor's tax initiative would squelch both. Raising taxes on small business owners when one in five Californians is out of work or employed part-time because he can't find a full-time job is the definition of insanity.
Once more cash starts flowing to Sacramento, taxpayers can forget about budget and regulatory reforms that the Governor has suggested are on his agenda after the election. The only thing Democrats in Sacramento have planned after November is more spending.
-
Victor Davis Hanson
California, Here We Stay
Reasons not to flee an imploding state
PHIL KLEIN/CORBIS
Thanks to a uniquely temperate climate, California’s agricultural abundance is boundless.
California’s multidimensional decline—fiscal, commercial, social, and political—sometimes seems endless. The state’s fiscal problems were especially evident this past May, when Governor Jerry Brown announced an “unexpected” $16 billion annual budget shortfall. Two months later, he signed a $92 billion budget that appears balanced only if voters approve an $8.5 billion tax increase in November. According to a study published by a public policy group at Stanford University, California’s various retirement systems have amassed $500 billion in unfunded liabilities. To honor the pension and benefit contracts of current and retired public employees, state and local governments have already started to lay off workers and slash services.
Not just in its finances but almost wherever you look, the state’s vital signs are dipping. The average unemployment rate hovers above 10 percent. In the reading and math tests administered by the National Assessment of Educational Progress, California students rank near the bottom of the country, though their teachers earn far more than the average American teacher does. California’s penal system is the largest in the United States, with more than 165,000 inmates. Some studies estimate that the state prisons and county jails house more than 30,000 illegal aliens at a cost of $1 billion or more each year. Speaking of which: California has the nation’s largest population of illegal aliens, on whom it spends an estimated $10 billion annually in entitlements. The illegals also deprive the Golden State’s economy of billions of dollars every year by sending remittances to Latin America.
Meanwhile, business surveys perennially rank California among the most hostile states to private enterprise, largely because of overregulation, stifling coastal zoning laws, inflated housing costs, and high tax rates. Environmental extremism has cost the state dearly: oil production has plunged 45 percent over the last 25 years, even though California’s Monterey Shale formation has an estimated 15.4 billion barrels of recoverable oil, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Geologists estimate that 3 trillion cubic feet of natural gas sit untapped as well. Those numbers could soar with revolutionary new methods of exploration (see “California Needs a Crude Awakening,” Summer 2012).
Between the mid-1980s and 2005, the state’s aggregate population increased by 10 million Californians, including immigrants. But that isn’t the good economic news that you might think. For one thing, 7 million of the new Californians were low-income Medicaid recipients. Further, as economist Arthur Laffer recently noted in Investor’s Business Daily, between 1992 and 2008, the number of tax-paying Californians entering California was smaller than the number leaving—3.5 million versus 4.4 million, for a net loss of 869,000 tax filers. Those who left were wealthier than those who arrived, with average adjusted gross incomes of $44,700, versus $38,600. Losing those 869,000 filers cost California $44 billion in tax revenue over two decades, Laffer calculated.
Worst of all is that neither the legislature nor the governor has offered a serious plan to address any of these problems. Soaring public-employee costs, unfunded pensions, foundering schools, millions of illegal aliens, regulations that prevent wealth creation, an onerous tax code: the story of all the ways in which today’s Californians have squandered a rich natural and human inheritance is infuriating.
So why, you might ask, would anyone stay here?
For some of us, family heritage explains a lot. Sometime in the 1870s, my maternal great-great-grandmother homesteaded our farm and built the farmhouse in which I currently live, near what is now the town of Selma. I grew up working alongside her grandson—my grandfather, who was born in the same farmhouse in 1890 and died there in 1976. He worshiped California. Even in his eighties, he still marveled at the state’s unique combination of rich soil, lengthy growing season, huge aquifer, and water flowing down from the Sierra Nevada mountains. He planted most of the fruit and nut trees growing in my yard today. On my father’s side, my great-grandfather helped found the nearby Swedish colony of Kingsburg, where a plaque in a municipal park—thankfully not stolen during a recent wave of bronze thefts—marks Hanson Corner, the site of the ancestral family farmhouse.
My mother, a 1946 Stanford law graduate, was one of the state’s first female appellate court justices and would lecture me about the brilliance of California’s four-level court system. My father—a Pat Brown Democrat convinced that technical training was in short supply for the influx of Southeast Asian and Hispanic immigrants—helped found a vocational junior-college campus in the 1970s. Countless Californians are like me: determined to hold on to the heritage of our ancestors, as well as our memories of better times and the property on which we grew up. We feel that we played no part in our state’s current problems, and we’re reluctant to surrender to those who did.
Another draw to California is its culture. The California way, casual and even flaky, can sometimes become crass and self-indulgent; for evidence of that, just visit Venice Beach or Berkeley’s Telegraph Avenue. But at its best, California still creates a ’49er bustle of self-invention that makes little allowance for class, titles, or hierarchy. As someone who established a classics program with mostly minority students at California State University’s Fresno campus, I can attest that real talent is often found unfettered by hierarchy. In a state with no majority culture, where it is almost impossible to determine a person’s income by race, dress, accent, or bearing, performance tends to trump reputation or appearance. The proverbial “millionaires and billionaires” whom I see drinking coffee on University Avenue in Palo Alto on Monday are dressed no differently from the loggers I talk with in the Huntington Lake bar in the Sierra on Friday. Some of the wealthiest farmers in the world are indistinguishable from their tractor drivers. In California, one earns respect more from what one does than from what one has done.
Some of the reasons that people began migrating to California haven’t changed, even in the twenty-first century: dysfunctional politics cannot so easily mar what nature has so abundantly bestowed. California will always be warm, dry, and beautiful, and it boasts an unparalleled diversity of climate and terrain. This past winter, I could leave my Sierra cabin (altitude 7,200 feet, with 20 feet of snow piled nearly to the roof) in the morning, drive down to 70-degree afternoons on my farm in the Central Valley, and arrive in the evening at the Stanford University campus, with its cool bay breezes. What’s most striking about California isn’t its rugged mountains, gorgeous beaches, and vast plains, but their proximity to one another. That nearness is an obvious incentive for Californians to stay put. In the winter, when midwestern sunbirds fly to Arizona and New Yorkers go to Florida, Californians are never farther than a few hours’ drive from the coast.
This beauty is economically profitable as well. Thanks to its climate, California can grow three crops a year, while most states struggle with one or two. The long growing season—plus great soil, plenty of irrigation, vast agribusiness economies of scale, and technological support from nearby universities—means that California’s farms can produce almost twice the usual tonnage of fruits and vegetables per acre. Not only are California’s cotton, wine, fruit, and dairy industries more productive than any in the world; hundreds of millions of affluent Asian consumers translate into skyrocketing export-commodity prices for the state’s farmers. This year, beleaguered California farms—fighting water cutoffs, new regulations, and encroaching suburbanization—will nonetheless export over $17 billion worth of food overseas (see “California’s Water Wars,” Summer 2011). In so mild a climate, moreover, outdoor construction is an all-year enterprise. It’s hard to believe that the world’s most productive farmers and most innovative builders would pack up and leave without a fight.
California also possesses enormous natural wealth in oil, gas, minerals, and timber. With commodity prices high and new technologies for energy exploration emerging all the time, the dollar wealth below California’s surface is greater than ever. The existential stuff of any civilization remains food and fuel, and California has more of both than any other state. So we wait for sanity to return to our officials, as our natural untapped wealth grows ever more valuable.
And no explanation of California’s appeal would be complete without mentioning how many top universities it hosts. In most rankings of the world’s universities, Stanford, Caltech, UC Berkeley, and UCLA make the top 20. The industries that best explain why California is still the world’s eighth- or ninth-largest economy—Silicon Valley, the Los Angeles aerospace industry, Napa Valley wineries, and Central California agriculture—originated in the research and development programs of the state’s vast public university system.
True, that system faces considerable budget pressure and has increasingly adopted a highly politicized and therapeutic curriculum. California State University, in particular, has lowered its standards, admitting students who don’t meet traditional GPA and test-score thresholds, so that over half of entering freshmen must enroll in remediation courses. But the state’s 50-year-old master plan for higher education—which instituted a tripartite arrangement of junior colleges, the California State University system, and the elite ten-campus University of California—remains viable. The schools still draw top scholars from around the world. And students come as well, especially engineering and computer students from China, India, South Korea, and Japan. Many end up settling here. Even in these bad times, it’s difficult to destroy such an inspired system.
Another reason to feel hopeful about California is that it’s reaching the theoretical limits of statism. To pay for current pensioners, the state simply can’t continue to bestow comparable defined-benefit pension packages on new workers, no matter how stridently the public-sector unions claim otherwise. And as public insolvencies mount—with Stockton, Mammoth Lakes, and San Bernardino seeking bankruptcy protection a year after Vallejo emerged from it—public blame is finally shifting from supposedly heartless state taxpayers to the unions. The liberal unionism of an aging generation is proving untenable, as we saw in recent ballot referenda in which voters in San Diego and San Jose demanded that public-worker compensation plans be renegotiated.
Though the fiscal situation is dire, Californians can take comfort from the fact that their budget, unlike the federal government’s, is smaller than at any time since 2006. The state constitution currently requires two-thirds of the legislature to approve any tax hike (though Governor Brown’s ballot initiative in the November election would raise taxes without the legislature’s approval). Since Democrats lack the supermajority necessary to raise taxes, and since California cannot print its own money, the legislature has been forced to shrink budgets.
Californians are also fickle and can turn on a dime. For all its loud liberal credentials, the state is as likely to cut government as to raise taxes. Over the years, Golden State voters have passed ballot propositions limiting property taxes, outlawing free public services for illegal aliens, ending racial preferences, demanding “three-strikes” incarceration for repeat felons, and abolishing bilingual education programs in public schools. Two statewide propositions at the ballot box in November would limit public unions’ prerogatives and require balanced budgets. The state and federal courts and Sacramento bureaucracies overturn most resolutions of this kind or try to avoid enforcing them, but the referenda demonstrate how California can explode into conservative anger at any moment. No wonder the Democratic state legislature regularly tries to change the ballot process.
At some point, the state’s southern border will finally be closed, and with it the unchecked yearly flow of illegal immigrants. The economic downturn in the United States, globalized new industry in Mexico, and increased border enforcement have already resulted in lower numbers of illegals. No national support exists for wholesale amnesty or for open borders. And with an enforced border, California will see not only decreased remittances to Mexico and Latin America and a reduced draw on state services but also, perhaps, a change in attitude within the state’s largest ethnic group. After all, illegal immigration warps the politics of the Mexican-American community, which constitutes more than 40 percent of the state’s population. The unlawful entry of Mexican nationals into California not only ensures statistically that Mexican-Americans as a group suffer from disproportionate poverty rates; it also means that affluent third- and fourth-generation Mexican-Americans become part of a minority receiving disproportionate state help. As one of my middle-class, third-generation college students once put it: “Without the illegal aliens in this school, I wouldn’t get special treatment.”
Without influxes of massive numbers of illegal immigrants, California Latinos could soon resemble California Armenians, Japanese, and Portuguese—whose integrated, assimilated, and intermarried ethnics usually earn more than the state’s average per-capita income. With controlled borders, Chicano Studies departments should eventually go the way of Asian Studies and Armenian Studies—that is, they would become small, literary, and historical, rather than large, activist, and partisan. Indeed, the great fear of the liberal Hispanic hierarchy in government, media, and academia is that without illegal immigration, the conservative tendencies of the Hispanic middle class would cost the elites their positions as self-appointed spokespeople for the statistically underachieving.
To grasp a final reason for optimism about California’s future, you need to understand that many of the state’s political problems result from a bifurcation between the populous coastal strip from San Diego to San Francisco, where the affluent make state policy, and the vast, much poorer interior, from Sacramento to San Bernardino, where policy dreams about immigration, agriculture, public education, and resource use become nightmares in practice. But this weird juxtaposition of such different societies within one state is starting to change. Hispanic Redwood City, nestled next to tony Atherton and Palo Alto, now has as many illegal aliens per capita as do distant Madera and Tulare. Living in high-priced Bel Air, Brentwood, or old Pasadena no longer shields one from crime or from the decay of the California transportation system.
On the congested coastal strip, building regulations, zoning absurdities, and environmentalist prohibitions on new construction prohibit almost anyone under 40 from acquiring a house without a sizable inheritance or an income in the upper six figures. Elites in Santa Monica and Menlo Park are starting to notice that their once-premier public schools don’t perform at the level that one might expect from the astronomical sales, income, and gas taxes. Shutting down thousands of acres of irrigated farmland in the state’s interior, at a time when foreign buyers are lining up to buy California produce, translates into higher prices at the Santa Barbara food co-op. Soon, even the Stanford professor and the La Jolla administrator may learn that illegal immigration, cumbersome regulations, and terrible elementary schools affect them as well.
The four-part solution for California is clear: don’t raise the state’s crushing taxes any higher; reform public-employee compensation; make use of ample natural resources; and stop the flow of illegal aliens. Just focus on those four areas—as California did so well in the past—and in time, the state will return to its bounty of a few decades ago. Many of us intend to stay and see that it does.
Victor Davis Hanson is a contributing editor of City Journal and a senior fellow in classics and military history at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University.
-
The Other California Tax Grab
Politicians are already spending cap-and-trade auction revenue..
Amid so much other good news—13.3% tax rate, liberal supermajority—Californians will also be overjoyed to know that this week the state's new cap-and-trade tax gets underway. Liberals are counting on this to raise billions in new revenue, as if it won't drive more jobs out of the state.
In the Al Gore-global warming frenzy of 2006, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a law instructing the California Air Resources Board to design a Zynga-like market to limit carbon emissions. The state's 350 largest industrial operators will bid for the government-invented "rights" to emit carbon. Revenue from these auctions flow to the state. These permits can then be traded as virtual commodities, which over time will increase in value as businesses comply with an ever-tighter carbon-emissions cap.
This year the state plans to give away 90% of the permits for free to mitigate the compliance costs for covered businesses, which include refineries, steel plants, food processors and cement makers. The rest will be auctioned off with a floor price of $10 per metric ton of carbon. While the smallest operators can expect to pay at least $25,000, larger manufacturers will be dunned millions.
But this semi-free lunch isn't forever. Over the next eight years, the state will ratchet down the number of free permits, thereby driving up their price at auction and on the secondary market.
As a footnote: Utilities will receive their permits for free. But they'll be required to auction off their allowances and use the profits to fund solar and wind projects and control electricity rates, which are soaring thanks to the state's mandate that 33% of all electricity produced by 2020 must be renewables.
The state Legislative Analyst's Office predicts the auctions will raise between $660 million and $3 billion this year and up to $14 billion in 2015 as the emissions cap tightens and prices soar. That's a big pot of change if you're broke. Although the 2006 law requires that auction proceeds be spent on reducing greenhouse gases, liberals are saying Democrats should use their new supermajority to treat the cash as general tax revenue.
The state budget this year already siphons off $500 million of the cap-and-trade revenue for such things as "efficient public transportation" and "sustainable infrastructure" that are paid for out of the general fund. Last year Governor Jerry Brown suggested using the gusher to finance his bullet train, which is a mere $50 billion to $90 billion short.
This assumes the money ever materializes. A study for the California Manufacturers & Technology Association this year estimates the new law will cost state and local governments between $21 billion and $39 billion in revenue due to job losses in the hundreds of thousands and 5.6% slower economic growth by 2020. California has lost about a third of its industrial base over the last decade.
This is the same policy that President Obama wanted to impose at the national level before West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin literally put a bullet in it. Cap and tax has been sold as a way to end global warming, which it has no chance of doing. As California shows, its real purpose is to subject even more of the private economy to political direction and grab more revenue to spend.
-
Don't worry, it will get much worse.
The Other California Tax Grab
Politicians are already spending cap-and-trade auction revenue..
Amid so much other good news—13.3% tax rate, liberal supermajority—Californians will also be overjoyed to know that this week the state's new cap-and-trade tax gets underway. Liberals are counting on this to raise billions in new revenue, as if it won't drive more jobs out of the state.
In the Al Gore-global warming frenzy of 2006, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a law instructing the California Air Resources Board to design a Zynga-like market to limit carbon emissions. The state's 350 largest industrial operators will bid for the government-invented "rights" to emit carbon. Revenue from these auctions flow to the state. These permits can then be traded as virtual commodities, which over time will increase in value as businesses comply with an ever-tighter carbon-emissions cap.
This year the state plans to give away 90% of the permits for free to mitigate the compliance costs for covered businesses, which include refineries, steel plants, food processors and cement makers. The rest will be auctioned off with a floor price of $10 per metric ton of carbon. While the smallest operators can expect to pay at least $25,000, larger manufacturers will be dunned millions.
But this semi-free lunch isn't forever. Over the next eight years, the state will ratchet down the number of free permits, thereby driving up their price at auction and on the secondary market.
As a footnote: Utilities will receive their permits for free. But they'll be required to auction off their allowances and use the profits to fund solar and wind projects and control electricity rates, which are soaring thanks to the state's mandate that 33% of all electricity produced by 2020 must be renewables.
The state Legislative Analyst's Office predicts the auctions will raise between $660 million and $3 billion this year and up to $14 billion in 2015 as the emissions cap tightens and prices soar. That's a big pot of change if you're broke. Although the 2006 law requires that auction proceeds be spent on reducing greenhouse gases, liberals are saying Democrats should use their new supermajority to treat the cash as general tax revenue.
The state budget this year already siphons off $500 million of the cap-and-trade revenue for such things as "efficient public transportation" and "sustainable infrastructure" that are paid for out of the general fund. Last year Governor Jerry Brown suggested using the gusher to finance his bullet train, which is a mere $50 billion to $90 billion short.
This assumes the money ever materializes. A study for the California Manufacturers & Technology Association this year estimates the new law will cost state and local governments between $21 billion and $39 billion in revenue due to job losses in the hundreds of thousands and 5.6% slower economic growth by 2020. California has lost about a third of its industrial base over the last decade.
This is the same policy that President Obama wanted to impose at the national level before West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin literally put a bullet in it. Cap and tax has been sold as a way to end global warming, which it has no chance of doing. As California shows, its real purpose is to subject even more of the private economy to political direction and grab more revenue to spend.
-
Tax hikes, improving economy bode well for state budget
California will see a much smaller deficit next year, thanks in part to the passage of Prop. 30, the nonpartisan legislative analyst says. Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor says: “We still have a lot of catching up to do.” (Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press / November 14, 2012)
November 14, 2012, 8:52 p.m.
SACRAMENTO — Although a modest deficit will linger into next year, California's finances are poised for marked improvement as the state reaps the benefits of newly approved taxes and the economy continues to recover, the Legislature's top budget advisor said Wednesday.
Schools can expect more money eventually, and the state may even start to see surpluses, according to Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor, who provides nonpartisan counsel to lawmakers. He said a healthier budget should then allow officials to turn their attention to California's other chronic financial issues, such as an unstable tax base and an expensive debt burden.
In a report released Wednesday, his office estimates that state officials will need to close a $1.9-billion budget gap in the spending plan they pass next summer, about one-eighth of the problem they faced this year. The gap is smaller than it might have been because state officials, as part of a regular process, recalculated how much tax revenue arrived in recent years, resulting in a $1.4-billion boost.
A big chunk of the remaining deficit is due to the lagging stock price of Facebook, which went public this year. The analyst's office said there would be $626 million less in tax revenue than expected from the initial public offering. The state also is saving far less from closing redevelopment agencies than officials had projected.
Nonetheless, Gov. Jerry Brown hailed the analyst's forecast.
"This report validates the hard work the state has done to cut its deficit and balance its budget over the long term," he said in a statement. "California is now on the path for a fair and sustainable budget as long as we continue to exercise fiscal discipline and pay down debt."
Chipping away at California's most intractable budget problems has been Brown's primary goal since beginning his second tour of duty in Sacramento in 2010.
On election day last week, voters approved Proposition 30, the governor's plan to temporarily raise the sales tax and income taxes on high earners, providing an estimated $6 billion annually for state coffers. Voters also passed Proposition 39, which changes the corporate tax code to raise an estimated $1 billion a year for the general fund and clean energy projects.
Within six years, the report said, California could find itself with a $9-billion surplus, a stark turnaround after many years of severe budget deficits. But continuing financial challenges could quickly eat up any extra money.
Taylor said surplus dollars may be used to shore up the underfunded public pension system or pay back more debt. "We still have a lot of catching up to do," he said.
There will also be intense pressure from activists to restore funding to social services cut during many budget crises.
"We're turning the corner," said Chris Hoene, executive director of the California Budget Project in Sacramento, a think tank that advocates for low-income families. "We should approach the budget with some cautious optimism."
Despite the improved financial outlook, Taylor said the state will probably burn through its existing reserve of nearly $1 billion and end up with a nearly $1-billion deficit by the end of the current fiscal year.
Most of the problem, he said, is the lack of savings from dissolving redevelopment agencies. The state may reap only $1.4 billion, he said, less than half of the Brown administration's estimate.
Facebook, once expected to provide California with a tax windfall, has also been a disappointment. Brown administration officials expected to reap $1.9 billion in taxes by the end of the current fiscal year from the company's initial public offering, but the report issued Wednesday said they should count on only $1.25 billion.
Kim Rueben, a senior fellow at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center in Washington, D.C., said California needs to be more careful when dealing with potential tax windfalls like Facebook, perhaps routing the money to a separate reserve fund.
"You don't want it to be in your day-to-day budget," she said.
==========================
OTOH POTB is also reporting this:
By Andrew Blankstein and Matt Stevens, Los Angeles Times
November 14, 2012, 11:11 p.m.
Los Angeles County court officials announced sweeping cuts in the judicial system Wednesday, including the closure of all courtrooms in 10 regional courthouses.
The cuts are expected to delay some trials, cause longer lines and result in more layoffs, but officials said it was the only option for closing a shortfall of $50 million to $80 million in the court budget.
Courtrooms will be shuttered in such landmark courthouses as Beverly Hills, West Los Angeles, Malibu, Avalon, Huntington Park, Whittier, Pomona and San Pedro. The courthouses will continue to handle some administrative matters, such as ticket payments, but will no longer hear cases.
The Beverly Hills and Malibu courthouses have been the sites of numerous celebrity proceedings over the years, including cases involving Zsa Zsa Gabor, Robert Downey Jr., Mel Gibson and Lindsay Lohan.
The criminal and civil cases from those locations will be reassigned to courts that could be anywhere from seven to 35 miles away, leading to longer commutes for jurors, witnesses, litigants and law enforcement officials.
The closures are expected to occur over the next eight months.
"It's devastating to the court system, and it's going to be a sea change in how we do our business," said Lee Smalley Edmon, presiding judge of the L.A. County Superior Court. "Unfortunately, there are going to be longer lines in each of our courthouses and great delays throughout the system."
Officials said civil courts will be particularly hard hit, with many civil courtrooms operating with only one court clerk and without any full-time court reporters. It's unclear how many court workers will lose their jobs. The Los Angeles County courts have already laid off hundreds of employees and left more positions unfilled, resulting in longer lines to file paperwork and cases that plod along at a snail's pace.
In the last fiscal year, the court system shaved $70 million from its budget, in part by freezing wages and forcing staff members to take furlough days. Plans also call for the creation of "trial hubs," which would handle certain classifications of cases, including small claims, landlord-tenant disputes, collections and personal injury. Those hubs would be spread at remaining courthouses throughout the county.
Antonio Bestard, a veteran civil trial attorney from Pomona, said that even before Wednesday's announcement, the effects of previous cuts were hard to miss.
"It's going to be an unfathomable burden that's going to deny the general public basic judicial remedies, from the smallest traffic infractions to the most complicated civil lawsuits," Bestard said.
David Sapp, a staff attorney for the ACLU of Southern California, worried that low-income litigants could be disproportionately affected.
"Some people are in immediate need of judicial relief and may not even be able to get in front of a judge, which is really scary in terms of access to justice," Sapp said. "This is going to make existing disparities even worse."
Richard J. Burdge Jr. president of the Los Angeles County Bar Assn., said that as devastating as the cuts may be, he believes they won't cripple the court system.
"It's not going to be easy, but there is going to be some civil justice system," Burdge said. "It's going to be incredibly burdensome for a claimant to travel halfway across the county to get to a courthouse and in some communities."
LAPD Cmdr. Andy Smith said that the same would be true for police officers and that their increased travel time could potentially reduce their ranks in the field. But Smith said that his "real concern" is for the victims and witnesses who already may have difficulty getting to court.
"It'll be even more difficult to get people to testify if they have to drive or be transported a long distance."
-
If tax rate hikes bring prosperity, why not raise them further, and on everyone?
The forum (search function) is a time machine. Soon enough we will know who was right, the LA Times or our poster GM.
-
If tax rate hikes bring prosperity, why not raise them further, and on everyone?
The forum (search function) is a time machine. Soon enough we will know who was right, the LA Times or our poster GM.
I wish I could put money on this in Vegas.
-
In lieu of Vegas there is Wall Street. OTOH as the saying goes "The market can be wrong longer than you can stay solvent."
-
I'm already investing in the metals. Picked up a Remington700 heavy bbl in .308 yesterday with a scope for 450, new in box.
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/28/us/california-shows-signs-of-resurgence.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121128
-
The top federal rate with all the surcharges will be 44.6%.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324001104578161013055340282.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
Under prop 30, the top Calif rate will be 12.3%.
http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_30,_Sales_and_Income_Tax_Increase_%282012%29
Add those two: 56.9%
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2176526
Whoops, that income may have already been double taxed at the corporate level, 35% federal and 8.84% Calif http://www.caltax.org/research/calrank.html, roughly the highest in the world. http://money.cnn.com/2012/03/27/pf/taxes/corporate-taxes/index.htm
If you buy anything, add up to 10% for 2013 sales tax, state and local.
http://www.taxrates.com/blog/2012/11/19/california-sales-tax-rate-changes-january-2013/
If you invest any of it, don't forget the new investment dividend surtaxes - on what was already taxed twice at the corporate level: 44.8+12.3% +35+8.8% http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204880404577225493025537660.html
Previous post in the Calif thread: POTH says California shows signs of resurgence.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/28/us/california-shows-signs-of-resurgence.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121128
Good luck with that. What could possibly go wrong?
In one year, Britain lost 2/3rds of its millionaires with smaller tax increases. Even with a moat.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9707029/Two-thirds-of-millionaires-left-Britain-to-avoid-50p-tax-rate.html
California has freeways going out, not an English Channel.
"Latest U-Haul Index Shows Californians Leaving for Texas"
http://www.thenewamerican.com/economy/economics/item/13723-latest-u-haul-index-shows-californians-leaving-for-texas
Who knew? Pretty soon you won't need a truck to haul what is left.
-
I want the PRK to move rates to 95 percent!
-
http://patdollard.com/2012/12/400000-california-illegal-aliens-to-begin-receiving-unemployment-checks-other-benefits/
-
55 Reasons Why California Is The Worst State In America And The Entire State Is Rapidly Becoming A Bright, Shining Example Of Everything That Is Wrong With America
December 12th, 2012
Share62 Tweet8 +11 Share0113
by Michael
Why in the world would anyone want to live in the state of California at this point? The entire state is rapidly becoming a bright, shining example of everything that is wrong with America. It is so sad to watch our most populated state implode right in front of our eyes. Like millions of Americans, I was quite enamored with the state of California when I was younger. The warm weather, the beaches, the great natural beauty of the state and the mystique of Hollywood all really appealed to me. At one point I even thought that I wanted to move there. But today, hordes of Californians are racing to get out of the state because it has become a total nightmare. It is the worst state in the country in which to do business, taxes were just raised even higher, unemployment is more than 20 percent higher than the national average and the state government is drowning in debt. Meanwhile, poverty, gang activity and crime just seem to get worse with each passing year. On top of everything else, the insane politicians in Sacramento just keep on passing more laws that make the problems that the state is facing even worse. Unfortunately, what is happening in California may be a preview of what is coming to the entire nation. The old adage, “as California goes, so goes the nation”, has been proven to be true way too many times.
In dozens of different ways, the state of California is showing the rest of us what not to do. Will we learn from their mistakes, or will we follow them into oblivion? Please share the list below with as many people as you can. In addition to a large amount of new research, this list also pulled heavily from one of my previous articles and from outstanding research done by Richard Rider. The following are 55 reasons why California is the worst state in America…
1. One survey of business executives has ranked California as the worst state in America to do business for 8 years in a row.
2. In 2011, the state of California ranked 50th out of all 50 states in new business creation.
3. According to one recent study, California is the worst-governed state in the entire country.
4. Thanks to Proposition 30, California now boasts the highest state income tax rate in the nation.
5. Even though California just raised taxes dramatically on the wealthy, state revenues are falling like a rock. State revenue for November 2012 was 10.8 percent below projections.
6. California has the highest sales tax rate in the United States.
7. California has the 8th highest corporate income tax rate in the country.
8. California has the highest “minimum corporate tax” in the country. Each corporation must pay at least $800 to the state even if a corporation does not make a single dollar of profit.
9. California is tied with New York for the highest gasoline tax rate in the country.
10. California is the only state in America that taxes carbon emissions.
11. The state of California issues some of the most expensive traffic tickets in the nation. This is another form of taxation.
12. As of October, only Nevada and Rhode Island had higher unemployment rates than California.
13. The unemployment rate in California is more than 20 percent higher than the overall unemployment rate for the rest of the nation.
14. The state of California requires licenses for 177 different occupations (the most in the nation). The national average is only 92.
15. California teachers are the highest paid in the nation, but California students rank 48th in math and 49th in reading.
16. California accounts for 12 percent of the U.S. population, but a whopping 33 percent of Americans that receive TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) live there.
17. Only the state of Illinois has a lower bond rating than the state of California does.
18. Including unfunded pension liabilities, the state of California has more than twice as much debt as any other state does.
19. Average pay for California state workers has risen by more than 100 percent since 2005. That is good news for those state employees, but it is bad news for the taxpayers that have to pay their salaries.
20. More than 5,000 California state troopers made more than $100,000 last year.
.
Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/55-reasons-why-california-is-the-worst-state-in-america-and-the-entire-state-is-rapidly-becoming-a-bright-shining-example-of-everything-that-is-wrong-with-america/
-
:-o :-o :-o
-
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/01/03/neighbors-poach-jobs-from-california/
January 3, 2013
Neighboring States Poach California Jobs
There’s nothing new about governors competing to bring jobs to their state, but rarely has it been this brazen. The Wall Street Journal reports that neighboring states, as well as some states as far flung as Georgia and Tennessee, are stationing official “business recruiters” in California to convince businesses to move their operations out of state.
It’s no accident that California is the main target. The Golden State has the nation’s largest economy, but it is also one of the least business-friendly: A recent CNBC study reported that California has the third-highest cost of doing business in America due to its high taxes and endless bureaucratic red tape. Combine this with a dysfunctional state government, and it’s not hard to see why some companies might want out. And with the voters electing a new Democratic supermajority that many expect will increase the burden on state businesses, the job sharks think they have an attractive pitch:
Last year, Californians voted to raise taxes on the state’s wealthiest residents. They also voted to close a tax loophole that had allowed multistate corporations to avoid paying tax based on their California sales. Meanwhile, auctions got under way in November for California’s cap-and-trade program for emissions, forcing businesses to start paying for the rights to release more than a certain amount of greenhouse gases. This year, California companies will be held responsible if the warehouses they contract with underpay employees.
It’s still too early to know whether the sales pitch is working, but the mere fact that other states are investing so much in luring businesses away suggests that some are detecting a distinct hint of blood in the water. They may be proven wrong, but California will have to play good defense to keep businesses from packing their bags and heading out.
-
By VAUHINI VARA
SANTA ROSA, Calif.—Property crime has been rising in California, and some law-enforcement officials blame the state's October 2011 sentencing overhaul that has kept thousands of low-level criminals out of prison.
California saw a year-over-year increase of 4.5% in property crime in the fourth quarter of 2011, immediately after the overhaul, marking the first rise since 2004, according to a report from the state attorney general this fall. In contrast, property crime, which includes burglary, auto theft and larceny, fell 2.4% in the nine months before the sentencing changes stemming from a U.S. Supreme Court decision.
While the attorney general doesn't release 2012 data until late this year, localities ranging in size from Sacramento to Santa Rosa in Sonoma County saw property crimes rise last year. The Federal Bureau of Investigation, which hasn't reported 2012 crime data, says property crimes fell 0.5% nationally in 2011 from a year earlier.
Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown signed the overhaul into law in 2011 to ease state-prison crowding. The law put low-level criminals in the custody of county sheriffs instead of state prisons. Many counties have chosen not to lock up some of those criminals at all, or to lock them up for shorter periods, instead monitoring them with electronic ankle bracelets, meetings with probation officers or home detention.
Known as realignment, the changes are "causing more of these people to be out in society rather than locked up," said Santa Rosa Police Sgt. Michael Lazzarini, and that could be a "pretty good reason" for the rise in property crimes. "Not only is it continued workload for the investigators, but it's also a quality-of-life issue for the citizens," he said.
Santa Rosa saw property crime rise 5% last year through November to 3,568 crimes, while violent crimes declined 7% to 585 crimes. Sgt. Lazzarini, the head of the property-crimes-investigation team, said detectives have been stretched thin since the new state law, which he neither supported nor opposed. He said he has struggled to decide which crimes to investigate.
There aren't enough data yet to back up Sgt. Lazzarini's hunch on a statewide basis. Gil Duran, a spokesman for Mr. Brown, said it is impossible to make claims about the reason for the crime increase with limited data. "Any respectable criminologist will tell you that [they] don't determine overall trends in a year or two," he said in an email. "Attempts to tie any increases to realignment are purely political."
But local numbers and anecdotal evidence have convinced some leaders in the law-enforcement community.
"Our members do believe that the increase that they are seeing in property crime has some relationship to the change in how offenders are either supervised or are present in their communities as a result of public-safety realignment," said Scott Seaman, president of the California Police Chiefs Association.
Mr. Seaman, police chief in the Silicon Valley town of Los Gatos, added: "We acknowledge that additional study must be done to better determine what that linkage is." The association supported realignment "in principle" but worries that police haven't been given enough funding to handle the increased workload, he said.
Realignment was an answer to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2011 that California state-prison overcrowding constituted "cruel and unusual punishment" that allowed the state to avoid building costly new prisons. The law didn't free existing prisoners but steered newly convicted low-level criminals to counties.
The change helped shrink the statewide prison population 10% to 132,941 in December 2012 from a year earlier and has attracted some plaudits from criminal-justice experts who say that rehabilitating low-level criminals in communities is more effective than prison in preventing new offenses.
Joan Petersilia, co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, a nonpartisan think tank at Stanford University, said it would be difficult to prove a link with higher property crime so soon after the overhaul. But the police chiefs "may well turn out to be right," she added.
Ms. Petersilia and other scholars and law-enforcement officials also say there could be other reasons for any crime increase, such as police staffing shortages or economic woes. They also say incarceration can be worse at deterring some low-level crimes than methods like electronic monitoring paired with drug and mental-health treatment.
Police chiefs like Ed Medrano of Gardena, Calif., express frustration that there aren't enough data to examine the reasons for the property-crime increase.
"How can we directly attribute this to realignment?" he said. "The reality is that we can't at this point. This was implemented too fast, and there was no mechanism for monitoring the progress of realignment and studying it."
Sacramento Police Chief Rick Braziel said property crime is up in his city, and he believes that could be due partly to realignment. "Is it the lack of cops, is it realignment, or is it a combination of factors?" he said. "I think it's the latter." Mr. Braziel, who is president of the California Peace Officers' Association, added that he warns members to be "real cautious" in drawing conclusions about realignment and crime this soon.
Dean Flippo, district attorney in Monterey County, said he saw an upswing in overall property crime in 2012 in his county. "Is it due to realignment?" he said. "I don't think anyone can say with any certainty at all—but there is some circumstantial evidence."
-
My favorite alleged Democrat pundit and at least one-time Obama voter has been critical of the
blue social model (red/yellow/orange - we don't accept the msm red-blue designations here).
"California is a few years ahead of America as a whole; those who think it is on the wrong road need to think very hard about what is happening and why, because unless something changes, this is where we could all be headed in the not so distant future."
--------------------
California: Living the Turquoise (Yellow/Red) Dream - by Walter Russell Mead
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/01/06/california-tumbles-deeper-into-economic-abyss/
We’ve been hearing a lot lately about California’s return to fiscal solvency thanks to a round of tax hikes; the ‘one percent’ of Californians are, we have been told, happy to pay their fair share and to participate in the rescue of the Golden State.
That’s what the politicians say; some of the actual taxpayers dissent. As Robert Cristiano laments over at the New Geography website, when the new taxes, the old taxes and the ever-increasing regulatory barrage all come together, life in California loses its charm:
"What is my fair share? Under existing Federal and State income tax rates, I will pay 50% of my income in taxes. In California alone, my “fair share” on a million dollars of income is $133,000 each year. In exchange for my taxes, I receive little from the state. In addition, I pay gasoline taxes that pay for the upkeep of the highways. I pay airline taxes that maintain the airports I use. I pay among the highest in the nation sales tax on what I consume. I pay property taxes for the schools my grown children no longer use (they have already left California). I pay utility taxes for the upgrade of infrastructure. I pay higher health insurance rates. I already pay more than my own way.
I used to develop new homes in California and paid development fees, school fees, park fees, bridge & thoroughfare fees, endangered species fees, utility hook up fees, and processing fees to employ the city workers who reviewed my plans. Such fees totaled $40,000 to $75,000 for each new home built in California. I more than paid my own way. Such new homes are no longer feasible in California considering that home prices have fallen between 20-40% since 2008. And with the new regulations to be imposed in 2013 with the passage of the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, housing and energy will cost even more making new houses even less attractive than they are now."
Mr. Cristiano’s problem is that he is a target for all three pillars of California’s progressive coalition. To the Democrats who represent lower income people and to those who represent state and city workers, he is a source of revenue to be milked. To the anti-development greens, he is an enemy to be destroyed—the human equivalent of crabgrass. People who become rich by developing suburban housing tracts were the heroes of post World War Two California; for progressives they have become villains who get rich by destroying the earth.
If he made movies or computer software, Mr. Cristiano would only be sheared; that is, California’s blue coalition would treat him like a sheep, stripping him of wool but otherwise leaving him to go about his business. But because he makes real stuff, they treat him like a mink: they want the whole pelt. In the same way they go after construction, California’s greens heavily tax and regulate manufacturing—again, a mainstay of the post World War Two boom in the state.
The conceptual one percenters in California (Hollywood and Silicon Valley) may well stick around. They can—and do—outsource increasing amounts of their production to escape the state’s cost structure, but an increase in state income taxes is more like a mosquito bite than a visit from Count Dracula for information tycoons in both places. But for one percenters whose wealth is based on production and construction in the state itself, the picture is much darker. As Cristiano puts it:
“So many of the 1% are quietly leaving. The exodus has already begun. Spectrum Location Solutions reported that 254 companies left California in 2011. Despite claims of an upturn, a press release by the State Controller’s office last week revealed tax revenues from both personal income taxes and corporate taxes fell during the month of this November. Revenue from personal income dropped 19 percent below projections while corporate tax revenue was down a whopping 213.4 percent. Such declines will continue unabated for years to come as the California brain drain proceeds.”
It’s unclear what Governor Jerry Brown and his fellow policy-makers are thinking. California is the sixth most expensive state to live in, with a top individual tax rate that is the second highest in the nation. One would think that with all this incoming revenue the state’s public services would be sparkling with quality, yet the opposite is true. California public schools rate as some of the most expensive and poorest performing in the country. In 2011 the Supreme Court ordered that California release 30,000 inmates, deeming the prisons so overcrowded that their conditions qualify as “cruel and unusual punishment.” This shocking move reflects two vital points. First, that with all its wealth, California doesn’t have the funds necessary to build more prisons. Second, that the state is producing too many prisoners—another failure of California civil institutions. Even with its enormous taxes and public institutions that show no sign of benefiting from them, the Golden State still boasts one of the largest budget deficits in the nation.
As regular readers know, Via Meadia doesn’t have a lot of confidence in California’s political and economic management. The confluence of union power with a green hatred of construction forces the state into such cockamamie boondoggles as a $60 billion plus high speed rail. (Unions want jobs, but greens block any kind of construction that doesn’t fit their vision of a low carbon economy.) Call it a turquoise governing philosophy: the mix of green and blue that wants to carry forward 20th century policies like a large civil service and a mass welfare state even as it manages the shift to a post-industrial, low carbon economy.
This strategic vision blends the priorities of three constituencies that are essential for the contemporary Democratic Party in California: rich greens (strong in Hollywood and Silicon Valley), public sector unions (vital statewide political organizations that Democratic candidates can’t win without), and low income Californians (a growing number) who depend on public services.
This is the coalition that nationally the Democratic Party is increasingly coming to resemble as well. The danger to the state and the country is that while this can be a short term majority coalition, it leads to incoherent policy that in the end frustrates at least one of the groups and crimps growth overall.
In California, the bulk of the sacrifices are falling on the low income people who need state and local government services. First, because the green-driven opposition to everything from real estate development to manufacturing kills the blue collar jobs that would facilitate the rise of immigrants and other low income Californians into the middle class. Second, because in order to preserve the position of union workers and retirees, the public sector is so expensive and unwieldy that the interests of consumers of government services are systematically sacrificed in the interests of the producers. Bad schools, tenured teachers. Crowded prisons, happy guards. Cities and counties cutting back on necessary services from trash collection to law enforcement; civil servants doing well.
Via Meadia‘s quarrel with California isn’t really about the goal. We are as turquoise as Jerry Brown in our own way: we think that a low carbon, post-industrial economy can ultimately provide an abundance that will help everyone. When the turquoise tide rolls in, it really will lift all the boats in the harbor.
But how do you get from Point A to Point B? The California path seems unrealistic in two ways. In the first place, it insists on trying to do all this with the methods and cost structure of the Prussian bureaucratic government model. A big, low-productivity, life-tenured civil service workforce cannot meet the needs of the 21st century, and the more you want this kind of government to do, the less will it will do it and the more it will cost.
Then, partly to raise the revenue for this outsized and unwieldy behemoth, California is both crushing the old economy before the new one is really ready to take its place and it is inhibiting the growth of the new service oriented businesses that could provide jobs for its army of unemployed and unskilled workers. The transition between a manufacturing economy and an information one is going to be tough, especially on blue collar and unskilled workers. California hasn’t really thought through the problem of transitional employment and in California’s case the high local population of unskilled immigrants makes the issue more urgent. California needs to be encouraging manufacturing and real estate development rather than squashing them, and it needs to develop tax, regulatory and zoning policies that favor small business start ups rather than entangling them in red tape.
California and its governor are right to be hopeful about the future. They are right to believe that the 21st century can offer people at all income levels a richer, more dignified life than was ever seen in the past. But the interlocking requirements of their governing coalition lock them into a set of policies that doom them to frustration.
It’s easy for those who worry about the future of America’s most important state (the biggest population, the largest economy, the leader in both the information and entertainment industries) to blame a bunch of misguided Democrats for the state’s predicament. There is some truth to that, but it would be very wrong to let the GOP off the hook. If the governing party is making such a mess, why hasn’t the opposition been able to come up with a coherent and popular counter-plan?
California’s failure is the result of failures of leadership on both sides of the aisle. The GOP needs to study its long running decline and current collapse in California if it is to have any hope of being relevant long term across the country. California is a few years ahead of America as a whole; those who think it is on the wrong road need to think very hard about what is happening and why, because unless something changes, this is where we could all be headed in the not so distant future.
-
Brown's Breakthrough Budget
California's Democratic supermajority gets to work. Let the spending begin..
By ALLYSIA FINLEY
California Gov. Jerry Brown is touting his new "breakthrough" budget that provides $2.7 billion in additional funding for schools, $500 million for universities and a $1 billion reserve fund. For only the second time in the past decade, California has a balanced budget. But can the state's new Democratic supermajority keep it?
Mr. Brown is promising to be a good steward of the cash cow voters gave him on election day, when they approved a ballot initiative (Prop. 30) increasing the state sales tax and rates on top earners. They also okayed a measure (Prop. 39) requiring corporations to pay taxes based on their sales in the state, which will raise $2 billion in new revenues from out-of-state businesses that were using an alternative, more favorable formula. Thanks to these tax hikes, there will be an additional $8 billion to $11 billion flowing into Sacramento each year.
That is, if the projections are correct and lawmakers don't spend themselves into a hole.
The state has borrowed nearly $25 billion over the past decade from special funds, schools, and local governments; $10 billion from the feds for unemployment benefits; and $73 billion from capital markets for infrastructure improvements. Meanwhile, local governments want Mr. Brown to pay billions in reparations to redevelopment agencies, which the governor looted to balance his budget a couple of years ago.
The California State Teachers' Retirement System has requested a $3.5 billion annual infusion to keep the teachers' pension fund solvent. State universities and colleges are clamoring for an additional $600 million. Labor unions aim to renegotiate their relatively austere contracts, and Democrats plan to stuff their budget with sundry provisions such as middle-class college scholarships and dental benefits for low-income individuals.
Meanwhile, Medicaid providers have sued the state for slashing their payments by 20% in the last four years and will want to be re-compensated now that the state has cash to spare (at least in theory) and a Democratic supermajority. The budget proposes $670 million in taxes and fees on hospitals and Medicaid managed-care plans to help fund the ObamaCare Medicaid expansion, which will cost an estimated $350 million this year and grow over time. Note, though, that $350 million is merely a "placeholder for the costs" until a more "refined estimate can be developed" once Washington provides more guidance on rules.
A bank-breaking budget is more like it.
-
Thanks to Brown, Kali-fornia has turned the corner (says the Economist). Now what kind of accounting tricks could account for this?
See! Things are getting better. :wink: :roll:
http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21569723-laughing-stock-america-gets-serious-about-its-budget-back-black
-
We keep trying to understand the enigma of California, mostly why it still breathes for a while longer, given the efforts to destroy the sources of its success. Let’s try to navigate through its sociology and politics to grasp why something that should not survive is surviving quite well — at least in some places.
Conservati delendi sunt
The old blue/red war for California is over. Conservatives lost. Liberals won — by a combination of flooding the state with government-supplied stuff, and welcoming millions in while showing the exit to others. The only mystery is how Carthaginian will be the victor’s peace, e.g., how high will taxes go, how many will leave, how happy will the majority be at their departure?
The state of Pat Brown, Ronald Reagan, Pete Wilson, and George Deukmejian is long dead due to the most radical demographic shifts of any one state in recent American history — as far away as Cicero was to Nero. One minor, but telling example: Salinas, in Monterey County where the murder rate is the highest in the state, just — at least I think the news story is not a prank — named its new middle school after Tiburcio Vasquez.
A convicted murderer.
He was the legendary 19th-century robber and murderer who was hanged for his crimes. But who is to say that Vasquez is a killer, and Henry Huntington a visionary?
The New Demography
California has changed not due to race but due to culture, most prominently because the recent generation of immigrants from Latin America did not — as in the past, for the most part — come legally in manageable numbers and integrate under the host’s assimilationist paradigm. Instead, in the last three decades huge arrivals of illegal aliens from Mexico and Latin America saw Democrats as the party of multiculturalism, separatism, entitlements, open borders, non-enforcement of immigration laws, and eventually plentiful state employment.
Given the numbers, the multicultural paradigm of the salad bowl that focused on “diversity” rather than unity, and the massive new government assistance, how could the old American tonic of assimilation, intermarriage, and integration keep up with the new influxes? It could not.
Finally, we live in an era of untruth and Orwellian censorship. It is absolutely taboo to write about the above, or to talk about the ever more weird artifacts of illegal immigration — the war now on black families in demographically changing areas of Los Angeles, the statistics behind DUI arrests, or the burgeoning profile of Medi-Cal recipients. I recall of the serial dissimulation in California my high school memorization of Sir Walter Raleigh:
Tell potentates, they live/Acting by others’ action/Not loved unless they give; Not strong but by affection; If potentates reply/Give potentates the lie.
There were, of course, other parallel demographic developments. Hundreds of thousands of the working and upper-middle class, mostly from the interior of the state, have fled — maybe four million in all over the last thirty years, taking with them $1 trillion in capital and income-producing education and expertise. Apparently, they tired of high taxes, poor schools, crime, and the culture of serial blame-gaming and victimhood. In this reverse Dust Bowl migration, a barren no-tax Nevada or humid Texas was a bargain.
Their California is long gone (“Lo, all our pomp and of yesterday/Is one with Nineveh and Tyre”), and a Stockton, Fresno, or Visalia misses their presence, because they had skills, education, and were net pluses to the California economy.
Add in a hip, youth, and gay influx to the Bay Area, Silicon Valley, and coastal Los Angeles that saw California as a sort of upscale, metrosexual lifestyle (rule of thumb: conservatives always find better restaurants in liberal locales), and California now has an enormous number of single-person households, childless couples, and one-child families. Without the lifetime obligation to raise $1 million in capital to pay for bringing up and educating two kids from birth to 21 (if you’re lucky), the non-traditional classes have plenty of disposable income for entertainment, housing, and high taxes. For examples, read Petronius, especially the visit to Croton.
Finally, there is our huge affluent public work force. It is the new aristocracy; landing a job with the state is like hitting the lottery. Californians have discovered that, in today’s low/non-interest economy, a $70,000 salary with defined benefit public pension for life is far better than having the income from a lifetime savings of $3 million.
Or, look at it another way: with passbooks paying 0.5-1%, the successful private accountant or lawyer could put away $10,000 a month for thirty years of his productive career and still not match the monthly retirement income of the Caltrans worker who quit at 60 with modest contributions to PERS.
And with money came political clout. To freeze the pension contribution of a highway patrolman is a mortal sin; but no one worries much about the private security’s guard minimum wage and zero retirement, whose nightly duties are often just as dangerous. The former is sacrosanct; the latter a mere loser.
The result of 30 years of illegal immigration, the reigning culture of the coastal childless households, the exodus of the overtaxed, and the rule of public employees is not just Democratic, but hyper-liberal supermajorities in the legislature. In the most naturally wealthy state in the union with a rich endowment from prior generations, California is serially broke — the master now of its own fate. It has the highest menu of income, sales, and gas taxes in the nation, and about the worst infrastructure, business climate, and public education. Is the latter fact despite or because of the former?
How, then, does California continue? Read on, but in a nutshell, natural and inherited wealth are so great on the coast that a destructive state government must work overtime to ruin what others wrought.
Also, when you say, “My God, one of every three welfare recipients lives in California,” or “California schools are terrible,” you mean really, “Not in Newport or Carmel. So who cares about Fresno, or Tulare — they might as well be in Alabama for all the times I have been there.”
So Much Taxation, So Little in Return
Thank God for Mississippi and Alabama, or California schools would test dead last.
Somehow, in just thirty years we created obstacles to public learning that produce results approaching the two-century horrific legacy of slavery and Jim Crow. About half the resources of the California State University system are devoted to remedial schooling for underperforming high school students (well over half who enter take remediation courses; half don’t graduate even in six years; and well over half have sizable financial aid). The point of CSU’s general education requirement is not so much any more to offer broad learning (who is to say what is “general education?”), but rather to enter a sort of race, class, and gender boot camp that allows some time off to become familiar with how the culture and politics of the state should continue.
The majority of the once-vaunted upper-tier University of California campuses now resemble second-tier CSU of old. Yet I think a Fresno State graduate of 1965 was far better educated than a UC Irvine or UC Santa Cruz student of today.
The state’s wealthiest and best-prepared students are perhaps only well-taught at its elite schools — the two UC campuses at Berkeley and UCLA, Stanford, Caltech, USC, Pepperdine, or Santa Clara — while the poorer but still serious students increasingly enroll in the new private online and tech schools that sprout up around failed CSU campuses. Why pay for the farce of GE, when you can just get the nuts-and-bolts job skills cheaper and quicker at a tech school?
Stagecoach Trails
Little need be said about infrastructure other than it is fossilized. The lunacy of high-speed rail is not just the cost, but that a few miles from its proposed route are at present a parallel but underused Amtrak track and the 99 Highway, where thousands each day risk their lives in crowded two lanes, often unchanged since the 1960s.
The 99, I-5, and 101 are potholed two-lane highways with narrow ramps, and a few vestigial cross-traffic death zones. But we, Californian drivers, are not just double the numbers of those 30 years ago, but — despite far safer autos and traffic science — far less careful as well. There are thousands of drivers without licenses, insurance, registration, and elementary knowledge of road courtesy. Half of all accidents in Los Angeles are hit-and-runs.
My favorite is the ubiquitous semi-truck and trailer swerving in and out of the far left lane with a 20-something Phaethon behind the wheel — texting away as he barrels along at 70 mph with a fishtailing 20 tons. The right lane used to be for trucks; now all lanes are open range for trucking — no law in the arena! The dotted lane lines are recommendations, not regulations. (Will young truck drivers be hired to become our new high-speed rail state employee engineers?)
When I drive over the Grapevine, I play a sick game of counting the number of mattresses I’ll spot in the road over the next 100 miles into L.A. (usually three to four). Lumber, yard clippings, tools, and junk — all that is thrown into the back of trucks without tarps. To paraphrase Hillary: what does it matter whether we are killed by a mattress or a 2 x 4? In places like Visalia or Madera, almost daily debris ends up shutting down one of the only two lanes on the 99.
Wrecks so far? It is not the number, but rather the scary pattern that counts. I’ve had three in the last 10 years: a would-be hit-and-run driver (the three “no”s: no license, no registration, no insurance) went through a stop sign in Selma, collided with my truck, and tried to take off on foot, leaving behind his ruined Civic; a speeder (80 m.p.h.) in L.A. hit a huge box-spring on the 101 near the 405, slammed on his brakes, skidded into a U-turn in the middle lane, reversed direction, and hit me going 40 m.p.h. head-on (saved by Honda Accord’s front and side air-bags and passive restraint seat harnesses; the injured perpetrator’s first call was to family, not 911); and a young woman last year, while texting, rear-ended me at 50 m.p.h. while I was at a complete stop in stalled traffic in Fresno (thank God for a dual-cab Tundra with a long trailer hitch). She too first called her family to try to help her flee the scene of her wrecked car, but my call apparently reached the Highway Patrol first.
Drive enough in California, and you too, reader, will have a ‘”rendezvous with Death, at some disputed barricade.”
West and East Californias
The coastal elites unite politically with the interior poor, in the fashion of the Caesarians and the turba. I suppose that their common adversary is, as was true of Rome, the disappearing middle class. Along the coast, elites have harvested well California’s natural and acquired wealth. I’ll again just toss out a few brands; you can imagine the lucre and jobs that are generated from Santa Rosa to San Diego: Apple, Chevron, Disney, DreamWorks, Facebook, Google, Hewlett-Packard, Hollywood, Napa Valley, Oracle, PG&E, Stanford, UC Berkeley, Wells Fargo, the ports of Los Angeles, San Diego, and Oakland.
So let us not speak of California decline, but of California’s decline and another California boom — one of 6% unemployment and another of 16%, one of $100,000 per capita income and another of $15,000, one of cottages sold on the first day on the market in Newport and another of vacant McMansions molding away in Stockton.
Success continues on the coast and is managed by very wealthy and mostly liberal residents of the sprawl that surrounds Los Angeles and San Francisco. For the five million or so who are enriched in enterprise zones like these — and there are thousands more spin-off and smaller such companies — life is pretty good if you keep your household small, inherited a house, or make enough money to buy something at about $500 to $1,000 dollars a square foot. In Selma, new 1800 sq. foot homes sell for $140,000; in Palo Alto, dollhouses go for $1.5 million. So who is the prince, and who the fool? Are opera tickets and a street light that still has its wire worth it?
The Cost of Doing Business
Coastal folk seem to view high taxes like Mafia protection money, but in the sense of psychological satisfaction and freedom from guilt. For now, sales, gas, and income taxes are not so high as to matter to those who voted for them, at least in view of the social and political advantages of coastal living: the beautiful weather, the Pacific panorama, the hip culture of recreational light drug use, neat restaurants, sports, fine wines, solar and wind romance, foreign cars, and general repugnance at religion, guns, conservatives, and traditional anything.
To the extent that “they” (i.e. you, reader) exist, the distant others are nebulous, rarely thought-about souls. Perhaps they really do enjoy polluting the planet as they generate the electricity, pipe in the natural gas and oil, refine the fuels, grow the food, and cut and haul the lumber that gives a Palo Alto or Santa Barbara the stuff to go on one more day.
Vote For Me Not To Represent You?
I still can’t figure out politics and culture of our vast interior, both the enormous and mostly empty state above Sacramento, and the huge Central Valley and Sierra. As my neighbors put it, life would have to get pretty awful here to be worse than in Oaxaca. I once asked a neighbor why he was hauling wrecked trailers onto his small parcel. He smiled and told me California was “heaven.” From my few trips to Mexico, I could not argue.
One of the questions I always hear from strangers: “Why doesn’t everyone leave?” The answer is simple: for the coastal overdogs there is nowhere else where the money is as good and the weather and scenery are as enjoyable. How much would you pay to walk in cut-offs in February and not in three jackets in Montana? And for the interior underclass, California’s entitlements and poor-paying service jobs are paradise compared to Honduras, Jalisco, or Southeast Asia. And, yes, the middle-class small farmers, hardware-store owners, company retirees, and electricians are leaving in droves.
Weird Politics
The Latino population, I would imagine, would be in revolt over the elitist nature of California politics. Of course, thousands of second-generation Latinos have become public employees, from teachers to DMV clerks, and understandably so vote a straight Democrat-public union ticket. But millions are not working for the state, and they suffer dramatically from the ruling Bay Area left-wing political agenda of regulations, green quackery, and legal gymnastics. It is not just that the foreign national illegally entered the U.S. from Oaxaca, but entered the most complex, over-regulated, over-taxed, and over-lawyered state in the nation — hence the disconnects.
Take energy. California may have reserves of 35 billion barrels of oil in its newly discovered shale formations, and even more natural gas — the best way to provide clean electricity and, perhaps soon, transportation energy for the state. Tens of thousands of young Latino immigrants — given that agriculture is increasingly mechanizing, construction is flat, and the state is broke — could be making high wages from Salinas to Paso Robles, and along the I-5 corridor, if fracking and horizontal drilling took off. Even more jobs could accrue in subsidiary construction and trucking. And for a cynic, billions of dollars in state energy taxes from gas and oil revenue would ensure that the state’s generous handouts would be funded for a generation. Did someone forget that the California boom of the 1930s and 1940s was fueled by cheap, in-state oil?
More importantly, our power companies have the highest energy bills in the nation, given all sorts of green and redistributionist mandates. The costs fall most heavily on the cold winter/hot summer interior residents, who are the poorest in the state. Those who insist that the utilities invest in costly alternate energy and other green fantasies live mostly in 65-70 degree coastal weather year-round and enjoy low power bills.
Yet the liberal coastal political lock-hold on the state continues.
No one in San Joaquin or Tranquility cares about a baitfish in the delta, but they do vote nonetheless for the elites who divert water from farms, put the poor farm worker out of work, and feel good about saving the smelt in the process. Go figure.
Soft Apartheid
How then does the California coalition work, and in some sense work so well?
The coastal elite offers an agenda for more welfare funding, scholarships, class warfare, public unions, diversity, affirmative action, open borders, and amnesty, and in response the interior voter signs off on everything from gay marriage, solar and wind subsidies, gun restrictions, mass transit schemes, and the entire progressive tax-and-spend agenda. Most of this coalition never much sees one another.
The young Mountain View programmer keeps clear of Woodlake. He even has only a vague idea of what life is like for those who live in nearby Redwood City and make his arugula salad at the hip pasta bar in Palo Alto. In turn, the Redwood City dishwasher has an equally murky sense that the wealthy kid who works at Google does not wish to deport his uncle — and so the two become unspoken political partners of sorts. One of the state’s wealthiest cities, a gated Atherton, is juxtaposed to one of its most Latinate communities, Redwood City. But they might as well be Mercury and Pluto. Or should we applaud that the owner of the manor and his grass cutter vote identically — and against the interests of the guy who sold and serviced the Honda lawn mower?
In the flesh, the energetic people I associate with during the week in Silicon Valley and see on the Stanford campus and on University Avenue are, it must be said, innovative folk, but soft apartheidists: where they live, where their kids go to schools, where they eat, and whom they associate with are governed by a class, and de facto racial, sensibility that would make Afrikaners of old proud.
The liberal aristocracy is as class-bound as the old Republican blue-stockings, but saved from populist ostracism by what I have called the “hip” exemption — liberalism’s new veneer that allows one to be both consumer and critic of the Westernized good life, to praise the people and to stay as far away from them as possible. Mitt Romney is an outsourcer; Google’s offshore holdings are cool.
Hope?
“My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty and despair!”
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
Is there hope? Can there be honesty about our crises and courage to address them? If there is not to be assimilation and integration at the rate as in the past, then I sometime fantasize that a new conservative movement of second- and third-generation upper middle-class, over-taxed Mexican-Americans will demand competitive schools for their children without the fantasies of Chicano studies and coastal global warming indoctrination.
They will push for energy development, beefed-up law enforcement, and reasonable taxes and power rates, and so lock horns with the coastal elites, well apart from abortion, the death penalty, and the constant alternative lifestyle agenda. Some already are heading that way; more would if the borders were closed and the old forces of the melting pot were not impeded.
Or maybe change will come from the other end of the surreal coalition. I talk to young, high-end yupster couples and wonder how they can vote for 40% federal income taxes, 11% state income taxes, Obamacare, and payroll and Medicare surcharges on their hefty incomes when increasingly they don’t use the public schools. Or if they have children, they pay exorbitant prices for private schooling and coastal housing that anywhere else would be laughable. I don’t think Menlo-Atherton High School, or the average paving on any residential street in Palo Alto, or the security on Willow Avenue, or the square footage of the typical Menlo Park bungalow is all such a great deal for losing 55% of your income to the local, state, and federal redistributionists.
Will Howard Jarvis return, with Birkenstocks and ponytail?
Would some young visionary see that just a few ecologically correct new dams, and a well-run development of the Monterey shale formation, would enable vast new increases in California energy and agriculture — food and fuel are what sustains mankind — and launch another Gold Rush?
Then I wake up and accept that contemporary California is a quirk, one governed by a secular religion, a non-empirical belief system that postulates that natural gas is bad because it produces heat and that dams that store precious water are unnatural. So far the consequences of such thinking rarely boomerang on the cocooned fantasists.
We are like the proverbial spoiled third-generation progeny of the immigrant farmer: the first-generation toiler lived in a hovel until he bought his 80 acres with paid cash. The second remodeled the old house, had a nicer car than a tractor, doubled the acreage, but took the weekend off and had less money in the bank than did his dad. The third fantasized and puttered about in his hiking boots, went through the inheritance, mortgaged the land — and was as glib and mellifluous as he was broke.
California is a tired idea.
For the sword outwears its sheath,
And the soul wears out the breast.
-
VDH knows Calif!
"Are opera tickets and a street light that still has its wire worth it?"
I am a little slow but now they are stealing the wires out of the street lights.
http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news/local&id=8589144
What can go wrong when people have no skin in the game? Everything.
-
Two-Tax Rise Tests Wealthy in California
By ADAM NAGOURNEY
Published: February 6, 2013
PALO ALTO, Calif. — It is getting awfully expensive to be a millionaire in California.
With the new year, big earners are confronting a 51.9 percent federal-state income tax hit on earnings over $1 million, the result of a confluence of new tax-the-rich levies imposed by California and Congress in the closing days of 2012. That is officially the highest in the nation. And at 13.3 percent, the top-tier California income tax is, in addition to being higher than any other state, the steepest it has been since World War II.
Though no one expects traffic jams at 30,000 feet as panicked millionaires make for the state line, the wealthy are once again grumbling about abandoning California for less punishing tax climates. Phil Mickelson, the golfer who collects purses in excess of $1 million, suggested that he might become the latest in a line of athletes and entertainment figures, among them Tiger Woods, who left California for states like Florida, which has no personal income tax.
The Republican governor of Texas, Rick Perry, firing a new shot in an old interstate war, began putting radio advertisements on the air in California this week summoning burdened businesses his way. “I have a message for California business: Come check out Texas,” Mr. Perry said.
Blood, it seems, is in the water.
“Are you looking to leave California because of the recent tax increase?” a CNN Money correspondent posted online in an inquiry this week. “You could be profiled in an upcoming story.”
For all its many attributes, California has long been a state defined by high taxes and the people who hate them; conservatives here were successfully organizing against taxes before anyone heard of the Tea Party. Yet this milestone — or perhaps millstone — has sneaked up as an unpleasant surprise for the rich, a cloud in the sky at a time when the state budget has come back into balance (in no small part because of the aforementioned tax increase) and the state economy seems to be snapping back to life.
Mr. Mickelson later apologized for discussing the topic, though that did not prevent Mr. Perry from sending him a message on Twitter: “Hey Phil ... Texas is home to liberty and low taxes ... we would love to have you as well!!” Conservatives and antitax activists have cited Mr. Mickelson’s remarks as evidence of what they have long argued are the costs California pays for having such a high tax burden.
“It’s definitely the highest in the United States,” said David Kline, a vice president of the California Taxpayers Association, a taxpayers’ advocacy organization. “What we like to point out to people is that there are states with absolutely no personal income tax — so if you moved from California to Florida, and you are in a high-income bracket, you are automatically giving yourself a 13.3 percent raise.”
For what it is worth, California’s big earners can deduct their state taxes from their federal returns, or at least for the time being: were Congress to repeal that deduction, which is now under discussion, the actual tax burden would be 52.9 percent. The top rate in California has been as high as 15 percent and as low as 6 percent, and the combined rate has been higher at times, like when federal income taxes spiked to pay for wars.
Gov.Jerry Brown, a Democrat who urged voters to approve the latest state income tax surcharge, dismissed Mr. Perry’s poaching as political trickery, suggesting that high earners consider other factors in deciding where to locate. “People invest their money where these big things have occurred,” he told reporters. “The ideas, the structures, the climate, the opportunity is right here on the Pacific Rim.”
Some of those earners seem at least resigned to the tax burden as a cost of being able to live in California rather than, say, Texas.
“I am happy to pay my taxes, whatever they are: no problem with me,” said David Geffen, the entertainment mogul, who owns estates on the oceanfront in Malibu and on the hedge-lined streets of Beverly Hills. He said he thought it could hurt the business climate, but added, “I don’t think anybody of means is really going to move because of it.”
Cristobal Young, an assistant professor of sociology with the Center on Poverty and Inequality at Stanford, conducted a study last fall that concluded that tax rates had little effect on where millionaires choose to live.
Mr. Young said he suspected that few, if any, millionaires would leave or stay away because of the tax increase. More likely, he said, they would find ways of reducing their tax burden, with loopholes or income avoidance, or simply reduce their work.
======================
“I suspect the accountants are busier this year, but I don’t think the moving companies are getting a boost,” Mr. Young said. “Moving out of state is actually one of the most costly responses they could make. California’s high-income earners are clustered in coastal cities far from state borders. Moving to Nevada or Texas or Florida is a very big life change, and means leaving behind family, friends, colleagues and business connections.”
The burden represents a political reality both here and in Washington: while there might be a new willingness to raise taxes to deal with governmental shortfalls, the target of those new taxes is the wealthy.
In December, Congress agreed to increase federal income taxes on income over $400,000 a year. In November, California voters approved the temporary state income tax surcharge, establishing the top marginal tax rate at 12.3 percent. There is also is a 1 percent millionaire surcharge for mental health programs.
The median rate paid by average taxpayers is significantly lower. Still, this new round of upper-income taxes lifted California to the top of the tax mountain, said Gerald Prante, an economist at Lynchburg College in Virginia, who published a report on marginal tax rates across the country. Right behind California is New York City, which has a 51.7 percent marginal rate. (The rest of New York State has a slightly lower rate because the city imposes a personal income tax.)
Hawaii ranks third, and seven states do not have a personal income tax at all.
Mr. Prante also said there was little evidence that the high taxes he charted had chased anyone out of California. “Has one person ever moved?” he said. “Obviously, yes. But how big an effect is it? Taxes aren’t the only thing that matters when people move.”
But Bradley R. Schiller, a professor of economics at the University of Nevada, Reno, said the argument that high taxes were not pushing people defied the obvious. The French actor Gerard Depardieu recently left his home country to avoid what he described as a severe increase in income taxes, drawing criticism from France and his fellow citizens. Accordingly, Mr. Schiller said, high-profile millionaires are unlikely to want to draw attention to decisions to leave for states with lower taxes, thus making the migration harder to track.
“Taxes have to be a very important part of the equation,” Mr. Schiller said. “If you are talking about an income tax of 13 percent on a millionaire in California and an income tax rate of zero percent on a millionaire in Nevada, to argue that it doesn’t affect a millionaire’s locations decision is to say all millionaires must be stupid.”
Mr. Schiller, who was born in California, now lives in Nevada.
-
Senate Democrats, Law Enforcement, Mayors Announce Bills to Reduce Gun Violence
February 07, 2013
Yee legislation will prohibit easily changeable magazines on assault weapons and require safe storage of all guns
SACRAMENTO – Today, Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco/San Mateo) along with several of his colleagues, law enforcement, gun safety advocates, San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee, and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced a series of bills to help prevent gun violence.
The legislative package is designed to close loopholes in the existing regulations, keep the circulation of firearms and ammunition out of the hands of dangerous persons, and strengthen education relating to firearms and gun ownership.
Among the bills is Yee’s SB 47 to prohibit the use of the bullet button and other devices that allow for changeable magazines on all military-style assault weapons, such as AR-15s. Under SB 47, featured weapons would only be allowed to have low capacity (10-round) ammunition magazines that could not be changed without dissembling the firearm action. Essentially, bullets could only be loaded one-by-one from the top of the gun.
“While we cannot stop every senseless act of gun violence, the significant rise of mass shootings across the country demonstrates that we must take steps to close the loopholes that currently exist in California,” said Yee. “These bills will lower the likelihood of a mass shooting and limit the casualties when such an incident occurs.”
In addition to SB 47, Yee is authoring SB 108 to require all guns to be properly stored when not in the possession of the owner. Current law only requires that gun owners own a trigger lock or safety lock box for their weapon, but doesn’t require the safety device to be used on an idle firearm. Yee’s bill will specifically require that all guns be properly stored with a trigger lock or in a lock box at a residence when the owner is not present.
Yee also plans to introduce legislation that will remove unnecessary and cumbersome barriers that have prevented many counties from implementing Laura’s Law, a program that allows enforcement of Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT) orders for some potentially dangerous mentally ill patients.
The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence recently released a study that showed the states with the toughest gun laws have the lowest rates of gun-related deaths, while states with weak gun laws have the highest rates of gun deaths.
The 6 states with the lowest per capita gun death rates (Hawaii, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut), all had some of the toughest gun laws in country. In contrast, the top 10 states with the highest per capita gun death rates (Alaska, Louisiana, Montana, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Wyoming, Tennessee, Alabama, and Mississippi) all had weak gun laws.
“It is a fact that strong gun laws work and weak laws result in the loss of innocent lives,” said Yee “Clearly, there is a direct correlation between common sense gun laws and fewer gun-related homicides.”
###
Senate Democrats’ Ten Legislative Actions
REGULATION: Closing loopholes in existing laws
1. Fixed magazines (Steinberg): Prohibit the future sale, purchase, manufacture, importation, or transfer in California of semi-automatic rifles that can accept detachable magazines. This legislative action decisively closes the loopholes that have allowed the gun industry to flood our communities with rapid-reload battlefield weapons.
2. High Capacity magazines (Hancock): Ban possession of large capacity ammunition magazines over 10 rounds. This legislative action decisively closes loopholes that have allowed the gun industry to enable the assembly and home-modification of 10-round magazines into larger capacity magazines.
3. Bullet button (Yee): This legislative action closes the loophole that has allowed the gun industry to flood our communities with modification tools to rapidly detach and replace magazines from semi-automatic rifles.
4. Shotgun Definition (Jackson): This legislative action updates the definition of a banned shotgun with a revolving cylinder to include the new technology of a shotgun-rifle combination.
CIRCULATION: Keeping weapons and ammunition in the hands of responsible gun owners
5. Requires Ownership Record of all Guns (Steinberg): Applies ownership records consistently across-the-board, ensuring all firearms are recorded, and ensuring that no firearms of any classification are legally accessible to prohibited persons or persons without a background check.
6. Ammunition Purchase Permit (de Leon): Expanding on what Los Angeles and Sacramento are already doing requiring anyone wishing to purchase ammunition in California to obtain a purchase permit first, by passing a full and complete background check.
7. Gun Loans (Block): This legislative action prevents unregulated gun loans, with exceptions, including hunting. To limit legal accessibility of weapons to prohibited persons or persons without a background check.
8. APPS Expansion (Leno): This legislative action prohibits individuals on APPS from residing in a home with any weapons. Expand the APPS list by adding more than two DUIs, other crimes.
9. APPS Enforcement (Leno/Steinberg): This legislative action authorizes DOJ to use existing DROS funding to eliminate the 19,000 backlog of individuals on APPS.
EDUCATION: Fostering a culture of responsible and informed gun ownership
10. Fire arm safety certificate (Block): This legislative action will establish a safety certificate for handguns, mirroring the training currently required annually to lawfully carry a concealed weapon (CCW).
Contact: Adam J. Keigwin,
(916) 651-4008
================================
It gets worse , , ,
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/02/foghorn/list-of-proposed-california-gun-control-measures-500-round-max-no-grandfathering-no-detachable-mags-mandatory-license/
-
California's Anti-Gun Senate Democrats Announce Plans to Further Infringe on the Second Amendment
Last week, anti-gun Assembly Democrats announced their plans to eliminate the right of law-abiding citizens to exercise their Second Amendment rights. Yesterday, anti-gun Senate Democrats did the same. In a press release, Senate Democrats announced several egregious anti-gun bills they are planning to promote and pursue in the 2013 legislative session.
According to the Brady Campaign’s national ranking of state gun control laws, California is already THE “best” (most restrictive) state in the nation and has already banned pseudo "assault weapons." So, even though California is considered the most restrictive state, anti-gun state Senators seem to think more gun laws will reduce their violent crime problem where current gun control laws have failed. By definition, violent and insane criminals violate laws, especially gun control laws. They neither obey gun bans, nor register their firearms and absolutely do not comply with any gun control schemes whatsoever. As a result, innocent law-abiding citizens are the only ones who pay the price and are left defenseless and made victims or criminals.
The language in several of these onerous bills have not been finalized or assigned a bill number, but below we have listed the bill explanations according to the press release.
Detachable Magazines, introduced by "F" rated state Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, prohibits the sale, purchase, manufacture, importation or transfer of all semi-automatic rifles that can accept detachable magazines.
"High Capacity" Magazines, introduced by "F" rated state Senator Loni Hancock, bans the possession of "high capacity" ammunition magazines over ten rounds.
Shotgun Definition, introduced by "F" rated state Senator Hanna-Beth Jackson, redefines a banned shotgun with a revolving cylinder to include the new technology of a shotgun-rifle combination.
Ownership Record, also introduced by Senator Steinberg, requires firearm ownership records on ALL firearms.
Gun Loans, introduced by "F" rated state Senator Marty Block, bans unregulated gun loans, with exceptions, including hunting.
APPS Expansion, introduced by "F" rated state Senator Mark Leno, expands Armed Prohibitive Persons System (APPS) list to include more than two DUIs, among other crimes, and would prohibit those individuals from residing in a home with any firearms.
Firearm Safety Certificate, introduced by Senator Block, establishes a safety certificate for handguns, mirroring the training currently required annually to lawfully carry a concealed weapon (CCW).
Senate Bill 47, again introduced by "F" rated state Senator Leland Yee, requires the registration of most semi-automatic centerfire rifles with detachable magazines sold between January 2001 to December 2013 and bans tools ("bullet button") used to detach and replace magazines from semi-automatic rifles.
Senate Bill 53, introduced by "F" rated state Senator Kevin de Leon, requires ammunition purchasers in California to obtain an ammunition purchase permit first by passing a full and complete background investigation, registration and thumb printing for all ammunition sales and bans the internet/mail order purchase of all ammunition.
Senate Bill 108, introduced by Senator Yee, requires a person who is 18 years of age or older, who owns, leases, rents, or is other legal occupant of a residence to store a firearm that he or she owns or has lawful possession of locked in a container or otherwise be disassembled each time the person leaves his or her property.
Senate Bill 140, introduced state Senators Leno and Steinberg, authorizes the California Department of Justice (DOJ) to raid existing Dealers' Record of Sales (DROS) funding to eliminate the 19,000 backlog of individuals on the APPS.
The NRA will continue to monitor these onerous bills against law-abiding citizens. In the meantime, call AND e-mail your state Senator urging him or her to protect law-abiding citizens instead of penalizing them for the criminal actions of others. Contact information for your state Senator can be found here.
-
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/02/11/california-cheating-young-with-toxic-bonds/
February 11, 2013
California: Already Stoking the Next Big Financial Crash?
Walter Russell Mead
The next financial market meltdown may already be brewing: not in the housing market, this time, but in municipal bonds. Greedy bankers, opportunistic politicians and hobbled regulators are putting a time bomb in the muni market that could set off another devastating crash.
California is leading the way.
It is starting out innocently enough. Looking to expand a number of aging school facilities but loath to raise the taxes necessary to pay for it, California cities have opted to fund school construction projects with capital appreciation bonds, which allow school districts to borrow money now while putting off payments for decades. It sounds like a great deal, but it has one major drawback: The interest rates involved push the eventual price tag to many times the original amount—sometimes as much as ten times more. The New York Times has the story:
In San Diego, property owners owe $630 million on a $164 million bond. For theFolsom Cordova Unified School District, a $514,000 bond will cost $9.1 million.
And in the most expensive case yet, the Poway Unified School District borrowed $105 million to finish modernizing older school buildings, which local property owners will be paying off until four decades from now at an eventual cost of nearly $1 billion. Because payments on the bond do not start for 20 years, current school board members faced little risk of resistance from property owners. [...]
In 2009, as the housing market crash drove down tax revenues for schools and state education financing was cut, California lifted its requirement that long-term bonds be paid off at approximately the same rate each year, opening the door for bonds that delay payments for 20 years.
This is irresponsibility on steroids, but it represents a dream come true for crony capitalists and Wall Street I-bankers. Fat fees, enormous interest, and the taxpayers won’t even know what hit them when the whopping bills come due.
But everyone involved should be put on notice: While not all of these bond issues are equally bad, as a class these bonds are toxic and likely to bring serious pain to everyone connected to them. Some of the deals already done will likely blow up in the future; bankruptcy will loom when the pension squeeze and the bond bomb both hit at full force.
But the worst danger is not from the relatively small number of deals already done but in the potential for this kind of finance to spread. Like the bad ideas that started off small but grew until they were big enough to blow up the mortgage market, dangerous practices can become more common and widespread in municipal finance. More politicians will catch on to the magic of long term bonds that bring benefits now but will savage your town a couple of decades on. Other state legislatures will be pressured to follow California’s rash venture into muni madness as investment banks, construction companies and public sector unions lobby non-stop. Politically managed pension funds will load up on this dangerous paper. Investors hungry for yield will pile on and tell themselves that the market is safe. It will all look brilliant until the roof caves in.
Investment banks who underwrite these bonds should be very careful to police the email traffic of the employees who work on them; the risk that every tiny detail and email message relating to them will one day be made public in court and/or legislative hearings is huge. Massive lawsuits are likely and there is serious reputation risk. The day may well come when we’ll all watch the heads of investment banks squirming in vicious congressional hearings that rip their reputations and the reputations of their banks to shreds when the public wakes up to these Soprano style rip-offs. Figuratively speaking, some of the people involved in these deals will be hanging from street lights when the public figures out what’s been done.
Politicians who approve or recommend these bonds should be braced for a firestorm of public rage when and as voters realize just how badly they’ve been shafted. Nobody has an electoral mandate to saddle future generations in this way. If any politicians associated with this receive campaign contributions from any of the financial institutions involved, expect to have every painful detail exposed to public scrutiny. (And journalists, have at it—there is gold in these hills: crony capitalists bribe conniving politicians to sign one sided debt indentures that mortgage the future of whole communities. This is the 21st century equivalent of selling Manhattan for $24 worth of beads and there’s a Pulitzer in there somewhere for somebody who digs up the sordid details behind this mess.)
Investors should not under price the risks of these bonds. Because they are so one-sided, because in many communities their impact will be so great, and because both the time and money involved are greater than with many other bonds, the risk on them is much, much higher than on less exotic securities. When these come due, you can expect legislators and quite possibly courts to be so filled with outrage that the entire political establishment will be looking for ways to help cities and towns escape the consequences of these foolish agreements. Do not expect sympathetic treatment in bankruptcy court: Exotic in this case is a synonym for toxic. Do not believe the snake oil the I-bankers are peddling with these bonds, and realize that attempting to enforce your rights under them is going to be much, much more difficult than the commission-hungry bond salespeople are telling you. These bonds are not your ordinary muni, and the risks and liabilities they involve need to be scrutinized very carefully on a case by case basis. Remember your experience with CDOs during the last meltdowns; I-bankers lie like rats when they are trying to unload securities and you should not trust all the soothing promises they will make.
And finally, voters need to wake up and take some responsibility. The American muni market is an important and valuable thing; wisely used, it allows cities and towns to spread large capital expenditures over time, and it has been been vital to the development of much of our infrastructure. But just as ‘liar loans’ and other abuses in combination with exotic financial instruments and razzle-dazzle investment strategies paved the way for a serious housing and financial market meltdown, outrageous instruments like these can damage the entire muni market.
Note also that California opened the door to these casino style bonds at a time when its credit ratings were falling and its cities were increasingly cash squeezed. California didn’t legalize these bonds because it was a strong borrower and because its cities were able to finance their operations through normal methods. This was a move of desperation, more like a gambler writing IOUs than like a prudent transaction in the humdrum world of municipal finance.
There are two ways these bonds can be paid. In one scenario, inflation shoots up so far and so fast that by the time the bonds come due, the value of money has fallen so far that they can be easily paid. A billion dollar debt isn’t a problem if it costs $300 million to buy a pair of shoes. Or more optimistically, economic growth could be so strong and the cities and towns who issued these bonds could have gained so much population that the interest rates can be borne without undue strain. That, alas, is unlikely. After all, many of the jurisdictions attracted to this kind of debt have limited credit and resources who don’t have better alternatives. They also presumably have politicians who are not very good at managing city affairs.
Once upon a time, the mortgage market was a safe and staid place where widows and orphans could lend to responsible borrowers paying reasonable prices for sensible housing. But a combination of lax regulation, political opportunism, Wall Street (and Fannie Mae) greed, credulous investors and speculative borrowers turned the mortgage market into a horrible mess that cost this country as much money as a foreign war. Let’s try not to do the same thing with our municipal finance system, shall we?
-
http://offgridsurvival.com/californiatobansemiautomaticguns-confiscatefirearms/
-
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/02/21/the-california-tax-that-terrifies-tech/?iid=HP_LN
-
http://washingtonexaminer.com/conn-carroll-californias-green-jobs-bust/article/2522728
California in Crisis: Golden State's green jobs bust
February 27, 2013 | 6:00 pm
Conn Carroll
Senior Editorial Writer
The Washington Examiner
✉ Email AuthorE@conncarroll DConn on FB
Kevork Djansezian/Getty Gas prices in California continue to be the highest in the country in part because of an excess of clean-air rules and environmental regulations.
Fourth of a five-part series. To read the previous day's installment, click here, and to see the entire series, including stories, video and graphics, click here.
It was supposed to be the next big thing.
California built decades of broad-based prosperity from the Gold Rush, then Hollywood, then aerospace, and later Silicon Valley. At the turn of the century, "green jobs" were supposed to be the wave of the future.
"This is not just a challenge, it's an opportunity," then-candidate Barack Obama said during a 2008 presidential debate. "Because if we create a new energy economy, we can create 5 million new jobs, easily, here in the United States."
Sign Up for the Morning Examiner newsletter!
President Obama, of course, has completely failed to deliver on this promise of 5 million new green-collar jobs. The entire U.S. economy has created only 1.2 million jobs since Obama was sworn into office, many of them in the fossil fuel extraction, production and distribution sector.
But in Obama's defense, most of his green jobs agenda was killed. Cap-and-trade and renewable electricity mandates never made it through Congress. High-speed rail was killed off by governors in Ohio, Florida and Wisconsin.
CALIFORNIA IN CRISIS
Monday: What happened to the Golden State?
Tuesday: The California spending rush
Wednesday: Big Ed's big fail: How teachers union's are destroying California's schools
Today: California's green jobs bust
Tomorrow: Golden Geezers: Thanks to open borders, a generous welfare state, high taxes, land use regulations, failed education system, California is bleeding middle class families
Read the entire series at this link
But where the rest of the nation has rejected all or most of these proposals, California has embraced them all.
How is that going for them? For starters, California now has the highest gas prices in the country. As of the third week in February, the price of regular unleaded was 40 cents more ($4.15 per gallon) than the national average ($3.74).
There are two main reasons for this. First, California has special clean-air rules that essentially make the state a boutique gasoline market year-round. Second, thanks to other environmental regulations such as the California Environmental Quality Act, only 14 refineries are still operating in the state, down from 27 in 1980. As California's cap-and-trade program kicks in this year, the number of refineries will continue to go down, and the price of gasoline will continue to rise.
California already has some of the nation's highest electricity prices -- 39 percent higher than the national average -- and those will continue to rise as the state begins to enforce both its renewable energy mandate and cap-and-trade programs.
The cap-and-trade law will at least spare residential consumers and utility companies part of the added pain with rebates and special allowances. But it does so at the expense of businesses and manufacturers, who are simply are out of luck. Cap-and-trade will cost them about $1 billion a year, according to the California Chamber of Commerce.
And that comes on top of the renewable energy mandate, which requires all utilities to produce 30 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2020. It contains no rebates or loopholes. The mandate alone will drive up electricity rates for everyone by more than 13 percent, according to the Pacific Research Institute, as utilities are forced to buy more expensive electricity from renewable sources.
The California Public Utilities Commission's Division of Ratepayer Advocates has already estimated that 59 percent of all renewable energy contracts signed by utilities paid above-market prices for their renewable energy.
Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal reported that California will once again face rolling blackouts starting in 2015, thanks to the loss of conventional plants and unreliability of wind and solar energy due to weather fluctuations.
But all these new green energy programs must at least be creating thousands of new green jobs, right? Wrong. According to the best numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, fewer than 2,500 green jobs have been created in California since 2010. Compare that with the more than 556,000 jobs that California has added in total since the recession ended in June 2009.
Meanwhile, Texas, which is actively removing obstacles to private-sector development of its fossil fuel resources, has actually lost 928 green jobs since 2010. But the state has also added 612,000 total jobs since the recession ended, including more than 26,000 new jobs in oil and gas extraction alone. That total does not include a slew of other fossil-fuel-related jobs such as oil refining and natural gas distribution, nor does it include jobs that the fossil fuel industries support indirectly.
With an unemployment rate 1.8 points below the national average, and 3.7 points below California's, Texans are probably happy they decided to skip the costly "green jobs" craze.
Tomorrow: How environmentalists are destroying California's infrastructure.
Conn Carroll (ccarroll@washingtonexaminer.com) is a senior editorial writer for The Washington Examiner. Follow him on Twitter at @conncarroll.
-
"Over the past two decades, a net 3.4 million people have moved out of California for other states." (The non-rich far outnumber the rich also leaving Calif.)
"Roughly 40% of the people leaving are Hispanic."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324338604578326402863024028.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
My guess looking at these figures and circumstances, generalizing, is that the people wanting to work are the most likely to leave and the people comfortably on programs are the most likely to stay.
What could possibly go wrong?
-
California Call to Action: Two Anti-Gun Bills are Expected to be Heard Next Tuesday
Contact members of the Assembly Public Safety Committee Today
On Tuesday, April 2, the Assembly Committee on Public Safety will consider two drastic and sweeping restrictions on the sale of lawful firearms and ammunition in California.
Assembly Bill 48 (Skinner), would ban the sale of magazine parts kits that can hold more than ten cartridges, it would ban the sale or transfer of ammunition by anyone other than a licensed firearms dealer and would require that every single ammunition transfer be reported to the state. Under this unprecedented attack on ammunition, millions of law-abiding gun owners would become criminals.
If enacted, a gun owner who “furnishes” ammunition to a friend at the shooting range, and a father who hands his son ammunition while teaching him how to properly and safely use a firearm, would become criminals. Under AB 48, sporting goods stores, general stores, and shooting ranges that do not sell firearms would be BANNED from selling ammunition on a widespread basis throughout the state. This would effectively put many ranges out of business! What is more, AB 48's sales registration requirements have already been tried, and failed, at the federal level. In 1986, the BATFE scrapped this requirement because it had no substantial law enforcement value! But the bill’s problems don’t end there. AB 48 is utterly vague in its attempt to ban parts kits, prohibiting the sale of “devices capable of converting an ammunition feeding device into a large-capacity magazine.” To the extent this provision might be deciphered to ban common magazine parts kits violates, the law is unconstitutional. And by criminalizing the transfer of ammunition by all but licensed firearm dealers, AB 48 further violates the Second Amendment.
The other bill is, Assembly Bill 169 (Dickinson), which would ban the sale and transfer of firearms that are not currently on California's roster of handguns approved for sale in the state. In doing so, this bill would prohibit the transfer of millions of lawfully-owned handguns and jeopardize their continued ownership.
Currently, California law allows handguns that are not on the approved roster to be sold or otherwise transferred to another individual either on consignment or as a private party transfer, provided that the sale is completed through a licensed firearms retailer, where the purchaser is subjected to a background check. If enacted, AB 169 would leave gun owners who lawfully purchased a handgun that previously appeared on the State's approved roster with no means to sell or transfer their handgun, if that firearm is no longer listed on the roster.
Call AND e-mail members of the Assembly Public Safety Committee today and remind them that these bills will NOT deter violent criminals intent on committing crimes and will unconstitutionally restrict the ability of law-abiding Californians to purchase, transfer and use firearms and ammunition on an unprecedented scale. Let them know that passage of these bill will result in additional unnecessary expenses for the state, continue to drive legitimate business owners out of California and force the taxpayers to pick up the tab for costly litigation against the state! Contact information for members of the Assembly Public Safety Committee is provided below:
Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-17), Chairman
(916) 319-2017
E-mail here
Assemblyman Melissa Melendez (R-67), Vice-Chairman
(916) 319-2067
E-mail here
Assemblyman Reginald Jones-Sawyer (D-59)
(916) 319-2059
E-mail here
Assemblyman Holly Mitchell (D-54)
(916) 319-2054
E-mail here
Assemblyman Bill Quirk (D-20)
(916) 319-2020
E-mail here
Assemblyman Nancy Skinner (D-15)
(916) 319-2015
E-mail here
Assemblyman Marie Waldron (R-75)
(916) 319-2075
E-mail here
You can write your representative here urging them to OPPOSE the anti-gun bills listed above. Please feel free to also copy and paste all the bill information to ensure your state legislators know which bills to OPPOSE.
You can also send a letter to all elected officials in California here. Please feel free to copy and paste all the bill information above to ensure the elected officials of California know which bills to OPPOSE.
You can also find information about anti-gun and pro-gun legislation in California at http://www.calnra.com.
-
California: Three Anti-Gun Bills Pass in the Assembly Public Safety Committee
Call the Members of the Assembly Appropriations Committee TODAY
Unfortunately, early this week, all the Democrats in the state Assembly Public Safety Committee voted for three egregious anti-gun ensuring that each bill received and was reported by a 5 to 2 vote. The following Democratic Assembly committee members SUPPORTED these onerous bills:
Tom Ammiano (D-17)
Reggie Jones-Sawyer (D-59)
Holly Mitchell (D-54)
Bill Quirk (D-20)
Nancy Skinner (D-15)
These two Republican Assemblymen OPPOSED these onerous bills:
Melissa Melendez (R-67)
Marie Waldron (R-75)
Please contact the state legislators above to express your disappointment in their vote to PUNISH law-abiding gun owners or your thanks for SUPPORTING law-abiding gun owners. Contact information can be found here.
These three anti-gun bills will now be re-referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. A hearing date has not been set, but we will keep you posted. Continue to check your e-mail and www.nraila.org.
Assembly Bill 48 (Skinner), would ban the sale of magazine parts kits that can hold more than ten cartridges, it would ban the sale or transfer of ammunition by anyone other than a licensed firearms dealer and would require that every single ammunition transfer be reported to the state. Under this unprecedented attack on ammunition, millions of law-abiding gun owners would become criminals.
If enacted, a gun owner who “furnishes” ammunition to a friend at the shooting range, and a father who hands his son ammunition while teaching him how to properly and safely use a firearm, would become criminals. Under AB 48, sporting goods stores, general stores, and shooting ranges that do not sell firearms would be BANNED from selling ammunition on a widespread basis throughout the state. This would effectively put many ranges out of business! What is more, AB 48's sales registration requirements have already been tried, and failed, at the federal level. In 1986, the BATFE scrapped this requirement because it had no substantial law enforcement value! But the bill’s problems don’t end there. AB 48 is utterly vague in its attempt to ban parts kits, prohibiting the sale of “devices capable of converting an ammunition feeding device into a large-capacity magazine.” To the extent this provision might be deciphered to ban common magazine parts kits violates, the law is unconstitutional. And by criminalizing the transfer of ammunition by all but licensed firearm dealers, AB 48 further violates the Second Amendment.
The other bill is, Assembly Bill 169 (Dickinson), which would ban the sale and transfer of firearms that are not currently on California's roster of handguns approved for sale in the state. In doing so, this bill would prohibit the transfer of millions of lawfully-owned handguns and jeopardize their continued ownership.
Currently, California law allows handguns that are not on the approved roster to be sold or otherwise transferred to another individual either on consignment or as a private party transfer, provided that the sale is completed through a licensed firearms retailer, where the purchaser is subjected to a background check. If enacted, AB 169 would leave gun owners who lawfully purchased a handgun that previously appeared on the State's approved roster with no means to sell or transfer their handgun, if that firearm is no longer listed on the roster.
Assembly Bill 500 (Ammiano) extends the ten-day waiting period for a firearm for an additional seven days and expands the mandatory storage requirements of a firearm.
Call AND e-mail members of the Assembly Appropriations Committee today and remind them that these bills will NOT deter violent criminals intent on committing crimes and will unconstitutionally restrict the ability of law-abiding Californians to purchase, transfer and use firearms and ammunition on an unprecedented scale. Let them know that passage of these bill will result in additional unnecessary expenses for the state, continue to drive legitimate business owners out of California and force the taxpayers to pick up the tab for costly litigation against the state! Contact information for members of the Assembly Appropriations Committee can be found here.
Please forward this alert to your family, friends and fellow gun owners in California and urge them to do the same. California is going to need all its law-abiding citizens to contact their state legislators urging them to OPPPOSE legislation that will infringe upon the Second Amendment and hunting issues.
You can also write your representative here urging them to OPPOSE the anti-gun bills listed above. Please feel free to also copy and paste all the bill information to ensure your state legislators know which bills to OPPOSE.
You can also send a letter to all elected officials in California here. Please feel free to copy and paste all the bill information above to ensure the elected officials of California know which bills to OPPOSE.
You can also find information about pending anti-gun and pro-gun legislation in California at www.calnra.com.
Help NRA Get Californian’s Connected With NRA’s California Resources
Help the NRA expand its California network to keep all pro-Second Amendment Californians better informed about legislation in Congress, Sacramento, and locally that threatens your right to keep and bear arms, as well as developments in Second Amendment litigation and regulatory enforcement actions. Please forward this email to your family, friends and fellow gun owners, whether they belong to the NRA or not! Encourage them to sign up for California NRA’s Stayed Informed e-mails here. And follow NRA through these additional connections:
Websites:
NRA-ILA, NRA-ILA California, NRA – ILA Legal Update, CalNRA.com, CRPA.org, CalGunLaws.com, HuntforTruth.org
Facebook Pages: NRA’s Facebook page, CalGunLaws.com Facebook page, NRA Members' Councils' Facebook page, Hunt for Truth Facebook page
LinkedIn: NRA’s LinkedIn page, YouTube: NRA YouTube, Twitter: NRA Twitter, NRA-ILA Twitter, CalNRATwitter, CalGunLaws Twitter
The NRA recognizes that California is one of the most active Second Amendment "battleground states," so for decades NRA has devoted substantial resources to fighting for the right to keep and bear arms for Californians. The NRA has full-time legislative advocates in its Sacramento office fighting ill-conceived gun ban proposals. NRA coordinates a statewide campaign to fight ill-conceived local gun bans and regulations. And NRA has been litigating cases in California courts to promote the right to self-defense and the Second Amendment for many years. NRA’s California legal team continues to work pro-actively to strike down ill-conceived gun control laws and ordinances, and to protect the Second Amendment rights of California firearms owners. For information about NRA’s litigation efforts, see www.nraila.org/legal/litigation.aspx
-
California: Anti-Gun Bills Scheduled for Committee Hearings Next Week
Contact your State Legislators in Sacramento TODAY
Many anti-gun bills are scheduled to be heard in committee next Monday and Tuesday. Call AND e-mail your state legislators urging them to OPPOSE the bills listed below. Remind them that a criminal by definition does not obey or respect the law and any legislation infringing on gun owners will do nothing to affect criminals or their access to and misuse of firearms. Instead, urge them to focus on meaningful legislation relating to school safety, mental health issues, marketing of violence as entertainment for our children and the collapse of federal prosecutions of violent criminals.
On Monday, April 15 in the Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation at 1:30 p.m. in Capitol room 126 (Click here to listen to this hearing):
Assembly Bill 760 (Dickinson) imposes a sales tax of .05 cents per ammunition component (complete cartridge, bullet or case).
On Tuesday, April 16 in the Assembly Committee on Water, Parks and Wildlife at 9:00 a.m. in Capitol room 437 (Click here to listen to this hearing):
Assembly Bill 711 (Rendon) BANS the use of all lead ammunition for hunting.
On Tuesday, April 16 in the Assembly Committee on Public Safety at 9:00 a.m. in Capitol room 126 (Click here to listen to this hearing):
Assembly Bill 231 (Ting) expands the law for Criminal Storage of Firearms and child access.
On Tuesday, April 16 in the state Senate Committee on Public Safety at 9:00 a.m. in Capitol room 4203:
Senate Bill 47 (Yee) expands the definition of “assault weapons” to BAN the future sale of rifles that have been designed/sold and are equipped to use the “bullet button” or similar device, requires NEW “assault weapon” registration of ALL those semi-auto rifles that are currently possessed to retain legal possession in the future, and subjects these firearms to all other “assault weapons” restrictions.
Senate Bill 53 (DeLeon) requires persons to buy an annual ammunition purchase permit, requires the registration and thumbprint of the purchaser for each ammunition purchase, and bans online and mail order sales of ammunition to Californians.
Senate Bill 108 (Yee) requires mandatory locked storage of firearms within a locked house regardless of whether anyone is present.
Senate Bill 293 (DeSaulnier) BANS the sale of conventional handguns, if the state Department of Justice approves the sale of “Owner Authorized – Smart” handgun technology.
Senate Bill 299 (DeSaulnier) turns victims of firearm theft into criminals for failing to report the loss of their firearm within 48 hours.
Senate Bill 374 (Steinberg) expands the definition of "assault weapons" to BAN the future transfer of all semi-auto rifles that accept detachable magazines (including those chambered for rimfire cartridges) and virtually all semi-auto rifles with fixed magazines (primarily those chambered for rimfire cartridges), requires NEW "assault weapon" registration, requires registration of ALL those semi-auto rifles that are currently possessed to retain legal possession in the future, and subjects these firearms to all other "assault weapon" restrictions.
Senate Bill 396 (Hancock) BANS the POSSESSION of any magazine with a capacity to accept more than 10 cartridges, including currently legally possessed "grandfathered" large capacity magazines.
Senate Bill 567 (Jackson) expands the definition of shotgun for “short-barreled shotguns” that are illegal to own.
Senate Bill 755 (Wolk) expands the list of persons prohibited from owning a firearm.
Your state Senator and Assemblyman MUST hear from you TODAY urging them to OPPOSE the anti-gun bills listed above. Don't forget to forward this alert to your family, friends and fellow gun owners throughout California and urge them to do the same. We need all of California gun owners and Second Amendment supports to continually call AND e-mail their state legislators. The California Legislature needs to know that this tyranny against law-abiding citizens needs to stop.
You can write your representative here urging them to OPPOSE the anti-gun bills listed above. Please feel free to also copy and paste all the bill information to ensure your state legislators know which bills to OPPOSE.
You can also send a letter to all elected officials in California here. Please feel free to copy and paste all the bill information above to ensure the elected officials of California know which bills to OPPOSE.
You can also find information about anti-gun and pro-gun legislation in California at www.calnra.com.
Help NRA Get Californians Connected With NRA’s California Resources
Help the NRA expand its California network to keep all pro-Second Amendment Californians better informed about legislation in Congress, Sacramento, and locally that threatens your right to keep and bear arms, as well as developments in Second Amendment litigation and regulatory enforcement actions. Please forward this email to your family, friends and fellow gun owners, whether they belong to the NRA or not! Encourage them to sign up for California NRA’s Stayed Informed e-mails here. And follow NRA through these additional connections:
Websites:
NRA-ILA, NRA-ILA California, NRA – ILA Legal Update, CalNRA.com, CRPA.org, CalGunLaws.com, HuntforTruth.org
Facebook Pages: NRA’s Facebook page, CalGunLaws.com Facebook page, NRA Members' Councils' Facebook page, Hunt for Truth Facebook page
LinkedIn: NRA’s LinkedIn page, YouTube: NRA YouTube, Twitter: NRA Twitter, NRA-ILA Twitter, CalNRATwitter, CalGunLaws Twitter
The NRA recognizes that California is one of the most active Second Amendment "battleground states," so for decades NRA has devoted substantial resources to fighting for the right to keep and bear arms for Californians. The NRA has full-time legislative advocates in its Sacramento office fighting ill-conceived gun ban proposals. NRA coordinates a statewide campaign to fight ill-conceived local gun bans and regulations. And NRA has been litigating cases in California courts to promote the right to self-defense and the Second Amendment for many years. NRA’s California legal team continues to work pro-actively to strike down ill-conceived gun control laws and ordinances, and to protect the Second Amendment rights of California firearms owners. For information about NRA’s litigation efforts, see www.nraila.org/legal/litigation.aspx
To donate to help support the NRA’s California efforts, please click here.
-
California Capitol Update
In This Issue
Legislative Update
Sign the Petition to Support the Romeikes
Judge Orders Sale of Morning-After Pill to Teens
Extra! Extra! Read all About It
Legislative Update
We shared with you on Tuesday that AB 154, the bill that expands abortions, passed through the Business, Professions and Consumer Protection Committee. The hearing can be viewed here and begins at the 1:03 mark.
SB 323 passed out of committee on Wednesday. SB 323 would revoke the tax-exempt status of the Boy Scouts and all non-profit youth sports and civic organizations, including private schools by forcing such organizations to hire, allow as members and leaders, persons whose sexual orientation and gender identity is against the tenets.
While organizations like the Boy Scouts are being bullied punitively with SB 323 because of their oath to stay morally straight, the Assembly passed AB 332, requiring condoms for adult film actors.
SB 606 (De Leon) is a bill that was gutted and amended this week to bring harsher sentencing to paparazzi that harass celebrities' children. The bill amends the Penal Code for an existing crime by increasing jail time from 5 days to up 3 years in county jail on a 1st conviction and would add fine of up to $10,000 to the same jail time for a 2nd conviction. The bill further provides for civil liability in an action for damages.
While we do not condone the harassment of any children, we find this bill in stark contrast to several bills that sought to protect our children from sexual predators that have failed to be voted out of the Public Safety Committee. Bills such as AB 5 (Morrell) and AB 605 (Linder) that would have sent registered sex-offenders back to prison for violating parole, both failed to get enough votes to pass out of their committee.
Who Voted for AB 154
Who Voted for SB 323
Sign the Petition
The Romekies, a German homeschool family, fled their native Germany in 2008 and sought asylum in the United States after German officials dragged their children to government-run schools. They were granted refugee status in the U.S. by immigration judge, Lawrence O. Burman. Judge Burman found that the Romeikes were being denied basic human rights.
However, the U.S. Justice Department stepped in arguing that the freedom to choose to educate one's own children is not a fundamental right.
The Petition to the President of the United States to allow the Romeikes to remain in our country has been successful in receiving the required number of signatures to be considered. Continue to show your support for our parental right to homeschool our children by standing with the Romekies and sign the petition if you have not already!
Judge Orders Sale of Morning-After Pill to Teens
As we are fighting back the expansion of abortion in California, a federal judge in New York ordered that a morning-after pill normally requiring a prescription for girls 16 and younger be made available over the counter for all ages.
Extra! Extra! Read all About It
GRAPHIC:The ghoulish details of abortionist Gosnell's trial
TEACHER FIRED FOR SHOWING HIS BIBLE
Boy Scouts Under Attack in California
Melissa Harris-Perry: Your Children Are Not Yours
Funding of our work comes from individuals like you!
If you benefit from the work CRI performs on behalf of families, please consider a tax-deductible contribution today!
Reminder:
All donations are tax-deductible
All donations are confidential
CRI does not sell or lend our mailing list
Make an Online Donation Today!
-
Action Needed!
Urge a NO vote on AB 1266
Forced Co-Ed Locker Rooms
AB 1266 requires that a pupil be permitted to participate in sex-segregated school programs, activities, and facilities, including athletic teams and competitions, consistent with his or her gender identity. Gender identity refers to a person's private sense of his or her own gender. For example, if a female considers herself a male and is most comfortable referring to her personal gender in masculine terms, then her gender identity is male. Any student would be permitted to participate on male or female sports teams and access any bathroom or locker room of their choosing simply on the assertion that they identify themselves as a male or a female.
This bill will be voted on by the Assembly Committee on Education on Wednesday, 4/17/2013.
We urge you to contact your the committee members listed below and ask them to vote "NO" on AB 1266.
Read AB 1266
Assembly Education Committee
Assemblymember Joan Buchanan (Chair)
916-319-2016 Fax: 916-319-2116
Assemblymember Kristin Olsen (Vice Chair)
916-319-2012 Fax: 916-319-2112
Assemblymember Nora Campos
916-319-2027 Fax: 916-319-2127
Assemblymember Rocky Chávez
916-319-2076 Fax: 916-319-2176
Assemblymember Adrin Nazarian
916-319-2046 Fax: 916-319-2146
Assemblymember Shirley Weber
916-319-2666 Fax: 916-319-2179
Assemblymember Das Williams
916-319-2035 Fax: 916-319-2135
-
I never knew adolescent males held such political power in California. I expect there will be a massive spike in young males self identifying as needing access to the girl's showers.
Action Needed!
Urge a NO vote on AB 1266
Forced Co-Ed Locker Rooms
AB 1266 requires that a pupil be permitted to participate in sex-segregated school programs, activities, and facilities, including athletic teams and competitions, consistent with his or her gender identity. Gender identity refers to a person's private sense of his or her own gender. For example, if a female considers herself a male and is most comfortable referring to her personal gender in masculine terms, then her gender identity is male. Any student would be permitted to participate on male or female sports teams and access any bathroom or locker room of their choosing simply on the assertion that they identify themselves as a male or a female.
This bill will be voted on by the Assembly Committee on Education on Wednesday, 4/17/2013.
We urge you to contact your the committee members listed below and ask them to vote "NO" on AB 1266.
Read AB 1266
Assembly Education Committee
Assemblymember Joan Buchanan (Chair)
916-319-2016 Fax: 916-319-2116
Assemblymember Kristin Olsen (Vice Chair)
916-319-2012 Fax: 916-319-2112
Assemblymember Nora Campos
916-319-2027 Fax: 916-319-2127
Assemblymember Rocky Chávez
916-319-2076 Fax: 916-319-2176
Assemblymember Adrin Nazarian
916-319-2046 Fax: 916-319-2146
Assemblymember Shirley Weber
916-319-2666 Fax: 916-319-2179
Assemblymember Das Williams
916-319-2035 Fax: 916-319-2135
-
Forced Co-ed Bathroom Bill Passes Committee
Assembly Bill 1266 passed out of the California Assembly Education Committee today on a party-line vote. This bill requires that students be permitted to participate in sex-segregated school programs, activities, and facilities consistent with his or her gender identity.
Gender identity refers to a person's private sense of his or her own gender. For example, if a female considers herself a male and is most comfortable referring to her personal gender in masculine terms, then her gender identity is male.
According to Karen England, Executive Director of Capitol Resource Institute, "AB 1266 requires that schools allow children of any gender to participate on any sports team, and enter into locker rooms, showers and bathrooms of their choice. This bill's prohibition on gender identity discrimination means that a boy claiming gender confusion is permitted to share those facilities with girls. There is no privacy protection for the majority of students."
"These situations should always be addressed at the local level with the school administration and parents working together to assist children with their particular needs," said England. "This bill forces a radical policy on all school districts in California."
Read AB 1266
-
By ALLYSIA FINLEY
California's bullet train was conceived 20 years ago from Quentin Kopp's infatuation with European high-speed rail. His beautiful brainchild, however, has since morphed into a monstrosity. Mr. Kopp seems more and more like the protagonist Victor Frankenstein of literary lore, disillusioned by what his ambitions have wrought.
Testifying in a lawsuit filed by Kings County, the 84-year-old retired judge of San Mateo County Superior Court says that California's present high-speed rail plan violates the ballot measure that he helped craft and voters approved in November 2008. In essence, he argues, the state pulled a bait-and-switch on voters.
Kings County wants the court to enjoin the release of state bond funds until the rail authority's plan adheres to the letter of the initiative. The lawsuit is scheduled for trial in May. If it succeeds, state taxpayers may finally dodge the bullet train. Without state bond money, the rail authority has no fuel to burn. So the good news for California—finally—is that compliance with the initiative's original terms is unlikely if not impossible.
Assistant Opinion Journal.com editor Allysia Finley on Jerry Brown’s visit to China courting investors for California’s bullet train. Photo: Getty Images
.Still, killing the project outright is not Mr. Kopp's desire. "I have not changed my position or enthusiasm for high-speed rail in California," he tells me. On the contrary, the San Franciscan bursts with paternal pride. In 1994 he sponsored legislation in the state Senate to study high-speed rail's "desirability and feasibility." Two years later he introduced the bill establishing the California High-Speed Rail Authority to design an 800-mile, zigzagging bullet-train route from San Diego to Sacramento.
From 2006 to 2011, the judge served on the authority's board of directors, during which time he helped lead the campaign for the ballot measure that authorized $9 billion in bonds to build the train project. The initiative mandated that electric trains run every five minutes at peak speeds that exceed 200 miles per hour; zip between Los Angeles and San Francisco in 2 hours and 40 minutes; and operate without a subsidy.
The rail authority's campaign literature promised that the train would cost $45 billion and be financed primarily by the feds and private investors. Mr. Kopp insists that the rail authority rigorously studied the plan before presenting it to voters. The initiative passed by a five-point margin in November 2008.
Over the next two years, the Obama administration gave California $3.5 billion in grants tied to matching state funds on the condition that the state build the first segment in the sparsely populated Central Valley.
Mr. Kopp says the Central Valley was chosen because the flat, open expanse was the best place to test trains to ensure they were "technologically sufficient." The Central Valley also happens to be represented by Democratic Rep. Jim Costa, whose vote was crucial for passing ObamaCare in March 2010. Mr. Costa campaigned for re-election later that year by trumpeting the thousands of jobs high-speed rail would create in his district, where the unemployment rate exceeded 17%.
Meanwhile—in response to mounting criticism from the state legislative analyst's office and others that the business plan was unrealistic—the rail authority produced a revised plan in November 2011 that raised the train's price tag to $100 billion.
Golden State voters were incensed. To mollify them, Gov. Jerry Brown instructed the authority to whittle the cost down to roughly $70 billion by developing a plan for a "blended system." This new plan, adopted in April 2012, would electrify commuter rail in the Bay Area—which had long been on the wish-list of local politicians and transit agencies—in lieu of building dedicated tracks for high-speed trains.
Mr. Kopp says that such a system "bastardizes" high-speed rail. Passengers traveling between San Francisco and Anaheim would have to change trains twice—once in San Jose and again in Los Angeles—which violates the letter of the ballot initiative. Trains would also run at most every 15 minutes, not every five minutes as required by the initiative.
According to Mr. Kopp, 10 trains must run per hour during peak times to support the authority's ridership forecasts and operate without a subsidy. He insists that "the money will come," but only if the train is built according to the original plan.
Right now, however, the state doesn't have enough money on hand even to electrify the first 130 miles of tracks from Madera to Bakersfield. Private firms have refused to invest in the project without a subsidy or revenue guarantee, both prohibited by the initiative.
There's also some not trivial concerns about safety. To meet the law's required 2 hours and 40 minutes travel time, the rail authority intends for the train to barrel through the Central Valley and Tehachapi Mountains, which are transversed by a fault line, at 220 mph.
Mr. Kopp believes that these speeds are feasible. But the fastest train in the world, which runs between Paris and Strasbourg, France, tops out at just under 200 mph. The Chinese reduced their bullet trains' maximum speeds to about 190 mph after a train going 217 mph crashed in Wenzhou two years ago. Forty passengers were killed, and hundreds were injured.
According to a recent study by the Reason Foundation, if the California authority assumed top speeds of 200 mph, averaging 150 mph through rural areas—as is consistent with the National Research Council's safety recommendations—the bullet train's travel time would increase to between 3 hours and 50 minutes and 6 hours. It takes about six hours to drive and an hour to fly from Los Angeles to San Francisco.
Even so, Mr. Kopp insists that the bullet train could make the L.A. to San Francisco trip in 2 hours and 40 minutes and operate without a subsidy—but only if the state sticks to the plan approved by voters in November 2008. And what about studies that have found only two high-speed rail lines in the world break even?
"I've heard that," he says. "But I don't believe it."
Ms. Finley is an editorial writer for the Journal.
-
Assembly Bill 1266 passed out of the Assembly floor on a party-line vote this morning. AB 1266 forces all California schools to allow students to participate in sex-segregated school programs, activities, and facilities consistent with his or her gender identity.
"This bill allows children of any gender to participate on any sports team, and enter into locker rooms, showers and bathrooms of their choice based on that student's private sense of their own gender regardless of their biological gender at birth," said Karen England, Executive Director of Capitol Resource Institute.
"By imposing this radical policy on all schools in California, the Legislature seeks to take away local control from the school districts, parents, and communities. What this bill is saying is the rights of a few students supersede the rights of all other students. AB 1266 will bring many unintended consequences for students, school districts and communities," said England. "No student should be forced to share bathrooms or change clothes in front of members of the opposite sex. AB 1266 mandates San Francisco values on all California schools."
AB 1266 will now move to the California Senate.
Read AB 1266
-
http://gunssavelives.net/blog/gun-laws/breaking-new-guns-essentially-banned-in-california-as-microstamping-law-takes-effect/
-
http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml
-
From a reliable friend:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
And...........
California is now passing a law on ammunition. It requires:
1. Registration and license to buy ammo.
2. $50 dollar license fee.
3. Background check.
If a person tries to buy ammo, and has a mental problem now or in the
past, or even certain violations of CA law, they will be denied the
license. Then, the government will go to their homes and "remove" the
weapons found. Just another way around trying to restrict gun ownership.
Look for gun shops opening up at every border with a passable road so
people can buy ammo out of state and bring it back.
------------------------------------------------
From Pater Tenebrarum: the latest thinking on nuclear issues in California?
As Pater says: *
File under: you couldn't make this up.
*
Tom
*
Good News for Nuclear Terrorists in California
May 30, 2013 | Author Pater Tenebrarum <http://www.acting-man.com/?author=6>
Nuclear Infractions Are Henceforth Cheaper …
Right after California's bureaucrats had the brilliant idea to consider a
ban on
campfires<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/23/california-to-ban-fire/>–
since campfires are potentially dangerous and therefore a legitimate
object of concern for the nannycrats (as the Washington Times notes, 'enjoying
the pleasures of life is just not good for you')– the bureaucrats running
the California town of Chico, the most populous in Butte county, have given
birth to an even more astonishing example of cranial flatulence.
Similar to other municipalities, Chico is apparently struggling
financially. In fact, it has an 'enormous hole in its budget' that is in
desperate need of plugging. As a result, the town has decided to raise all
sorts of fees and fines. Breaking various city ordinances has just become a
lot more
expensive<http://www.chicoer.com/editorials/ci_23322509/editorial-hits-and-misses>–
with one notable exception. Hold on to your hat, here it comes:
“The council has for years approved spending millions of dollars it didn't
have, shifting money around to hide the problem. Now it's out in the open,
and citizens will pay dearly if they dare break city laws.
But there's good news out there for nuclear bomb owners. The current fine
for a first-time violation of the city's nuclear-free ordinance is $1,064.
Under a proposal to revise certain fines, a first-time offense will be
reduced to $1,000.
For those of you new to town, this is not a joke.”
(emphasis added)
Maybe this is an attempt to attract certain types of tourists
fromWaziristan<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Emirate_of_Waziristan>?
We'd also be curious to know what the fine for repeat offenders is.
File under: you couldn't make this up.
-
Democrats in Sacramento are taking a victory lap for balancing this year's budget without raising taxes (not counting the $6 billion retroactive hike voters approved at political gunpoint in November). The dirty little secret is they're instead tapping California's new cap-and-trade program.
California expects to generate $500 million this year from auctioning off permits to emit carbon, and between $2 billion and $14 billion annually by 2015. This rich new vein of revenues was supposed to flow to green programs (e.g., solar subsidies), but Governor Jerry Brown cut a deal with Democrats in the legislature to seize this year's proceeds to finance more generous welfare and Medicaid benefits. Environmentalists are suddenly stunned to discover that they're not exempt from Sacramento's generally accepted accounting principle of raiding internal accounts to backfill the budget.
Mr. Brown has vowed to repay the $500 million cap-and-trade "loan" in short order. But as a matter of law, he has until the California Air Resources Board (CARB) says it needs the cash to administer the cap-and-trade program. That may be never since CARB's expenditures are discretionary, and the quarterly auctions will produce gushers of revenues that guarantee the cap-and-trade fund never runs dry.
The board's chairwoman Mary Nichols, who's endorsing the raid, has tried to quell enraged environmentalists by reminding them that "the part about the cap-and-trade program that is reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it's the cap," and "not the revenue that we get from the allowances."
Good point, and one which businesses are making in a lawsuit that contends the state is levying an unconstitutional tax under the guise of a "regulatory fee." California's Prop. 13 (1978) requires a supermajority vote of the legislature to raise taxes. CARB circumvented this requirement in 2011 by setting up a state-run auction to sell permits and calling the profits "regulatory fees" that would be used to mitigate emissions.
But as the state Supreme Court underscored in its 1997 Sinclair Paint Co. opinion, regulatory fees cannot "exceed in amount the reasonable cost of providing the protective services for which the fees are charged" or be imposed for "unrelated revenue purposes."
California has never quantified the "reasonable cost" to protect the public from carbon emissions, and it's hard to argue that spending cap-and-trade dollars on welfare checks advances environmental objectives. The state doesn't need to auction off permits to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It could achieve its emissions targets by giving away permits for free and ratcheting the cap down over time.
In short, California Democrats are proving that the real point of cap and trade is to give politicians another revenue stream for income redistribution while dodging accountability for raising taxes. That's worth keeping in mind when liberals resurrect the scheme for the entire U.S.
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/us/in-california-a-push-for-immigrant-health.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130622
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/us/in-california-a-push-for-immigrant-health.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130622
Shocked that we were mis-led by politicians. No Obamacare for illegals that are legalized only meant you will pay for it in other taxes, and it allows them to leave that cost off-budget for CBO scoring on both Obamacare and immigration reform.
If California won't treat them, Hennepin County Medical Center (Minneapolis) provides no questions asked healthcare (or go to any other sanctuary city).
The Feds will add the coverage back in after the bills are passed and fully implemented, or else the Dems will still have that hatchet to hold over the head of selfish, uncaring, white Republicans.
-
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/gun-control-california-senate-passes-bill-requiring-permit-to-buy-ammo_062013
-
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/gun-control-california-senate-passes-bill-requiring-permit-to-buy-ammo_062013
Ready to move yet?
-
Action Needed!
AB 1266 - Forced Co-Ed Locker Rooms (Ammiano)
AB 1266 mandates that students in K-12 public schools be permitted to participate in sex-segregated sports, programs, activities and allowed to use bathrooms and lockers of their choosing, irrespective of their gender and according to their own gender identity. Gender identity refers to a person's subjective opinion of ones gender, which may or may not correspond to the person's biological sex.
This bill will be voted on by the entire Senate as early as today.
We urge you to call your Senator today and urge them to vote "NO" on AB 1266.
Find your Senator
AB 1121 Gender Identity: Petition for Change of Name
This bill will allow persons to obtain a legal name change simply by stating that his or her perceived gender identity differs from the sex assigned to them at birth. The requirement to provide Public Notice of the name change will be waived under this law resulting in public safety concerns due to potential fraud and other criminal intent. AB 1121 will be voted on by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday.
Contact the committee members listed below and ask them to vote "NO" on AB 1121.
Senate Judiciary Committee
Senator Noreen Evans (Chair)
916-651-4002
Senator Mimi Walters (Vice Chair)
916-651-4037
Senator Joel Anderson
916-651-4036
Senator Ellen Corbett
916-651-4010
Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson
916-651-4019
Senator Mark Leno
916-651-4011
Senator William (Bill) Monning
916-651-4017
-
Dear Marc F.,
Thanks so much for your help in letting the Legislature know that we oppose the weakening of Proposition 13.
As you know people will lose their homes, business owners will lose their businesses, jobs will be lost, rents will rise and taxes will increase if Proposition 13 is changed, modified or destroyed.
I’m sad to say that the Assembly passed a horrific modification that will unfairly raise taxes. Homeowners will have non-homeowners voting by less than a two-thirds majority to increase property taxes.
Even though the politicians had said they supported Proposition 13, such as Al Muratsuchi, they were part of the liberal democratic supermajority that voted for it.
Those voting for it were the following Democrats:
Alejo, Ammiano, Atkins, Bloom, Blumenfield, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chesbro, Cooley, Daly, Dickinson, Eggman, Fong, Fox, Frazier, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Hall, Roger Hernández, Holden, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Lowenthal, Medina, Mitchell, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel Pérez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Weber, Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. Pérez
Be sure to remember that on election day!
The bill that the Assembly passed now goes to the State Senate. There it looks like it’s in suspense. We will keep you informed this is the case, which means it will not be voted on again until possibly next year.
Thanks again for your opposition to changing Proposition 13. Please encourage others to sign the petition by going to www.saveproposition13.com, and forward this email to them. It has had a positive effect.
Best wishes,
Craig Huey
Small Business Owner
-
Calif. lawmakers pass K-12 transgender-rights bill
By 1SF July 5, 2013 6:50 am
Print Tell a Friend
Text Size: A A A
SACRAMENTO -- Transgender students in public schools can participate in school activities and use school facilities that conform to their gender identity under a bill that passed the Senate Wednesday and now heads to the desk of Gov. Jerry Brown.
The bill, AB1266 by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, had the bare majority, passing 21-9 on a partisan vote with Democrats in support.
"There should be certainty that every kid has the chance to go to school and be treated equally and fairly," said state Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, who presented the bill on the Senate floor. "We know that these particular kids suffer much abuse and bullying and denigration."
Backers of the bill have noted that current California law already prohibits schools from discriminating on the basis of gender identity, but they said many school districts in the state don't comply with that. The Los Angeles and San Francisco school districts have had such policies in place for many years, ensuring access to restrooms, locker rooms or sports teams that align with the identity of transgender students.
Opponents raised many concerns, with state Sen. Jim Nielsen, R-Gerber (Tehama County), calling it an "extraordinarily consequential piece of legislation" that he said many parents and students would be reticent to accept. He said students "now may be subjected to some very difficult situations and their parents to even more objectionable situations. It is not, ladies and gentlemen, a simple bill. It is a landmark bill for California."
Other Republican senators wondered about students who might take advantage of the law to participate on an opposite-sex sports team, and how the California Interscholastic Federation would handle such a situation. The federation, which oversees high school athletics in California, has a policy that is in line with the bill for transgender students who want to play on teams that conform with their gender identity. Shannon Minter, the legal director at the National Center for Lesbian Rights, called the bill's passage "wonderful."
"I think it's past time," said Minter, who is transgender. "California needs to catch up with other states and our transgender students need this protection and the schools need the guidance."
Wyatt Buchanan is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: wbuchanan@sfchronicle.com
-
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/08/gun-confiscation-bill-introduced-in-california-we-can-save-lives/
-
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/24/CA-release-10k-inmates
-
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/07/27/5600272/california-bill-would-regulate.html
-
From the Torrance PD
http://www.safeandsecuretorrance.com/
-
• CALIFORNIA: CONTINUE TO FIGHT AGAINST ANTI-GUN BILLS . . . The California State Legislature is now back in session in Sacramento until mid-September, and several bills of concern to hunters, sportsmen and gun owners are again before California lawmakers for consideration, including Assembly Bill 711, a ban on the use of traditional ammunition in hunting (now on the suspense calendar until Aug. 29), and Senate Bill 374, which seeks to expand the state's already strict limitations on modern sporting rifles. Strongly supported by the anti-hunting Humane Society of the United States, AB 711 would make California the first state to completely ban the use of traditional lead ammunition for hunting. Banning traditional ammunition for hunting statewide is only the first step, as many legislators acknowledge the fact that a ban on ALL traditional ammunition used for shooting sports will be next. Between now and the end of August please make every attempt to contact your State senator. Listen to the latest NSSF radio commercial opposing AB 711 here. SB 374 has been amended since its introduction; however, the bill still expands the definition of "assault weapon" to include all semiautomatic rifles, except those chambered in rimfire and those with fixed magazines of up to 10 rounds. The bill also includes language that defines "bullet button" rifles and others that need a tool for magazine release as assault weapons and requires their registration. The bill still also bans a huge number of "commonly owned" rifles. NSSF will continue to track this onerous legislation and keep you informed of developments.
-
California: Anti-Gun Legislation Must Be Stopped in Sacramento
Your Privacy, Freedom and Right to Self-Defense are at Stake
Contact Your state Senator and Assemblyman TODAY!
California gun owners and sportsmen are quickly running out of time to contact your state legislators and stop draconian legislation from passing in Sacramento. With both the state Senate and Assembly now back to work, anti-gun legislators are moving fast to build momentum to railroad passage of severe anti-gun legislation. Gun owners and sportsmen CANNOT let this happen. It is critical that you call AND e-mail your state Senator and Assemblyman NOW urging them to STOP working to turn law-abiding gun owners into criminals. Contact information for your state Senator and Assemblyman can be found here.
Below is an update of what happened this week in Sacramento where your immediate action is needed:
Senate Bill 475 (Leno) allows San Francisco officials to effectively BAN gun shows and the sale of firearms in the Cow Palace at the Fairgrounds. This anti-gun bill is on its final reading in the Assembly and could be considered at anytime. It is important to call AND e-mail your state Assemblyman urging him or her to OPPOSE SB 475.
Assembly Bill 180 (Bonta) repeals state firearms preemption in Oakland by allowing that city to enact ordinances that are more restrictive than state laws relating to registration or licensing of firearms. This anti-gun bill is on its final reading in the state Senate and could be considered at anytime. It is important to call AND e-mail your state Senator urging him or her to OPPOSE AB 180.
Assembly Bill 231 (Ting) expands the law relating to the storage of firearms. This bill does nothing to reduce California's violent crime problem and only turn law-abiding gun owners into criminals whether or not anything harmful actually happens, and regardless of whether there was any misconduct on the part of the gun owner. Ultimately, AB 231 is a misguided proposal that imposes unprecedented liability on those who choose to exercise their fundamental right to keep and bear arms. This onerous legislation passed in the Senate Appropriations Committee on Monday. AB 231 is now on its final reading in the state Senate and could be considered at anytime. It is very important to call AND e-mail your state Senator urging him or her to OPPOSE AB 231.
Assembly Bill 48 (Skinner) BANS the sale of magazine parts kits that can hold more than ten cartridges and requires mandatory reporting (REGISTRATION) of law-abiding citizens who purchase more than 3,000 rounds of ammunition within a five-day period. AB 48 was placed in the state Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file and will be heard later this month. In the meantime, please contact all members of the state Senate Appropriations Committee urging them to OPPOSE AB 48. Contact information for members of this committee can be found here.
Assembly Bill 711 (Rendon) would make California the firststate in the nation to prohibit the use of all lead ammunition for hunting. The NR urges all hunters, recreational shooters and gun-owners to actively OPPOSE B 711. We will keep you posted on the hearing date for this legislation in the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file. In the meantime, please continue to contact the members of the state Senate Appropriations Committee urging them to OPPOSE this anti-gun legislation. Contact information for this committee can be found here.
Below are anti-gun Senate bills that have passed in the state Senate and are now awaiting consideration in an Assembly committee for which a meeting has not been scheduled to date:
Senate Bill 47 (Yee) bans the sale of popular “bullet button” semi-automatic rifles with certain physical characteristics. SB 47 would also require registration of currently owned bullet-button rifles, and would amend the definition of “fixed magazine” for purposes of California’s “assault weapons” laws to include a magazine that cannot be removed without “disassembly of the firearm action.” SB 47 passed in the Assembly Public Safety Committee by a 4 to 2 vote on Tuesday and now goes to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
Senate Bill 108 (Yee) requires mandatory locked storage of firearms in a locked house regardless of whether anyone is present. The hearing for SB 108 on Tuesday by the Assembly Public Safety Committee was cancelled at the request of author but is expected to be rescheduled soon.
Senate Bill 374 (Steinberg) would expand the definition of “assault weapons” to include ALL semi-automatic rifles that accept a detachable magazine. SB 374 would ban on the sale and possession of ALL semi-auto rifles and require registration to retain legal possession in the future. SB 374 passed in the Assembly Public Safety Committee by a 4 to 2 vote on Tuesday and now goes to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
Senate Bill 396 (Hancock) bans the possession of all standard capacity magazines over ten rounds and would require confiscation of these magazines that are currently lawfully possessed. SB 396 passed in the Assembly Public Safety Committee by a 4 to 2 vote. SB 396 will now move to the state Assembly Appropriations Committee. We will keep you posted on the next hearing date for this bill.
Senate Bill 567 (Jackson) redefines shotguns to include any firearm that may be fired through a rifled bore or a smooth bore, regardless of whether it is designed to be fired from the shoulder. SB 567 also bans the sale of shotguns that have a revolving cylinder and requires registration of these currently owned shotguns. SB 567 passed in the Assembly Public Safety Committee by a 4 to 2 vote on Tuesday and now goes to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
Senate Bill 683 (Block) expands California’s handgun safety certificate requirement to apply to all firearms, and would prohibit anyone from purchasing or transferring any firearm without a firearm safety certificate. SB 683 passed in the Assembly Public Safety Committee by a 4 to 2 vote on Tuesday and now goes to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
You can write your representative here urging them to OPPOSE the anti-gun bills listed above. Please feel free to also copy and paste all of the bill information to ensure your state legislators know which bills to OPPOSE.
You can also send a letter to all elected officials in California here. Please feel free to copy and paste all of the bill information above to ensure the elected officials of California know which bills to OPPOSE.
Help NRA Get Californians Connected with NRA’s California Resources
Help the NRA expand its California network to keep all pro-Second Amendment Californians better informed about legislation in Congress, Sacramento, and locally that threatens your right to keep and bear arms, as well as developments in Second Amendment litigation and regulatory enforcement actions. Please forward this email to your family, friends and fellow gun owners, whether they belong to the NRA or not! Encourage them to sign up for California NRA’s Stayed Informed e-mails here. And follow NRA through these additional connections:
Websites:
NRA-ILA, NRA-ILA California, NRA – ILA Legal Update, CalNRA.com, CRPA.org, CalGunLaws.com
Facebook Pages: NRA’s Facebook page, CalGunLaws.com Facebook page, NRA Members' Councils' Facebook page
LinkedIn: NRA’s LinkedIn page, YouTube: NRA YouTube, Twitter: NRA Twitter, NRA-ILA Twitter, CalNRATwitter, CalGunLaws Twitter
The NRA recognizes that California is one of the most active Second Amendment "battleground states," so for decades NRA has devoted substantial resources to fighting for the right to keep and bear arms for Californians. The NRA has full-time legislative advocates in its Sacramento office fighting ill-conceived gun ban proposals. NRA coordinates a statewide campaign to fight ill-conceived local gun bans and regulations. And NRA has been litigating cases in California courts to promote the right to self-defense and the Second Amendment for many years. NRA’s California legal team continues to work pro-actively to strike down ill-conceived gun control laws and ordinances, and to protect the Second Amendment rights of California firearms owners. For information about NRA’s litigation efforts, see www.nraila.org/legal/litigation.aspx.
To donate to help support the NRA’s California efforts, please click here.
-
PS: I just donated $25 to the NRA legislative action fund.
-
California: Key Member of the Assembly Appropriations Committee MUST Hear Your Opposition to Drastic Anti-Gun Legislation
Vital for You to Contact Assemblyman Susan Eggman NOW
This Friday, August 30, the Assembly Appropriations Committee will be casting a series of historic votes on your gun rights in California. Currently the following bills are in this committee suspense file due to the excessive cost of MILLIONS of dollars for implementation being imposed on YOU and the other citizens of California.
Senate Bill 47 (Yee) would ban the use of a "bullet button" on semi-automatic rifles to comply with current law by classifying firearms with "bullet buttons" as "assault weapons" and banning their future sale or transfer. Continued legal possession would require that you REGISTER and pay a FEE (TAX) on ALL of your semi-autos with “bullet buttons.”
Senate Bill 53 (DeLeon) would require Californians to obtain a permit BEFORE purchasing ammunition, require a background check before every future ammunition purchase and require registration of ALL ammunition that you purchase.
Senate Bill 374 (Steinberg) would ban the future sale or transfer of and classify ALL semi-automatic rifles with a detachable magazine or holding more than ten rounds of ammunition as "assault weapons." Continued legal possession would require that you REGISTER and pay a FEE (TAX) on ALL your semi-autos newly classified as “assault weapons.”
Senate Bill 396 (Hancock) would ban the possession of ALL magazines over ten rounds, including the millions of "grandfathered" standard capacity magazines currently legally possessed by Californians.
It is essential that you voice your opposition to these nonsensical bills that would only affect and punish law-abiding citizens. Please contact Assemblyman Susan Eggman today, August 28 and ask her to VOTE NO on ALL anti-gun bills in Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file.
Assemblyman Susan Eggman
Phone (916) 319-2013
Fax (916) 319-2113
E-mail – assemblymember.eggman@assembly.ca.gov
In addition, please urge your family, friends, fellow gun owners, sportsmen and Second Amendment supporters throughout California to contact Assemblyman Susan Eggman and tell her to oppose all anti-gun legislation in the Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file.
-
California: Anti-Gun Bills Now Go to the state Senate and Assembly Floors
Contact your state Senator and Assemblyman EVERY DAY
Today, both the state Senate and Assembly Appropriations Committees passed several anti-gun and one anti-hunting bill by party-line votes. These misguided anti-gun/anti-hunting bills now go to the floor of the state Senate and Assembly, and could be up for a final vote at anytime.
Time is now very short to stop these egregious bills!
You MUST call AND e-mail your state Senate and Assemblyman EVERY DAY respectfully urging them to OPPOSE all anti-gun legislation. You MUST also remind your family, friends, fellow gun owners, sportsmen and Second Amendment supporters that they must do the same EVERY DAY. The Golden State will need all its law-abiding citizens contacting their state legislators to save the Second Amendment.
Your state Senator and Assemblyman think their constituents are not pro-gun and they use that excuse every time they vote for anti-gun/anti-hunting legislation. To ensure that your state Senator and Assemblyman know that their district is full of pro-gun constituents you MUST contact them daily reminding them that you want your pro-gun voice heard. Contact information for your state Senator and Assemblyman can be found here.
The following bills are now on the floor of the state Senate:
Assembly Bill 48 (Skinner) bans the sale of parts and repair kits capable of converting magazine capacity to greater than ten rounds. This bill also requires that any person who purchases 6,000 rounds of ammunition within a five day period be reported to local law enforcement.
Assembly Bill 169 (Dickinson) bans the sale and transfer of all lawfully acquired firearms that were never, or are no longer, on the California roster of approved handguns.
Assembly Bill 180 (Bonta) repeals state firearms preemption by allowing the City of Oakland to enact ordinances that are more restrictive than state laws concerning the registration or licensing of firearms.
Assembly Bill 231 (Ting) expands the law relating to the storage of firearms. This bill does nothing to reduce California's violent crime problem and only turn law-abiding gun owners into criminals whether or not anything harmful actually happens, and regardless of whether there was any misconduct on the part of the gun owner. Ultimately, AB 231 is a misguided proposal that imposes unprecedented liability on those who choose to exercise their fundamental right to keep and bear arms.
Assembly Bill 711 (Rendon) makes California the first state in the nation to prohibit the use of all lead ammunition for hunting.
The following bills are now on the floor of the state Assembly:
Senate Bill 53 (De León) bans the online and mail order purchase of all ammunition and requires registration and thumbprinting for all ammunition sales. Further, SB 53 requires that all ammunition purchasers pay a fee (tax) to obtain an annual ammunition purchase permit.
Senate Bill 299 (DeSaulnier) makes it a crime if a victim of firearm theft does not report the theft within 48 hours.
Senate Bill 374 (Steinberg) bans the future sale or transfer of and classify ALL semi-automatic rifles with a detachable magazine or holding more than ten rounds of ammunition as "assault weapons." Continued legal possession would require that you REGISTER and pay a FEE (TAX) on ALL your semi-autos newly classified as “assault weapons.”
Senate Bill 396 (Hancock) bans the possession of ALL magazines over ten rounds, including the millions of "grandfathered" standard capacity magazines currently legally possessed by Californians.
Senate Bill 475 (Leno) effectively bans gun shows at the Cow Palace by requiring approval of the board of supervisors of the Counties of San Mateo and San Francisco prior to any gun shows.
Senate Bill 567 (Jackson) redefines shotguns to include any firearm that may be fired through a rifled bore or a smooth bore, regardless of whether it is designed to be fired from the shoulder. SB 567 also bans the sale of shotguns encompassed by the revised definitions that have a revolving cylinder, and requires registration of these currently owned shotguns.
Senate Bill 683 (Block) expands California’s handgun safety certificate requirement to apply to all firearms, and prohibits anyone from purchasing or transferring any firearm without a firearm safety certificate.
Senate Bill 755 (Wolk) expands the list of persons prohibited from owning a firearm, including persons who have operated cars and boats while they are impaired commonly referred to as DUI.
On a good note, the following anti-gun bills were held in committee and are defeated for the year:
Senate Bill 47 (Yee) bans the use of a "bullet button" on semi-automatic rifles to comply with current law by classifying firearms with "bullet buttons" as "assault weapons" and banning their future sale or transfer. Continued legal possession would require that you REGISTER and pay a FEE (TAX) on ALL of your semi-autos with “bullet buttons.”
Senate Bill 293 (DeSaulnier) prohibits new handguns that are not “smart guns” (aka “owner-authorized handguns”) from being added to CA’s roster of approved handguns once two “smart guns” become available for sale.
There is still time to call AND e-mail your state Senator and Assemblyman urging them to OPPOSE all anti-gun/anti-hunting legislation listed above. Don’t forget to forward this alert to your family, friends, fellow gun owners, sportsmen and Second Amendment supporters across California.
-
http://gunssavelives.net/blog/gun-laws/california-assembly-passes-semi-auto-firearms-ban/#
-
The NRA Intends to File Legal Challenge if Governor Brown Signs Unconstitutional Semi-Automatic Firearm Ban into Law
There are currently several gun control bills sitting on Governor Brown’s desk that he will either veto or allow to become law by October 13, 2013. Our Right to Keep and Bear Arms has never been as seriously threatened in California as it is today. After years of incrementally adopting gun control measures, this year the Legislature decided to propose new laws adopting everything on the gun ban lobby’s wish list. Many of those bills were successfully opposed by the NRA and died in the Legislature, but unfortunately some did not.
These bills pending before the governor include a ban on lead ammunition for hunting and a limit on how many handguns one can transfer in a year. California gun owners should review the NRA’s Action Alert to learn more about the bills and should contact the Governor to request vetoes of all these gun control bills.
Perhaps the worst of the worst of the lot is Senate Bill 374 (“SB 374"), which would make unprecedented changes to California’s already unjust and byzantine “assault weapon” law. Under current California law, these firearms can only be possessed if they are properly registered, can only be used for limited purposes, and, with few exceptions, cannot be transferred to anyone in the state. SB 374 would drastically expand the definition of “assault weapon” to include any “semi-automatic rifle that does not have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept no more than ten rounds.” (Yes, that quote contains a double negative, and no, we have no idea what that means). The bill defines a fixed magazine as “an ammunition feeding device contained in, or permanently attached to, a firearm in such a manner that the device cannot be removed without disassembly of the firearm action.”
Under SB 374, all rifles meeting this description must be registered as “assault weapons” by July 1, 2015. It is practically impossible to know which firearms meet the new definition of “assault weapon,” however, as “disassembly of the firearm action” is undefined and nobody (least of all the legislators who voted for it) knows what it means, or for that matter even what a firearm “action” actually is. Millions of semi-automatic rifles have magazines that can be removed with the push of a button, and, at a minimum, those will likely be considered “assault weapons” under SB 374. That classification would include classic hunting rifles like the Remington Woodsmaster, Browning BAR, and the Ruger 99/44, among many others.
SB 374 will restrict the use and ban the transfer of millions of commonly owned and constitutionally protected semi-automatic, center-fire rifles, making those rifles completely unavailable to future gun owners. Possession of currently owned rifles meeting the new definition will remain legal, but only for those who register their firearms in time and limit their use of the firearms to the specific activities California permits. Those who don’t register and limit their use of those guns will become felons.
Unlike with previous registration requirements, there is no planned public education campaign to notify people about the new law and its mandates. So the tens of thousands of firearm owners who do not hear about or understand SB 374 are out of luck if found with an unregistered firearm that falls under the new definition of “assault weapon.” And even those who do register their firearms on time will be precluded from ever selling them or passing them down to their children or grandchildren.
By banning millions of the most common hunting, sporting, and self-defense rifles in existence, SB 374 is in direct conflict with the U.S. Supreme Court’s Heller decision. In Heller, the Court made it clear that arms “typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes” or those “in common use” are constitutionally protected.
If SB 374 is signed by the Governor, the NRA intends to immediately file suit challenging this unconstitutional law. To help with that effort, please consider making a donation to the NRA Legal Action Project here.
This lawsuit would join previous NRA legal challenges in California such as our suit against AB 962, the “handgun ammunition” regulatory scheme passed in 2009 in the Parker v. California case; our suit against the California Department of Justice over SB 819, which authorized misuse of the fees firearms purchasers are required to pay in Bauer v. Harris; and our challenge to SB 140, which stole $24 million from the firearm-purchaser-fee account and gave it to DOJ for political projects. To learn more about additional actions the NRA’s legal team is taking on behalf of California gun owners, click here.
Second Amendment supporters should also be careful about supporting litigation efforts promised by other individuals and groups without access to the necessary funding, relationships, firearm experts and experienced lawyers on the NRA’s California and national legal teams. Our network of esteemed civil rights attorneys and scholars has the resources, skill and expertise to maximize the potential for victory, along with a track record of challenging anti-gun legislation with positive results.
Please donate to the NRA Legal Action Project today!
-
The tax default for California politicians is always "more," so brace yourself for rare good news. Governor Jerry Brown last week signed a law repealing a $120 million retroactive income tax increase on about 2,500 small business owners and investors.
This was an unjust levy on business owners who followed a 1993 California law offering a 50% cut in the capital-gains tax on certain in-state business startups. The courts ruled this tax incentive unconstitutional last year for discriminating against out-of-state firms, and the state's revenue-hungry Franchise Tax Board responded by demanding five years of back taxes and penalties on the businesses that had foolishly believed the politicians and followed the law.
We and others highlighted this money grab, and even California's liberals saw the light and voted 112-1 in the Assembly to overturn the retroactive tax increase. The most amusing twist came when even John Chiang, the state controller and chairman of the Franchise Tax Board, called for overturning the retroactive tax his own board tried to impose. Maybe he realized that confiscatory taxes on entrepreneurs send the wrong message for a state that wants to lead the world in technology startups.
Mr. Brown signed this and a package of other business-friendly measures that he said "underscores our commitment to strengthening the state's business climate." One of those was a "made in California" label for technology made in the state, which is pure PR.
The Governor will have to do a lot more, since in nearly every survey California has one of the country's worst state business climates. He could start by cutting the state's 13.3% top marginal income-tax rate, ending cap-and-trade taxes on its own industries, and forcing regulators to stop treating businesses like enemies. We know those won't happen without a major political shift, but for now let's be grateful for this small tax miracle.
-
http://www.outdoorhub.com/news/nra-file-lawsuit-californias-new-assault-weapons-bill-passed/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Glock%20Talk%20Newsletter%2013%20%281%29&utm_content=
-
The wait is over for California’s law-abiding gun owners, sportsmen and Second Amendment supporters. Governor Brown has signed some anti-gun bills and one anti-hunting bill into law. However, he also vetoed several anti-gun bills.
Below is a list of the bills signed into law and vetoed as well as a link to the respective descriptions given by Governor Brown.
The NRA will be looking over all the recently signed laws and our legal options for law-abiding Californians.
Thanks to NRA members, gun owners, sportsmen and Second Amendment supporters who tirelessly called and e-mailed their state legislators and the Governor urging them to oppose all the anti-gun/hunting legislation. Without your help, the veto actions on some of the deeply flawed anti-gun bills may not have occurred.
Bills Enacted into law:
Assembly Bill 711 (Rendon) makes California the first state in the nation to prohibit the use of all lead ammunition for hunting. To view Governor Brown’s signing message, click here.
Assembly Bill 48 (Skinner) bans the sale of parts and repair kits capable of creating or converting a magazine to a capacity to hold greater than ten rounds.
Assembly Bill 231 (Ting) expands the law relating to the storage of firearms.
Senate Bill 683 (Block) expands California’s handgun safety certificate requirement to apply to all firearms, and prohibits anyone from purchasing or transferring any firearm without a firearm safety certificate.
Bills Vetoed:
Senate Bill 374 (Steinberg) bans the future sale or transfer of and classify ALL semi-automatic rifles with a detachable magazine or holding more than ten rounds of ammunition as "assault weapons" and the continued legal possession of these newly classified semi-automatics as “assault weapons” would require that you REGISTER and pay a FEE (TAX) on ALL of them. To view Governor Brown’s veto message, please click here.
Assembly Bill 169 (Dickinson) limits the sale and transfer of all lawfully acquired firearms that were never, or are no longer, on the California roster of approved handguns to two a year and redefines the technical provisions of single short pistols. To view Governor Brown’s veto message, please click here.
Assembly Bill 180 (Bonta) repeals state firearms preemption by allowing the City of Oakland to enact ordinances that are more restrictive than state laws concerning the registration or licensing of firearms. To view Governor Brown’s veto message, please click here.
Senate Bill 299 (DeSaulnier) makes it a crime if a victim of firearm theft does not report the theft within seven days. To view Governor Brown’s veto message, please click here.
Senate Bill 475 (Leno) effectively bans gun shows at the Cow Palace by requiring approval of the board of supervisors of the Counties of San Mateo and San Francisco prior to any gun shows. To view Governor Brown’s veto message, please click here.
Senate Bill 567 (Jackson) redefines shotguns to include any firearm that may be fired through a rifled bore or a smooth bore, regardless of whether it is designed to be fired from the shoulder. SB 567 also bans the sale of shotguns encompassed by the revised definitions that have a revolving cylinder, and requires registration of these currently owned shotguns. To view Governor Brown’s veto message, please click here.
Senate Bill 755 (Wolk) expands the list of persons prohibited from owning a firearm, including persons who have operated cars and boats while they are impaired commonly referred to as DUI. To view Governor Brown’s veto message, please click here.
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/19/us/california-upends-its-image-of-legislative-dysfunction.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20131019&_r=0
-
High School that Banned NRA T-Shirt Backs Down
Anti-Gun Position Retracted in Face of Public Ridicule and Pending Lawsuit
On September 19, school officials at Canyon High School in Orange California forced 16 year old student Haley Bullwinkle to remove her NRA t-shirt because school officials found her shirt promoted gun violence and violated the school’s dress code. The shirt depicted a deer, an American Flag, and a hunter holding a hunting rifle, with text stating “National Rifle Association of America, Defending America’s Traditions Since 1871”. Haley was forced to remove her NRA shirt and wear a school shirt instead, or face suspension.
Haley changed her shirt, but came home at the end of the school day upset and afraid she would be suspended. Haley’s parents were also upset. “She’s never been in trouble before. She gets good grades,” said Jed Bullwinkle, Haley’s father. “She is not a threat to school safety in any way, no matter what shirt she’s wearing. I don’t understand how this t-shirt could be made into a safety issue,” Mr. Bullwinkle said.
Mr. Bullwinkle asked the school principal to look into the matter. In an email, the principal said “The shirt had a gun on it which is not allowed by school police. . . . It is standard protocol to have students change when they are in violation of dress code.”
The family contacted a local NRA instructor, and the case made it’s way to the NRA’s California lawyers at Michel & Associates in Long Beach. The firm has worked with the NRA in the past in successfully assisting several students facing similar school actions. Those cases including getting a case involving a Sacramento student wearing a sporting clays t-shirt dismissed (Steven Huish), getting an expulsion overturned against an early morning duck hunting student who left his unloaded shotgun in his locked off campus pick up truck (Gary Tudesko), and forcing an apology from administrators at Cornerstone Elementary the school after they forced 5th graders to cut the little plastic rifles off the little green army men they had glued to their graduation caps to show support for the armed forces.
Recognizing the need to bring Canyon High School’s censorship to the attention of the public, the law firm contacted several local media outlets and began preparing a pre-litigation demand letter to send to the school. The story was picked up nationally and went viral, and the school was inundated with media requests for comment. Among other things, these stories noted that the school mascot carries spears and arrows, the school football team logo has a spear on it, and the drill team twirls imitation rifles. The apparent double standard did not go unnoticed.
In the face of public ridicule and legal action the school district came to its senses and issued an apology. In a statement published by Michael L. Christensen, Superintendent of Schools, Orange Unified School District, the school district said the shirt was okay to wear to school, and promised to provide training to staff aimed at preventing future incidents. The matter now seems to be resolved, and the NRA has given Haley a carton of the banned t-shirts to give to her friends, to wear to school if they want to.
“This whole thing smelled of political censorship,” said civil rights lawyer Chuck Michel, attorney for the Bullwinkles. “It was a school administrator applying a personal perspective without even taking the time to look closely at the message the shirt conveyed.” Michel noted that this kind of incident goes unreported more often than not; students’ free speech issues like this one seem to appear in the national news on a regular basis, and for some reason schools are not fixing the problem.
He’s right. Sadly, these types of incidents are not rare. In Virginia a student faced possible jail time for refusing to remove an NRA t-shirt. Under ill-conceived “zero-tolerance” policies, political correctness is trumping common sense, with students facing suspension of worse for drawing a gun, chewing a pop-tart into the shape of a gun, or just making the shape of a gun with their hand.
The NRA stands ready to assist members and gun owners facing these anti-gun prejudices. To help support its efforts, please donate to the NRA’s Legal Action Project here.
Below are links to other news article related to this issue:
Los Angeles Times – School apologizes for making girl remove NRA T-shirt
The Blaze – School that forced teen girl to take off NRA shirt has a change of heart
-
Be sure to check Steve Frank's California News & Views throughout the day for breaking news and commentary! Visit http://capoliticalnews.com/!
Hydrogen Highway to Cause MORE Pollution—Not Less—At Taxpayer Expense
VOTE IN NEW WEBSITE POLL: Should the SEIU be de-certified, so BART can be re-opened with private sector workers?
PLEASE FORWARD THIS NEWSLETTER TO YOUR FRIENDS
Another California Industry in Trouble—Los Angeles Area Ports
by Stephen Frank on 11/05/2013
California is losing its movie and TV industry. Manufacturing is gone—no steel mills or auto factories Dairy farmers are moving to South Dakota, tomato farmers are moving to Mexico—ten years ago 90% of the world strawberries came from Ventura County—now it is 50%–the rest from China.
We design TV’s, cell phones and computers—none built in this nation. Not a single light bulb is made in the USA—thanks to Bush and Obama all are made in China. Now we are about to lose most of the Ports on the West Coast. Mexico is opening a massive high tech port just below San Diego to take care of the West Coast—nonunion, no crazy regulations, significantly cheaper than a U.S. Port—and thanks to NAFTA they can use Mexican drivers to transport around the U.S. (looks like the Teamsters are in trouble in the long run)
“There are other challengers to our supremacy, including port expansions in both Western Canada and Mexico that could offer newer facilities and rail connections directly within their own countries and the vast U.S. market. But the greatest challenge seems likely to come from the Gulf, which offers excellent access to trains that carry goods directly to the vast majority of the United States.
Demographic trends will also play a role. In the 1970s and 1980s, the Pacific Coast seemed like the premier growth market, but high housing prices, taxes and regulatory restraints – and, most importantly, outmigration – have slowed regional business growth.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
CalPERS Members Live Longer, May Push Up Rates
by Stephen Frank on 11/05/2013
We know that CalPERS on 1/1/14 will have $640 billion in unfunded liabilities. We know that it is mismanaged and secretive, not allowing the public a good look at its books—so the unfunded liabilities could be more. This is an agency that opposes any reform and has opposed a proposal that would not save money for twenty years, even that is a negative to CalPERS. They do not want interference from those who will lose their pensions or those paying for them.
Now another “worry”—that isn’t. They are concerned that people will live longer, thus cost more. Over the weekend dozens of cancer patients have told the heart wrenching story of being cut off from their doctors and medicines due to ObamaCare. Many more say they can no longer afford the care to keep themselves alive. Barack Obama is making sure lots of people die before their time due to the Third World health care program. The rich will pay for good care out of pocket. The poor have the taxpayers to pay for theirs—it is the middle class that will die off, literally.
How many cops will be fired to keep this economic illiterate system? “Assuming 10 years of mortality improvement, a phased-in employer rate increase would be 0.4 percent to 0.9 percent of pay in the first year and in the sixth year 1.4 percent to 3.9 percent of pay.
Assuming 20 years of mortality improvement, the employer rate increase would be 1.0 percent to 1.8 percent of pay in the first year and in the sixth year 2.8 percent to 6.4 percent of pay.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
________________________________________
________________________________________
No Need for Government Choo Choo—HyperLoop Can Do it PRIVATELY and for 1/20th the Cost
by Stephen Frank on 11/05/2013
We do have a choice. Either allow Guv Brown to pay off his union buddies and donor base with $200 billion worth of contracts for a choo choo train—or allow a private firm to spend $10 billion of its own money to provide a world class train—which few will use anyway.
The Hyperloop Can take you from LA to San fran in about 35 minutes—the Brown $200 billion model could go the same distance in four hours. Which would you want—costly and slow and no taxpayer cost and fast?
This is the future of infrastructure—Sacramento is the corrupt past.
“”I found it an extremely interesting engineering challenge,” he said. “I used to work in space environments. It takes a lot of the challenges that I’m used to and brings them down to earth.”
JumpStartFund is helping the company hire a core team of 30 to 50 employees through its crowdsourcing platform. The company has received applicants in Australia and Asia, said JumpStartFund Chief Executive Dirk Ahlborn. Many of the initial team will work remotely in exchange for stock options. “
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
Few Californians “Buy” ObamaCare—Medi-Cal (Total Gov’t Health Care via tax $$) Explodes
by Stephen Frank on 11/05/2013
You thought that ObamaCare was about getting folks to buy their own health care insurance? Actually, the purpose, by changing the Med-Cal regulations, was to put MILLIONS of people on the government dole—paying nothing. That explains why YOUR health care costs are skyrocketing—to pay for millions to get it absolutely free. You are subsidizing the long lines, few doctors and lack of hospitals for the millions who now qualify for Med-Cal (other States have their own names for this Medi-Caid program)
“Most people who purchase individual health-insurance plans buy for affordability, so they will likely opt for the Bronze — the least expensive — plan on the exchange, Hopper said. But the premiums of those new plans are more expensive than current plans, and his clients are seeing their premiums jump 30 percent to 50 percent, he said.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
No Insurance Provider Safe From California Government: Non Profit Kicked Out of Exchange—Less Choice for Health Care in Alameda County
by Stephen Frank on 11/05/2013
So, on October 5 you bought your health insurance through the State of California in a company called Alameda Alliance—a non profit. Great. Now forget about it. The State of California no longer likes the group, so your new insurance policy is dead. You will not get a subsidy for its high rates—more than you were paying for before, because the government just “remembered” the rules.
What stops the cronies running your health care from doing it to another health care insurance firm? Nothing—you are a pawn in the power game. Now you only have three choices left in the Bay Area—all chosen by government.
“Alliance was one of the Bay Area’s four regional plans that were offered in addition to the state’s major insurers, including Contra Costa Health Plan, Valley Health Plan in Santa Clara County and Chinese Community Health Plan in San Mateo and San Francisco counties.
Alliance did not meet a minimum financial solvency requirement to sell its plans on the exchange, according to the Department of Managed Health Care.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
Unions Fighting to Keep Failed Schools From Parents—Do Not Want Quality Education for Students—Just the $$
by Stephen Frank on 11/05/2013
Unions are special interests looking for power and money—they have nothing to do with production (thought the auto companies are proof union kill an industry). Unions are not about saving lives—note the numerous strike closing hospitals and putting the elderly and young at risk for death—just to make a point they, not doctors own the hospital.
Now we have the California Teachers Association fighting hard to keep perverts in the classroom, getting you daughters major surgery—without letting you know. Then you have the most failed of schools, where the parents understand the unions have killed education for thousands—and the unions fought to keep children in bad schools, not learning—because they can.
“Many schools statewide, particularly in Los Angeles, are eligible for reform under the law.
UTLA leaders know this, and they’re worried. The union represents 35,000 Los Angeles educators, and though statewide teachers unions have taken the lead in the fight against the parent trigger in the past, UTLA is prepared to take up the cause on its own.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
s
Hydrogen Highway to Cause MORE Pollution—Not Less—At Taxpayer Expense
by Stephen Frank on 11/04/2013
Even junk science cannot save this massive boondoggle meant for unions and crony capitalists. At a cost of $ 2 million each—paid for by drivers in California—100 hydrogen gas stations will be built—for the less than 250 hydrogen cars—which cost upwards of one million each!! This is how the rich get richer—getting the poor to pay for their lifestyle choices.
The worst part is that these ultra-rich will not make the air—they will make the air dirtier! These Al Gore sycophants are going to harm our environment—at a hefty price to us. Ford did not use tax dollars to subsidize the Model T—let the ultra-rich pay for their own mess.
““Hydrogen fuel cells in the cars themselves produce virtually no pollution, aside from water,” concluded a 2007 study by the libertarian Reason Foundation. “However, depending on the technology used, the manufacture of hydrogen cells produces as much or more net pollution than the manufacture and use of gasoline.”
Advocates respond that hydrogen production will become cleaner as the technology advances. But Adrian Moore, who managed the Reason study, told me, “The only
way it is green is if each station makes the hydrogen from solar, wind or hydro power on site, without shipping the hydrogen in tankers.” He said the 2007 conclusions are still valid.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
Swisscom builds ‘Swiss Cloud’ as spying by NSA Killing U.S. Industry
by Stephen Frank on 11/04/2013
Here is another industry that the United States is going to lose. Not because of regulations or taxes, but because our Federal government consists of snoops that spy on everybody in the world—we are a nation that cannot be trusted with secrets, information or privacy. Now the world is fighting back.
The “cloud” is a new form of information storage. It is an almost exclusive effort by American companies. Now that foreigners and foreign government know that the NSA is stealing their secrets, others are making plans to provide secure clouds in other country that the NSA cannot steal from.
The Swiss are very “diplomatic” “But revelations that the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) secretly gathered user data from nine big U.S. tech companies including Google, Apple and Facebook has demonstrated that privacy for users of cloud services can be compromised, and some suggest customers could seek out alternatives to the dominant U.S. providers to try and protect sensitive information.
Swisscom’s head of IT services Andreas Koenig told Reuters the telecom provider’s decision to set up a home cloud was unrelated to the recent NSA revelations and driven more by a desire to cut costs and make its systems more dynamic.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
Lowest bidder CR&R being recommended to privatize Newport Beach trash collection!
by Stephen Frank on 11/04/2013
Is it the role of government to collect the trash? That is not a basic service. Glad to see the City Council of Newport Beach is about to give a contract to privatize trash collection. Let a private firm do it, make profits and pay taxes on its revenues—this is a win-win.
Next the Newport Beach Council needs to sell off all of its parking lots and unneeded property—return them to the property tax rolls and allow private jobs to be created. This is not the time for government to be no different than a crony capitalist conglomerate.
“City staff members plan to recommend that the Newport Beach council agree to outsource trash services to the company that submitted the lowest bid for the work.
Staff will present to council members an agreement negotiated with CR&R waste services, whose original proposal would have saved the city an estimated $17 million over seven years, according to an independent assessment.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
Weintraub: Californians’ love-hate relationship with direct democracy
by Stephen Frank on 11/04/2013
Voters love to complain about the Initiative process in California. They do not understand the measures, they are not sure if a NO is for or against their views. They never know the true costs or the weasel words used to reverse the real purpose of the ballot measure. So they complain.http://capoliticalnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/110411-vote-sm.png
Then they complain about the high taxes, bad policies, crummy schools and now the lack of health care caused by the State legislature. Maybe if these folks stopped watching Seinfeld re-runs and got involved in public policy and politics California and America is governed by “low information” voters—those that believe the TV ads and slick brochures instead of reading all sides of an issue—they read the Times or Bee (of any variety) and think they understand an issue—yet seem to be unaware they are getting just one side of the story. California is in a Depression, folks are getting ripped off with high cost Third World health care, and the NSA and IRS have exploded our privacy rights. When will the people get really angry?
“We love that we have the ability to set the politicians straight, either by getting a jump on them on the next big issue or reversing course when we think they’ve made a big mistake.
But we’re not wild about reading through all those damn initiatives that appear on the ballot every year, or sorting through the claims and counter claims of the interest groups that sponsor and oppose them. And we don’t like the way that big money pays to get most measures on the ballot and then underwrites the campaigns.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
Newsletter, please help my readership grow by passing it around. If some one sent this to you, and you would like your own subscription, you can sign up on my web page at www.capoliticalnews.com
________________________________________
-
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/California-ammunition-sales-limit-overturned-4965809.php
-
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304448204579182154135387652?mod=Opinion_newsreel_5
-
http://capoliticalnews.com/2013/12/11/federal-judge-says-california-attorney-general-kamala-harris-wrong-on-gun-control-laws/
-
http://capoliticalnews.com/2013/12/15/california-rich-opting-out-of-obamacare-only-14-of-enrollees-not-needing-subsidies/
-
http://capoliticalnews.com/2013/12/15/california-rich-opting-out-of-obamacare-only-14-of-enrollees-not-needing-subsidies/
Yes, why would anyone want a government-written health plan except to see if someone else will pay for it.
Everyone I've encountered seemed negative on Obamacare until last week when a friend said his cost went down from 1800/mo to 900. He is mid-50s with an early history of serious heart trouble. I would argue that in his business, selling homes, he is still better off with a healthy economy and paying fair market for his coverage than with the subsidy and the ill economic effects that come with it. If O'Care is not repealed, I will report back when his subsidized premium goes above what is was unsubsidized.
But that was the trick of implementation. Even if only a few million middle earners sign up, if you cleanly repeal it you will be taking away their meds, doubling their costs, killing them.
-
California's Bullet Train Derailment
A judge says the rail authority is breaking the law. Who cares!
Dec. 17, 2013 7:16 p.m. ET
If you're in a hole, keep digging and someone will eventually come to the rescue. That seems to be the operating principle of California's high-speed rail authority, which hopes to bulldoze a growing list of legal and financial obstacles to break ground on its $70 billion bullet train early next year.
Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Michael Kenny ruled last month that the rail authority had failed to satisfy several procedural requirements of the 2008 ballot measure that authorized $10 billion in state bonds to build the 500-mile train from Anaheim to San Francisco. He also prohibited the state from spending state bond money until the authority complies.
Rail authority chairman Dan Richard dismissed these failures as mere carelessness. The authority must only go "back and put more information on the record," he says. "Nothing in those rulings changes our ability to move forward."
But the lapses are serious and deliberate. The authority didn't obtain required environmental clearances for 270 miles of track. And it didn't produce a financial plan identifying its funding sources for the first 300-mile segment from Merced to the San Fernando Valley, which is projected to cost $31 billion.
Private investors won't put up a dime, and the feds have provided a mere $3.25 billion in grants, which require a dollar-for-dollar state match. California has so far tapped about $600 million in stimulus funds for pre-construction work and this spring will have to put up $823 million to get more federal cash. It's not clear where the authority plans to get this money since state bonds are off limits due to the judge's ruling.
Only two options exist. The Obama Administration could eliminate its state-match requirement. Or the legislature could appropriate revenues from the state general fund. Both are politically perilous for Democrats.
Public opinion has swung sharply against the bullet train since 2008. Polls show that voters by two-to-one would derail the choo-choo in a referendum. High-speed rail helped cost Democrats a special election for a state Senate seat this summer and a Congressional race last November, both in the Central Valley.
While Mr. Richard claims the rail authority has "a very tight relationship with the feds," the state's legal disregard may be wearing thin in Washington. Earlier this month, the federal Surface Transportation Board rejected the authority's request to start construction on the first segment before environmental reviews are complete.
Despite these setbacks, which make completion of the first 300-mile segment a virtual impossibility, the White House is not blocking the authority from using federal stimulus funds to seize property and prepare ground for construction. On Friday, the State Public Works Board approved the authority's first request to take a commercial property under eminent domain.
The rail authority hopes that once enough businesses and homes are destroyed, politicians in Sacramento and Washington will feel obligated to ride to the train's financial rescue. Maybe that's the Obama Administration's plan too.
-
Steinberg's Power Grab
By Allysia Finley
Dec. 23, 2013 2:02 p.m. ET
Legislative vacancies handicapped California Democrats last year and nearly imperiled the party's supermajority. Senate President Darrell Steinberg doesn't intend to let that happen again. His solution? Give the governor power to fill vacancies.
The Senate leader last week floated the idea, which would require a state constitutional amendment, after grousing about prolonged "gaping vacancies" in the legislature and the expense to taxpayers of holding low turnout special elections. Ten seats were left unfilled at various times over the past year, mostly as a result of legislators assuming another political office.
However, eight of those 10 seats had belonged to Democrats. Consequently, Democrats often lacked enough votes to flex their supermajority power. California law requires a two-thirds vote of both chambers to raise taxes, place constitutional amendments on the ballot and change the state Political Reform Act.
Several surprisingly close special elections also threatened Democrats' supermajority. Over the summer, Republicans won a race in a Central Valley district that is 60% Hispanic and where Democrats hold a 22-point voter registration advantage, winnowing their supermajority to one seat in the Senate. Two special elections in the fall to fill Democratic vacancies in the Assembly were also tighter than expected due to low voter turnout, which usually benefits Republicans. Democrats ultimately prevailed in both races, but only after spending heavily. Mr. Steinberg is more concerned with the cost of special elections to his own party than to taxpayers.
Few if any vacancies are expected next year, so Democrats' supermajority should be able to act uninhibited. That's important since Mr. Steinberg will need a full Democratic house to approve a constitutional amendment for next year's November ballot changing how vacancies are filled. Of course, it's not unusual for legislative majorities to entrench their power. The Senate president is merely going a step further by attempting to cement his party's supermajority. But note: His plan could backfire if Republicans unexpectedly win the governorship.
-
NOT A DROP TO SPARE
California faces a catastrophic drought next year
By Todd Woody
In the run-up to the holidays, few noticed a rather horrifying number California water managers released last week: 5%.
That’s the percentage of requested water the California State Water Project
(SWP), the largest man
-
made distribution system in the US, expects to deliver in 2014. The SWP supplies water to two-thirds of the state’s 38 million residents and 750,000 acres of farmland.
Ending one of its driest years in recorded history for the second year in a row, California, an agricultural and technological powerhouse, faces extreme drought conditions in 2014 unless winter storms materialize between now and April, according to the US National Weather Service.
That means farmers will receive a fraction of the water they need for spring planting, likely triggering spikes in food price as agricultural land goes fallow. “The San Joaquin Valley is facing the prospect of a record low water allocation, an historic low point in water supply reliability, and yet another year of severe economic hardship,” the Westlands Water District, which supplies water to 600,000 acres in California’s bread basket, said in a statement. The potential cost to the regional economy? More than $1 billion.
With the state already a tinderbox, a dry 2014 raises the likelihood of more catastrophic wildfires like August’s Rim Fire, which devastated parts of Yosemite National Park and ranked as one of the largest in California history.
The prospects for a wetter 2014 are not looking good. California relies on snowpack in the Sierra Nevada Mountains for much of its water. As of Dec. 1, California’s snowpack contained just 13% of the average water annual water content. San Francisco, meanwhile, has received just 38% of its average rainfall since July. Less than an inch of rain has fallen on Los Angeles in that time, or 39% of its average.
Here’s how much rain has fallen in all of California over the past day: none.
In response, California governor Jerry Brown has ordered a “drought management team” to convene weekly to manage the state’s response to what is likely to be a very difficult year.
-
second post
http://capoliticalnews.com/2013/12/29/real-cost-of-the-guv-brown-delta-tunnel-64-billion-and-loss-of-hundreds-of-thousands-of-prime-farm-land/
http://capoliticalnews.com/2013/12/29/california-topples-new-york-to-reclaim-sales-crown-muni-credit-we-borrow-more-than-anyone-else/
-
December 30, 2013 by Ben Bullard
PHOTOS.COM
California residents are lining up to beat a new ban on unregistered shotguns and rifles, as a 2011 law that creates a State registry for long guns is set to go into effect at the start of the new year.
The law basically treats all long guns sold after Jan. 1, 2014 as handguns. It was passed in a legislative session that also saw the revocation of any form of open carry statewide.
Currently, California handgun owners must register their weapons in a statewide database. But starting next week, owners of long guns must do the same.
As 2013 draws to a close, CBS Sacramento reports that California residents are racing to stores in the hope of acquiring long-barreled firearms before the law requires them to join the ranks of registered gun owners:
Even though the law is at least temporarily boosting his bottom line, Just Guns owner John Deaser isn’t a fan. He says requiring people to register their rifles and shotguns is an unnecessary invasion of privacy.
In the last week of 2013, he says sales of long guns are up 30 to 50 percent.
The new registry ends California gun dealers’ standing practice of destroying the records of their customers as soon as they’ve cleared a background check. It also means that guns currently in existence, including heirloom weapons that have been handed down from one generation of family members to the next, will have to be registered for the first time when they next change hands.
The new State registry will record the make, model and serial number of every firearm owned or purchased in California; and gun owners must voluntarily report any transfer of ownership to the State.
http://personalliberty.com/2013/12/30/run-on-guns-in-california-as-new-registry-deadline-approaches/
-
California: New Anti-Gun Laws Take Effect Today, January 1
Signed into law in 2011, but taking effect today are a number of laws surrounding long gun registration.
• A person living in California will not need to register their currently owned firearms. However, starting today, whenever a long gun is transferred through a dealer it will automatically be registered to the receiving individual (PC 11106 and 28160).
• For transactions that do not require a dealer, as of today, the recipient of the long gun will need to register the long gun with the California Department of Justice (see generally PC 27860-28000).
• Individuals moving into California as of today will need to register their long guns (in addition to handguns) soon after moving into the state (PC 27560).
• The exception for the dealer requirement for transfers of curio or relic long guns older than fifty years will end today unless the recipient has a California Certificate of Eligibility and a Federal Curio or Relics license; the recipient will still need to register the long gun with the California Department of Justice. (PC 27965 and 27966).
Signed into law in 2012 and taking effect today, one fee will be charged for any number of firearms in a single transaction (PC 28240).
As for laws taking effect today for bills that were signed into law this year:
• Penal Code section 32310 and 32311: In addition to the current restrictions on manufacturing, importing, selling, giving and lending large capacity magazines, the law now prohibits buying and receiving to the list of prohibited activities. Additionally, the law now prohibits a person from manufacturing, importing, selling, giving, lending, buying or receiving “large capacity magazine conversion kits.” A “large capacity magazine conversion kit” is a device or combination of parts of a fully functioning large-capacity magazine, including, but not limited to, the body, spring, follower, and floor plate or end plate, capable of converting an ammunition feeding device into a large-capacity magazine. Possession of large capacity magazines and large capacity magazine conversion kits are still not illegal.
• Penal Code section 25100: With certain exceptions, if you keep a loaded firearm in your residence, and a person prohibited from possessing firearms gains access to the firearm and that person hurts him or herself, someone else or carries the firearm into a public place, you can be prosecuted. In addition, you can commit “criminal storage in the third degree” if you keep a loaded firearm within any premises where you know or should know a child is likely to gain access to the firearm.
• Penal Code section 25135: If you live with someone and you know or have reason to know the other person is prohibited from possessing, receiving, owning or purchasing a firearm, you must keep the firearm locked up (with a gun safety device or in a locked container) or keep it on your person or in close proximity.
• Penal Code section 28220: If the California Department of Justice cannot determine whether a person is prohibited from owning or possessing firearms as a result of a criminal case, mental health commitment, or has attempted to purchase a handgun within the last thirty days, the DOJ can only delay the transaction for up to thirty days while it tries to figure out whether the person is prohibited from possessing or receiving firearms. After thirty days the licensed dealer may release the firearm but is not required to do so.
• Penal Code sections 28210 and 28215: A dealer is required to provide a copy of the Dealer’s Record of Sale (DROS) to the firearm purchaser.
• Penal Code sections 29810, 29825, 29830, 33870: When a person is prohibited from owning and possessing firearms by a court order with a specified date of termination, that person has the option to store their firearms with a licensed firearm dealer.
• Health and Safety Code sections 8100 and 8105: Those who communicate serious threats of physical violence against an identifiable victim to a psychotherapist are prohibited from owning and possessing firearms for five years. The psychotherapist is required to report the threat to law enforcement within 24 hours. A person prohibited this way may petition for the restoration of their firearm rights.
• Welfare and Institutions Code section 8102: When firearms are seized at the scene of a mental health disturbance, a prohibited person can elect to have their firearms transferred or sold to a licensed firearm dealer.
• Fish and Game Code section 4155: It is unlawful to trap any bobcat, or attempt to do so, or to sell or export any bobcat or part of any bobcat taken in the area surrounding Joshua Tree National Park.
The NRA has numerous legal challenges currently pending, and more are planned, including potential challenges to some of these new laws. If you would like to assist in our fight against this attack on gun owners’ rights in California, please donate to the NRA Legal Action Project here. Rest assured that your donation will be used for the benefit of Californians. For a summary of the many actions the NRA legal team has taken or is currently taking on behalf of California gun owners, click here.
If you need help deciphering California’s gun laws, you might find the
“California Gun Laws: A guide to state and federal firearm regulations” by C.D. Michel helpful. While the vast majority of information in this book is timely and is currently applicable, and although the majority of California’s firearms laws do not change year to year, we are aware that to some degree California firearms law changes annually, and that federal firearms law changes occasionally. To address these changes, and to cover other more specialized firearms law topics that are not covered in this book due to narrow public interest and space limitations, the author makes legal updates and supplemental legal memoranda available to address forthcoming or applicable changes in the law on the website that supplements this book:www.CalGunLaws.com.
-
California's Cap-and-Trade Awakening
A Democrat discovers the economic costs of anticarbon politics.
Jan. 17, 2014 6:46 p.m. ET
Democrats in California needed to pass cap and trade to find out what's in it. At least that's the take-away from state Senate president Darrell Steinberg's epiphany in the Los Angeles Times this week.
Cap and trade is "asking the trading market to enter directly into the energy segment again and that brings back bad memories," Mr. Steinberg said, harking back to the state electricity crisis in 2001. That crisis culprit was a hasty change in state law, which energy traders exploited. "When you're allowing for trading beyond our borders," the state Senate leader added, "you may be reducing pollution in another state or country, but that doesn't reduce pollution in California."
Maybe Mr. Steinberg has forgotten that the 2006 state law that created the cap-and-trade program was entitled the "Global Warming Solutions Act"—not the "California Air Pollution Reduction Act."
Cap and trade's actual purpose was to raise revenue for the state by auctioning permits to emit carbon and to indirectly subsidize California green businesses. Refiners, fuel suppliers, manufacturers and other energy-intensive industries must adopt green technologies to comply with the emissions cap or buy permits from the state and "greener" companies.
Mr. Steinberg's real beef seems to be that out-of-state businesses are again gaming California's quarter-baked policies. The California Air Resources Board allows in-state businesses to comply with the cap by buying "offsets" from out-of-state enterprises such as forest conservation projects and methane digesters. The offsets, which are cheaper than permits, were intended to help businesses and prevent a jobs exodus.
California this year also merged its cap-and-trade program with Quebec's. The state's goal all along was to broaden cap and trade to neighboring jurisdictions. But the upshot is that money is flowing from California businesses to out-of-state green companies. Meantime, energy costs will rise when the cap hits fuel suppliers next year. "I worry about what it could do to energy costs," said Mr. Steinberg.
It's nice to see the politicians who passed cap and trade admitting reality, but the complaints mean nothing unless Mr. Steinberg is willing to push for repeal.
-
second post
California Governor Declares Drought Emergency
Parched Farms to Get Assistance; Residents May Face Curbs on Water Use
By Jim Carlton and Alejandro Lazo
Jan. 17, 2014 8:52 p.m. ET
SAN FRANCISCO—Gov. Jerry Brown has declared a drought emergency in parched California, freeing more state resources to cope with the growing economic and environmental threat from the driest conditions on record to hit much of the Golden State.
Monica Soares fixes her bicycle on the dry part of the Folsom Lake bed. Associated Press
"We are in an unprecedented, very serious situation, and people should pause and reflect on how dependent we are on the rain, on nature and one another," Mr. Brown said in announcing the expected proclamation at a news conference here Friday. The governor directed state officials to take actions including help for farmers whose supplies have been sharply curtailed, and called for a voluntary 20% reduction in water consumption statewide.
Mr. Brown warned that mandatory rationing might be ordered if the drought—now in its third year in California—doesn't abate soon. Already, water agencies in cities including Sacramento, Santa Cruz and Folsom have instituted mandatory rationing, while others say they likely will follow suit. The San Juan Water District outside Sacramento, for instance, likely in February will institute a ban on lawn watering and other restrictions on its 185,000 wholesale customers "if we don't get a Godzilla storm," said Shauna Lorence, the agency's general manager.
The actions in California come as drought plagues much of the rest of the West, with little relief in sight. Water forecasts released Wednesday by the Department of Agriculture predict generally dry conditions west of the Continental Divide for the next six months.
One of the culprits has been a stubbornly persistent ridge of high pressure over the West Coast, which has diverted storms to the Pacific Northwest. Wildfires, usually unheard of at this time of year, have been breaking out, including a 125-acre blaze being battled this week near Los Angeles. The state's snowpack level, an indicator of future runoff to rivers and lakes, is at a paltry 17% of normal.
The economic fallout is beginning to spread. The U.S. Agriculture Department on Wednesday declared parts of 11 mostly Western states to be natural-disaster areas, making farmers in places including California, Arizona and Nevada eligible for low-interest assistance loans.
In California, with its huge economy, the financial impacts are likely to ripple beyond the farmers. Growers in the Central Valley's Westlands Water District, for instance, are expected to fallow 200,000 of their 600,000 acres this year, resulting in job losses in surrounding communities, according to a statement by the agency. Other businesses that stand to suffer include landscapers, nurseries and orchards.
"There will be parts of California where this drought will cut into the fiber of our economy," said Timothy Quinn, executive director of the Association of California Water Agencies.
Mr. Brown said his disaster declaration will make it easier for farmers to purchase water from each other through an exchange program, and facilitate water transfers between state and federal agencies.
Longer term, water managers and state lawmakers said the drought's severity should lend new urgency to what they call the need to improve and expand California's aging water infrastructure. While almost anything concerning Western water leads to fights, the governor said he hoped this time would be different.
Write to Jim Carlton at jim.carlton@wsj.com and Alejandro Lazo at alejandro.lazo@wsj.com
-
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/454657/Ice-age-on-the-way-as-scientists-fear-the-Sun-is-falling-asleep
-
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/22/smith-wesson-stop-selling-guns-california-due-micr/
-
second post:
Red-light cameras being stopped in California cities
by Stephen Frank on 01/22/2014
This is what we know. When there are red light camera’s at an intersection, there are more traffic accidents. The revenues to cities are very small, many even lose money on the deal. The money maker is the Australian firm 10,000 miles away—which refuses to come to court to answer questions about the traffic tickets THEY, not the COPS, give.
In Europe the people burn turn, tear down and destroy red light camera’s—even the passive socialist subjects refuse to allow these camera’s. In the United States we write letters to the editor and complain about them. For some reason we do not defeat or Recall the elected officials that allow us to be gouged by a foreign corporation.
“Declining revenues, a nonsupportive court system and increases in the number of accidents instead of decreases, are the major reasons why cities have pulled the plug on red-light cameras in the past two years.
Some city council members and city traffic engineers interviewed said photo enforcement is causing more rear-end accidents because people are scared when they see a yellow light at a camera-controlled intersection and slam on their brakes.
At one intersection in Los Angeles, Beeber said statistics showed an 80 percent increase in rear-end collisions. Murrieta reported a 325 percent increase in rear-end collisions after red-light cameras were installed, according to the state Legislature. Both cities have scrapped their programs. In Murrieta, voters approved a ballot measure that called for removing the cameras by 87 percent. The courts later overturned the ballot measure.”
-
http://capoliticalnews.com/2014/01/23/california-state-budget-increases-9-includes-raises-for-unionized-state-workers/
-
On the California Water Front
How green politics has exacerbated the state's growing shortages.
Jan. 26, 2014 5:42 p.m. ET
Governor Jerry Brown in his state of California speech last week recalled Joseph's advice from scripture to "Put away your surplus during the years of great plenty so you will be ready for the lean years which are sure to follow." If only government water regulators were as wise as Joseph.
Mr. Brown has declared the state's severe drought an emergency. Snowpack in the Sierra Nevadas, the state's primary water source, is 20% of normal for this time of year, and reservoirs that capture the melted runoff are fast being depleted. While urging conservation, he says the government's ability to provide relief is limited since "we can't make it rain." That's refreshing modesty for Democrats these days. But the water shortage like so many other crises in California has been exacerbated by government. Californians are getting another first-hand lesson in the high costs of green regulation.
Local water districts that supply southern California, the Bay Area and the southern San Joaquin Valley may receive only 5% of their contractual allocations this year while growers in the heart of the valley might be cut off completely. Supplies for residents north of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta could be sharply restricted for the first time.
Districts in the south report they can weather the drought through 2015 without rationing water since they've invested in underground storage, desalination, wastewater reclamation and water metering. Yet the normally flush north, which likes to blame southern Californians for wasting the state's most precious resource, has been slow to adopt such technologies and is now feeling the pinch.
The green paradise of Santa Cruz has barred restaurants from serving water with meals except on diners' request. Sacramento residents have been ordered to scale back their water consumption by 20% and forbidden from using sprinklers on weekdays or washing cars with a hose. City workers and neighborhood watch groups are patrolling the streets for scofflaws.
Suffering the most are farmers south of the delta whose water allocations have plunged over the last two decades due to endangered-species protections. According to the Western Growers Association, up to 4.4 million acre-feet of water is diverted annually to environmental uses like wildlife refuges and salmon restoration. That's enough to sustain 4.4 million families, irrigate 1.1 million acres of land and grow more than 100 million tons of grapes.
Farmers are having to fallow hundreds of thousands of acres and pump groundwater, which depletes aquifers and can cause land subsidence. One irony here is that environmentalists are destroying one of FDR's great public-works programs—irrigating the naturally arid San Joaquin Valley.
California's biggest water hog is the three-inch smelt, which can divert up to one million acre-feet in a wet year. In 2008, federal regulators at the prodding of green groups restricted water exports south to protect the smelt, which have a suicidal tendency to swim into the delta's pumps. While wildlife refuges have continued to receive all 400,000 acre-feet of water they're entitled to under environmental regulations, farmers haven't gotten 100% of their water allocations since 2006. Even during years of heavy precipitation, federal regulators have supplied growers with 45% to 80% of their contractual deliveries.
After a deluge late in 2012, 800,000 acre-feet of melted snowpack was flushed into the San Francisco Bay. Regulators worried that reservoirs could overflow if the heavy precipitation continued. Yet they didn't want to harm the smelt by pumping more water south. All that flushed-out water would come in handy now.
California also has limited surface water storage because green groups oppose building new reservoirs or expanding existing ones like the Shasta Dam. Construction could disturb species's habitats. Reservoirs also encourage population growth, which is one reason many northern California communities rely heavily on groundwater.
Senator Dianne Feinstein noted last year that "expanding and improving California's water storage capacity is long overdue" since the last significant government investments in water storage and delivery were in the 1960s—not incidentally before the California Environmental Quality Act and National Environmental Policy Act were enacted in 1970. Those laws make it easier for environmentalists to block public works.
Ms. Feinstein and her fellow Democrats are now rushing to dodge the political storm brewing in the San Joaquin Valley. Earlier this month, she and her fellow California Senator Barbara Boxer and Rep. Jim Costa of Fresno urged federal agencies to "exercise their discretion in regulatory decision-making within the confines of the law to deliver more water to those whose health and livelihoods depend on it."
That sounds nice, but both Senators left farmers out to dry in 2012 when they opposed House legislation that would have redirected more water to humans and helped mitigate the present shortage. The Senators claimed the bill would "eviscerate state and federal environmental laws and water rights" and "seriously set back California's ability to resolve its water challenges." President Obama threatened a veto.
Republican Reps. Kevin McCarthy, Devin Nunes and David Valadao plan to introduce similar legislation that would temporarily suspend some environmental regulations and put humans at the front of the water line once it starts raining. This is a modest step toward reforming the absurd government status quo that puts green indulgences above human welfare.
-
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/01/29/report-some-bay-area-communities-could-run-out-of-water-within-4-months/
-
Some hyperventilating can be found in this source, but it regularly does the work and research that others do not.
Be sure to check Steve Frank's California News & Views throughout the day for breaking news and commentary! Visit http://capoliticalnews.com/!
How “Good” is California Government Education? Only 25% of 4th Graders Read at Grade Level
Follow on twitter: @capolitcalnews
PLEASE FORWARD THIS NEWSLETTER TO YOUR FRIENDS
Bakersfield—What Recovery? Sales Tax Revenues Down—Healthcare/Pension Costs Up
by Stephen Frank on 01/29/2014
Guv Brown needs to talk with the city council of Bakersfield. Then he needs to fire his speech writers and his economic team. Either they have been lying to Jerry—or he is too confused to understand higher spending, lower revenues, plus the water policy of protecting fish over the needs of people—we are in a Depression in California—and it is getting worse.
Sales tax revenues are down—but spending is not cut. This is getting owrse.
“The city’s unfunded liability has risen by $8.7 million, to just more than $176 million for the 2011-2012 Fiscal Year.
Unfunded liability is the amount CALPERS would be short if every Bakersfield city employee whose pension it covers retired tomorrow.
The city’s cost for the one Kaiser Permanente and two Blue Cross health plans which it offers employees also rose, between 8.5 percent and 15 percent for contracts approved last month.
The increase will cost the city $1.5 million during 2014, Smith said, and is largely based on medical claims paid out.”
.See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
How many workers will be affected by Obama’s minimum wage executive order?
by Stephen Frank on 01/29/2014
The headlines for the compassionate looks great—raise the minimum wage to get people out of poverty. Not mentioned is that very few would be affected—most on minimum wage are teenagers, not adults with families. Not heard from are those that will lose their jobs if the minimum goes up—will Obama speak for them?
“Though the 2 million figure has been widely cited, it’s worth clarifying several points. To start, the 2 million estimate didn’t only include people who were employed through federal contracts, but also workers whose wages Demos estimated were funded through other federal spending, such as Small Business Administration loans, Medicare, and Medicaid. According to the Demos study, the number of workers who are employed directly through federal contracts was 560,000. A spokesman for Demos told the Washington Examiner that this is the category of people the group believes to be covered by the executive order.
But the number covered by the executive order would still be less than this 560,000.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
How “Good” is California Government Education? Only 25% of 4th Graders Read at Grade Level
by Stephen Frank on 01/29/2014
Over the past twenty years California has more than doubled the money spent on government education. If this was a product, the management would be fired, the process changed and anybody responsible for the results not allowed to work in the industry.
How well do California government school fourth graders read? “The majority of California’s fourth-graders aren’t making the grade when it comes to reading. A new report finds only one in four California fourth-graders is reading at grade level.” You get an “F” if you score 25% on a test—this result is after billions have been spent, curriculum dumbed down and continuous changes to the curriculum over the years.
This is why children and parents should decide the education venue for each student—not the failed special interests that own the schools. Our children deserve the best—not the system we have now.
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
Little-Known Facts About the Contract for the First Construction Segment of California High-Speed Rail
by Stephen Frank on 01/29/2014
Guv Brown and his desire to pay off unions and special interests means that Sacramento can not be transparent. The choo choo train is not about transportation—no one wants it, it is too expensive and literally the Authority is stealing private property in Fresno to continue the pretense this is going forward. The values of the contract is publicly misstated, the political donations from the construction companies AND the unions (not noted in this article) are not mentioned by the Guv and his political team.
Arnold, Jerry and the High Speed Rail Authority have been caught lying about the cost, the route, the travel time and the ridership..they even lied that this is a high speed rail. Due to how slow it will go, it is nothing more than a slick looking slow train.
“Three days after the $27,200 contribution was made – and on the day it was recorded by the California Secretary of State – California Attorney General Kamala Harris submitted an extraordinary request to the California Supreme Court on behalf of Gov. Brown, the California High-Speed Rail Authority, and other interested parties. They want the court to grant relief to allow the project to continue, even though a Sacramento County Superior Court judge decided in 2013 that the California High-Speed Rail Authority failed to comply with the law established by Proposition 1A in 2008 and therefore could not sell any of the $9.95 billion in bonds authorized by voters under that statewide ballot measure.”
”See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
Water supply project costs could halt plans for desalination, water recycling plants
by Stephen Frank on 01/29/2014
This is a terrible choice for the people of San Fran—but they have worked hard to get into this mess.
They now have a choice. For the short run spend money on the seismic problems of the water supply of the city. Or, for the long run spend money for a desalinization plant and recycling of wastewater programs. They do not have money for both. They have to pick one, and it does not matter which—in the future San Fran will lose its water supply.
“An extra $161 million in costs required to finish the so-called Water Systems Improvement Project and to start gleaning drinking water from groundwater will be paid out of money set aside for the desalination plant, Ritchie said. The WSIP — a seismic rebuild of the dams, tunnels and pipes that deliver SFPUC water to 2.6 million Bay Area homes and businesses — exceeded its $4.6 billion budget thanks to construction overruns like the one at Calaveras Dam, where the discovery of ancient landslides made the job more difficult.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
CalSTRS: where is the urgency? It is Unsustainable
by Stephen Frank on 01/29/2014
Thanks to being forced to admit the full unfunded liabilities of CalSTRS, that agency has a deficit of $171 billion. When this was only $71 billion, it was declared to be unsustainable—now it is really $100 billion more and the agency has said and done nothing. The Board is not even anxious—have you seen statement of concerns, plans to solve the problem, urgency from the Governor or the Democrats running the Legislature? The unions that own Sacramento like the pensions—thinking money for education can be increased by raising taxes.
“CalSTRS provides pension benefits to nearly 900,000 beneficiaries. To ensure that money is available to pay for future benefits, the system accumulates contributions into a trust fund. Officially, CalSTRS has only 63% of the assets it needs to provide current and future retirement benefits, leaving the system with an $80.4 billion funding shortfall (market value). Currently, that unfunded liability grows $22 million each day lawmakers forgo a solution.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
Greenhut: Everything is great in California (but don’t look too closely)
by Stephen Frank on 01/29/2014
When you watch Jerry Brown patting himself on the back for the California “miracle” you can almost believe it. For instance our jobless number are down—yet, in San Diego, that drop is counting the 92% that have dropped out of looking for jobs. Brown says he has a budget surplus—yet the State Controller says we have an $18.4 billion cash deficit—is Brown too confused or is trying to be like Obama?
So far, the State has found 17 communities that will be waterless in 90-120 days—as we get closer to summer, while salmon, delta smelt and the fairy shrimp have all the water they need, families will be cutting back 20% or more—and Central Valley farmers will get about 5% of their needs.
“But, as Jessica Calefati of the San Jose Mercury News reported recently, “Gov. Jerry Brown’s image as a responsible, penny-pinching steward of California’s finances has been cemented in recent weeks because of his renewed call to pay off California’s ‘wall of debt.’ That’s a term Brown coined when he took office to describe the tens of billions of dollars California owed to public schools and special funds whose coffers were raided to help balance budgets in the past. But look behind that $24.9 billion wall and you’ll see a $330 billion skyline of other liabilities threatening the state’s financial health. It includes $80 billion needed to cover teachers’ pensions and $64 billion to pay for state workers’ health care in retirement — two particularly troublesome liabilities because the state isn’t even making the minimum payments on them.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
Should California’s Crowded Prisons Look to San Francisco’s Shrinking Jails
by Stephen Frank on 01/29/2014
A court has ruled that the comfort of criminals is more important that the safety of society. So far, between Arnold and Jerry, close to 50,000 criminals that should be in the State prison system are backed on the streets—in Los Angeles to probation folks have lost track of where thousands of these criminals are and what they are doing. On the plus side, this has caused the explosion in the purchasing of guns. Maybe that is because as the criminals have been released cash poor cities and counties have been forced to fire law enforcement officers. This exposed the fact that YOUR safety is your business, government can not protect you 24/7
“When it’s time for an inmate to leave prison or jail, San Francisco’s counselors find out what’s needed in housing, employment, health care and drug rehabilitation. The probation department has gone as far as picking people up from prisons to help them return to San Francisco. And little steps—like trying not to release people from county jail in the middle of the night when they’re more prone to slip up—have become part of the culture. “Other counties have taken realignment money and invested it in more jails,” Adachi says. “We haven’t done that.” Instead, San Francisco has focused on alternative sentencing and re-entry programs that hook offenders up with drug treatment, education and employment services.”
Now you know why gun sales have soared.
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
NAFTA at 20 years old—American Unemployed and Larger Trade Deficits
by Stephen Frank on 01/29/2014
In the last twenty years American manufacturing jobs have gone overseas—just as Ross Perot and other NAFTA opponents said they would. Special rules were created for foreigners that American firms can not use. NAFTA was a way, we were told to globalize our economy—instead our economy took a hit and our workers became victims of those that believe in “One World”, not the protection of this nation.
A total disaster—as we knew it would be. Only the big corporations won.
“Major corporations like General Electric, Caterpillar and Chrysler announced they would add jobs for increased sales to Mexico. Instead, they eliminated jobs. For example, General Electric testified before Congress saying, “We are looking at another $7.5 billion in potential sales over the next 10 years. These sales could support 10,000 jobs for General Electric and its suppliers.” In reality, “General Electric has eliminated 4,936 U.S. jobs since NAFTA due to rising imports from Canada and Mexico or decisions to offshore production to those countries.”
The report also documents the fact that “the small pre-NAFTA U.S. trade surplus with Mexico turned into a massive new trade deficit and the pre-NAFTA U.S. trade deficit with Canada expanded greatly.” According to Census Bureau data, in 1993, the non-inflation adjusted U.S. trade surplus with Mexico was $1.6 billion, and in 2013, the U.S. trade deficit had grown to $50.1 billion. The non-inflation adjusted U.S. deficit with Canada grew from $4.4 billion in 1994 to $7.4 billion in 2013. Together the Mexico and Canada inflation-adjusted trade deficits “have morphed into a combined NAFTA trade deficit of $181 billion.”
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
Economic Disaster of Drought has Started for 17 California Communities
by Stephen Frank on 01/29/2014
This is going to be a very long summer in California, unless we get another 1991 “March Miracle” and rain pours for ten days and ten nights, solving our water problem for years. The Brown/Obama policy has stopped 50% of the water needed in order to assure that the delta smelt, salmon and fairy shrimp have all the water they need. Now this process is beginning to collapse, for California citizens.
“As California’s drought deepens, 17 communities across the state are in danger of running out of water within 60 to 120 days, state officials said Tuesday.
The water systems, all in rural areas, serve from 39 to 11,000 residents. They range from the tiny Lompico County Water District in Santa Cruz County to districts that serve the cities of Healdsburg and Cloverdale in Sonoma County.”
Add to that the impending farm crisis in the Central Valley, receiving only 5% of the water they need for the farms. This could be the most difficult summer faced by California in a generation. Watch the water issue and you will see the pin pulled on the economy of our Golden State.
See the full story by clicking on the blue headline
________________________________________
________________________________________
Newsletter, please help my readership grow by passing it around. If some one sent this to you, and you would like your own subscription, you can sign up on my web page at www.capoliticalnews.com
________________________________________
-
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/369695/californias-obamacare-scandal-jillian-kay-melchior
-
Conceptually it is correct that it is a loan, but that is not how it is being presented.
http://www.craighuey.com/630_000_californians_will_have_their_property_confiscated?utm_campaign=hueyrep_2_1_14&utm_medium=email&utm_source
-
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/02/05/long-forgotten-pot-bust-bureacratic-screwup-prompt-agents-to-seize-california/?intcmp=latestnews
-
The Opinion Pages|OP-ED CONTRIBUTORS
The Dust Bowl Returns
By Blain Roberts and Ethan J. Kytl
FRESNO, Calif. — EVERY Saturday in late December and January, as reports of brutal temperatures and historic snowfalls streamed in from family in Vermont, New York and even southern Louisiana, we made weekly pilgrimages to our local beer garden to enjoy craft brews and unseasonably warm afternoons.
Normal winters here in Fresno, in the heart of California’s Central Valley, bring average highs in the 50s, steady periods of rain and drizzle, and the dense, bone-chilling Tule fog that can blanket the valley for days and even weeks on end.
But not this year. Instead, early 2014 gave us cloudless skies and midday temperatures in the 70s. By the end of January, it seemed like April, with spring trees in full bloom.
We fretted over the anomalous weather, to be sure. A high-pressure system parked off the Alaskan coast had produced not just our high temperatures but also soaring levels of fine particulate matter in the air and more than 50 rainless days, worsening a
three-year drought, the most severe in half a millennium. If it’s this bad in January, we wondered, what’s it going to be like in July? But then we’d return to the beer taps, or meander over to peruse food truck menus.
Life in the Central Valley revolves around two intricately related concerns: the quality of the air and the quantity of the water. Although Fresno is the state’s fifth-largest city, it is really just a sprawling farm town in the middle of the nation’s most productive agricultural region, often called “America’s fruit basket.” Surrounded by mountains, which trap the pollution created by a surging population, interstate transportation and tens of thousands of farms, the valley has noxious air, even on good days.
The political atmosphere surrounding crop irrigation is equally toxic. Some farms in the western Valley — crippled by cuts in water allocations, salt buildup in the soil and depleted aquifers — now resemble the dust bowl that drove so many Tom Joads here in the 1930s. Farmers line highways with signs insisting that “food grows where water flows,” while environmentalists counter that the agriculture industry consumes 75 percent of the water transported by California’s byzantine water system.
Locals assess the situation in numbers and colors. Meteorologists compile and trade rainfall statistics with all the regularity and precision of batting averages, but without any of the fun. The air quality index — ranging from a “healthy” green to a “hazardous” maroon — occupies an ominous presence in the day, not unlike the color-coded terrorism alert scale adopted after 9/11.
Experts offer dire warnings. The current drought has already eclipsed previous water crises, like the one in 1977, which a meteorologist friend, translating into language we understand as historians, likened to the “Great Depression” of droughts. Most Californians depend on the Sierra Nevada for their water supply, but the snowpack there was just 15 percent of normal in early February. And the dry conditions are likely to make the polluted air in the Central Valley — which contributes to high rates of asthma and the spread of Valley Fever, a potentially fatal airborne fungus — even worse.
The current crisis raises the obvious question: How long can we continue to grow a third of the nation’s fruit and vegetables?
Tom Willey — an organic farmer from nearby Madera with the genial manner and snowy beard of a Golden State Santa Claus — certainly wonders. For six and a half years, he and his wife, Denesse, have provided most of our family’s fresh produce through their community-supported agriculture program. The Willeys taught us to appreciate kohlrabi and even turned our 5-year-old into a fan of brussels sprouts, which she likes to eat straight from the farm box.
Twenty years ago, the water table under the Willeys’ farm measured 120 feet. But a well test in late January revealed that it is now 60 feet lower. Half of that decline, Tom estimates, has occurred in the last two years.
I guess the Tom Joads' of the current generation will not be singing "California here I come." All this snow in Minnesota looks pretty good...
The Willeys have done what they can to cope. They’ve cut back on less profitable crops, and they are already dedicated practitioners of sustainable agriculture. But many farmers aren’t, and the future is worrisome. Pumping from aquifers is so intense that the ground in parts of the valley is sinking about a foot a year. Once aquifers compress, they can never fill with water again. It’s no surprise Tom Willey wakes every morning with a lump in his throat. When we ask which farmers will survive the summer, he responds quite simply: those who dig the deepest and pump the hardest.
Yet for all the doom around us, here in Fresno itself it is hard to find evidence that the drought is changing the behavior of city dwellers. Locals have made a few concessions, though mainly to mitigate the effects of the bad air. The two of us, for instance, have skipped afternoon jogs to ease the strain on our lungs.
And while religious communities around the valley organized a day of prayer and fasting, entreating God to send rain, concrete efforts to solve the water problem are less apparent. Gov. Jerry Brown has called on all Californians to reduce their water use by 20 percent, but residential lawns, seeded each year with winter ryegrass, continue to glow in brilliant, bright-green hues, kept alive by sprinkler systems that are activated in the dark of night.
Fresnans have long resisted water-saving measures, clinging tenaciously to a flat rate, all-you-can-use system. Nudged by state and federal officials, Fresno began outfitting new homes with water meters in the early 1990s, but voters passed a ballot initiative prohibiting the city from actually reading them. It took two decades for all area homes to acquire meters and for the city to start monitoring the units. To its credit, Fresno has a watering schedule, limiting when residents can water their lawns. But enforcement, to put it charitably, is lax.
Our behavior here in the valley feels untenable and self-destructive, and for much of it we are to blame. But we also find support among an enthusiastic group of enablers: tens of millions of American shoppers who devour the lettuce and raisins, carrots and tomatoes, almonds and pistachios grown in our fields.
Rain showers moved in Thursday morning, for the third time in a week. The faithful will see signs of divine intervention, but it seems clear we need to stage one of our own. These storms brought less than two inches of rain — merely a drop in our tired, leaky bucket.
Blain Roberts, the author of the forthcoming book “Pageants, Parlors, and Pretty Women: Race and Beauty in the Twentieth-Century South,” and Ethan J. Kytle, the author of the forthcoming book “Romantic Reformers and the Antislavery Struggle in the Civil War Era,” are associate professors of history at California State University, Fresno.
+++++++++++++++++++++
2
February 2014
Severe Drought Has U.S. West Fearing Worst
By Adam Nagourney and Ian Lovett
LOS ANGELES — The punishing drought that has swept California is now threatening the state’s drinking water supply.
With no sign of rain, 17 rural communities providing water to 40,000 people are in danger of running out within 60 to 120 days. State officials said that the number was likely to rise in the months ahead after the State Water Project, the main municipal water distribution system, announced on Friday that it did not have enough water to supplement the dwindling supplies of local agencies that provide water to an additional 25 million people. It is first time the project has turned off its spigot in its 54-year history.
State officials said they were moving to put emergency plans in place. In the worst case, they said drinking water would have to be brought by truck into parched communities and additional wells would have to be drilled to draw on groundwater. The deteriorating situation would likely mean imposing mandatory water conservation measures on homeowners and businesses, who have already been asked to voluntarily reduce their water use by 20 percent.
“Every day this drought goes on we are going to have to tighten the screws on what people are doing” said Gov. Jerry Brown, who was governor during the last major drought here, in 1976-77.
This latest development has underscored the urgency of a drought that has already produced parched fields, starving livestock, and pockets of smog.
“We are on track for having the worst drought in 500 years,” said B. Lynn Ingram, a professor of earth and planetary sciences at the University of California, Berkeley.
Already the drought, technically in its third year, is forcing big shifts in behavior. Farmers in Nevada said they had given up on even planting, while ranchers in Northern California and New Mexico said they were being forced to sell off cattle as fields that should be four feet high with grass are a blanket of brown and stunted stalks.
Fishing and camping in much of California has been outlawed, to protect endangered salmon and guard against fires. Many people said they had already begun to cut back drastically on taking showers, washing their car and watering their lawns.
Rain and snow showers brought relief in parts of the state at the week’s end — people emerging from a movie theater in West Hollywood on Thursday evening broke into applause upon seeing rain splattering on the sidewalk — but they were nowhere near enough to make up for record-long dry stretches, officials said.
“I have experienced a really long career in this area, and my worry meter has never been this high,” said Tim Quinn, executive director of theAssociation of California Water Agencies, a statewide coalition. “We are talking historical drought conditions, no supplies of water in many parts of the state. My industry’s job is to try to make sure that these kind of things never happen. And they are happening.”
Officials are girding for the kind of geographical, cultural and economic battles that have long plagued a part of the country that is defined by a lack of water: between farmers and environmentalists, urban and rural users, and the northern and southern regions of this state.
“We do have a politics of finger-pointing and blame whenever there is a problem,” said Mr. Brown. “And we have a problem, so there is going to be a tendency to blame people.” President Obama called him last week to check on the drought situation and express his concern.
Tom Vilsack, secretary of the federal Agriculture Department, said in an interview that his agency’s ability to help farmers absorb the shock, with subsidies to buy food for cattle, had been undercut by the long deadlock in Congress over extending the farm bill, which finally seemed to be resolved last week.
Mr. Vilsack called the drought in California a “deep concern,” and a warning sign of trouble ahead for much of the West.
“That’s why it’s important for us to take climate change seriously,” he said. “If we don’t do the research, if we don’t have the financial assistance, if we don’t have the conservation resources, there’s very little we can do to help these farmers.”
The crisis is unfolding in ways expected and unexpected. Near Sacramento, the low level of streams has brought out prospectors, sifting for flecks of gold in slow-running waters. To the west, the heavy water demand of growers of medical marijuana — six gallons per plant per day during a 150-day period — is drawing down streams where salmon and other endangered fish species spawn.
“Every pickup truck has a water tank in the back,” said Scott Bauer, a coho salmon recovery coordinator with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. “There is a potential to lose whole runs of fish.”
Without rain to scrub the air, pollution in the Los Angeles basin, which has declined over the past decade, has returned to dangerous levels, as evident from the brown-tinged air. Homeowners have been instructed to stop burning wood in their fireplaces.
In the San Joaquin Valley, federal limits for particulate matter were breached for most of December and January. Schools used flags to signal when children should play indoors.
“One of the concerns is that as concentrations get higher, it affects not only the people who are most susceptible, but healthy people as well,” said Karen Magliano, assistant chief of the air quality planning division of the state’s Air Resources Board.
The impact has been particularly severe on farmers and ranchers. “I have friends with the ground torn out, all ready to go,” said Darrell Pursel, who farms just south of Yerington, Nev. “But what are you going to plant? At this moment, it looks like we’re not going to have any water. Unless we get a lot of rain, I know I won’t be planting anything.”
The University of California Cooperative Extension held a drought survival session last week in Browns Valley, about 60 miles north of Sacramento, drawing hundreds of ranchers in person and online. “We have people coming from six or seven hours away,” said Jeffrey James, who ran the session.
Dan Macon, 46, a rancher in Auburn, Calif., said the situation was “as bad as I have ever experienced. Most of our range lands are essentially out of feed.”
With each parched sunrise, a sense of alarm is rising amid signs that this is a drought that comes along only every few centuries. Sacramento had gone 52 days without water, and Albuquerque had gone 42 days without rain or snow as of Saturday.
The snowpack in the Sierra Nevada, which supplies much of California with water during the dry season, was at just 12 percent of normal last week, reflecting the lack of rain or snow in December and January.
“When we don’t have rainfall in our biggest two months, you really are starting off bad,” said Dar Mims, a meteorologist with the Air Resources Board.
Even as officials move into action, people who have lived through droughts before — albeit none as severe as this — said they were doing triage in their gardens (water the oak tree, not the lawn) and taking classic “stop-start-stop-start” shower.
Jacob Battersby, a producer in Oakland, said he began cutting back even before the voluntary restrictions were announced.
“My wife and I both enjoy gardening,” he wrote in an email. “ ‘Sorry, plants. You will be getting none to drink this winter.’ ”
-
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/02/12/1056971.pdf.
-
http://capoliticalnews.com/2014/02/24/calif-doctor-shortage-could-lead-to-higher-rates-on-exchange-plans/
-
http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-republicans-20140303,0,804636.story?track=rss#axzz2tzJmAUqn
-
http://capoliticalnews.com/2014/03/12/bullet-train-spending-approaches-1-2b-now-dead-broke/
http://capoliticalnews.com/2014/03/12/high-speed-rail-authority-deadbeats-still-stealing-private-property-and-signing-contracts/
and this on pensions:
http://capoliticalnews.com/2014/03/12/rising-pension-expenses-to-put-an-end-to-long-beachs-brief-period-of-financial-stability/
-
Who is shocked to read this? Aside from the majority of Californians...
http://capoliticalnews.com/2014/03/12/bullet-train-spending-approaches-1-2b-now-dead-broke/
http://capoliticalnews.com/2014/03/12/high-speed-rail-authority-deadbeats-still-stealing-private-property-and-signing-contracts/
and this on pensions:
http://capoliticalnews.com/2014/03/12/rising-pension-expenses-to-put-an-end-to-long-beachs-brief-period-of-financial-stability/
-
I really don't know how we can defeat the dependency crowd when there are so many of them and growing by leaps and bounds unless there is a big shock wave that finally makes at least some of them wake up to reality. We will see.
*****Republicans roar for Tea Party candidate at California convention
Reuters
By Sharon Bernstein 13 hours ago
BURLINGAME, California (Reuters) - California Republicans wrapped up their annual state convention on Sunday with a roar of approval for a charismatic Tea Party-backed candidate seeking to unseat popular Democratic Governor Jerry Brown as he vies for an unprecedented fourth term.
Tim Donnelly, a Southern California state assemblyman who made his name as a leader for the anti-illegal immigration Minutemen Project, brought the crowd of several hundred party activists to its feet in a speech that slammed Brown, warned of government tyranny and criticized recent efforts in the state to allow transgender children to use school restrooms in accordance with their gender identities.
"I want my state back," said Donnelly, a businessman who represents the conservative desert area east of Los Angeles. He blamed government regulation for driving customers away from a plastics business that he founded. "I want my freedom back."
About 1,000 delegates and guests attended the weekend convention in Burlingame, about 15 miles south of San Francisco. Speakers included former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus who urged members to strike a more inclusive tone as the party struggles to rebuild in a state where it once dominated.
"We have a responsibility to those who do not yet have the liberties and the rights that we enjoy," Rice told the group on Saturday as part of a speech urging the party to become more inclusive on issues like immigration. "We cannot abandon them ... We were once them."
The convention took place after months of strategizing and fundraising led by former Republican state senate leader Jim Brulte. In a state where Democrats control both legislative houses and every statewide elected office, Brulte is charged with helping to revive the party's moribund operation.
Just 29 percent of voters were registered Republicans in California in 2013, down from about 35 percent in 2005, part of a long decline in the party of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan in the increasingly diverse and socially liberal state.
Brown, who served as the state's top executive from 1975 to 1983 before winning the spot again in 2010, is seeking a fourth term as governor. By steering Democrats in the legislature sharply toward the center and stubbornly demanding fiscal restraint, his focus on paying down debt while restoring funding in key areas such as education has won him high approval ratings in a state where voters can be fickle.
CONSERVATIVE CROWD
But it was clear from the differing reactions to Donnelly and a more moderate candidate, former U.S. Treasury official Neel Kashkari, that this was a conservative crowd.
Kashkari, who is seeking support from business interests in the state and is more moderate than Donnelly on many social issues, has made jobs and education the cornerstone of his campaign. He cited support from college Republicans and said he planned to meet with party activists in their hometowns after the convention ended.
"I'm running for governor because California is failing millions of our families," Kashkari said, referring to low-performing schools and a weak rate of job creation. His speech was met with polite applause, but not with the thunderous reaction that delegates gave to Donnelly.
At the convention and behind the scenes, Republican leaders have been urging candidates to be more inclusive and to refrain from inflammatory rhetoric. In his speech, Donnelly avoided talking about immigration and religion.
Democrats, he told the delegates, were not the enemy - they were potential Republicans.
Donnelly, 47, has an impassioned, populist style of speaking that tends to include a lot of zingers. His Burlingame speech was not without swipes at liberal causes, including environmentalists who want a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, a controversial method of extracting natural gas and oil from underground rock deposits.
"We ought to frack our way to prosperity and drill our way to prosperity, rather than sitting on an ocean of oil and importing it from our enemies," he said to wild applause.
On his first day in office, Donnelly said, he would declare a moratorium on all laws that would restrict freedom, businesses or the constitutional rights of Californians.
He also railed against politicians who want to allow boys to use the girls' restroom at school, a jab at a recent state law allowing transgender youth to play sports or use bathrooms in accordance with their gender identities.
Assemblyman Brian Jones, a San Diego-area Republican who has thrown his support behind Donnelly, said that the sometimes provocative candidate has taken to heart pleas from senior party leaders and the business community to make his message more inclusive.
"He's saying the same things, but in a more welcoming manner," Jones said. "He's grown and is paying attention and being responsive to feedback."
(Editing by Dan Whitcomb and Matthew
-
Yes, there is quite an art and a skill to gaining trust and changing hearts and minds, and not just insult the idiocy of liberalism.
"He's saying the same things, but in a more welcoming manner."
-
http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2014/03/californias-historic-drought/100706/
-
http://capoliticalnews.com/2014/04/15/tax-used-to-research-initiative-to-make-85-of-california-blighted-to-return-redevelopment-agencies-to-steal-private-property/
-
Court Again Says No Bond Sales for High Speed Rail Authority (Choo Choo Train)
by Stephen Frank on 04/16/2014
Guv Brown and his Democrat buddies again went to court to claim the law does not pertain to them. If Obama can make his own laws, why not the Democrats of California? Again, the California 3rd Court of Appeal said NO—you may not violate the law and issue more bonds. Now there will be a trial. Then, when that trial is decided, the losing side will appeal—all the way up to the United States Supreme Court. This could take another 3-4 years before an absolute final decision is made.
Yet the Authority continues to sign billion dollar deals, without a dime in the bank or anyway to pay the bills. They are so far in debt, they are using $26 million of borrowed money this year, and $29 million next year (from the State) just to pay attorneys to keep the lawsuits going.
“On April 15, 2014, the California 3rd District Court of Appeal rejected an extraordinary appeal backed by Governor Jerry Brown, Attorney General Kamala Harris, Treasurer Bill Lockyer, and the California High-Speed Rail Authority. These top state officials wanted the appeals court to suppress two decisions of a lower court so the state could borrow money for the High-Speed Train Program by selling bonds.
In 2013, a Sacramento County Superior Court judge found that the California High-Speed Rail Authority failed to comply with provisions of Proposition 1A, the “Safe, Reliable High-Speed Passenger Train Bond Act,”
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/17/education/competing-views-of-teacher-tenure-are-on-display-in-california-case.html?emc=edit_th_20140417&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=49641193
-
http://capoliticalnews.com/2014/04/21/calpers-hikes-rate-459-million-funding-still-low/
In a related vein see http://capoliticalnews.com/2014/04/21/pensions-still-cloud-stockton-bankruptcy-exit/
-
http://capoliticalnews.com/2014/04/29/mexico-and-texas-have-lower-taxes-than-california-both-have-growing-economies-while-our-state-in-depression/
-
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/california-612425-toyota-state.html
-
California GOP worried over top-two governor race.
http://start.toshiba.com/news/read/category/Top%20News/article/the_associated_press-california_gop_worried_over_toptwo_governor_race-ap (http://start.toshiba.com/news/read/category/Top%20News/article/the_associated_press-california_gop_worried_over_toptwo_governor_race-ap)
P.C.
-
:cry: :cry: :cry:
Both of them are terrible candidates.
-
http://reason.com/blog/2014/05/14/sriracha-ceo-compares-ca-to-communist-vi
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/what-recovery-houston-notches-more-new-home-starts-than-the-entire-state-of-california/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/high-speed-rail-crashes-into-high-costs/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/top-two-electoral-disaster-for-california-18-turnout-and-one-party-rule/
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/alabama-gop-gets-dose-of-teacher-union-bipartisanship-happening-in-ca-as-well/
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/free-pot-for-san-jose-voters-bribe-and-brain-killer/
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/they-gave-an-election-but-nobody-came-that-happened-tuesday/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/guv-brown-cap-and-trade-to-pay-for-high-speed-rail-for-next-272-years/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/18-billion-in-ca-water-bonds-not-a-drop-of-new-water-now-sacramento-wants-another-11-billion/
-
Barry Goldwater 2.0: This candidate wants to redefine conservatism
By George Will
JewishWorldReview.com | MENLO PARK, Calif.
Fifty Julys ago, up the road near San Francisco, in the unfortunately named Cow Palace, the Republican National Convention gave its presidential nomination to Arizona Sen. Barry Goldwater, who knew he would lose: Americans were not going to have a third president in 14 months. Besides, his don't-fence-me-in libertarian conservatism was ahead of its time. His agenda, however, was to change his party's national brand.
Today, in this state where one in eight Americans lives, and where Democratic presidential candidates can reap 55 electoral votes without spending a dime or a day campaigning, the Republicans' gubernatorial candidate has an agenda and spirit similar to Goldwater's. Neel Kashkari is not, as some careless commentary suggests, an anti-Goldwater, diluting the state party's conservatism. He is Goldwater 2.0, defining conservatism a half-century on.
He relishes "turning upside down" the parties' stereotypes. The Democratic candidate, 76-year-old Gov. Jerry Brown, is "the old white guy." Kashkari, the 40-year-old son of Indian immigrants, was born in 1973, the year before Brown was first elected governor. Brown is a child of the establishment — his father, Pat, California's 32nd governor, was defeated in 1966 by Ronald Reagan. Jerry Brown, California's 34th and 39th governor, is a government lifer, having been secretary of state, attorney general and Oakland's mayor when not unsuccessfully seeking a U.S. Senate seat and the presidency (three times).
Kashkari prospered in the private sector, a place as foreign to Brown as Mongolia. Born in Ohio, Kashkari studied mechanical engineering at the University of Illinois, came to California to work in the aerospace industry, then earned an MBA from Wharton, joined Goldman Sachs and landed a Washington job with a Goldman Sachs alumnus, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. As a treasury official during one of the most dangerous periods in America's economic history, from July 2006 to May 2009, Kashkari says: "I saw the best in our political system."
RECEIVE LIBERTY DEFENDING COLUMNISTS IN YOUR INBOX … FOR FREE!
Receive Will and many, many more. Sign up for the daily update. It's free. Just click here.
He remembers that, with a liquidity-deprived financial system pushing the nation to the precipice of a depression, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell simply said, "Of course we'll find a way to get this done." The politically perilous but nation-saving business of bailing out the banking system was done in days. "What other democracy in the world," Kashkari asks, "can move that fast to deal with a crisis?"
Just as McConnell's opponent in this year's Kentucky Republican primary execrated McConnell's finest hour, Kashkari's primary opponent vociferously deplored Kashkari's role as administrator of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). This opponent, a factually challenged fire-breather (of illegal immigration, he said, "We are in a war"), also said Kashkari supports sharia law. That would be peculiar for a Hindu who calls himself "a libertarian socially" (he is pro-choice and pro-same-sex marriage) and lives in Southern California's culturally relaxed Laguna Beach.
Today, California is a one-party state: Democrats have 2-to-1 majorities in both legislative chambers and account for 40 of 55 members of Congress. Republicans hold no statewide office and have only 28 percent of voters registered by party. All of this has something to do with these facts: California has the nation's highest income tax, sales tax and poverty rate (adjusted for the cost of living) and the second-highest gasoline tax. Only four states have higher unemployment rates. Kashkari says California's "U-6 unemployment rate" — which includes unemployed people seeking full-time jobs, part-time workers who want full-time jobs and people too discouraged to seek jobs — is above 16 percent.
Running against Brown requires discerning silver linings on black clouds. Kashkari says of polls showing Brown leading 52 percent to 32 percent: Well, 100 percent of Californians know who Brown is, so 48 percent are looking for an alternative.
Kashkari promises to derail Brown's obsession — the (at least) $68 billion San Francisco-to-Los Angeles bullet train. Brown has been silent about the recent court decision striking down the tenure system that entrenches incompetent public school teachers. The public likes the decision; teachers unions loathe it. Brown, Kashkari says dryly, has "multiple owners."
"If I get Jerry on a debate stage," Kashkari says, "anything can happen." That is true, as is this: Goldwater lost 44 states but won the future. His conservative cadre captured the GOP, which won five of the next six and seven of the next 10 presidential elections. If California becomes a purple state and Democrats can no longer assume its 20 percent of 270 electoral votes, Republicans nationwide will be indebted to the immigrants' son who plucked up Goldwater's banner of conservatism with a Western libertarian flavor.
• George Will Archives
-
Yes, I have.
Unfortunately he is pro-amnesty, pro-abortion, and pro-gay marriage.
In that in California a major part of why the Reps are on the verge of irrelevant is because of the successful passage (and reversal by Fed courts) of Prop 187, which led Latinos to conclude that Reps are anti-Latino, I cannot say that a pro-amnesty position is not necessary to have a chance of winning.
In that in California, the vote is overwhelmingly pro-abortion, so here too I cannot fault the logic.
In that in California the Fed courts struck down TWO initiatives for traditional marriage what a politician says has been made irrelevant, so again here too , , ,
I very much like his insight to define the Rep Party as the "Party of Work". This is pithy, profound, and precisely on point. It speaks well of the man's political instincts, as does his strategy of focusing on Brown's support of the disastrous bullet train.
-
" I cannot say that a pro-amnesty position is not necessary to have a chance of winning."
We lose either way :cry:
-
Oops, I put my post on this in the states thread instead of in 'California'.
http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=2404.msg82528#msg82528
-
Brother, Can You Spare a Job?
I spent a week as a homeless person, looking for work.The 'California Comeback' has a long way to go.
Email
Print
28 Comments
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
LinkedIn
smaller
Larger
By
Neel Kashkari
July 31, 2014 12:00 a.m. ET
'California Comeback!" is the favorite slogan of Gov. Jerry Brown and other Sacramento politicians cheering a temporary budget surplus provided by a roaring stock market. But California also has the highest poverty rate in America at 24%. Is California really back?
I wanted to see firsthand what that comeback looks like for many Californians. So, on the morning of July 21 I took a Greyhound bus from Los Angeles to Fresno. With only $40 in my pocket (and no credit cards), a backpack, a change of clothes and a toothbrush, I planned to find a job and earn enough money to get by. I am an able-bodied 41-year-old. Surely I could find some work.
Over the next seven days, I walked mile after mile in 100-degree heat searching for a job. I offered to do anything: wash dishes, sweep floors, pack boxes, cook meals, anything. I went to dozens of businesses in search of work but wasn't able to get any. In seven days, I didn't see a single "Help Wanted" sign, but I did see plenty of signs that fast-food outlets now accept food stamps.
Enlarge Image
Getty Images
I was committed to finding a job. It was my top priority, but halfway through the week my priority was forced to change: I barely had any money left and needed to find food. Fortunately, kindhearted homeless residents in Fresno pointed me to a shelter, Poverello House, which provides services to the homeless. I had no choice but to join the hundreds of men, women and families who go to the shelter for food. As the shelter did not have any beds for me I slept on the streets all six nights. I had only one shower during that time.
The meals at Poverello House were a Godsend. But they introduced a new challenge: I now needed to stay within a short walk of the shelter so I could be back in time for my next meal. I had only enough money left to take the city bus once, so my job-search area shrank. The odds of me finding a job were getting smaller by the day.
Since I had little money, a motel was out of the question. I tried to sleep on park benches or in parking lots. Anywhere I wouldn't be chased out. Night after night, however, I was woken up and told to move along by security guards or the police.
The people I met during my week in Fresno are proud. They don't want to be homeless. They don't want to be poor. They don't want to depend on a shelter or the state. Most want jobs but simply cannot find one.
But this poor job market doesn't just affect people seeking minimum-wage jobs; it also affects people up the education ladder. An educated, professionally trained photographer told me that when the economy faltered, his photography work dried up. Now he is grateful to have a job serving coffee. Unfortunately, stories similar to his are playing out in many cities across California.
The Fresno Community Food Bank is doing a record business these days, serving food to 220,000 residents, including 90,000 children, each month, up 340% from a few years ago, according to the food bank. Fresno is in the heart of California's agriculture economy. With a third year of record drought, farmers don't have enough water for their almond, cantaloupe and other crops. The rising cost of water had forced farmers to idle about 500,000 acres of land. One young woman in line at the food bank said it simply: "There's not enough water. Crops can't be grown. My family works in the fields and they can't get work every day . . . sometimes just on weekends."
I walked for hours and hours in search of a job, giving me a lot of time to think. Five days into my search, hungry, tired and hot, I asked myself: What would solve my problems? Food stamps? Welfare? An increased minimum wage?
No. I needed a job. Period. Like others, I have often said the best social program in the world is a good job. Even though my homeless trek was only for a week, with a defined endpoint, that statement became much more real for me. A job was the one thing that could have solved my food, housing and transportation problems.
California's record poverty is man-made: over-regulation and over-taxation that drive jobs out of state, failing schools that don't prepare students for the skilled work force and misguided water policies that prevent us from saving surplus water in wet years to prepare for our inevitable droughts. We have the power to tackle poverty if we implement smart, pro-growth economic policies, as many other states have done.
While the politicians who run California pat themselves on the back and claim a "California Comeback," they willfully ignore millions of our neighbors who are living in poverty. California's most vulnerable citizens deserve leaders who will fight for them. It's a fight that Republicans should lead. We have the policy ideas—improving education and reducing regulations to help create jobs—to rebuild the middle class and give every Californian, and every American, real economic opportunity.
Mr. Kashkari is the Republican nominee for governor of California. A video documenting his week of homelessness can be found at www.neelkashkari.com/poverty.
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/california-democrats-outlaw-best-weapons-from-being-sold-in-state/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/repeal-prop-14-top-two-primary-before-unions-and-wealthy-totally-own-sacramento-editorial-by-stephen-frank/
-
Hat tip to PC :-D
California wait period doesn't apply to gun owners
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A federal judge has overturned part of a California law requiring a 10-day waiting period for gun buyers, ruling that it does not apply to those who already own firearms.
U.S. District Judge Anthony Ishii of Fresno ruled that "10-day waiting periods impermissibly violate the Second Amendment" for gun-buyers who already passed background checks or are authorized to carry concealed weapons.
Californians buying their first firearm will still be subject to background checks and the 10-day waiting period under the ruling, dated Friday.
A spokesman for the state attorney general, Nick Pacilio, said Monday that officials are reviewing the ruling as they decide whether to appeal.
Two gun owners and two gun-owner rights groups, The Calguns Foundation and the Second Amendment Foundation, sued over the state waiting period in 2011.
http://start.toshiba.com/news/read/category/Top%20News/article/the_associated_press-california_wait_period_doesnt_apply_to_gun_owners-ap
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/there-is-no-california-comeback-income-tax-revenues-down-6-for-first-six-months/
There Is No California Comeback—Income Tax Revenues DOWN 6% for First Six Months
August 25, 2014 By Stephen Frank Leave a Comment
Text Size: a- A+
A few months ago I had the opportunity of meeting Stephen Moore at a Franklin Center bloggers conference in Virginia. He is as entertaining and direct in person as he is on TV or in this article. Importantly, he is willing to state facts that are too confusing for our Governor to understand. Remember, a couple of weeks ago Jerry Brown was trying to figure out how to handle a $30 billion debt along with an multi-billion “water” bond” where most of the money goes to special interest and less than a third MIGHT be used to create water storage. Oh, per the LAO, California has a $340 billion, ten times more than our confused Guv Brown knows about.
“First, the tax-receipt bubble may have already burst.
A 3 percent retroactive tax hike approved in November 2012, hit wealthy Californians on their prior earnings, and took the state’s top effective tax rate to 13 percent. Revenues shot up by more than 20 percent in fiscal 2013 thanks to the retroactive tax bills wealthy Californians had to pay last year.
But so far this calendar year, according to the latest data from California’s State Controller’s Office and the Rockefeller Institute, personal income-tax revenues fell by 11 percent in the first quarter of this year and more than 6 percent through June.
In fact, the decline through the first quarter, according to the Rockefeller Institute, was more than any other state.”
california fire
There Is No California Comeback
Stephen Moore, Daily Signal, 8/24/14
Stephen Moore, who formerly wrote on the economy and public policy for The Wall Street Journal, is chief economist at The Heritage Foundation. Read his research.
News media from coast to coast are celebrating a “California comeback” after a near-decade-long Golden State economic collapse.
But even this latest recovery may be much more fragile than has been reported, and the state’s structural defects still imperil the left-coast economy.
Certainly there are reasons for optimism. Tax collections were way up last year, and the state is balancing its budget after years of scrambling to close multibillion deficits with accounting gimmicks.
Silicon Valley is on fire as the tech boom has rebooted. San Francisco is one of the fastest-growing cities, with rents doubling and even tripling in recent years.
There is even a whispering campaign that if Hillary Clinton tanks, Gov. Jerry Brown, who will be older in 2016 than Reagan was when he left office, may run for president, on a platform of resurrecting the U.S. economy the way he engineered the rebound in California.
For liberals this is a story of “progressive government” — the model of high taxes, heavy regulation and government “investments” leading to prosperity.
That’s the message from the left’s leading economic sage, Paul Krugman, who recently wrote that the lesson from the “California comeback” is “that you should take anti-government propaganda with large helpings of salt.”
“Tax increases,” he maintained, “aren’t economic suicide; sometimes they’re a useful way to pay for things we need.
Government programs, like Obamacare, can work if the people running them want them to work, and if they aren’t sabotaged from the right.
“In other words,” he concludes, “California’s success is a demonstration that the extremist ideology still dominating much of American politics is nonsense.”
Before we start declaring a California Miracle, let’s examine the state’s underlying economy, because this looks more like an economic mirage.
First, the tax-receipt bubble may have already burst.
A 3 percent retroactive tax hike approved in November 2012, hit wealthy Californians on their prior earnings, and took the state’s top effective tax rate to 13 percent. Revenues shot up by more than 20 percent in fiscal 2013 thanks to the retroactive tax bills wealthy Californians had to pay last year.
But so far this calendar year, according to the latest data from California’s State Controller’s Office and the Rockefeller Institute, personal income-tax revenues fell by 11 percent in the first quarter of this year and more than 6 percent through June.
In fact, the decline through the first quarter, according to the Rockefeller Institute, was more than any other state.
The tech and social media boom has inflated revenues too, with tax windfalls from the Facebook, Zillow, and Yelp IPOs, Tesla stock sales and the WhatsApp acquisition to name a few.
According to the state’s legislative analyst, Facebook’s IPO alone was expected to net the $2.5 billion in one-off taxes.
“How many times do Californians have to relearn the lesson that one-off events are nonrecurring?” asks Rob Arnott, chairman of Research Affiliates, a nationally renowned money management firm headquartered in California.
“The revenues soon disappear as is happening now. When Google went public in 2004, capital-gains revenues jumped 49 percent the next year. Within two years, cap-gains taxes accounted for 11 percent of the California budget. But not long after the Google tax windfall had faded, the state was broke again.”
The big challenge for California, says Arnott, is “with the newly higher tax rates, and the resentment caused by tax retroactivity, how many spectacular new startups are likely in California, providing new tax windfalls, and how many will choose other tech hubs, like Austin or Seattle?”
Second, consider the supposed budget surplus. The rosy numbers don’t include gargantuan hidden deficits from state pension liabilities.
Moody’s reports that the state’s pensions assume a discount rate of 7.5 percent on liabilities. Is anyone getting a 7.5% low-risk return on their money today? Long-term Treasury bonds yield less than 3.5 percent.
The 4% difference, applied to $650 billion of liabilities, means a hidden deficit of $26 billion that the state hopes to close with investments carrying higher downside risk. If investments don’t close the gap, then future contributions — funded by even higher taxes or deeper cuts in state services — are the state’s obvious destiny.
In 2013, Moody’s prepared an analysis of state pensions, using a still-generous 5.47 percent discount rate. It found $120 billion in unacknowledged additional unfunded liabilities for California, and nearly $1 trillion nationwide. With a 3.5 percent discount rate, these hidden liabilities double.
As return assumptions are forced lower in the years ahead, the hidden deficits and unfunded liabilities (which will almost certainly have grown by then) will gradually move onto the official budget as red ink.
Whoever is presiding over the interjection of truth into this process will get the blame.
Meantime, a new report by a taxpayer watchdog group called TransparentCalifornia sheds light on why these pension and health care liabilities for city and state workers are so huge.
It found that in 2013 an assistant chief of police and fire for Los Angeles received a golden egg retirement package worth more than $900,000. An L.A. police captain with 30 years of service raked in $750,000 in ’13, and a retired San Diego program manager got $600,000.
There are scores and scores of such taxpayer rip-offs going on each year. And who pays for this largesse? Current and future California taxpayers — many of whom will never earn a six-figure salary let alone a high-six-figure pension.
There are other economic signs of a continuing economic malaise that the California enthusiasts don’t acknowledge.
The Census Bureau reported last year that the California poverty rate adjusted for cost of living is 23.8% — almost 50% above the average for all other states.
The Los Angeles Times reported in September 2013 that California’s poverty rate is the highest in the nation, despite welfare benefits that are among the highest.
Economist Arthur Laffer, an adviser to President Reagan, notes that “the poverty rate is now higher in California than in Texas, adjusted for cost of living, even though Texas is still a poorer state.”
One reason for the high poverty is that almost everything is more expensive in California. Transportation, electricity, water, fees and housing are often 50% higher and sometimes double the rest of the nation, according to a California Policy Institute analysis.
These costs, the CPI finds, are a result of extraordinary regulatory burdens, high taxes, green policies, and generous pay and pensions for state and municipal public employees. Such costs act as regressive taxes on California’s working poor.
Naturally, income inequality in California is widening, as the rich in Silicon Valley and Hollywood have seen big wealth gains, while more at the bottom of the income ladder fall into poverty and the middle class is crushed.
For example, despite the hiring boom in the tech industry, the unemployment rate in California is still tied for seventh highest in the nation. In some areas of the state, the jobless rate is 20%.
One of the best indicators of prosperity for a state or city is whether people and businesses are moving to that location or away from it. Detroit went bankrupt in part because fixed government costs (e.g., pensions) were stuck while the population shrank by more than half and the tax base evaporated.
Meanwhile, places that have a friendly environment for business, and especially for entrepreneurs — such as Texas and Arizona — attract people and capital. Here is where California scores most poorly of all.
From 2003 to 2012, a net 1.4 million people left California for other states. According to the CPI analysis based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data, the state lost 5 percent of its businesses in 2012 due to bankruptcy, outmigration or mergers. And during an economic recovery, no less.
By the end of 2013 (the most recent quarter available), California was still down compared with two years earlier. How many more business owners will add to the growing exodus, moving their businesses to less-hostile tax and regulatory regimes?
The history of California since the 1970s has been one of glorious booms and gut-wrenching busts. In the last two decades, the booms have gotten shorter and the busts more severe.
The state has enormous natural advantages — beautiful weather, mountains, beaches, enormous energy resources, some of the most productive agricultural land in the country, and many of the greatest universities in the world. It’s also a magnet for some of the most talented immigrants from every corner of the world.
But the policies that progressives keep pushing are making California unlivable and unaffordable. CEO Magazine has ranked California “the worst state in which to do business” — in terms of taxes, regulations, litigation costs and business friendliness — 10 years in a row.
Joseph Vranich, a business relocation consultant who tracks movement of businesses in and out of the state says, “Over the last decade we’ve detected a steady acceleration of businesses moving out of California. You routinely see these employers and the jobs relocated in Nevada, Colorado, Texas and Idaho.”
Arnott’s glum assessment: “We’re beyond bankrupt here in California, as are many of the big states. It’s only a matter of time before that becomes obvious.”
-
http://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-california-lawmakers-reject-background-checks-for-ammo-buyers-20140828-story.html
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/40-of-los-angeles-workers-paid-minimum-wage-why-california-is-in-a-depression/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/san-francisco-transit-workers-average-123k-per-year-reject-11-raise/
-
Is this GOP challenger this good? Any chance or am I California dreamin':
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/gop-challenger-hammers-brown-california-governors-debate
-
I didn't even hear about the debate! (I've given up reading Pravda on the Beach) Anyone have a URL?
I think I've posted about this Rep. candidate before-- very promising!
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/15/technology/with-tech-taking-over-in-schools-worries-rise.html?emc=edit_th_20140915&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=49641193
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/california-club-a-triple-decker-56-labor-cost-jump/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/los-angeles-collects-information-on-citizens-via-traffic-cameras-3000000-a-week/
-
As a state legislator, TMcC had my respect for the right values and clear headed analysis. I am glad that even though he is now a Congressman, he continues to put out his CA ballot recommendations.
McClintock November Ballot Recommendations
Prop 1 – Water Bond: YES. This is a long way from a perfect measure, but it’s as good as it gets in California these days: a $7.5 billion water bond that spends $2.7 billion for new water storage. If that sounds breathtakingly underwhelming, remember that’s $2.7 billion more than the multi-billions of dollars of water bonds that we’ve spent in recent years. Sadly, it doesn’t overhaul the environmental laws that vastly inflate costs and it squanders a great deal more that won’t be used for storage, but it is a step away from the lunacy of the green left (that adamantly opposes it) and this alone merits support.
Prop 2 - Stop Us Before We Screw Up Again: YES. This repeals Prop 58, a vat of Schwarzenegger snake-oil sold to voters as the panacea to the state’s budget woes. It wasn’t. (My I-told-you-so moment). Prop 58 promised an iron-clad reserve, but in reality, the governor could suspend it any time he wanted. He did. (Oops, I did it again). What I like most about Prop 2 is that to raid the required budget reserve, both the governor AND the legislature must agree and then, only for a specifically declared emergency. In a nutshell, it requires the legislature and governor to do what they did voluntarily during the Deukmejian era. Still plenty of loopholes, but better than what we have today.
Prop 45 – If You Thought Obamacare Was Bad: NO. This is a trial lawyers measure that give the state insurance commissioner the power to set health care rates. Sound good? Doctors and other health care providers are already opting out of Obamacare because of artificially low rates; this compounds the problem for California. The good news it you’ll have cheap health insurance. The bad news is you won’t have a lot of providers accepting it.
Prop 46 – If You Thought Prop 45 Was Bad: NO. Another trial lawyers measure that quadruples the amount they can get for pain and suffering awards. Prop. 45 means lower provider reimbursements and Prop. 46 means higher provider costs. It also requires drug testing for doctors, which is a stupid idea but I appreciate the poetic justice in making THEM pee into little cups for a change. Anyway, it won’t matter because your doctor will be out of state.
Prop 47 – Rose Bird’s Revenge: NO. We’ve gone overboard on some drug-related offenses, but this Proposition can only be described as a drug-induced hallucination. It reduces many grand-theft crimes to misdemeanors and would release an estimated 10,000 incarcerated criminals back on the streets. Basically, it is a burglar’s get-out-of-jail free card. Good news for alarm companies and the handful of 60’s radicals nostalgic for Rose Bird – bad news for the rest of us. Hide the silver.
Prop 48 – Freedom Works: YES. This ratifies Indian Gaming compacts for two tribes in economically depressed regions of the state that will be an economic boon to the struggling local communities there. It also cuts through environmental red tape that would otherwise delay these projects for years.
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/how-many-are-covered-hospitals-28-of-calif-hospitals-had-worse-than-expected-infection-rates/
How Many are Covered California Hospitals? 28% of Calif. Hospitals Had Worse-Than-Expected Infection Rates
October 22, 2014 By Stephen Frank
More than one out of four hospitals in California have worse than expected infection rates—and government has demanded You be a victim. Connect the dots: Under Covered California you are only allowed to use doctors in a network and hospitals in the network. Neither doctors nor hospitals are chosen on the basis of quality—they are chosen on the basis of cost. The State of California forces you to use the low cost doctor and hospitals that have lots of infections. Feel safe now getting your government approved health care?
“KHN found that 695 U.S. hospitals had reported rates that were higher than expected for one or more of the six infections. Further, researchers found that 25% or more of hospitals had worse-than-expected infection rates in 13 states and Washington, D.C. California was one of the 13 states, with 28% of hospitals reporting at least one worse-than-expected infection rate.
If you are harmed or die, you or your family will not be allowed to sue Covered California for their lack of vetting hospitals for quality or safety. Once again, government is the problem not the solution.
28% of Calif. Hospitals Had Worse-Than-Expected Infection Rates
California Healthline, 10/22/14
California is one of 13 states and Washington D.C. where more than 25% of hospitals had higher-than-expected infection rates for at least one of six infections, according to a Kaiser Health News analysis of available CDC data, Kaiser Health News reports.
Background
About one in 25 hospital patients in the U.S. have a health care-associated infection on any given day, and 75,000 U.S. residents die from hospital-related infections annually, according to KHN. The federal government since 2012 has been publishing hospital-related infection rate analyses on Medicare’s Hospital Compare website. In addition, Medicare in the fall will begin factoring hospital-related infection rates into reimbursement payments(Rau, Kaiser Health News, 10/21).
Analysis Details
For the analysis, KHN analyzed CDC data from reports submitted by more than 3,000 hospitals on:
• Catheter-associated urinary tract infections;
• Central line-associated blood stream infections;
• Infections from the antibiotic-resistant germ Clostridium difficile, or C. diff;
• Infections from the antibiotic-resistant Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, or MRSA.
• Surgical site infections from abdominal hysterectomies; and
• Surgical site infections from colon surgery.
The hospitals were rated as having infection rates that were better, as expected or worse based on the hospital type and patient mix. The MRSA and C. diff infections were contracted between Jan. 1, 2013, and Sept. 30, 2013, while the other infections were contracted between Oct. 1, 2012, and Sept. 30, 2013 (KHN analysis, 10/21).
Analysis Findings
KHN found that 695 U.S. hospitals had reported rates that were higher than expected for one or more of the six infections. Further, researchers found that 25% or more of hospitals had worse-than-expected infection rates in 13 states and Washington, D.C. California was one of the 13 states, with 28% of hospitals reporting at least one worse-than-expected infection rate.
In addition, KHN found that seven hospitals were determined by CDC to have worse-than-expected infection rates in four of the six categories, including the highly regarded:
• New York-Presbyterian Hospital;
• Pennsylvania-based Geisinger Medical Center; and
• University of Michigan Health System.
Meanwhile, the analysis found that some major teaching hospitals generally had lower-than-expected infection rates, including:
• Denver Health Medical Center;
• Duke University Hospital; and
• Mayo Clinic’s hospitals.
Reaction
Some of the hospitals contested CDC’s data. Some hospitals said their infection rates appeared higher because they worked harder to identify and report the infections or as the result of the hospitals admitting more patients who were prone to contracting infections.
Patient safety expert Kevin Kavanagh said the hospital-related infection rates were the result of many hospitals not strictly following infection disease treatment protocols and a lack of specificity in the government’s protocols. He added, “Right now there are too many recommendations on how to handle infectious diseases” and there is “too much leeway” on adhering to the recommendations.
Don Goldmann — chief medical and science officer at the Institute for Healthcare Improvement and co-author of a 2011 New England Journal of Medicine study on hospital-related infections — said, “The percentage of time that health care providers do all of the things they are supposed to do when caring for a patient with a contagious disease can be pretty low.”
Goldman added that many hospitals are more likely to follow protocols when addressing rarer ailments such as Ebola, but that “[w]hen [an infection risk has] been around for a long time, it kind of becomes part of the background” (Kaiser Health News, 10/21).
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_profilepage&v=OS7-HuXaREE
-
OAKLAND, Calif. — When Jerry Brown first served as governor of California, he set out to reshape the powerful California Supreme Court by appointing its first female chief justice. But his pick, Rose Bird, had never served as a judge before and came to be perceived as a liberal ideologue.
Ms. Bird, along with two other judges Mr. Brown named to the court, was recalled by voters in an election in 1986.
Nearly 40 years after he made that selection, Mr. Brown is again seeking to remake a court that to this day is viewed by legal scholars as among the most influential in the nation, with one study proclaiming it the state court most followed by other appellate judges. And once more, the ever-unconventional Mr. Brown is roiling the waters with a series of head-snapping, if decidedly more applauded, choices for this tribunal.
“I’ve had 37 or 38 years to reflect on the law and what’s needed,” Mr. Brown said in a freewheeling interview conducted in his hideaway, a barely marked office in downtown Oakland, where he formerly was mayor. “The world is very different. Obviously I know more about how the court works and what the reactions are of people to the court. Hopefully I don’t repeat history.”
Of the three people Mr. Brown has nominated to the seven-member Supreme Court — the latest confirmed on Monday — not one had a day of judicial experience: Two are law professors and the third is an associate attorney general in the Justice Department.
They are all graduates of the same law school — Yale — which also counts among its alumni a California lawyer who made a career in politics, Mr. Brown.
Mr. Brown’s most recent choice, Leondra R. Kruger, the associate attorney general, lives in Washington and has never practiced law in California. “That was kind of a mindblower,” said David S. Ettinger, a lawyer who writes a blog tracking the California Supreme Court.
Her nomination followed Mr. Brown’s selection of Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar, a law professor at Stanford who also spent much of his career in Washington, serving in the Obama and Clinton administrations. Mr. Brown began this process in 2011 when he nominated Goodwin Liu, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, three days after a Republican filibuster forced President Obama to withdraw Mr. Liu’s nomination for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
All three of the nominees are under 45, young enough to be handing down rulings long after Mr. Brown, who is 76 and about to be sworn in for his fourth and final term, is gone. Ms. Kruger, who was confirmed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments on Monday, is, at 38, the youngest member of the court in nearly a century. Under California law, the governor nominates justices, and, assuming they are approved by the commission, they appear on the ballot every 12 years for an up-or-down vote.
Mr. Brown’s latest selections have also brought a new measure of diversity to the court. Mr. Liu is the child of Taiwanese parents, Ms. Kruger is the first African-American to serve on the court since 2005, and Mr. Cuéllar was born in Mexico.
Continue reading the main story
As Mr. Brown moves into what is likely the final chapter of a 45-year career in public life, the California Supreme Court, where he served as a clerk as a young man, is providing him one more way to put a lasting stamp on his state. And not incidentally, it is providing him an opportunity for a bit of a do-over after the troubled appointment of Ms. Bird, who became not only the first woman to serve as the court’s chief justice, but also, in 1986, the first chief justice to be ousted by voters.
Mr. Brown’s selections were the product of a long search that included consultations with two members of the United States Supreme Court — he would not say which ones — and come at a time when some scholars said the California court, while still widely admired, has lost some of the intellectual luster it once had. He said his nominees were modeled after Yale law professors.
“I was looking for people who you could say were ‘learned in the law’ — a phrase you might not hear too much anymore,” Mr. Brown said. “I put the word out: Are there people who are scholars or of unusual ability?”
Mr. Brown’s choices have caught the eye of other judges and legal scholars, reflecting the regard of a court that, among other things, was first state high court to strike down a law banning interracial marriage, has held that mental health professionals sometimes have a duty to warn people about dangerous patients, and found a constitutional right for same-sex couples to marry in California.
“He is appointing superbly qualified people,” said Margaret H. Marshall, a former chief justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. “There is always a tension between appointing people who have already been judges and appointing people who have not previously been judges, but I think that’s an interesting balance for any court to have.”
Joseph R. Grodin, who was appointed to the court by Mr. Brown in 1982 and swept out in the Bird recall, said the appointments could very well alter the court. “Governor Brown is interested in very high quality, and I think he’s achieved that,” he said. “I have very high expectations and some degree of excitement over where the California Supreme Court may be headed.”
At the same time, Mr. Brown’s selections have ruffled some feathers in a state with an abundance of lawyers, law schools, and sitting judges looking to move up the ladder.
“This has been pointed out to me by a number of African-American lawyers, law school professors and judges in recent days, all of whom wonder why the governor had to go all the way to the East Coast to find a justice,” Willie Brown, a Democrat and former speaker for the State Assembly, wrote in a column for The San Francisco Chronicle. “Were there no qualified African-Americans in California?”
Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the School of Law at the University of California, Irvine, called Ms. Kruger “a very unconventional choice — she’s never practiced in California. She’s a Washington lawyer. So why didn’t he pick someone from California?”
Still, he added, he was impressed with Mr. Brown’s ambitions. “The three nominees share certain characteristics: They are quite young, they have impeccable qualifications, and they are by all accounts brilliant,” he said.
Legal scholars said that aside from Mr. Brown’s effort to inject more intellectual heft to the court, they expected that these appointments would move the court to the left. All of Mr. Brown’s original choices from his first two terms were replaced with judges chosen by a conservative Republican governor, George Deukmejian. Mr. Brown has now replaced all of them with his own appointees.
Of the seven members now on the court, four were chosen by Republican governors, and three by Mr. Brown.
As for the Yale connection, the governor said that he would certainly consider graduates of other law schools for future nominations. But he added, “Yale is pretty good — it’s a small school, so it’s very selective.”
The court has long been known as influential. A study published in 2007 by the University of California, Davis, Law Review said that California Supreme Court was the most influential in the nation, based on the number of times that the court’s findings were cited by other courts going back for 65 years.
“Judges are inherently conservative, and one of the most frequent things we do is look to precedent: How do other courts talk about the issues?” Ms. Marshall said. "California is certainly one of the places to which I looked when I was at the court.”
Mr. Ettinger said that with these appointments, “the court is well poised to really make a mark.”
“And I think that is what Governor Brown is looking for: leaving a legacy that will restore the luster of the Supreme Court he knew when he clerked for the court.”
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/stunning-data-on-average-compensation-for-municipal-employees-in-california-120000-a-year/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/sacramento-forces-elderlysick-into-confusing-health-care-program-with-little-service/
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHJpNhGUP5Q#t=89
-
Be sure to check Steve Frank's California News & Views throughout the day for breaking news and commentary!
Visit http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
Please follow on Twitter @capoliticalnews
Please forward to your friends: FORWARD
Can An Independent Win Boxer’s Seat? Yes, But Republican or Democrat Won’t
By Stephen Frank on Jan 11, 2015 06:02 pm
Thanks to Prop. 14, neither the Republican, nor Democrat party, or any Third Party be allowed to nominate a candidate to replace Barbara Boxer in the U.S. Senate. Under the terms of Prop.14, ALL candidates are Independent, though they are allowed to express a “preference” for a political party, which does not mean they are […]
Read More and Comment: Can An Independent Win Boxer’s Seat? Yes, But Republican or Democrat Won’t
Rider: In California ALL Your Insurance Policies Premiums are Taxed—Did You Know?
By Stephen Frank on Jan 11, 2015 05:59 pm
There are so many taxes, direct and indirect, that it is impossible to keep up with them. Years ago an economist found that more than 50% of the cost of a loaf of bread was taxes. Now, even I am shocked. Did you know that you pay tax on your premium when you buy insurance […]
Read More and Comment: Rider: In California ALL Your Insurance Policies Premiums are Taxed—Did You Know?
Employment Is Up. Paychecks, Not So Much
By Stephen Frank on Jan 11, 2015 05:56 pm
The legacy media and the Democrats are crowing about the jobs number—it is now “down to 5.6%. What they are not telling is that 70% or more of the jobs created under Obama are part time/low pay jobs. And, it can be proved that they are not full time jobs—as the unemployment rate goes down […]
Read More and Comment: Employment Is Up. Paychecks, Not So Much
California Environmental Protection Act Does NOT Cover Local Stores Dispensing Marijuana
By Stephen Frank on Jan 11, 2015 05:52 pm
When the Left doesn’t like something they try every possible technicality to kill a project, either through use of regulations or lawsuits. In both cases they want to make sure they financially break those they do not like. Years ago, Californians voted for medicinal marijuana. I voted against it, but it is the law. Now […]
Read More and Comment: California Environmental Protection Act Does NOT Cover Local Stores Dispensing Marijuana
As Expected: Brown Spends NO $$ From $7.5 Billion Water Bond on Dams
By Stephen Frank on Jan 11, 2015 05:49 pm
Brown lied and California jobs and farms died. The California Political News and Views told its’ readers during the recent election campaign that our confused Guv Brown was LYING about using part of the $7.5 billion water bond would be used for water storage. We said the money was really a payoff for special interests […]
Read More and Comment: As Expected: Brown Spends NO $$ From $7.5 Billion Water Bond on Dams
Government Take Over of Utilities Begin—Putin/Castro laughing
By Stephen Frank on Jan 11, 2015 05:42 pm
Who says California not a Socialist State, as much as Cuba or Russia? Putin and Castro have to be laughing at us. Thanks to government regulations, several cities are going to force PG&E to sell it poles and equipment to a government agency—at a price the agency is willing to pay. If they cannot agree, […]
Read More and Comment: Government Take Over of Utilities Begin—Putin/Castro laughing
Farmworkers and the New Civil Rights Struggle – Decertification of Bad Unions
By Stephen Frank on Jan 11, 2015 05:39 pm
Unions have become the enemy of workers, black, white, Hispanic and Asian. Hispanic workers in the Central Valley are being harassed for money by a union that has not spoken with them for twenty tears—and they want back “dues” (bribes is the correct term). An election was held, to see if the workers wanted the […]
Read More and Comment: Farmworkers and the New Civil Rights Struggle – Decertification of Bad Unions
States Urge SCOTUS to Strike Down S.F. Gun Law
By Stephen Frank on Jan 11, 2015 05:37 pm
Over the past few days, four people were killed in the Bay Area. Yet, they are proud of laws that allow criminals (by definition criminals do not abide by laws) to have guns and make honest citizens defenseless. In this case San Fran wants those that invade homes to be safe from homeowners that have […]
Read More and Comment: States Urge SCOTUS to Strike Down S.F. Gun Law
Illegal Alien Activists in California One Step Away from French Newspaper Terrorists
By Stephen Frank on Jan 11, 2015 05:33 pm
In Paris, terrorists shot up a magazine because they did not like a cartoon. In Santa Barbara, terrorists have begun the process of destroying a newspaper—for the crime of using proper language in a headline. They do not like “illegal aliens” (people that come into this nation, knowingly) being called illegal aliens. They are NOT […]
Read More and Comment: Illegal Alien Activists in California One Step Away from French Newspaper Terrorists
NSF Funds $18,952 Dissertation on Mating Habits of Syrian Hamsters
By Stephen Frank on Jan 11, 2015 05:30 pm
Did you know that there are Syrian hamsters? I wonder if there are Turkish hamsters, Israeli or Chinese hamsters? I did not know and really do not care. But Obama and the Federal government do care. While Obama allows the Syrian government to kill hundreds of thousands of Syrians, while Syria is the home base […]
Read More and Comment: NSF Funds $18,952 Dissertation on Mating Habits of Syrian Hamsters
In Case You Missed It:
California flush with cash—and massive debts and liabilities not spoken about
2016 California Senate Race MIGHT NOT Have GOP on November Ballot
California Medi-Cal Doctors Reimbursement CUT 60%–How Many Will Continue Losing Money
Union Leader: Beating Up Recalcitrant Union Members Part of Job
Brown: No State Funding Increase If UC Raises Tuition
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
Calpers Gets Schooled
A judge says public pensions can be impaired as part of bankruptcy.
Feb. 8, 2015 6:43 p.m. ET
51 COMMENTS
Federal judges tend to be impatient with bullies. Behold judge Christopher Klein ’s opinion last week confirming the city of Stockton’s bankruptcy exit plan, which is as incisive in its rebuke of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (Calpers) as it is instructive about U.S. bankruptcy law.
Stockton, California's City Hall ENLARGE
Stockton, California's City Hall Photo: Reuters
Stockton declared Chapter 9 bankruptcy in 2012, and it has since rewritten labor contracts and asked creditors for writedowns. Yet after being browbeaten by Calpers, the giant public-pension fund, the city held pensions harmless. Calpers argued that the California constitution’s guarantee of contracts shielded pensions from cuts in bankruptcy. The fund also asserted sovereign immunity and police powers as an “arm of the state,” including a lien on municipal assets.
Judge Klein upheld Stockton’s bankruptcy plan but not before effectively throwing Calpers out of court. “It is doubtful that CalPERS even has standing,” he writes. “It does not bear financial risk from reductions by the City in its funding payments because state law requires CalPERS to pass along the reductions to pensioners in the form of reduced pensions.”
As the judge explains, “CalPERS has bullied its way about in this case with an iron fist.” Calpers’s arguments are “constitutionally infirm in the face of the exclusive power of Congress to enact uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcy under Article I, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution—the essence of which laws is the impairment of contracts—and of the Supremacy Clause.”
The Supremacy Clause holds federal law superior to state statutes as long as the feds don’t violate state powers under the Constitution. The judge notes that states act merely as “gatekeepers” to Chapter 9 bankruptcy. Once states authorize municipalities to file for bankruptcy, they hand over custody to federal courts. Thus, as “a matter of law, the City’s pension administration contract with CalPERS, as well as the City-sponsored pensions themselves, may be adjusted as part of a chapter 9 plan.”
What all this means is that Calpers can’t stop cities from modifying pensions in bankruptcy. This has ramifications across the U.S. because unions are trying to make public pension benefits inviolable as a matter of constitutional law. If that view prevails, then politicians can make irresponsible deals to get elected that no future politicians can rescind even if they become unaffordable. Illinois is currently ground zero in this showdown.
Judge Klein also noted that California’s Supreme Court has recognized an “unusually inflexible ‘vested right’ in public employee pension benefits” that stands in contrast to the U.S. Supreme Court’s “less rigid view of the extent of a ‘vested right’ in retiree benefits,” as delivered in last month’s M&G Polymers v. Tackett ruling. Judge Klein adds that California courts’ interpretation of vested rights “encourages dysfunctional strategies to circumvent limitation and peculiarities in California public finance.”
You can say that again. The judge seems to be inviting a legal challenge to California’s vested-rights doctrine, and someone should take him up on it. Meantime, Calpers would do better by raising its investment returns rather than going to court to raid taxpayers.
Popular on WSJ
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/02/17/gun-rights-groups-await-judge-ruling-on-california-microstamping-law/
-
One-Third of Californians Provided FREE Health Care—How Long Can We Afford This?
February 20, 2015 By Stephen Frank Leave a Comment
Text Size:
a- A+
If Obama has his way, his amnesty would add one million illegal aliens to the role of Medi-Cal in California. In the past 120 days, Covered California has brought 750,000 people “free health care cards”. It should be noted that these folks have No doctors or hospitals that were created to treat them—they got cards, nothing else.
Can the people of California afford the new freebies? Who pays? How many will die for lack of health care—and then the families sue for fraud? California is digging its Depression deeper in the economic landfill.
““It’s been relieving to have Medi-Cal and know that if something happened — I needed an ambulance or there was an emergency — I wouldn’t have to worry about being in debt thousands of dollars,” she said.
Hopkins says before she would not have gone to the doctor. “It’s nice to have this option, although it’s been taking a long time to be able to get an appointment.”
Hopkins says she had to wait five weeks for her first doctor’s visit.”
Wait till next year when many fewer doctors will participate, while millions more are card holders.
NHS-nurse-hospital_2519626b
More Pressure on Providers in Face of Medi-Cal Expansion
KQED, 2/19/15
Medi-Cal — the public health insurance program for low-income Californians — is growing faster under federal health care reform than the state expected. Twelve million residents — nearly a third of the state’s population — now rely on Medi-Cal, and that’s increased pressure to find more doctors willing and able to treat patients for what has historically been low reimbursement rates.
At the LifeLong Clinic in West Berkeley most of the patients waiting to see a doctor are on Medi-Cal. Among them, 26-year-old Amanda Hopkins, says she enrolled half a year ago when the state expanded the benefits program.
“It’s been relieving to have Medi-Cal and know that if something happened — I needed an ambulance or there was an emergency — I wouldn’t have to worry about being in debt thousands of dollars,” she said.
Hopkins says before she would not have gone to the doctor. “It’s nice to have this option, although it’s been taking a long time to be able to get an appointment.”
Hopkins says she had to wait five weeks for her first doctor’s visit.
Clinic medical director Dr. Davi Pakter says the long wait is one side effect of adding nearly three million people to Medi-Cal since January, 2014. At his clinic, the patients with the greatest need are seen first.
“We try very hard to arrange our schedules so that we can accommodate folks that are in urgent need,” he said, “and try to avoid sending folks to the emergency room — which is a much higher cost and usually not in the best interest of the patient.”
Pakter says that means people who need a check-up or treatment for a less urgent condition can end up waiting one to two months.
A lot of Medi-Cal patients are turning to federally subsidized clinics like LifeLong because private practice doctors won’t accept Medi-Cal insurance.
“They’re not able to afford it,” says Dr. Del Morris, the president of the California Academy of Family Physicians. Morris says the state’s notoriously low reimbursement rate — one of the lowest in the nation — won’t cover the cost of caring for Medi-Cal patients.
“These patients, because of their social circumstance have a higher acuity level than an average patient of the same age,” he says. “These are complicated patients with complex problems and take up a lot of a physician’s time. To be taking on patients like this and lose money in the process is just not something most private practices are willing to do.”
Morris who’s also the medical director of the Stanislaus County Health Services Agency — says Medi-Cal patients are often forced to get care at emergency rooms.
Morris expects the situation to worsen, unless state lawmakers take action.
A provision of the Affordable Care Act that temporarily boosted Medi-Cal reimbursement rates expired on December 31. Also, state lawmakers passed a ten percent cut to California’s reimbursement rates during the depths of the state’s recession took effect last month for primary care doctors.
State lawmakers Sen. Ed Hernandez (D-La Puente) and Asm. Rob Bonta (D-Alameda) introduced a bill this week that would restore the higher reimbursement rates. But even if it passes, they’ll have to persuade Gov. Jerry Brown to sign it.
H.D. Palmer with the state’s finance department says the governor’s not budgeting for higher provider rates because California faces numerous fiscal uncertainties.
“So we have to be very careful and prudent about adopting any new major spending commitments or dealing with some of the difficult but necessary reductions that had to be made in recent years,” he said.
California’s spending on Medi-Cal will jump by $1.7 billion in a just a few years. Right now and through 2016, the federal government pays 100 percent of the cost of covering people who are eligible under the Medicaid expansion. From 2016 to 2020, the contribution will gradually decline to 90 percent, meaning California must pick up the rest.
-
Interesting picture of two different time frames. I would like to see this updated.
https://www.census.gov/dataviz/visualizations/051/res/graphics/CA_Migration_v2_101-01.png
https://www.census.gov/dataviz/visualizations/051/
This only counts inflows, outflows from states. Midwesterners and northeasterners came to California. Illegals are leaving?
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/02/us/california-imposes-first-ever-water-restrictions-to-deal-with-drought.html?emc=edit_na_20150401&nlid=49641193&_r=0
-
Cal State de-recognizes Christian group for wanting Christian leaders
Peter Hasson Texas Campus Correspondent, Campus Reform, 3/27/15
Cal State, Stanislaus has de-recognized its chapter of Chi Alpha, a Christian student group, because the group wanted its leaders to be Christian.
The school says the leadership restrictions violate a Cal State University system-wide executive order of non-discrimination.
California State University is no longer recognizing the Cal State Stanislaus chapter of Chi Alpha, a Christian student group, because the religious group required its leaders be Christian.
The system decided this requirement violated a Cal State University system-wide executive order.
“What they cannot be is faith-based where someone has to have a profession of faith to be that leader.”
“What they cannot be is faith-based where someone has to have a profession of faith to be that leader,” Cal State Stanislaus Associate Vice President Tim Lynch explained to CBS Sacramento. “Every club is allowed to establish its own standards for how leaders are selected—as long as it’s non discriminatory.”
Lynch did, however, acknowledge that fraternities and sororities are given a “gender exemption” to the policy.
The Cal State system generated controversy in 2014 when it derecognized the InterVarsity Christian Fellowship group for similar leadership requirements.
In a letter to Suzanne Espinoza, Cal State’s vice president for enrollment and student affairs, the group argued that the discriminatory policy “urdens Chi Alpha’s sincere religious exercise,mproperly interferes with the internal affairs of a religious organization, and [v]iolates the law, including the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article I of the California Constitution.”
The letter also urged the university to reinstate its recognition of Chi Alpha.
In a separate press release, Bianca Travis, president of the Chi Alpha Stanislaus chapter, questioned how the Christian group was supposed to function without Christian leaders.
“How can someone lead us if they don’t share our mission?” she asked.
The student group has secured the legal services of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, the same law firm that successfully argued Hobby Lobby’s case against the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate before the Supreme Court.
According to a press release from the Becket Fund, “[t]he membership of Chi Alpha’s Stanislaus chapter is open to any student, however it asks that its leaders, who lead worship services and Bible Studies, affirm the group’s Christian beliefs.”
“The price of admission to a state school shouldn’t include denying your faith,” Becket Fund lawyer Adele Keim explained in an interview with Campus Reform.
-
The Many Droughts of California
By JEFF WHEELWRIGHTAPRIL 3, 2015
MORRO BAY, Calif. — CALIFORNIA has only two seasons, rainy and dry. In March, when the rains stop — assuming they have begun — we must forget about precipitation for at least six months. The rainfall determines our mood for the summer and fall. Where I live, on the Central Coast, 17 inches of rain per winter has been the long-term average. Beating that number — we last did it five years ago — feels like winning the lottery. Lately, the average has been well under 10.
The difference between a good rain year in California and a bad one depends on the number of storms blowing in from the Pacific. One or two storms a winter is bad; four to six, good. Even in wet, happy years, when we shrug off floods and mudslides, rain is intermittent. Storms soak the valleys and snow blankets the mountains for a day or two, but then follows a week or two of sun. During the dry times, where we find ourselves now, the long series of sunny days becomes a little scary. As of Wednesday, the water content of the snowpack in the Sierra range was lower than at any time since 1950. Relentless pumping of groundwater is causing farmland to sink in the Central Valley.
As the drought enters its fourth year, the voluntary tightening of water use has failed to meet its goals. So this week Gov. Jerry Brown instituted mandatory restrictions. Cities and towns will have to cut their consumption by 25 percent, compared with 2013.
But the state is so big and diverse that a dozen different droughts are in effect. Northern Californians, blessed with racing rivers, have relatively little to worry about, while around the megalopolis of Los Angeles, the water sources are remote and aqueducts are lifelines. Desert dwellers near Arizona and Nevada hardly perceive drought, while coastal residents like me take false comfort from the ocean and standby desalination plants.
Yet all across the state, skirmishes over a shrinking resource are taking place. Having watched my neighbor wash his truck when he’s not supposed to, now I’ll be justified in turning him in. More of us will report violators to the city authorities — though perhaps without giving our names. If the drought continues, California’s easygoing social compact may crack and wither, too.
Although aqueducts crisscross the state, half of Californians draw water from local reservoirs and groundwater. Two communities facing each other across Morro Bay — my town and the younger, more ragged community of Los Osos — have adopted different approaches. About 20 years ago, we in Morro Bay paid for a pipeline to tap into what’s called state water. That makes us dependent on someone else’s allocations, but in a drought we are in better shape than Los Osos, which relies solely on groundwater. Under strain from overpumping, Los Osos aquifers are threatened by chemical pollution and saltwater intrusion from the ocean. Morro Bay has municipal wells as backup, and a desalination plant to filter brackish groundwater. We try not to be smug.
Continue reading the main story Continue reading the main story
Continue reading the main story
About 30 miles inland, the city of Paso Robles is surrounded by ranches and vineyards. This picturesque, rolling country is a favorite of wine-tasting tourists. Unfortunately, the local reservoirs are below capacity and groundwater pumping has lowered the water table so that ranchers and landowners are finding that their wells are drying up. Vineyard owners, who are relative newcomers, not only take the bulk of the groundwater but also can afford deeper wells, so as to take more. Class warfare is beginning.
Even forming a committee to review the problem has been divisive.
The conflict looming the largest in the state is the one between urban and agricultural interests, but that mother of all battles, upheaving the economy, will not be fought unless the drought lasts several more years. Years ago when water rights in California were assigned, the cities and their industries were not as muscular and thirsty as they are today.
The surface water for the big farms and dairy operations in the Central Valley is first transported from mountain reservoirs to the delta region, where the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers meet the fingers of San Francisco’s East Bay. The delta also provides the water that town and city dwellers drink.
Here is the home of the delta smelt, a 2-inch-long fish that has been caught up in water battles for a generation. By court order, the endangered smelt is entitled to a certain amount of river water, ahead of downstream users. Farmers in the Central Valley have blamed the smelt for cutting their allotments — and that’s during the good years. Residential supplies haven’t been affected by the smelt, so far as we’ve noticed.
Since the drought started, the fish has had fewer and fewer defenders. Recently, it might have done the state a favor by becoming what one biologist termed “functionally extinct,” because of an increasingly saline environment. If society writes off the smelt, who will inherit its portion of the water? Probate for the fish could be rancorous — a dry run, so to speak, for a much greater struggle to come. Perhaps we Californians have taken our bountiful natural resources too much for granted. Let’s hope that nature doesn’t settle the score.
-
1) I didn't know he still calls himself a Republican
2) I didn't know anyone still cares what he thinks
3) Is he trying to get back into the political game?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/03/arnold-schawrzenegger-indiana_n_6999766.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/half-of-california-doctors-say-no-to-new-medicaid-patients-others-limit
-
By
Allysia Finley
May 15, 2015 6:41 p.m. ET
48 COMMENTS
Israel has made the desert bloom, but the task hasn’t always been an easy one. For decades, the country suffered chronic water shortages brought on by intermittent droughts amid rapid population growth—a problem only partly ameliorated by aggressive water pricing and conservation. In 2009, after five consecutive dry winters, the government water authority restricted outdoor gardening and agricultural irrigation.
By the end of this year, Israel will have completed three massive desalination plants in Ashdod, Hadera and Sorek that combined are capable of producing 100 billion gallons of potable water each year from the sea. More such projects are in the works. Next year desalination will provide about half of Israel’s water—not including the roughly 80% of recycled wastewater that goes mainly to agriculture—up from zero in 2004 and about 10% in 2009. The drought ended in 2012, and Israel doesn’t need to worry much about the next one. In a mere five years, desalination has turned a scarce resource into a commodity that may soon be exportable.
On the far side of the world, in another state often portrayed as a promised land of milk and honey, Californians are suffering perhaps the worst drought in a millennium. Desalination to the rescue? Carlos Riva, the CEO of Boston-based Poseidon Water, hopes so. But the same political and regulatory forces that have already exacerbated the state’s water shortage are standing in the way. Mr. Riva’s diplomatic way of putting it: “Water is a simple molecule, but a complex commodity.”
Most of the bureaucratic effort in California is going into cutting consumption. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has turned off the spigot of water trickling from the Sierra Nevadas to farmers in the Central Valley. Gov. Jerry Brown last month ordered urban water agencies to cut usage by 6% to 36% (based on per capita consumption) and threatened $10,000 fines against noncompliant residents and businesses. All this while the untapped Pacific Ocean glitters nearby.
Desalination technology that is “mainstream outside the U.S.,” Mr. Riva says, is proving exasperatingly difficult to bring to thirsty California.
“The water industry is probably one of the last industries that is still held in traditional municipal hands,” Mr. Riva notes. As a result, the “market is ultraconservative because there’s nobody in the municipalities that has any motivation to take the risk with new technology.”
Poseidon does have a $1 billion desalination plant slated to open this fall in Carlsbad, north of San Diego. Upon completion it will be the largest in North America, capable of producing 54 million gallons of water each day. Construction began in 2013, but first Poseidon spent six years battling 14 environmental lawsuits.
For instance, the Surfrider Foundation charged that the plant’s open-ocean intakes might harm marine life, though a judge ruled that Poseidon had reasonably mitigated the threat. Mr. Riva says the intakes “entrain two to three fish eggs or larvae” for every thousand gallons of water sucked in. “Not to make value judgments about fish, but these aren’t from any protected species,” Mr. Riva says. “They’re anchovies and things like that.” He adds that environmentalists believe that “all fish life is precious, and you have to do everything to save it.”
Obtaining the dozen or so permits required to build the plant was vexing as well, since regulatory authority over water in California is spread among state, federal and local agencies—the Bureau of Reclamation, the State Water Resource Control Board and the California Coastal Commission, to name a few.
“Because there are multiple agencies,” says Mr. Riva, there are “multiple opportunities for intervenors to delay.” The CEO is careful in his choice of words to avoid giving offense. However, what he appears to mean is that environmental obstructionists waged war on numerous fronts. Not totally without success, either: To obtain final approval from the Coastal Commission, Poseidon had to agree to restore 66 acres of wetlands and buy renewable energy credits—green indulgences.
Urged on by the Surfriders, the Coastal Commission is now gumming up Poseidon’s plans to build a second plant, which has been in the planning stages for 15 years, south of Los Angeles in Huntington Beach. Though Poseidon had obtained almost all required government permits by 2012, Mr. Riva says, the commission’s approval is pending the results of an independent panel convened to study alternatives to open intakes that would better protect fish eggs and larvae. Poseidon has proposed adding one-millimeter screens, which seems to be the simplest and most cost-effective strategy.
The panel concluded after its first phase, Mr. Riva says, that the only other option is what’s called a seabed infiltration gallery, built about 1,000 feet offshore. He explains: “You build these copper dams, then excavate the seabed, put in these drains and pipes, and put other filters on top of that, and then pipe the water back to shore.” While technically feasible, it’s a complicated engineering feat, so now the panel is examining the environmental impact and economic practicability.
Building an infiltration gallery, Mr. Riva says, would take five to seven years and cost multiple times the price of the rest of the facility—so he expects the review will show it isn’t doable. But could the commission be using this process to deal the Huntington Beach project death by regulatory review? “If people just don’t want it, put us out of misery,” he quips.
Environmentalists are also howling that desalination is too energy-intensive. Mr. Riva thinks these complaints are bogus: “We use less energy than one of the data centers that are being built, and nobody claims that they are somehow immoral.” Plus, as he points out, the only reason anybody is even discussing desalination in California now is because it is becoming so much more efficient, thanks to technological breakthroughs like energy-recovery systems, which conserve energy the way hybrid cars do. The Carlsbad plant will use less than half as much electricity per unit of water produced as desalination plants did in the 1980s.
Such improvements are fueled by the free market. “The operators are driven to find ways to reduce the energy because that increases the profitability of these projects,” Mr. Riva says, adding that Poseidon has a profit motive to implement more-efficient filters, pumps and control systems that will reduce the cost of water—an incentive the government doesn’t have.
Mr. Riva, who used to run a biofuels company, says he considers himself an environmentalist. “But I think the concept of environmentalism has been hijacked by extreme views,” he says. “We’re bending over backwards to protect the environment here.”
Meantime, local residents and politicians in San Diego and Orange County have voiced ostensibly more justifiable concerns about desalination’s high costs. Poseidon is a closely held private company but specializes in public-private partnerships. As Mr. Riva explains, “our model is to say: We will take on the risk of development, financing, building and operation, and in exchange you take the market risk of buying our water.” This isn’t too different from how public utilities contract for electric generation.
Under the terms of the purchase agreement, the desalinated water will cost San Diegans between $2,014 and $2,257 per acre foot (roughly 0.6 to 0.7 cents per gallon), or about twice as much as importing water from, say, the Sierra Nevadas. “We have a 30-year contract,” Mr. Riva rejoins. “Depending on escalation rates of the imported water and CPI [consumer-price index], then the expectation is that sometime in the middle of the first decade, our water will be less expensive. There will be a crossover point.”
Even so, desalinated water from Carlsbad will cost more than twice as much per unit as it does in Israel. There are multiple reasons for this. Electricity is more expensive in California than in Israel and most of the rest of the U.S. because of a state mandate requiring that pricey renewables make up a third of electric generation by 2020. Labor is more expensive in California, too. Cumbersome regulatory requirements jack up construction costs. Israel’s Sorek plant will produce about three times as much water as the Carlsbad facility yet cost half as much to build. Both plants were designed by the same company: Israel Desalination Enterprises (IDE) Technologies.
Poseidon’s Carlsbad desalination plant will augment the San Diego region’s water supply by about 7% while increasing customers’ bills by $5 to $7 a month. Although residents will have to pay for the additional supply even when they don’t need it, Mr. Riva asserts that the “reliability justifies a premium.” That is, many San Diegans may consider it worth paying a bit more per month to keep their verdant yards during droughts—or have a backup water supply if an earthquake destroys canals or aqueducts that import water from the north.
‘We’re talking about one of the only things that is really necessary for life. Your kids may think their phone is, but it’s not,” he says. “This is an absolute necessity in San Diego, which is a desert for life.”
The same is true of California as a whole. More than a dozen desalination projects have been proposed along the coast, but prospective developers are waiting for Poseidon to run the regulatory gantlet before moving ahead. Meanwhile, Mr. Riva says Poseidon is considering developing projects in Texas where water is also scarce—and, one presumes, where the governmental burden is lighter and environmentalists are fewer. If Poseidon can make desalination work in California, it can work anywhere.
Ms. Finley is an editorial writer for the Journal.
-
Not always precise in its coverage, but it does look into the right places:
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/guv-brown-wants-california-taxpayers-to-bail-out-oregon-obamacare/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/guv-brown-wants-california-taxpayers-to-bail-out-oregon-obamacare/
Should Calif bailing out Oregon be in the humor thread, or obituaries/RIP?
What does it take for people to recognize failure and quit supporting it?
-
http://www.tpnn.com/2015/05/28/governor-moonbeam-makes-the-use-of-the-words-husband-and-wife-illegal-in-california/
-
California Party Time
Sacramento spends its tax revenue gusher like there’s no tomorrow.
California Gov. Jerry Brown ENLARGE
California Gov. Jerry Brown Photo: Associated Press
May 31, 2015 5:57 p.m. ET
274 COMMENTS
These are hard times for the blue-state governing model of high taxes and public unions—see Illinois, Connecticut and Maryland. But our friends on the left ignore these states and tout California as their real model, as Sacramento celebrates record tax revenue. So it’s worth noting that the Golden State may be repeating the fiscal mistakes it made before its last economic bust.
There’s no doubt the state government is on a high, with Governor Jerry Brown forecasting $6.7 billion in additional revenue beyond his January projections due to growth in capital gains and incomes among high earners. Over four years general fund revenues have risen by 40% to $117.3 billion as income-tax collections surged 55%.
This follows what has turned out to be one of the most fortuitously timed tax increases in history. Mr. Brown’s 2012 ballot measure retroactively raised taxes on individuals earning more than $250,000 and increased the top rate to 13.3% from 10.3% for those making more than $1 million. The measure passed amid the Internet boom and stock market rise.
No one wants to mention, however, that the tax hike doubled down on the state’s top-heavy tax structure that produces huge revenue swings. The top 1% of taxpayers—those earning more than $525,000—paid over 50% of all California income taxes in 2012 while the bottom four quintiles earning less than $90,000 paid a mere 10%. The Golden State has lost middle-income jobs in manufacturing to other lower-taxing Western states, but it has assets like Silicon Valley that other blue states don’t.
The resulting revenue boom has politicians partying like it’s 1999, the height of the dot-com bubble. The boom has been especially sweet for teachers unions because under the state constitution schools are entitled to most of the haul. Over the past four years state spending on K-12 and community colleges has grown by 45% to $68 billion this year.
But now other liberal interest groups want to join the party. So Mr. Brown is proposing to extend Medicaid to illegal immigrants granted permanent residency by President Obama. California’s Medicaid expansion under ObamaCare has already added four million beneficiaries at a cost of $17 billion. National taxpayers are picking up $15.5 billion of the tab for now, but California’s share will grow after 2016.
Mr. Brown also wants to create another entitlement by inaugurating a state version of the earned-income tax credit for two million low-income Californians. That comes on top of next year’s increase in the minimum wage to $10 an hour, and $15 an hour by 2020 in Los Angeles.
Yet despite the government’s efforts to help the poor, California has the nation’s highest poverty rate at 23.4%. And nowhere in the U.S. save perhaps New York City is income inequality greater than San Francisco, which has been a hothouse for progressive policies such as a $15 minimum wage and mandated paid sick leave. All that income redistribution doesn’t seem to be the secret to equality.
Meantime, projected revenues from California’s cap-and-trade auctions have swelled by 150% in the last year to $2.2 billion. Mr. Brown wants to spend $400 million of that windfall on affordable housing; $350 million on low-carbon transportation (i.e., electric car subsidies that go mainly to the well off); $365 million on public transit and intercity rail; and $500 million on the L.A. to San Francisco bullet train that is already short of funding.
***
The danger is that this gusher of new spending will set up the state for another budget bust. Last November voters did approve a ballot referendum aimed at imposing some spending discipline, strengthening the porous rainy day fund. Under the new law’s formula, the state must spend $1.9 billion this year to pay down “debts and liabilities.”
But Mr. Brown has construed it broadly to include payments to schools and special funds that politicians had previously raided. He’d also create a new liability by proposing to seize $96 million from the rainy day fund to shore up University of California pensions. Yet Mr. Brown’s budget doesn’t even begin paying down the $191 billion unfunded liability for state worker and teacher retirement benefits.
At the end of 2015 the rainy day fund will have a meager $3.5 billion, and the Governor cautions that the “budget remains precariously balanced and faces the prospect of deficits in succeeding years.” Last year the state Legislative Analyst’s Office warned that a modest dip in income growth could trigger multibillion-dollar deficits due to built-in spending increases, particularly in education.
The paradox of Jerry Brown has always been that he’s smart enough to recognize the severity of the state’s fiscal problems, yet he can’t seem to restrain his prodigal legislature or even help himself. The revenue boom is making California’s economy and budget look better than they are. The reckoning will arrive when the next economic downturn does.
-
http://civictribune.com/yellowstone-evacuated-experts-claim-super-volcano-erupt-within-weeks/
-
http://civictribune.com/yellowstone-evacuated-experts-claim-super-volcano-erupt-within-weeks/
No. Next question.
-
It Takes a True Detective to Understand California’s High-Speed Rail Plans
Enjoy the Independence Day weekend, folks! NR offices are closed Friday, so this is the last Jolt of the week.
The best part of the new season of True Detective on HBO is that one of the major plot points is sleazy, mob-connected businessmen talking about federal funding for California’s high-speed rail project as a giant way to line their pockets.
Vince Vaughn plays a ruthless, ambitious mob-connected businessman who yearns to be a legitimate, respected mogul. In the opening episode, he’s at a giant party-unveiling for the project. One of his partners, a corrupt official in the fictional city of Vinci, California, just outside Los Angeles, hasn’t arrived on the meeting -- on account of his recent murder -- and Vaughn’s character sums up the pending deal for the guests:
Our city manager Ben Caspere was going to be here to explain this, but I suppose I can approximate the information.
So everybody knows Proposition 1 has passed.
And next year construction will start on a $68 billion high-speed rail up Central California.
An undeveloped valley adjacent to the rail and the coastal highway has been purchased by several holding companies anticipating a commercial development that will be in line for hundreds of millions in federal grants.
And the feds have guaranteed cost overages.
Have we seen ever seen a movie or television show bad guy whose plans involve a high-speed rail project before? Can you believe that HBO is portraying Gov. Jerry Brown’s signature legacy project in such a negative light?
Later, in a meeting with a more menacing, Eastern European gangster, Vaughn’s character declares,
[The city of] Vinci tapped fed money from the subway line, and the same thing will happen on a much, much bigger scale with the rail corridor. Owned by our holding companies.
In real life, the first segment of the initial rail line, running from Madera to Bakersfield, will cost $6 billion, consisting of $3.3 billion in federal funding and $2.6 billion in Proposition 1A bond proceeds. The California High-Speed Rail Authority declares, “Development of the [initial operating system] will be funded through government sources, while private-sector capital will fund future construction segments once the system is generating positive cash flow.”
In June 2013, the California High-Speed Rail Authority awarded the first contract -- nearly $1 billion. Construction began in the middle of last month.
Some California Republicans and a few Democrats are attempting to stop the project from going any further, arguing it has changed completely from its initial proposal and there’s no reason to expect anything other than more delays, cost overruns, and legal fights:
State Sen. Andy Vidak, R-Hanford, has introduced bipartisan legislation to allow California voters to reconsider the state's controversial high-speed rail project.
Vidak's measure would allow voters to weigh in on whether they want to continue funding the $68 billion project. It would also forbid any more spending on the project until a vote on June 6, 2016. The bill would redirect the unspent money toward road repair and construction.
Assemblyman Rudy Salas, D-Bakersfield, is co-sponsoring the bill.
The California High-Speed Rail Authority's pursuit of eminent domain land takings on the proposed alignment through Kings County has generated strong opposition and lawsuits from local residents and county government.
The authority is trying to drum up interest from the private sector for the project, but has so far failed to get private investment to help make up a financing shortfall of tens of billions of dollars.
And Republicans in Congress are making an attempt as well:
Republican Rep. Jeff Denham, of Turlock, has tried twice before to defund high-speed rail with an amendment, but he's not giving up.
On Tuesday night Denham spoke on the floor of the House of Representatives and declared, “I'm here one more year offering an amendment to end this incredible waste of taxpayer dollars.”
Denham's amendment forces the California High Speed Rail Authority to prove it can independently match nearly $3 billion in federal funds -- or potentially lose that money.
On Wednesday Denham said he doesn't believe that California can afford it.
“We are $87 billion short,' Denham said. “The governor's not proposing $87 billion. The president's not proposing $87 billion. So, we're really leaving the state of California at risk.”
Records show the project has spent nearly $900 million so far.
The city in the show, Vinci, appears to be inspired by real-life Vernon, California:
Only 92 people live in Vernon. There are no parks, schools, libraries, health clinics or grocery stores. The only four restaurants close by 4 p.m. By sundown the 44,000 workers who commute here have all fled the stench.
Vernon’s leaders like it that way. California’s tiniest city, if you want to call it a city, is one of the nation’s most lasting and efficient political machines, run almost entirely for the benefit of a handful of rarely opposed, extremely well-paid politicians. Vernon should have been subsumed long ago into the surrounding city of L.A, but its independence is a strange and stark example of how a democracy can become a dynasty.
The bespectacled Leonis C. Malburg, 77, whose grandfather founded Vernon in 1905, has been mayor for 33 years. Bruce Malkenhorst, 71, was for 32 years the city administrator as well as clerk, finance director, treasurer, redevelopment agency secretary and chief executive of the utility Vernon Light & Power. The city was reportedly paying him $600,000 a year, more than twice what L.A.’s mayor earns, until he resigned all posts unexpectedly and without public announcement in 2005. By most accounts Malkenhorst still pulls the strings. His appointed successor is his 42-year-old son, Bruce Jr.
Theirs is a benign dictatorship. Who would run against them? Outsiders hoping to move into town are denied housing permits and Vernon’s 32 houses and apartments are owned by the city and leased to its employees for as little as $150 per month.
What’s more, there were no contested elections in Vernon from 1984 to 2006.
On the show, the sleazy mayor of Vinci has a picture of himself with President George W. Bush in the background. In real life Vernon, 69 percent of the city’s voters are registered Democrat, 28 percent Republican. And you probably saw this coming:
A slick two-minute advertisement promoting Vernon as a bastion of blue-collar employment will be shown in theaters in working-class neighborhoods with the opening of a new movie, “Battle: Los Angeles.” The commercial follows a $65,000-a-week television advertising campaign that began last week. The ads were produced by Chris Lehane, a notoriously tough operative who worked as a senior adviser to Al Gore, and who is at the center of this campaign.
-
July 02, 2015
Morning Jolt
... with Jim Geraghty
It Takes a True Detective to Understand California’s High-Speed Rail Plans
Enjoy the Independence Day weekend, folks! NR offices are closed Friday, so this is the last Jolt of the week.
The best part of the new season of True Detective on HBO is that one of the major plot points is sleazy, mob-connected businessmen talking about federal funding for California’s high-speed rail project as a giant way to line their pockets.
Vince Vaughn plays a ruthless, ambitious mob-connected businessman who yearns to be a legitimate, respected mogul. In the opening episode, he’s at a giant party-unveiling for the project. One of his partners, a corrupt official in the fictional city of Vinci, California, just outside Los Angeles, hasn’t arrived on the meeting -- on account of his recent murder -- and Vaughn’s character sums up the pending deal for the guests:
Our city manager Ben Caspere was going to be here to explain this, but I suppose I can approximate the information.
So everybody knows Proposition 1 has passed.
And next year construction will start on a $68 billion high-speed rail up Central California.
An undeveloped valley adjacent to the rail and the coastal highway has been purchased by several holding companies anticipating a commercial development that will be in line for hundreds of millions in federal grants.
And the feds have guaranteed cost overages.
Have we seen ever seen a movie or television show bad guy whose plans involve a high-speed rail project before? Can you believe that HBO is portraying Gov. Jerry Brown’s signature legacy project in such a negative light?
Later, in a meeting with a more menacing, Eastern European gangster, Vaughn’s character declares,
[The city of] Vinci tapped fed money from the subway line, and the same thing will happen on a much, much bigger scale with the rail corridor. Owned by our holding companies.
In real life, the first segment of the initial rail line, running from Madera to Bakersfield, will cost $6 billion, consisting of $3.3 billion in federal funding and $2.6 billion in Proposition 1A bond proceeds. The California High-Speed Rail Authority declares, “Development of the [initial operating system] will be funded through government sources, while private-sector capital will fund future construction segments once the system is generating positive cash flow.”
In June 2013, the California High-Speed Rail Authority awarded the first contract -- nearly $1 billion. Construction began in the middle of last month.
Some California Republicans and a few Democrats are attempting to stop the project from going any further, arguing it has changed completely from its initial proposal and there’s no reason to expect anything other than more delays, cost overruns, and legal fights:
State Sen. Andy Vidak, R-Hanford, has introduced bipartisan legislation to allow California voters to reconsider the state's controversial high-speed rail project.
Vidak's measure would allow voters to weigh in on whether they want to continue funding the $68 billion project. It would also forbid any more spending on the project until a vote on June 6, 2016. The bill would redirect the unspent money toward road repair and construction.
Assemblyman Rudy Salas, D-Bakersfield, is co-sponsoring the bill.
The California High-Speed Rail Authority's pursuit of eminent domain land takings on the proposed alignment through Kings County has generated strong opposition and lawsuits from local residents and county government.
The authority is trying to drum up interest from the private sector for the project, but has so far failed to get private investment to help make up a financing shortfall of tens of billions of dollars.
And Republicans in Congress are making an attempt as well:
Republican Rep. Jeff Denham, of Turlock, has tried twice before to defund high-speed rail with an amendment, but he's not giving up.
On Tuesday night Denham spoke on the floor of the House of Representatives and declared, “I'm here one more year offering an amendment to end this incredible waste of taxpayer dollars.”
Denham's amendment forces the California High Speed Rail Authority to prove it can independently match nearly $3 billion in federal funds -- or potentially lose that money.
On Wednesday Denham said he doesn't believe that California can afford it.
“We are $87 billion short,' Denham said. “The governor's not proposing $87 billion. The president's not proposing $87 billion. So, we're really leaving the state of California at risk.”
Records show the project has spent nearly $900 million so far.
The city in the show, Vinci, appears to be inspired by real-life Vernon, California:
Only 92 people live in Vernon. There are no parks, schools, libraries, health clinics or grocery stores. The only four restaurants close by 4 p.m. By sundown the 44,000 workers who commute here have all fled the stench.
Vernon’s leaders like it that way. California’s tiniest city, if you want to call it a city, is one of the nation’s most lasting and efficient political machines, run almost entirely for the benefit of a handful of rarely opposed, extremely well-paid politicians. Vernon should have been subsumed long ago into the surrounding city of L.A, but its independence is a strange and stark example of how a democracy can become a dynasty.
The bespectacled Leonis C. Malburg, 77, whose grandfather founded Vernon in 1905, has been mayor for 33 years. Bruce Malkenhorst, 71, was for 32 years the city administrator as well as clerk, finance director, treasurer, redevelopment agency secretary and chief executive of the utility Vernon Light & Power. The city was reportedly paying him $600,000 a year, more than twice what L.A.’s mayor earns, until he resigned all posts unexpectedly and without public announcement in 2005. By most accounts Malkenhorst still pulls the strings. His appointed successor is his 42-year-old son, Bruce Jr.
Theirs is a benign dictatorship. Who would run against them? Outsiders hoping to move into town are denied housing permits and Vernon’s 32 houses and apartments are owned by the city and leased to its employees for as little as $150 per month.
What’s more, there were no contested elections in Vernon from 1984 to 2006.
On the show, the sleazy mayor of Vinci has a picture of himself with President George W. Bush in the background. In real life Vernon, 69 percent of the city’s voters are registered Democrat, 28 percent Republican. And you probably saw this coming:
A slick two-minute advertisement promoting Vernon as a bastion of blue-collar employment will be shown in theaters in working-class neighborhoods with the opening of a new movie, “Battle: Los Angeles.” The commercial follows a $65,000-a-week television advertising campaign that began last week. The ads were produced by Chris Lehane, a notoriously tough operative who worked as a senior adviser to Al Gore, and who is at the center of this campaign.
The Important Policy Point Lost in the Trump Controversy
The boss writes a column in Politico with some important points about immigration:
Trump’s comments made it sound as though Mexico is sending us moral defectives. That’s not the larger problem (although gangs certainly exploit the border and there are criminals in any population). Immigrants are willing to work. Immigrant men aged 18-65 are in the labor force at a higher rate than native men.
It’s just that a lack of education is an anchor around even the hardest-working person in modern America. This is illustrated in an exhaustive report based on government data, by Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors a lower level of immigration. I rely on it for the figures that follow.
Immigrants here from Mexico -- which has sent more immigrants than any other country for decades -- have the lowest levels of education. Nearly 60 percent of them haven’t graduated from high school. Only about 10 percent have some college and nearly 6 percent have a bachelor’s degree or higher.
By way of comparison, the situation of immigrants from Korea, for instance, is almost exactly reversed. More than 50 percent of them have a bachelor’s degree or higher, and less than 4 percent failed to earn a high school diploma.
This puts Mexican immigrants at an inherent disadvantage, and it shows. Nearly 35 percent of immigrants from Mexico and their U.S.-born children are in poverty; nearly 68 percent are in or near poverty. This is the highest level for immigrants from any country (the Philippines is the lowest, with 5.5 percent in poverty).
But it’s so much easier to debate whether Trump is a racist or not, or whether we like Trump or not.
Meet the Guy Running Greece Into the Ground
Man, Greece’s Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras is a bad guy:
Depositors were persuaded to keep their money in the banks by daily assurance for five months that a deal was imminent. In fact, for most of that time, no negotiations of any substance took place at all. Mr. Tsipras strung out the process with endless discussions over what the creditors should be called, where the talks should be held and who should talk to whom.
At the last minute, he submitted proposals that never stood any chance of being accepted, but which have allowed him to claim it was the creditors who were being unreasonable. Now with the bailout expired, the banks closed and the country in default, he has called a referendum asking voters to reject a deal that is no longer on the table.
Or . . . it’s possible he’s crazy:
Mr. Tsipras continues to insist that a “No” vote won’t lead to Grexit but will strengthen his hand with the creditors.
(“Grexit” is the cutesy term for Greece leaving the Euro.)
No policy maker anywhere else in the eurozone thinks this is true. The relationship between Mr. Tsipras and other eurozone leaders has broken down so irretrievably that it is hard to see how they can possibly agree on new loans for Greece while he remains in power. Instead, a “No” vote would force the European Central Bank swiftly to conclude that the Greek banking system, which relies heavily on government guarantees, was insolvent, perhaps as soon as Monday. The banks would be forced to close and couldn’t be reopened until they had been recapitalized, either via a bailing in of depositors, or using a newly-printed currency.
Or both!
As bad as Tsipiras is, he reflects the thinking of a considerable number of Greeks. Don’t feel that bad for the Greek people; they made this bed.
Under the old rules, an unmarried daughter used to receive her dead father's pension…
In 2013, Greece's retirement age was raised by two years to 67. According to government data, however, the average Greek man retires at 63 and the average woman at 59.
And some police and military workers have retired as early as age 40 or 45, Tsoukas said.
There are also unique benefits for some workers. Female employees of state-owned banks with children under 18 could retire as early 43, he said.
The Greek state doesn’t have the money to finance the early retirements of that many people and pay unemployment benefits to 25 percent of the population.
ADDENDA: I had missed this earlier; a member of the richest one percent -- Beyonce -- pouring a $20,000 bottle of champagne into her hot tub.
It’s her money; she can do what she likes with it. But the next time some snotty liberal denounces American culture for empty materialism and “conspicuous consumption,” I hope they remember some of the president’s friends. You can hear it now, right? “Well, I meant that rich people ostentatiously showcasing their wealth is a problem when people that I don’t like do it.”
I’m scheduled to appear on MediaBuzz with Howard Kurtz this Sunday.
I’m told there’s been a nice little pop in sales for The Weed Agency since summer began. To everyone who’s been buying, thank you very much.
-
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/07/09/el-nino-california/29921633/
-
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-gang-violence-20150727-story.html#page=1
-
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-gang-violence-20150727-story.html#page=1
Where are the black lives matter activists?
-
How California Is Winning the Drought
By CHARLES FISHMANAUG. 14, 2015
FOR California, there hasn’t ever been a summer quite like the summer of 2015. The state and its 39 million residents are about to enter the fifth year of a drought. It has been the driest four-year period in California history — and the hottest, too.
Yet by almost every measure except precipitation, California is doing fine. Not just fine: California is doing fabulously.
In 2014, the state’s economy grew 27 percent faster than the country’s economy as a whole — the state has grown faster than the nation every year of the drought.
California has won back every job lost in the Great Recession and set new employment records. In the past year, California created 462,000 jobs — nearly 9,000 a week. No other state came close.
The drought has inspired no Dust Bowl-style exodus. California’s population has grown faster even as the drought has deepened.
More than half the fruits and vegetables grown in the United States come from California farms, and last year, the third growing season of the drought, both farm employment and farm revenue increased slightly.
Amid all the nervous news, the most important California drought story is the one we aren’t noticing. California is weathering the drought with remarkable resilience, because the state has been getting ready for this drought for the past 20 years.
The future of water is going to be turbulent for all of us — not far away, but right where we live; not in some distant decade, but next month or next spring. A sense of water insecurity is coming to many places that have never had a water worry. Here’s what California’s scorching summer of 2015 is showing us: We know what to do. We just have to do it.
Cannon Michael, 43, is a sixth-generation farmer in California’s Central Valley, growing tomatoes, cotton, melons and wheat on 10,000 acres of dirt that were part of the holdings of his great-great-great grandfather Henry Miller, a rancher who was known as the “Cattle King.”
Mr. Michael returned to work the family farm in 1998, and has gradually transformed the mix of crops and how they are grown. In the past 10 years, he has spent $10 million installing drip irrigation on about half the land. When he grows tomatoes using drip hoses that squirt water right below where the plants emerge from the ground, he uses about 35 percent less water per acre than he would with traditional irrigation. But the plants produce more tomatoes — he says that he gets at least 70 percent more tomatoes per 1,000 gallons of water.
Leave a question in the comments with this story or on the Times Opinion Facebook page about water conservation in California. Charles Fishman will respond to a selection next week.
Mr. Michael isn’t an isolated example. He’s part of a trend. Since 1980, the amount of California farmland watered by drip- or micro-irrigation has gone from almost nothing to nearly three million acres, 39 percent of the state’s irrigated fields. In perfect parallel, farmland that is flood-irrigated — using more water to produce less food — has fallen to about 3.5 million acres from more than six million.
California’s urban areas are also slowly transforming themselves. East of Los Angeles is a quietly innovative water district called the Inland Empire Utilities Agency, providing water for just under a million people.
The agency has an aggressive water recycling program, which cleans and resupplies 52 million gallons of water a day for an immediate second use, on farms, in factories and commercial laundries, in recharging the area’s groundwater.
And although it is dozens of miles from the Pacific Ocean, the agency also desalinates water. The Inland Empire sits over an aquifer that has been polluted by a legacy of careless agricultural and human habitation. The desalination process removes chemicals and salt, turning 35 million gallons a day of tainted brine into water at least as clean as tap.
Those techniques expand Inland Empire’s water supply without actually requiring any new water, and they represent the leading edge of an effort in Southern California toward “water independence.” In water terms, California is famously a kind of teeter-totter: Most of the water is in the north, most of the people are in the south, and the water flows to the people.
But across Southern California, the progress is quietly astonishing. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California now supplies roughly 19 million people in six counties, and it uses slightly less water than it did 25 years ago, when it supplied 15 million people. That savings — more than one billion gallons each day — is enough to supply all of New York City.
California’s resilience is fragile. It won’t last another two years, it might not last another year.
And to say that the state is weathering the drought is not to trivialize the damage. This summer’s wildfires — which have killed one firefighter, have already burned more acreage to date than last year’s fires and have destroyed dozens of homes — are just one example.
In the town of East Porterville, in the central part of the state, the drinking wells began to go dry a year ago or more. Many residents rely on bottled water and water distributed at the fire station. Their taps, their toilets, their showers are dry — an astonishing level of deprivation in a state with great wealth.
Farm production numbers look good partly because prices for produce are high. Irrigation water, which comes from surface water sources mostly in the north, is allocated based on history, law and availability. Despite cuts of irrigation water of up to 100 percent, farmers have continued to get water, pumping it from aquifers under their land.
California is the only state in the nation that has never regulated groundwater — farmers are largely free to pump as much as they want, without even tracking what they use. In wet years, pumping well water is generally unnecessary and expensive. In dry years, it’s survival.
In 2014, California farmers were able to substitute groundwater for 77 percent of the irrigation water they did not receive. In 2015, farmers are increasing their pumping by an astonishing one billion gallons a day, but the irrigation cuts are so severe that they will replace only 71 percent of their water.
The farmers are saving themselves now, but they are inflicting long-term damage to the vast underground water supply that is really California’s only remaining water cushion.
What can we learn from California’s resilience in this drought? The first lesson goes back 20 years before it started, when cities began to put conservation measures in place — measures that gradually changed water use and also water attitudes. If cities look at the water they have — rainwater, reservoir water, groundwater, wastewater — as different shades of one water, they quickly realize that there’s no such thing as “storm water” or “wastewater.” It’s all water. You can start giving yourself new water sources quickly by cleaning and reusing the water you’ve already got.
California’s progress has been bumpy. The second lesson is that a drought starkly reveals water absurdities that need to be fixed, often urgently.
How can the largest agricultural economy in the country not require farmers to report how much water they use — and allow them to use groundwater without limit?
Photo
In Pleasanton, Calif., recycled water is part of the effort to fight the drought. Credit Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
How can the water-starved city of Los Angeles have an elaborate system of drains and pipes to collect the rain that does fall — often in brief, intense torrents — only to discard it in the Pacific instead of storing it?
How can it be that in Sacramento nearly half the homes have no water meters? Residents don’t know how much water they use and can’t see how much they conserve if they want to.
And the third lesson is how to use water insecurity to create its opposite. A drought like this one creates the opportunity to change things — even really big things — that couldn’t be changed without a sudden sense of vulnerability.
Last fall, prodded by Gov. Jerry Brown’s administration, the California Legislature passed a sweeping groundwater law, taking California from having the least regulated groundwater in the country to being a model. The concept is simple: No community will be allowed to pump more water from the underground aquifers than can refill those aquifers — either naturally, or with human help.
The law is so innovative, it will eventually remake water use across the state, and if other states pay attention, across the nation. The law could inspire new techniques for getting rainwater to refill overtaxed aquifers.
In a similarly future-focused move, San Francisco just passed an ordinance to require that new buildings of a certain size have on-site water recycling systems, and reuse their own wastewater. It’s the first city in the United States with such a requirement.
In May, the water district for all of Southern California decided to use the drought to change attitudes about lawns. It increased funding more than fivefold for a program that gives rebates to homeowners who replace their lawns with desert-appropriate landscaping. Las Vegas helped pioneer such “cash for grass” programs as a water-saving technique, removing 170 million square feet of turf — thousands of lawns — since 1999.
The response in Southern California, where $340 million was allocated for the program, stunned even experienced water managers. After five weeks, all the rebate money had been spoken for. The amount of turf set to be removed: about the same square footage that Las Vegas needed 16 years to take out.
For a century, California has pioneered innovations that have changed the way we all live. Without much fanfare, the state is doing that again, with water, moving to make standard what has been novel. A lawn landscaped with rocks and cactus instead of turf, morning coffee brewed matter-of-factly with recycled water, cities designed to return rainwater to the ground — these aren’t just symbols, they are how you handle water when you understand its value.
One of the wonderful ironies of water is that the more attention you pay to it, the less you have to worry about it. By the drought of 2045, the way California uses water will have been transformed again. Just as powerfully, the way ordinary Californians regard water will have been transformed. More than any water conservation practice in particular, it’s that attitude that will save the state — and the rest of us, as well.
Charles Fishman is the author of “The Big Thirst: The Secret Life and Turbulent Future of Water.”
-
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/10/20/nasa-gives-99-percent-probability-of-5-0-earthquake-in-la/
-
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-bullet-train-cost-final-20151025-story.html
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/22/us/stingy-water-users-in-fined-in-drought-while-the-rich-soak.html?emc=edit_th_20151122&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=49641193
-
My city, we were required to cut water usage by 25% from two years previous. We had already cut down to 350 gallons per day, so we are at 260 gallons for 3 people. Next door neighbor, with just two people are at 600 per day. Others at 1000.
Go figure.
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/22/us/stingy-water-users-in-fined-in-drought-while-the-rich-soak.html?emc=edit_th_20151122&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=49641193
There are better places to live.
-
And governmental stupidity is unknown elsewhere? (though usually not in the same degree!!!) :lol:
Mmmmm , , , have you noticed the swimming I get to do in October? see e.g. http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=2565.0 That I live in what may well be the world's capital for martial arts? That people who want to train with me can combine their trip to train with me with training with other teachers?-- and that one of the major international and domestic airports is only 25 minutes away? That the movie/TV/entertainment biz provides additional opportunities and resources? That it is in the 70s today with clear skies?--- Contrast the rest of the country , , , That I can get clean, healthy, and exciting food most places I go?
A man could go further and do worse , , ,
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/22/us/stingy-water-users-in-fined-in-drought-while-the-rich-soak.html?emc=edit_th_20151122&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=49641193
There are better places to live.
Leaving California was the best move I ever made.
-
Wish I could leave but work still requires that I be here, at least for about 2 more years...........then out of here.
-
DDF-- the choice you made is not for everyone :-D
PP: That may well be the case for me too, but for now this is where it makes most sense for me.
-
The question is where to go. I will probably head to another country and become an ex-patriot. But it all depends upon political and economic conditions at that time.
-
The question is where to go. I will probably head to another country and become an ex-patriot. But it all depends upon political and economic conditions at that time.
I did, and it has worked out better than it ever would have in the States.
Too many double standards, hypocrites and soft people. Traditional values abound here... we don't have the money you have here, but we're much happier.
My experience.
Any country from the southern border of the US to the tip of South America is worth looking at.
Don't let anyone else tell you. Find a place that interests you, go investigate it for yourself....and let their bumbling tax system crush itself under its own weight. I'm personally waiting for it all to just crash and burn... I'll be roasting marshmallows and being politically incorrect, but happy.
-
I was offered a potential gig doing open source intelligence for a PI firm in SoCal at 40 bucks an hour. Told them I would not live in California. Short term gig, maybe. No residency.
-
"...have you noticed the swimming I get to do in October? ... That it is in the 70s today with clear skies?--- Contrast the rest of the country , , , "
- Jealous!
"That I can get clean, healthy, and exciting food most places I go?"
- We can have ours with water. And never die of dehydration while swimming.
"A man could go further and do worse , , ,"
- Agree. Wish I could tell you of a better place. Southern California is paradise, or it would be if it still had the population density of fly over country. Besides water issues, the only problems are rooted in the people and their politics.
'Call some place paradise, kiss it good bye.'
-
GM:
We would LOVE to have you!
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/california-the-most-segregated-state-for-latino-students-third-worst-for-blacks/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/ca-property-crimes-up-116-in-2015-per-fbi/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/ca-property-crimes-up-116-in-2015-per-fbi/
Obviously not enough gun laws yet.
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/15-central-american-gang-members-arrested-for-multiple-california-murders/
-
http://www.sfgate.com/outdoors/article/Storms-filling-up-Northern-California-lakes-and-6875778.php
-
Sometimes this site is over the top, but more frequently it is California that is over the top.
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/lao-report-high-speed-rail-plan-from-san-fran-and-ends-at-shafter-population-18000/
-
Sometimes this source hyperventilates but on the whole it digs deep where others do not.
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
http://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/californias-64-billion-bullet-train-to-nowhere-gets-delayed-again/
-
EDITORIAL: One law for us, another for you
California’s legislative hypocrisy a failure of democracy
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES - The Washington Times - Monday, June 6, 2011
The California state Senate voted 28-8 Wednesday to exempt itself from the pointless gun-control laws that apply to the rest of the populace. Legislators apparently think they alone are worthy to pack heat on the streets for personal protection, and the masses ought to wait until the police arrive.
This is just one of many bills Golden State politicians used this legislative session to set themselves apart from the little people, the ones who pay their inflated salaries. Annual compensation for legislators averages about $140,000, not counting luxurious perks such as taxpayer-funded cars and free gasoline. By comparison, the average Californian earns $50,000 a year, and the unemployment rate is 11.9 percent - far above the national average. Exact salaries for state assemblymen and senators are obscured by the use of a "per diem" payment scheme that shelters a significant chunk of income from taxation.
Attempts by a handful of reformers to require politicians to provide a full annual disclosure of the benefits received from the public treasury have been rebuffed. Currently, government officials must file a statement of economic interests revealing income from any source other than a local, state or federal government agency. Gifts worth more than $50 also must be disclosed, but lawmakers rejected a bill that would have prohibited acceptance of concert and sporting event tickets, gift cards, spa treatments, golf outings and other benefits from lobbyists trying to buy votes.
Bills of this nature never meet an honest fate in which roll-call votes put members on the record as favoring or opposing each idea. Instead, reform measures are held in committee to die quietly as legislative deadlines pass. As of last week, it's effectively impossible for a bill to become law if it hasn't already passed in at least one of the chambers.
Such a silent death sentence was imposed on a bill that would have eliminated the practice of allowing select public employees to avoid paying red-light-camera tickets and escape any consequence for using toll roads without paying. The current system grants free rides to politicians, court workers, police officers, city council members, social workers, meter maids and their spouses. The bill failed even after a compromise amendment deleted the requirement to pay red-light-camera tickets.
The arrogance of the political class is certainly not limited to California. Federal law prohibits private companies from pestering the public with unwanted telemarketing calls from businesses, but Congress exempted "political organizations" - i.e., themselves - from its provisions. In Sacramento, an attempt failed to establish a special Do Not Call list for people who don't want to listen to automated calls from California pols.
Left coast politicians lack all shame regarding their self-enrichment at public expense. Even though their outrageous conduct has sunk a once-prosperous state $10 billion in debt, the public seems not to care. In November, voters recycled Jerry Brown as governor even though Gov. Moonbeam's disastrous tenure during the 1970s enabled the compensation packages for a unionized public sector that are busting the budget today. When California finally goes bankrupt, voters need only look in the mirror when wondering who deserves the blame.
© Copyright 2016 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
-
Whoops-- deceptively presented, turns out that was 5 years ago.
-
The Zombie Voter Apocalypse: California Refuses to Admit Its Voter Fraud Problem
Hans von Spakovsky / Jana Minich / May 26, 2016
Hollywood has always loved making films about the walking dead, but in Southern California it appears they have a real life problem with “zombie” voters.
An investigation by CBSLA2 and KCAL9 found that hundreds of deceased persons are still on voter registration rolls in the area, and that many of these names have been voting for years in Los Angeles.
For example, John Cenkner died in 2003, according to Social Security Administration records, yet he voted in the 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, and 2010 elections. His daughter told the station that she was “astounded” and couldn’t “understand how anybody” could get away with this.
Another voter, Julita Abutin, died in 2006 but voted in 2008, 2010, 2012, and 2014. According to CBS, the county confirmed they have “signed vote-by-mail envelopes” from Abutin since she passed away. So either someone has been forging her signature or her ghost has quite an earthly presence.
The investigation revealed that 265 deceased persons voted in Southern California, 215 of them in Los Angeles County. Thirty-two were repeat voters, with eight posthumously-cast ballots each. One woman who died in 1988 has been voting for 26 years, including in the 2014 election.
This report comes 20 years after the contested election of Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif., from this same area. An investigation by a U.S. House committee found that hundreds of illegal ballots were cast by noncitizens and improper absentee ballots.
In that 1996 election, when she defeated incumbent Bob Dornan, a winning margin of 979 votes was whittled down to only 35 votes or fewer when that voter fraud was factored in. In cases like these, where elections are decided by only a small number of votes, the harmful effects of voter fraud are most obvious.
Yet here, two decades later, California has still not taken the necessary steps to ensure the reliability of its electoral system.
As a result of the investigation, Los Angeles County supervisors called for an investigation into the findings. Even if these particular zombie voters did not change the outcome of an election, each fraudulently cast ballot stole and diluted the vote of a legitimate voter.
Cases like these and many others show that voter fraud is a real phenomenon and a potential threat to the integrity of the election process.
The Los Angeles County Registrar pointed to the 1200 to 2000 voter registrations removed every month to update records and told reporters, “There’s really no way to connect a person whose death is recorded with a person who is registered to vote unless we get some kind of notification from the family.”
But that is plain nonsense. Other states do frequent comparisons between their voter registration lists and the death databases maintained by the Social Security Administration, and other state agencies consult vital records departments in order to remove voters who have died.
The CBS investigation shows both that voter fraud exists and that this type of fraudulent voting is detectable through proper investigation.
CBS reports that California is the only state that does not comply with the Help America Vote Act of 2002, something the Obama administration has basically ignored.
The Help America Vote Act establishes mandatory minimum standards of accuracy for state voter registration lists and requires states to engage in regular maintenance and updates to remove ineligible voters who die or move away.
California is obviously not complying with these requirements.
-
https://www.firearmspolicy.org/petitions/ab1673/?mc_cid=cc77fd32d4&mc_eid=c42be3e26b
-
https://www.firearmspolicy.org/alerts/alert-even-more-anti-gun-bills-to-be-voted-on-tomorrow/?mc_cid=c8dba004ad&mc_eid=c42be3e26b
-
http://www.doctorhousingbubble.com/california-domestic-migration-housing-prices-net-migration-real-estate/
Tick tock.
-
https://www.firearmspolicy.org/alerts/ca-gun-rights-update-dont-believe-the-media/?mc_cid=ff91aa66cf&mc_eid=c42be3e26b
-
https://www.firearmspolicy.org/petitions/demand-gov-brown-veto-the-anti-gun-bills-at-his-desk/
-
https://www.firearmspolicy.org/join/
-
https://www.firearmspolicy.org/petitions/demand-gov-brown-veto-the-anti-gun-bills-at-his-desk/?mc_cid=a5f630e226&mc_eid=c42be3e26b
-
Several truly hideous new gun laws passed this session.
At least this:
September 27, 2016
Following a season of heartaches for California gun owners, Governor Jerry Brown has, in the closing days of the legislative cycle, decided in favor of the Second Amendment for the remaining gun bills on his desk. As of last night, he struck down two bad bills (AB 450 and SB 1332) and upheld one of the good ones (AB 2510).
VETOED – AB 450, according to its author, Assemblyman Kevin McCarty, would have “clarified” current law regarding concealed weapon permits and would have mandated that the issuing authority charge a fee “sufficient” to cover the cost of CCW issuance and administration. In reality, this bill would have lifted the limits placed on CCW fees, and, as a result, many prospective CCW holders would be “priced out of the market”—meaning that, potentially, only those of greater means would be able to afford a carry permit. It is important, also, to note that this bill was a blatant attempt to insert the state into decisions and affairs of the local government.
VETOED – SB 1332, authored by Senator Tony Mendoza, would have allowed spouses and domestic partners to jointly register a firearm under both of their names. However, this bill would also have severely crippled the process of the loaning of firearms—shortening the period during which the firearm can be loaned from 30 days down to 10. Furthermore, SB 1332 would have opened up the use of money from the Firearm Safety and Enforcement Fund for use in other DOJ projects.
SIGNED – SB 2510, authored by Assemblyman Eric Linder, allows local law enforcement agencies to do away with the current cumbersome and easily damaged paper CCW permits in favor of a new standardized CCW identification cards. These ID cards—already issued in certain California counties—would no longer need to be carried in conjunction with the large paper permits, are easily carried in a wallet/pocket/purse, are more durable, and would have the permit holder’s picture printed on it (making it easier for law enforcement to match the permit to the permit holder).
We at GOC would like to thank Governor Jerry Brown for his action on these pieces of legislation, and to thank every one of our members for standing with us in this year’s fight for the Second Amendment!
Stay armed and informed,
-
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/440479/california-state-water-project-funds-overpay-government-employees-nationwide
-
Very good piece.
-
Good news out of Sacramento.
With only one day left to spare, Governor Jerry Brown has signed the last pro-gun bill on his desk.
SB 443, by Senator Holly Mitchell, reforms current civil asset forfeiture laws which allow law enforcement to permanently seize your property, including your firearms, without due process.
As a civil rights organization that represents the interests of some of the most regulated, tracked, and legislated classes of people, we believe it is imperative that our supporters have access to their constitutionally guaranteed private property and due process rights.
That is why we have supported this contentious bill in the Legislature and it is why we actively fought to have Governor Brown sign it.
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/why-you-should-vote-no-on-californias-proposition-63-make-criminals-nervous/
-
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/california-dreamin-many-golden-state-want-secede-trump-s-u-n681796
Time for a divorce.
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/will-trump-supporters-save-the-republican-party-in-california/
-
http://rare.us/story/california-decides-to-regulate-cow-farts-in-order-to-fight-global-warming/
How did we ever survive the buffalo?
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/greenhut-california-gops-final-death-throes/
-
https://www.firearmspolicy.org/alerts/breaking-anti-gun-xavier-becerra-tapped-to-replace-kamala-harris-as-ca-ag/?mc_cid=78bca74c0e&mc_eid=c42be3e26b
-
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Lake-Tahoe-filling-up-what-does-that-mean-for-10793940.php
-
http://tribunist.com/news/california-drops-gun-control-bomb-announces-emergency-magazine-bans/?utm_source=GSL
-
http://tribunist.com/news/california-drops-gun-control-bomb-announces-emergency-magazine-bans/?utm_source=GSL
Ready to move yet?
-
I'm a Glock 19 and Remington 870 man myself.
-
I'm a Glock 19 and Remington 870 man myself.
I have an AR that self-identifies as a single shot rifle.
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4055182/Final-tally-shows-Trump-lost-popular-vote-2-8-million-BEAT-Clinton-3-million-votes-outside-California-New-York.html
According to this site 10 million are foreign born in California . 47 % are naturalized citizens. Take their children and there must be millions of votes just in California alone that go to the Democrats from immigrants and their children. If they are legal that is one thing but if not then it is clear they are swinging the nations politics:
http://www.ppic.org/main/publication_show.asp?i=258
-
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/443254/hillary-clinton-president-california
-
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/443254/hillary-clinton-president-california
It's like a whole other country. We should make that official.
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/21/business/dealbook/california-calpers-pension-fund-investment.html?emc=edit_th_20161222&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=49641193
-
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-winter-storms-la-nina-20161222-story.html?utm_source=Today%27s+Headlines&utm_campaign=c6792684fc-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2016_12_12&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b04355194f-c6792684fc-80108809
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/state-water-project-allocation-boosted-to-45-percent/
-
http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-sac-essential-politics-updates-gov-brown-signs-bills-to-curb-gun-1474918520-htmlstory.html?=
-
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-salem-minimum-wage-20170102-story.html
Trendy!
-
https://westernrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/tards_are_tards-1.jpg
(https://westernrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/tards_are_tards-1.jpg)
-
:x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x
-
:x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x
I am available to adopt any California prohibited firearms and magazines! :-D
-
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/eric-holder-hired-california-legal-battles-against-trump-n703116
-
Good fit. :x
-
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/eric-holder-hired-california-legal-battles-against-trump-n703116
Thankfully his career and elevation to AG has been based on the color of his skin and not his ability as an attorney, so not a big deal.
-
I am available to adopt any California prohibited firearms and magazines! :-D
In the event of an emergency, coup, war, insurgency, nuclear fallout, terror attack or tsunami, can we all agree to meet at GM's place? )
-
I am available to adopt any California prohibited firearms and magazines! :-D
In the event of an emergency, coup, war, insurgency, nuclear fallout, terror attack or tsunami, can we all agree to meet at GM's place? )
There are a few who are welcome. Crafty, Doug and CCP are on the list.
-
8-) 8-) 8-) :-D
-
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-atmospheric-river-prepare-20170105-story.html
-
http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/01/07/dear-mr-president-elect-please-pick-a-fight-with-california-on-behalf-of-the-american-people/
-
I did not know that illegal alien IDs were accepted by the TSA.
-
http://www.dmv.org/ca-california/ab-60-drivers-license.php
The whole concept of these "driver" ID s is absurd.
Why give people who cannot establish they are in the country legally an ID so they can drive around illegally in the US?
Just sickening.
-
As I understand it the argument is so that they can buy car insurance.
-
As I understand it the argument is so that they can buy car insurance.
Yeah, Illegals love them some car insurance! :roll:
-
California: Pre-Litigation Demand Letter sent to DOJ opposing “Bullet Button Assault Weapon” Regulations
As previously reported, the California Department of Justice (DOJ) officially submitted regulations regarding newly classified “Bullet Button Assault Weapons” to the Office of Administrative Law (“OAL”) for final publication in the California Code of Regulations (CCR). The regulations were submitted to OAL as “File and Print” only, meaning DOJ is claiming that the regulations are expressly exempted by statute from public comment or OAL review. The regular rulemaking process in California requires State agencies to provide at least 45 days for public comment on any regulation. But if OAL accepts DOJ’s position that all of their “assault weapon” regulations are exempt from this ordinary adoption process, the regulations will then be published in the CCR without any opportunity for public comment.
DOJ claims an exemption as a result of specific language in the recently enacted “assault weapon” law regarding the registration process. As enacted, the law requires DOJ to create regulations providing gun owners with the information necessary on how to properly register their bullet-button firearms with DOJ as an “assault weapon.” The law exempts such registration related regulations from the typical rulemaking process, but significantly, only to the extent necessary for the actual registration process.
Contrary to the limits of the OAL exemption contained in the statute itself, the regulations submitted by DOJ to OAL go far beyond what is necessary for the registration process. The regulations actually read like a wish list from the gun ban lobby that DOJ is attempting to shoehorn into the limited exception to the regulatory adoption process actually contained in the law. Included in the regulations DOJ submitted are over 40 new definitions, excessive personal information requirements for registering a firearm, requirements that individuals provide information on where they acquired their firearms, requirements that individuals provide DOJ with photos of their firearms, requirements for serializing firearms built from 80% receivers, expansion of the “assault weapon” definition to bullet-button equipped shotguns, and restrictions on removing the “bullet-button” once the firearm is registered as an “assault weapon.”
In response, today NRA and CRPA’s legal team submitted a joint-letter to DOJ demanding that DOJ withdraw their regulations as a violation of the authority granted under the law. NRA and CRPA’s legal team also submitted a joint-letter to OAL requesting OAL to reject and not officially publish DOJ’s regulations. In the event that DOJ does not adhere to this demand letter, a lawsuit will be promptly filed.
Don’t forget tomorrow, Tuesday January 10 at 12:00 p.m., NRA and CRPA’s legal team will be hosting a free webinar on the recently submitted “Bullet Button Assault Weapon” regulations. You can register for the webinar by clicking here. Submit questions in advance to webinarquestions@michellawyers.com. If you are unable to attend the webinar, it will be archived for later viewing.
Be sure to stay tuned to your inbox and www.nraila.org for updates on this issue and many more effecting your rights.
-
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-fancy-pot-shops-20161230-story.html?utm_source=Today%27s+Headlines&utm_campaign=3ddf9e92e6-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2016_12_12&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b04355194f-3ddf9e92e6-80108809
-
CD,
should marijuana be legal ?
IYHO?
I have mixed thoughts on the matter. usually after thinking about it I come down concluding it is probably better if not legal but not strongly of that view.
-
Off the top of my head, if I were drafting the law i would say:
a) no advertising
b) no public consumption
c) over 18 or over 21
-
third post of day:
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-bullet-cost-overruns-20170106-story.html
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/moodys-to-pay-nearly-a-billion-dollars-for-misleading-ratings/
-
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Reuters-poll-says-1-in-3-Californians-calexit-10879933.php
-
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Reuters-poll-says-1-in-3-Californians-calexit-10879933.php
I strongly support them.
-
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Reuters-poll-says-1-in-3-Californians-calexit-10879933.php
Our real enemies are from within
Not China or Russia etc
-
A bombastic site, but it covers things that I cannot find elsewhere:
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
Of no relevance to me because I do not own an AR, but perhaps of interest to some others. Obviously, due your own diligence:
http://www.krcrtv.com/news/local/shasta/shasta-co-men-create-new-part-to-make-guns-like-an-ar-15-legal/293100142
-
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Reuters-poll-says-1-in-3-Californians-calexit-10879933.php
I strongly support them.
I'm just stating for the record, that if at any time California secedes, (and I hope they try it), and finds themselves no longer part of the United States of America and privy to the protection that affords them (as well as the rule of law)... as a native born son of the state, I will be invading them to defend my birthright.
Just making that clear.
Personally, I hope they do. I've been bored lately.
Oh..and I don't want to be president if I win. Someone else can do that.
-
As opening stated in the Articles of Confederation after the Revolutionary War and carried forward by our Constitution in 1789 (?) with the words "In order to form a more perfect union", and as settled by force of arms in 1865, our Union is permanent and indivisible. PERIOD.
To the contrary is to surrender to the reconquista.
NO.
-
Understood. I'm just wondering how long the ties that bind will last.
-
Likewise, understood.
-
As opening stated in the Articles of Confederation after the Revolutionary War and carried forward by our Constitution in 1789 (?) with the words "In order to form a more perfect union", and as settled by force of arms in 1865, our Union is permanent and indivisible. PERIOD.
To the contrary is to surrender to the reconquista.
NO.
After California collapses, we can go in and retake it by force.
-
"After California collapses, we can go in and retake it by force."
That is what Lincoln would have done.
-
I'm sickened when I think of the state I was born in and what has happened to it.
It brings out the very worst in me.
-
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/01/27/california-could-cut-off-feds-in-response-to-trump-threats/
This should be fun to watch.
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/californias-debt-bubble-how-does-it-end/
-
second post
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/how-trump-could-rein-in-sanctuary-california/
-
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/02/trump-suddenly-recognized-president-california-liberal-state-begs-help/
-
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/02/trump-suddenly-recognized-president-california-liberal-state-begs-help/
California is free to burn or die in a flood. Whatever works. I guess the high speed rail and funding illegal aliens was more important than dam maintenance. Being stupid hurts.
-
Is the media bashing Brown for this. It was known for years this dam was at risk.
Why is he not being blamed for this avoidable mess?
If he was a Repub the MSM would be all over him
-
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/13/gun-rights-advocates-in-california-brace-for-long-/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTldSaE4ySTJaREkxTW1VMyIsInQiOiJxYUNkT1R3UFwveGdJaW45aGFNQ0pwTWo4UkZGMHhYZUpsQldpNHJFUEd2MXBWZXVXUWErRUJJTmpZdXgzVmtqSGd2Q3pOWDFMTTNFOHFIK2xkMkI5TWVyUXJORWVxdW5RekRjSWNRVnB6d3VSTTVBYys2Z081Rk1ZVW9OYW40M3kifQ%3D%3D
-
2 posts ago I asked why the media is silent with avoiding blaming the Democrat Gov of California for the dam problem
Next day we get this. If Trump is so great why doesn't he jump in and fix it ? Suddenly the Leftist media is linking Trump to this mess years in the making:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/if-trump-wants-to-make-america-great-again-he-can-start-by-fixing-the-oroville-dam-032117316.html
The outrageous double standard as always with liberals.
-
https://westernrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/c4uulslueaaw0zu.jpg
(https://westernrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/c4uulslueaaw0zu.jpg)
Live with it, if you can.
-
Snowball in hell's chance of passage though.
http://melendezforca.com/melendez-introduces-legislation-to-make-california-a-shall-issue-state/
-
http://dailycaller.com/2017/02/22/california-bans-students-from-traveling-to-anti-lgbt-states/?utm_campaign=thedcmainpage&utm_source=Facebook&utm_term=ma&utm_medium=Social
-
https://jointravisallen.com/assemblyman-travis-allen-stands-california-students/
-
The drought is over. Obviously this turn of events is due to climate change:
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-g-california-drought-map-htmlstory.html
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
https://cached-assets.patriotpost.us/images/2017-02-22-0cc97fe5_large.jpg
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/high-speed-rail-from-san-fran-and-ends-in-wasco-where/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/chaos-choo-choo-stop-1488755853
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
According to wikipedia 30 + % of California is Mexican.
Gee , how did that happen. And why do they mostly vote for Dems?
Repubs start the electoral college with an automatic 50 points in the negative and will no end in sight.
-
Some people simply cannot just drift off into the sunset :
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/arnold-schwarzenegger-senate-235905
I admire Arnold over all but his politics are not my cup of tea . He would not be helpful to conservatism.
-
To speed up the shifting political power AWAY from the aging white population Kalifornia is proposing this now. NO other reason for it:
http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-californians-could-begin-voting-at-age-1488914709-htmlstory.html
-
To prove the 17 yo voter initiate is nothing more then another cynical Democrat party ploy look at the age breakdown of voters in Kalifornia. Over age 55 republicans win. between the ages of 18 to 34 it is the other way around. Especially with all the higher rates of births and younger voters that are foreign born and likely Democrat voters. WHo are most of them going to vote for . The party that offers them an opportunity and freedom to work hard and take responsibility for oneself or the party that hands out cash stolen from the citizens that work hard?
http://www.ppic.org/main/publication_show.asp?i=526
-
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/13/californias-sanctuary-state-bill-clears-hurdle-moves-to-senate/
-
https://act.nraila.org/takeaction.aspx?AlertID=1586
-
http://www.10news.com/news/mayors-protest-california-becoming-a-sanctuary-state
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
The "great man" (at spending other people's money) :roll: struck again:
http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/04/07/jerry-browns-12-cent-gas-tax-passes-legislature-deadline/
Once Christy is out from New Jersey we will be at the mercy of the NJ Democrat mafia machine and we will start seeing tax increases like crazy once again too.
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
http://www.autoblog.com/2016/05/09/sleepbus-la-sf-overnight-official/
-
http://www.autoblog.com/2016/05/09/sleepbus-la-sf-overnight-official/
"To get the word out, the company is offering one-way trips for $48. That's expected to go up to $65 once things are fully up and running, but that's still cheaper than the cheapest nonpromotional airfare you're going to find, even on a budget carrier like Southwest. Add in the convenience of its pickup and drop-off locations at the Caltrain station in San Francisco and the Santa Monica Pier in LA and the SleepBus strikes us as a viable alternative to air travel, and a far better option than the Greyhound – at least until the high-speed train is complete."
Don't hold your breath on waiting on that.
-
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-1026-debbaudt-prop-47-anti-20151026-story.html
-
http://abc30.com/politics/federal-judge-blocks-california-law-that-bans-magazines-holding-more-than-10-bullets/2165329/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/ca-controller-reports-revenues-2-68-billion-short-of-2016-17-budget-act/
-
second post
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/california-government-retirement-plans-are-more-than-50-underfunded/
-
"http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/california-government-retirement-plans-are-more-than-50-underfunded/"
no biggie ; they will simply steal more money from the likes of me to fund their golden shutes
why not let Zuck fund them?
he believes in minimum wages!
but of course not the he should fund it. Again just people the likes of me.
Little Prick.
-
In response to pre-litigation demands from the NRA and CRPA, the Los Angeles City Council has voted to repeal a city ordinance prohibiting the sale or transfer of “ultracompact firearms” in Los Angeles. The city ordinance defined “ultracompact firearms” as handguns with “an overall length of six and three quarter inches (6.75”) or less or an overall height of four and one half inches (4.5”) or less, as measured with the magazine detached.”
The repeal of the ordinance was a direct result of NRA and CRPA attorneys threatening legal action against the City.
Gun owners in California are already subject to the strictest gun-control laws in the country, including a statewide restriction on the sale of handguns that are not listed on DOJ’s “Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale.” By banning the sale of certain handguns labeled “ultracompact” under the ordinance, the City prohibited the sale or transfer of certain handguns that are listed on DOJ’s roster—handguns that have been tested and are specifically approved for sale in California. Because the ordinance conflicted with state law in this respect, the ordinance is “preempted” by the state law and invalid.
On September 20, 2016,NRA and CRPA attorneys submitted a pre-litigation demand letter to the City, pointing out that the ordinance was preempted because it conflicted with the state law regulating what handguns can be sold, and was therefore invalid. The City stalled the repeal, but NRA and CRPA attorneys submitted repeated public record requests, and relentlessly pushed the City attorney’s office until the City finally repealed the ordinance.
Significantly, this isn’t the only recent NRA/CRPA victory in Los Angeles worth celebrating. In 2015, the City adopted an ordinance prohibiting the possession of magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds. The NRA and CRPA filed a lawsuit challenging the restriction. That lawsuit, titled Bosenko v. City of Los Angeles, included 30 duly elected California Sheriffs, two law enforcement organizations, CRPA, and a number of individual gun owners as plaintiffs.
The following year, both Proposition 63 and Senate Bill 1446 were enacted, making it a violation of state law to possess these standard capacity magazines. As a result, the City’s ordinance was duplicative of and preempted by the state laws. In exchange for dismissal of the Bosenko lawsuit the City agreed to amend their ordinance to include a “sunset” provision so the ordinance would expire and be invalid and unenforceable after July 1, 2017, the date which the new state laws were set to take effect.
The city ordinance has now expired.
Both Proposition 63 and Senate Bill 1446, however, suffered a major defeat in federal court after District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez issued a preliminary injunction in the NRA and CRPA supported case of Duncan v. Becerra. That injunction prohibits California from enforcing the state law banning the possession of standard capacity magazines that can hold over 10 rounds. Now that the state law has been enjoined, and because the Los Angeles ordinance is no longer in effect as of July 1, there is no law prohibiting the possession of standard capacity magazines in the City of Los Angeles.
This is welcome news for many California gun owners, including those who do not reside in Los Angeles. Thousands of law-abiding gun owners routinely travel through city limits to reach popular ranges such as the Angeles Shooting Range and other destinations that require traveling through city limits with firearms and the magazines that would have been prohibited.
Please continue to check your inbox and the California Stand and Fight webpage for updates on issues impacting your Second Amendment rights and hunting heritage in California.
-
I don't mean to beat up on California; it's a great place. My beef is with leftism and all their lies and their failures.
Experiments in Democracy It turns out that the state fighting hardest against income inequality has the highest poverty rate. The state that pays people the most to be poor has the most poor people. Incentive economics working! The regulations in housing that protect the haves, hurt the have nots. Laws like minimum wage that knock people out of their first job, also knock them out of their second, third and fourth jobs too. Who knew? (us)
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article172973181.html
California’s poverty rate remains nation’s highest
The state that bans drilling has no drilling revenues, and so on. The state the promised pensions without revenues to pay them has budget challenges.
The state that had no qualms, even linguistically, about making housing unaffordable with 'affordable housing laws' has the most homeless.
http://www.scpr.org/news/2017/09/12/75575/california-s-housing-costs-are-driving-its-no-1-po/
California's housing costs are driving its No. 1 poverty ranking
It's not like socialism is failing everywhere it's tried. We still have the USSR and Chavez-Venezuela's shining examples... okay, scrap that.
When will they ever learn?
-
They will never learn. Every leftist thinks they will be the ones with the clipboards, telling others what to do.
I don't mean to beat up on California; it's a great place. My beef is with leftism and all their lies and their failures.
Experiments in Democracy It turns out that the state fighting hardest against income inequality has the highest poverty rate. The state that pays people the most to be poor has the most poor people. Incentive economics working! The regulations in housing that protect the haves, hurt the have nots. Laws like minimum wage that knock people out of their first job, also knock them out of their second, third and fourth jobs too. Who knew? (us)
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article172973181.html
California’s poverty rate remains nation’s highest
The state that bans drilling has no drilling revenues, and so on. The state the promised pensions without revenues to pay them has budget challenges.
The state that had no qualms, even linguistically, about making housing unaffordable with 'affordable housing laws' has the most homeless.
http://www.scpr.org/news/2017/09/12/75575/california-s-housing-costs-are-driving-its-no-1-po/
California's housing costs are driving its No. 1 poverty ranking
It's not like socialism is failing everywhere it's tried. We still have the USSR and Chavez-Venezuela's shining examples... okay, scrap that.
When will they ever learn?
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/repeal-proposition-14-to-restore-meaningful-choice-in-california-elections/
-
http://reason.com/reasontv/2017/09/20/quentin-kopp-bullet-train-flashman
-
Jerry Brown signs sanctuary STATE bill into law.
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Jerry-Brown-signs-bill-making-California-a-12255884.php
They don't respect our laws. How is this different than Roy Moore not implementing gay marriage passed by one swing vote activist Supreme Court Justice?
-------------------
ccp on Catalonia leaving Spain: "Like California separating from US."
Okay, what if they did?
What if we respect self determination. They already have split. Let them go. We will need some ports and to keep our military assets that they don't want anyway. They can keep their share of the debt. I'd like to see that repayment schedule. Much of the state can stay, let them vote county by county or precinct by precinct, and let others join them. Hopefully we can negotiate free trade and travel for anyone who was a citizen before the split.
Here is a political map as recent as 2000. Note red and blue reversed!
(http://geocurrents.info/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/California-2000-Election-Map.jpg)
Can we build ports in the 2000 'blue' areas?
-
http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-gov-brown-downgrades-from-felony-to-1507331544-htmlstory.html
-
http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-gov-brown-downgrades-from-felony-to-1507331544-htmlstory.html
Just in case you were wondering what a society in decline looks like.
-
https://conservativetribune.com/ice-reminder-illegal-aliens/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=AE&utm_campaign=can&utm_content=2017-10-09
Up first, this mans' city?
http://www.speroforum.com/a/EXJKOGZVTR41/81864-California-mayor-colludes-with-Mexican-diplomat-over-immigrant-safe-spaces?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=OXVKINDFUR28&utm_content=EXJKOGZVTR41&utm_source=news&utm_term=California+mayor+colludes+with+Mexican+diplomat+over+immigrant+safe+spaces#.Wd2erHrcCeQ
-
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2016/09/28/gov-brown-signs-bill-allowing-felons-to-vote-in-jail/#.WeJPGotsPwM.facebook
-
"Gov. Brown signs bill giving jailed felons right to vote IN JAIL"
nice........ :?
-
5 Bills Get Governor's Signature
This time every year, Gun Owners of California waits patiently to assess the damage of Governor Jerry Brown’s pen. Speculating what he would sign or veto has always been a crapshoot of sorts, and this year was no exception; there were hints he would sign some bad ones and veto a few, but in the aftermath of the Las Vegas tragedy, the guessing stopped. His deadline was midnight October 15, so when the clock struck 12 last night, we learned the good news – and the bad.
GOOD NEWS:
• VETOED SB 464 / HILL/ D - That’s right – Governor Brown said NO to this bad boy, which was one of Gun Owners top legislative priorities. SB 464 would have required firearm dealers to install security measures such as concrete pillars in front of stores/and or vaults that meet certain standards. In spite of the veto, GOC will not forget that Big 5 Sporting Goods worked out a deal with the author to protect large retailers like themselves that would have put smaller dealers in financial jeopardy. In his veto message, the Governor stated “This bill would require additional security enhancements on the premises of all licensed firearms dealers in California. State law already requires that firearms dealers enact security measures to avoid theft. Local jurisdictions can-and have-gone further by adding additional specific requirements. I believe local authorities are in the best position to determine what, if any additional measures are needed in their jurisdictions.”
We agree; GOC lobbied the Legislature and the Governor heavily on this ill-conceived and costly proposal.
BAD NEWS:
• SIGNED AB 7 / GIPSON / D – Prohibits the open carrying of an unloaded long-gun in unincorporated areas of the state. This is an unnecessary statewide mandate; this could have easily been addressed by local authorities.
• SIGNED AB 424 / MCCARTY/ D – Removes authority of school officials to authorize a CCW license holder to carry on school grounds. Unfortunately, the Governor no longer believes this decision should left in the hands of those officials responsible for the safety of the students and staff.
• SIGNED AB 1525 / BAKER/ R – Requires additional statements on the dangers of owning a gun to be printed on the actual firearm packaging.
• SIGNED SB 536 / PAN / D – Requires the Department of Justice to provide information on gun violence restraining orders to anti-gun the Firearm Violence Research Center at the University of California; permits DOJ to cherry-pick who gets what data.
• SIGNED SB 620 / BRADFORD / D - After initially failing by a significant margin, this so called “criminal justice reform” bill passed after some serious arm twisting by the Democrat legislative leadership. The Governor approved the bill which gives courts the discretion to NOT issue mandatory sentencing provisions for the felony use of a firearm. In our opinion, SB 620 represents an extraordinary double-standard on guns and has the real potential of putting the safety of Californians in jeopardy.
(MARC: What is the problem here? Sounds to me like it allows for discretion for the judge in sympathetic cases , , ,)
The real good news is that the Governor, the Senate and the Assembly have done their damage for 2017, but this doesn’t mean that Gun Owners will be relaxing just because the politicians are taking a break. We are busy working in the courts, are gearing up for the 2018 legislative session, and most importantly, next year’s elections. Stay Armed and Informed with GOC!
-
http://mailchi.mp/471c0bed3a54/gun-laws-for-gun-owners-seminar?e=0332f322fa
-
https://spectator.org/adios-california/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/watch-the-water-grab-california-warns-nestle/
-
California: New Year and New Restrictions as the Legislature Convenes the 2018 Session
2018 is already off to a rough start in California as DOJ has failed to implement the necessary regulations to allow ammunition vendors to sell ammunition. As previously reported, recent changes to California law require ammunition vendors, businesses that sell ammunition but who are not licensed to sell firearms, to be in possession of a valid ammunition vendor license by January 1, 2018 in order to continue selling ammunition in California. The law required DOJ to implement the necessary regulations no later than July 1, 2017, but DOJ failed to even propose the regulations until July 14, 2017. Those regulations are still pending as the Office of Administrative Law has until January 16 to render a decision. As a result, many ammunition vendors remain in limbo on how to conduct their business because of the failure to implement the necessary regulations in a timely manner. Efforts by NRA and CRPA attorneys to have DOJ stay enforcement have fallen on deaf ears.
In addition to the new ammunition vendor requirements, school administrators no longer have the authority to allow carry by persons with concealed carry permits onto school campuses as a result of AB 424 passed in 2017. Further, those with newly classified “assault weapons” have until July 1, 2018 to register their firearms as “assault weapons,” or convert them to compliant or featureless configurations. More information can be obtained by viewing one of our several webinars. Background checks on ammunition purchases do not go into effect until July 1, 2019.
The legislature will convene on Wednesday January 3. Continue to check your inbox and the California Stand and Fight webpage for updates on legislation as it is introduced and moves through the legislative process along with other issues impacting your Second Amendment rights and hunting heritage in California.
-
http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/10/30/gov-jerry-brown-signs-bill-removing-penalty-using-gun-crime/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/california-court-approves-of-secret-deals-with-unions-keep-public-in-the-dark/
-
California’s Political Charity
Democrats propose a gimmick to help the rich avoid federal taxes.
by The Editorial Board
Jan. 12, 2018 7:00 p.m. ET
Much has changed in Donald Trump’s first year as President, including some progressive principles. Lo, California Democrats in 2016 campaigned to extend a tax hike on the rich. Now they’re promoting a gimmick to help reduce their wealthy residents’ tax burden.
State Senate President Kevin de Leon, who is challenging U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein in the June primary, complained last week that the new GOP tax law “offers corporations and hedge fund managers massive tax breaks and expects California taxpayers to pick up the costs.” It’s the “worst tax policy in the history of this country. Perhaps the world.”
In fact, some California taxpayers are among the law’s biggest beneficiaries—to wit, Silicon Valley titans such as Apple, Facebook and Google. California tech companies are sitting on more than $500 billion in cash overseas, which they will now be able to repatriate at a discounted tax rate.
But speaking of bad tax policies, Mr. de Leon has proposed legislation to help high earners avoid the new $10,000 state-and-local tax deduction limit. Taxpayers would receive a dollar-for-dollar tax credit for contributions to a new California Excellence Fund, which they could then deduct as charity. Taxpayers can deduct up to 60% of their income for charitable contributions under the new federal reform.
The Senate leader cites as his model private-school scholarship tax-credit programs in other states that function like vouchers. However, these charitable contributions help nonprofits or parents who want to send children to private schools. Mr. de Leon’s “excellence fund” would exist within the General Fund, and donations would be appropriated by the legislature. The only beneficiaries of this “charity” would be the donating taxpayer—and politicians.
In other words, Democrats in Sacramento want to help the rich dodge federal taxes. According to IRS data, California’s 71,000 taxpayers with million-dollar incomes deducted on average $462,500 in 2015 compared to $6,940 for individuals making between $50,000 and $100,000. Few California middle-class taxpayers will be harmed by the $10,000 deduction cap since the standard deduction has doubled to $12,000.
Neither the IRS nor federal courts are likely to allow this charity dodge. The IRS disallows deductions for charitable contributions to the extent that a taxpayer benefits—for example, paying $10,000 at a charity auction for an artwork valued at $8,000 would only yield a $2,000 deduction. In 1989 the Supreme Court ruled that contributions “made to such recipients with some expectation of a quid pro quo” are not deductible.
The one reform Mr. de Leon isn’t proposing is a cut in California’s top marginal tax rate of 13.3%, including the three percentage-point increase that Democrats pushed in a 2012 referendum. Rates on individuals making more than $250,000 also increased. Democrats successfully pushed to extend the tax hikes through 2030 in November 2016. The federal GOP tax reform means that the effective top state and federal combined marginal rate for Californians increases by 2.7-percentage points in 2018—to 50.3% from 47.6%.
Revenues are soaring due to strong income and capital-gains growth. Gov. Jerry Brown on Wednesday proposed a $132 billion budget that forecasts a $6 billion surplus. While the Governor wants to add some revenue to the state’s $8 billion rainy day fund, this will quickly vanish in the next recession—unless Democrats raid it first after he leaves office. State tax revenues fell cumulatively by more than $70 billion following each of the past two recessions.
California’s steeply progressive tax code has encouraged a boom-bust revenue and spending cycle. Reducing taxes on high earners would impose spending discipline and ameliorate the effects of the limitation of the state-and-local tax deduction. Alas, Democrats in Sacramento seem mainly interested in boosting their favorite charity—themselves.
-
Some great data in here:
http://beta.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-jackson-california-poverty-20180114-story.html
-
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/01/the-devil-is-in-the-diablo.php
California Public Utilities Commission ratified the plan to shut down California’s last nuclear power plant, Diablo Canyon, even though, as one of the last nuclear power plants built, it could easily be re-licensed for another 20 years. Diablo Canyon produces twice a much electricity as all of California’s solar panels, and PG & E is closing Diablo Canyon largely because of the state political mandate that electric utilities source 50 percent of their power from “renewable” sources by the year 2030, and nuclear power doesn’t count.
------------------------------
Nuclear energy is carbon-free, you idiots.
https://grist.org/article/its-time-to-go-nuclear-in-the-fight-against-climate-change/
The Green or whatever you call far left climate alarmists are driving carbon emissions up! Germany eliminated nuclear, burns more coal.
http://www.theenergycollective.com/robertwilson190/328841/why-germanys-nuclear-phase-out-leading-more-coal-burning
Do they ever acknowledge that nuclear is carbon free and has the best safety record?
Diablo is designed to withstand a 7.5 magnitude earthquake. If unacceptable earthquake risk is the reason for closure, why not close it now?
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
https://californiapolicycenter.org/permanent-water-rationing-coming-california/
Meanwhile in MN, Lake Superior is holding 555 Billion gallons of water (for sale) per inch of depth. The Great Lakes added 5.1 trillion gallons in 12 days last April.
http://www.mlive.com/weather/index.ssf/2017/04/great_lakes_gain_mind-boggling.html
The drought isn't global - or year-round.
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/on-the-chopping-block-gov-brown-joins-the-chorus-of-those-predicting-coming-pension-cuts/
-
Automatically registered to vote if they have a driver's license... ??
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/alert-starting-april-1-california-dmv-will-automatically-register-illegal-aliens-to-vote-by-court-order/
https://www.mercurynews.com/2016/12/28/dmv-licensed-800000-undocumented-immigrants-under-2-year-old-law/
http://www.vvdailypress.com/news/20180122/settlement-may-open-door-to-voter-fraud
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/01/illegals_in_california_with_drivers_licenses_eligible_to_vote_after_april_1.html
-------------------
Illegal voting is or should be (additional) grounds for deportation.
-
We have been quite hard and critical on California here, yet the WSJ is reporting a Gov. Brown turning a $27B deficit into a $6B surplus for this coming year?
How did this happen?
How did we miss this?
==============================================================
Jerry Brown’s Legacy: A $6.1 Billion Budget Surplus in California
The governor hopes to avoid the fate of predecessors who left office with big deficits
California Governor Jerry Brown took office in 2011 with a $27 billion deficit and drastically slashed spending. In 2012, he staked his governorship on a tax increase that voters approved that year and reauthorized in 2016.
By Alejandro Lazo and
Jan. 10, 2018 5:40 p.m. ET
LOS ANGELES—California Gov. Jerry Brown appears poised to exit office next year with a top political priority in hand: free from the massive budget deficits that had weighed on his predecessors.
Buoyed by tax increases passed under his administration and a strong economy, Mr. Brown said Wednesday that the state is projecting a $6.1 billion surplus for the next fiscal year, which begins July 1.
The governor proposed socking most of the money away in a rainy-day fund whose creation he pushed for in 2014. Nearly 70% of the state’s projected revenue of about $135 billion next fiscal year is derived from personal income taxes, according to the governor’s office.
The state’s fiscal health is especially crucial as it faces myriad challenges: record natural disasters, housing shortages and changes to federal tax regulation—all while it ramps up opposition to the Trump administration on several major policy fronts.
As is his custom, the governor warned of an inevitable economic slowdown.
“California has faced 10 recessions since World War II, and we must prepare for the 11th,” he said. “Let’s not blow it now.”
Mr. Brown has been preaching frugality for years—he kicked off one past budget talk with Aesop’s fable about the thrifty ant and the lazy grasshopper.
Mr. Brown took office in 2011 with a $27 billion deficit and drastically slashed spending. In 2012, he staked his governorship on a tax increase that voters approved that year and reauthorized in 2016.
His spending plan for 2018 calls for $131.7 billion of general fund spending. Including special funds and bonds, which are pools of restricted money that can only be used for specific projects, total proposed spending next fiscal year is $190.3 billion.
The governor’s budget document marks the start of roughly six months of negotiations with the Democratic-controlled legislature.
The state’s budget must be approved by June 15, so it can be enacted July 1.
Many in Mr. Brown’s party, which wields the power to raise taxes with two-thirds majorities in both state houses, have pushed for increased spending on social programs as the state has recovered from the last recession.
On Wednesday, Republicans called on the governor to return some of the budget surplus to voters—saying they were overtaxed.
Assemblyman Vince Fong, a Republican from Kern County and a former staffer of House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, said the forecast windfall was evidence that a gasoline tax increase passed by Democrats last year was unnecessary.
“We do not have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem,” Mr. Fong said. “Taxpayers work hard for their income—we should work just as hard to protect it.”
State officials and economists said planning for the 2018-2019 budget cycle had been particularly difficult this year.
They said state finances are facing a notably volatile period, given changes to federal tax law poised to hit California especially hard.
“I think there’s more financial uncertainty between Washington and Sacramento than in the past,” said Jerry Nickelsburg, director of the University of California, Los Angeles Anderson Forecast, a leading forecaster.
California, along with other high-cost and high-tax states, is considering ways to lessen the impact of the federal tax overhaul, which will raise taxes on a significant number of high-earners in the state.
State senate leader Kevin de León introduced legislation last week that would allow California taxpayers to donate to a fund and deduct 100% of the donation, essentially turning state tax payments into a deductible charitable contribution.
Other Democratic-led states, including New Jersey, are considering similar tactics to push back against what their leaders see as an unfair politically motivated move by the Trump administration against blue states.
While Mr. Brown warned of a slowdown Wednesday, he also touted increased funding in the state’s public schools and infrastructure programs as well as his efforts to pay down debt taken on by previous administrations.
Mr. Brown’s two most immediate predecessors were consumed by state budget woes at the end of their tenures. Democrat Gray Davis was recalled from office in 2003 after a recession, an energy crisis and controversial cuts led his popularity to sink.
Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger defeated Mr. Davis in the recall election, but he too was consumed with deficits as state coffers were pummeled by the last recession.
“One thing governors don’t like is to be presiding over a hemorrhaging budget because people do blame them,” Mr. Brown said Wednesday. “And for that reason, if none other, we are going to keep this steady as we go.”
-
Second post
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/455820/california-secession-good-done-soft-correctly?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Saturday%202018-01-27&utm_term=NR5PM%20Actives
-
quote author=Crafty_Dog
We have been quite hard and critical on California here, yet the WSJ is reporting a Gov. Brown turning a $27B deficit into a $6B surplus for this coming year?
How did this happen?
How did we miss this?
======================================================
"California’s finances are only in order if one ignores the trillion-dollar gorilla in the room, which is the state’s gigantic unfunded pension liability for which taxpayers are on the hook.."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickgleason/2016/07/26/camyth/#1c1e0db27113
http://www.pensiontracker.org/index.php
Economists and public finance experts point out that more realistic assumptions about rates of return put the state’s unfunded pension liabilities at nearly $1 trillion, or eight times the current general fund. That’s just the state’s unfunded pension liability. Unfunded retiree health benefits are another daunting challenge for California.
“Retiree health care expenses are largely unfunded but are an obligation for the state’s taxpayers just like pension benefits,” notes the California Policy Center’s Bill Fletcher “The best estimate we’ve seen for unfunded retiree health care is $150 billion,
https://californiapolicycenter.org/tag/unfunded-pension-liabilities/
Half of Calif tax revenues (48%) come from the top 1%, the most volatile sector. That is up with the markets and up with tech, but potentially catastrophic in the ordinary course of peaks and valleys.
The Dems number one measure of economic success is income inequality where California ranks first meaning worst.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/05/news/economy/california-unequal/index.html
http://www.measureofamerica.org/congressional-districts-2015/
They fail by their own standard. Does it make you feel better in Central Valley that Google and Apple are doing well?
Cost of living: Incomes in the richest areas of California need to adjusted for purchasing power parity (PPP). In other words, does $70,000 of income go further in a city where houses cost a million than 50,000 goes where houses cost 150,000. You need to adjust for AFTER TAX INCOME and cost of living to compare incomes in different areas.
The poor areas of California are just poor.
-
https://conservativepost.com/jerry-brown-has-done-it-illegal-immigrants-will-vote-in-california/
-
Stories of the poor getting poorer in Calif do not refute other stories of the rich getting richer in Calif or that income inequality is getter wider.
http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=1897.msg108411#msg108411
L.A.'s homelessness surged 75% in six years.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-homeless-how-we-got-here-20180201-story.html
"We are moving more homeless families and adults into housing," said Phil Ansell, director of the Los Angeles County Homeless Initiative. "What we have less control over is the inflow...
"We are dealing with historical consequences of bad decisions made 10 years ago to guarantee a right to sidewalks..."
-
https://www.facebook.com/JoinTravisAllen/videos/1761944957231523/?hc_ref=ARQ-V3QykNFfV4bCNEXZKo3xNNjoGusKfQiS1n8aXuXxQpbAkq4rjKu1p1SM-PntJZ4
https://jointravisallen.com/
-
It would appear Breitbart continues with dishonest headlines , , ,
http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/10/30/gov-jerry-brown-signs-bill-removing-penalty-using-gun-crime/
-
https://amgreatness.com/2018/02/19/understanding-california-mind/
-
In serious geopolitical economics, this is the measure of assets leaving a state, the comparative one-way u-haul costs:
(https://fee.org/media/27179/uhaul2018a.jpg?width=600&height=492.8281461434371)
Up to 16 times less cost to haul into Calif than out reflect huge difference in demand.
https://fee.org/articles/so-many-people-are-fleeing-the-san-francisco-bay-area-its-hard-to-find-a-u-haul/
-
That is quite potent.
-
" Up to 16 times less cost to haul into Calif than out reflect huge difference in demand."
Funny . Yet
The pop of California population keeps soaring.
Are the illegals driving the uUauls back to California stuffed with more illegals ?
https://www.statista.com/statistics/206097/resident-population-in-california/
-
https://www.hjta.org/press-releases/pr-hjta-files-brief-in-critical-pension-reform-case/
-
" Up to 16 times less cost to haul into Calif than out reflect huge difference in demand."
------
Funny . Yet
The pop of California population keeps soaring.
Are the illegals driving the uUauls back to California stuffed with more illegals ?
https://www.statista.com/statistics/206097/resident-population-in-california/
------
Yes, the population is still increasing but the people bringing assets in by the (expensive) truckload exceed the reverse by more than 16 to 1. Income and wealth are also no doubt increasing, it is still the home of Silicon Valley, the financial center of San Fran, the entertainment industry in L.A., Napa valley and a whole lot of other things including Dog Brothers Martial Arts.
They have a balanced state budget only when you don't count a world full of unfunded liabilities. They have many of the richest people in the world and they have the most illegal aliens and widest income inequality in the nation.
My view is that they are past the inflection point. Eventually they will lose their near monopoly on those industries, like venture capital. It will always be one of the most beautiful places to live and work anywhere but the business climate is better in other areas.
Such a dichotomy. Unimaginable wealth and success along with 10 million immigrants, 4.5 million households on public assistance, and no one knows how many public sector employees at what wage rate and how many retired public employees still receiving checks in escalating sizes.
http://www.ppic.org/press-release/one-quarter-of-california-families-receive-welfare-benefits/
Can they keep going like this?
-
Links in following article found here
https://mailchi.mp/0506378be8bf/follow-up-special-alertfirearm-purchases-and-identification-issued-by-ca-dmv?e=0332f322fa
Follow Up Special Alert:
Firearm Purchases and Identification Issued by CA DMV
In our last alert discussing California driver licenses and the Real ID Act, we mentioned that the California Department of Motor Vehicles (“DMV”) had told Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”) ATF that the non-REAL ID licenses issued to lawful California residents would be different than those issued to undocumented individuals.
It has come to our attention that DMV is issuing identification to lawful California residents that are identical to those issued to individuals who are unable to provide proof of their lawful presence in the United States. In other words, DMV provided ATF with bad information.
This means there is no distinction between an AB 60 license and a non-REAL ID, despite what the ATF previously attested to in communications with NRA and CRPA attorneys. As a result, California licensed firearm dealers are currently prohibited from accepting non-REAL IDs for the purposes of firearm transfers due to ATF’s current policy.
NRA and CRPA attorneys have reached out to ATF and DMV for further clarification but have yet to receive a response. Make sure you are subscribed to NRA and CRPA email alerts to be notified of any updates on this issue as it develops.
In addition, NRA and CRPA attorneys have received word from at least one firearms dealer that the California Department of Justice (“CA DOJ”) has taken the position that any license with the words “FEDERAL LIMTS APPLY” is not acceptable for the purposes of purchasing or transferring firearms, regardless of any additional language on the back of the license. This appears to be an unlawful overreach by CA DOJ because the question of lawful presence in the United States as it relates to firearm purchases falls directly under ATF’s control.
Under California law, one only needs to provide “clear evidence of the person’s identity and age” when attempting to acquire a firearm from a California licensed dealer. “Clear evidence” is defined as a valid California Driver’s License or Identification Card. Because both AB 60 licenses and non-REAL IDs are considered valid California identification, regardless if they satisfy federal requirements or not, both satisfy California’s requirement of “clear evidence of the person’s identity and age.”
Following additional clarification from ATF and DMV, NRA and CRPA attorneys will address CA DOJ’s position should they still insist that such licenses are restricted. Until then, we recommend our members hold off on renewing their California identification if possible or apply for and obtain a REAL ID.
-
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/what-form-identification-must-licensee-obtain-transferee-firearm
It is well worth.having a passport for a variety of reasons, this being one.
Links in following article found here
https://mailchi.mp/0506378be8bf/follow-up-special-alertfirearm-purchases-and-identification-issued-by-ca-dmv?e=0332f322fa
Follow Up Special Alert:
Firearm Purchases and Identification Issued by CA DMV
In our last alert discussing California driver licenses and the Real ID Act, we mentioned that the California Department of Motor Vehicles (“DMV”) had told Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”) ATF that the non-REAL ID licenses issued to lawful California residents would be different than those issued to undocumented individuals.
It has come to our attention that DMV is issuing identification to lawful California residents that are identical to those issued to individuals who are unable to provide proof of their lawful presence in the United States. In other words, DMV provided ATF with bad information.
This means there is no distinction between an AB 60 license and a non-REAL ID, despite what the ATF previously attested to in communications with NRA and CRPA attorneys. As a result, California licensed firearm dealers are currently prohibited from accepting non-REAL IDs for the purposes of firearm transfers due to ATF’s current policy.
NRA and CRPA attorneys have reached out to ATF and DMV for further clarification but have yet to receive a response. Make sure you are subscribed to NRA and CRPA email alerts to be notified of any updates on this issue as it develops.
In addition, NRA and CRPA attorneys have received word from at least one firearms dealer that the California Department of Justice (“CA DOJ”) has taken the position that any license with the words “FEDERAL LIMTS APPLY” is not acceptable for the purposes of purchasing or transferring firearms, regardless of any additional language on the back of the license. This appears to be an unlawful overreach by CA DOJ because the question of lawful presence in the United States as it relates to firearm purchases falls directly under ATF’s control.
Under California law, one only needs to provide “clear evidence of the person’s identity and age” when attempting to acquire a firearm from a California licensed dealer. “Clear evidence” is defined as a valid California Driver’s License or Identification Card. Because both AB 60 licenses and non-REAL IDs are considered valid California identification, regardless if they satisfy federal requirements or not, both satisfy California’s requirement of “clear evidence of the person’s identity and age.”
Following additional clarification from ATF and DMV, NRA and CRPA attorneys will address CA DOJ’s position should they still insist that such licenses are restricted. Until then, we recommend our members hold off on renewing their California identification if possible or apply for and obtain a REAL ID.
-
California’s Bullet Train To Fiscal Oblivion
March 13, 2018 By Stephen Frank 7 Comments
We were told the cost of the choo choo to nowhere was going to be $38 billion—and the private sector would pay half. We were told the ridership was going to be double what they think it will now be—and the route presented has long since been forgotten. We were told it would open in 2019—now it will open in 2029, at the earliest—if they can find the building capital. If they do, they will have NO money to operate the train.
“The original promise, made in a proposition voted on in 2008, called for the entire “high-speed” rail system to be built at a cost of just $37 billion and to be finished by 2020. It would carry 120,000 riders a day at a cost of $55 a ticket — far less than it costs on average to fly. And it would zip riders to their destinations in just a few hours. Nice.
But none of those things are even remotely true.
Just last week, the state’s rail authority announced that the system will now cost $77.3 billion, 20% more than the $64 billion estimated a mere two years ago. And, oh yes, instead of being done in 2029, it will be done in 2033. But they also admitted that costs might soar to $98 billion. If you’re in a betting pool, take the over on that one.”
By 2033 most of the cars on the road will be electric/self driving—no need to worry about traffic, accidents or getting tired driving the car. The high speed rail is the technology of the 20th century.
high speed rail train
California’s Bullet Train To Fiscal Oblivion
Investors Business Daily, 3/12/2018
Golden State: California’s bullet train project, also known as Jerry Brown’s Folly, has turned into a fiscal nightmare for the Golden State. Not only are the cost estimates soaring, but the time table has once more been shifted back. Based on current estimates, it may turn out to be the biggest fraud in the history of public works.
When you lie about money in the private sector, it’s called fraud; when you lie about money in the public sector, it’s called politics or “public policy.” California’s bullet train is a perfect example of this.
Early on, planners warned that the cost would be more than $100 billion. But Jerry Brown, California’s governor, didn’t like that estimate. So, like Canute commanding the tide to recede, he sought new estimates. He sold those lower estimates to a gullible, and frankly foolish, public.
The original promise, made in a proposition voted on in 2008, called for the entire “high-speed” rail system to be built at a cost of just $37 billion and to be finished by 2020. It would carry 120,000 riders a day at a cost of $55 a ticket — far less than it costs on average to fly. And it would zip riders to their destinations in just a few hours. Nice.
But none of those things are even remotely true.
Just last week, the state’s rail authority announced that the system will now cost $77.3 billion, 20% more than the $64 billion estimated a mere two years ago. And, oh yes, instead of being done in 2029, it will be done in 2033. But they also admitted that costs might soar to $98 billion. If you’re in a betting pool, take the over on that one.
And the ticket costs they now estimate will be $93 a pop, not $55. Big difference.
As Breitbart News notes, “only 6,132 passengers a day take the 1 hour, 39 minute flight (from Los Angeles to San Francisco) and there are lots of plan-ahead fares as low as $25.” The idea that the “high-speed” trains, which by the way will never achieve true bullet-train speeds of over 100 miles per hour, will carry 120,000 passengers a day is a total fantasy with no basis — none — in any statistical reality.
In short, there is already a low-cost, high-speed transport system between Los Angeles and San Francisco. It’s called “jet planes.” They are a 20th century technology, not a 19th century technology, as trains are.
By the way, this isn’t the first time the costs have been ratcheted up, nor will it be the last.
Just last month, the bureaucracy in charge of the rail project announced it would cost $10.8 billion for the firs 119 miles of rail (the route will ultimately cover over 500 miles). That might not sound so bad, but the initial estimate was $6 billion, so that’s a more than 70% increase. And this stretch is over flat land in what is by far the easiest part of the route to build, California’s agriculturally rich Central Valley.
But the state doesn’t have either an actual route, local community support or environmental clearance for the rest of the rail’s trip to Los Angeles, making it prohibitively expensive to build. Already, local communities in the southern part of the state are organizing to oppose having this white-elephant on wheels ripping through their communities.
So state bureaucrats, to avoid the political fallout, have begun talking about grandiose mega-construction plans, such as burrowing tunnels through two high mountain ranges surrounding L.A. This is more insanity.
Aside from the cost, that area is riddled with seismically active fault lines, which will make any attempt at building a lengthy tunnel dangerous at best. The San Andreas Fault — due, seismologists say, for an 8.0 or even higher quake — is right in the area they would have to tunnel.
Here’s the bad part: Everyone involved in the project knew from the very first the cost would be astronomical, but ignored it. This was to be Gov. Brown’s lasting political monument, apparently working off some kind of psychic competition with his father, the late former Gov. Pat Brown, who built much of the state’s water infrastructure and its freeways.
Jerry’s dad built things that Californians actually needed. An old-style Democrat, he was keen on people getting ahead and, to coin a phrase, making California great. Jerry Brown, his son, is more into leaving a lasting legacy of futility that all Californians will pay for. It’s a fraud, from start to finish. And, in a perverse way, this misbegotten rail system will actually serve as Brown’s legacy — one of waste, ego-driven public policy, and refusal to recognize basic fiscal realities.
If Brown has his way, this train-to-nowhere will lead to massive tax hikes and bitter voter anger at the people who built it. It might even bankrupt the state, which is already technically insolvent due to its outlandishly enormous pension obligations and plans for a “single-payer” health care program that dwarfs the rail project in size.
As it is now, the state comes up about $40 billion short in what it needs to fund the rail project, and that’s a very optimistic estimate.
But don’t worry: The Democrats in this one-party state will find a scapegoat, as they always have, when the bills come due. They’ll blame the Republicans.
-
Calif forgot to lock the exits:
California lost 9,000 business HQs and expansions, mostly to Texas, 7-year, 378 page study says
https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/blog/morning_call/2015/11/california-lost-9-000-business-hqs-and-expansions.html
-
Calif forgot to lock the exits:
California lost 9,000 business HQs and expansions, mostly to Texas, 7-year, 378 page study says
https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/blog/morning_call/2015/11/california-lost-9-000-business-hqs-and-expansions.html
California's tax authority will do it's best to still impose taxes on companies that have fled the state.
-
http://victorygirlsblog.com/74516-2/
-
Calif forgot to lock the exits:
California lost 9,000 business HQs and expansions, mostly to Texas, 7-year, 378 page study says
https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/blog/morning_call/2015/11/california-lost-9-000-business-hqs-and-expansions.html
California's tax authority will do it's best to still impose taxes on companies that have fled the state.
(Our Calif thread could just be all blue states.) If I move Colo, Fla or to the moon, the tax on the inflationary 'gain' for disposing of my MN assets will still be taxed at the highest rates in MN.
You can run, but you can't hide from them.
-
Calif forgot to lock the exits:
California lost 9,000 business HQs and expansions, mostly to Texas, 7-year, 378 page study says
https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/blog/morning_call/2015/11/california-lost-9-000-business-hqs-and-expansions.html
California's tax authority will do it's best to still impose taxes on companies that have fled the state.
(Our Calif thread could just be all blue states.) If I move Colo, Fla or to the moon, the tax on the inflationary 'gain' for disposing of my MN assets will still be taxed at the highest rates in MN.
You can run, but you can't hide from them.
Don’t worry Doug, in time they’ll just South Africa your assets away.
-
http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-gov-brown-downgrades-from-felony-to-1507331544-htmlstory.html
-
political correct decision.
real life incorrect.
STDs are going up.
and yes knowingly exposing someone to HIV is criminal.
What groups might be doing that ? :roll:
-
I don't know.... You go laying down with someone else without being sure.... You kind of get what you get.
Both parties are guilty IMO.
-
Terminator has "road map" to make Republicans relevant again in Cal and elsewhere :
https://www.yahoo.com/news/age-trump-schwarzenegger-wants-centrist-gop-063655838.html
Simply put become libs with an R in front of your name.
I admire his efforts but I believe he has lost his way frankly. I don't know why Kasich even calls himself a Republican frankly .
-
TAKE CALIFORNIA BACK AGAIN! REPEAL THE TOP TWO!
ACTION: Download the petition to repeal the Top Two at: www.stoptop2.com
Sign and mail back ASAP. Then, download 20 more and get them signed and mailed back before April 1st. While all petitions will be filed on April 23rd, we must gather signatures NOW so the signed petitions can be returned, signatures verified, and petitions bundled for filing in each county. Do NOT send signed petitions to the Secretary of State! Send signed petitions to the address indicated above and below. The address is indicated on each petition as well.
NOTE: Sign a petition only for your county. Make sure signers sign a petition for their county if you are circulating in multiple counties or at events.
GREAT NEWS! With the number of recipients this single email is reaching, downloading and circulating 20 petitions will put us over the top for the number of signatures needed to place the repeal of the Top Two on the 2018 general election ballot in November. Once on the ballot, we can get rid of the Top Two and bring representative government back to California.
Please do your part to: TAKE CALIFORNIA BACK AGAIN!
Sincerely,
Tom Palzer
President
Foundation to Stop Top 2 LLC
Chairman
Committee to Repeal the Top Two
www.stoptop2.com
info@stoptop2.com
909.913.9500
-
California Special Alert: Update Regarding Use of Non-REAL IDs for Firearm Purchases
NRA and CRPA attorneys recently received further clarification from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”) regarding the use of non-REAL IDs when purchasing a firearm at a California licensed firearms dealer. According to ATF, California licensed firearm dealers:
[M]ay accept post-January 22, 2018 licenses/identification documents that meet the definition in 18 U.S.C. 1028(d) in fulfilling their requirements under 18 U.S.C. 922(t)(1)(C) and 27 CFR 478.124(c)(3)(i). However, licensees may consider asking for additional documentation (e.g., passport) so that the transfer is not further delayed.
As a result, California residents who are issued non-REAL IDs after January 22, 2018, by the California Department of Motor Vehicles (“DMV”) may use their IDs for the purposes of purchasing a firearm, even if the ID contains the language “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” on the front of the license and states on the back of the license that
“This card is not acceptable for official federal purposes.”
Prior ATF Open Letter to Dealers Rescinded
ATF also informed NRA and CRPA attorneys that the letter issued in June of 2016 concerning “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” licenses, will be rescinded. A recent review of the ATF website for the letter states “Page Not Found.”
Pursuant to AB 60, the California Department of Motor Vehicles (“DMV”) may issue licenses and identification cards to individuals who cannot prove legal status in the United States. The licenses and identification cards issued pursuant to AB 60 stated “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” on the front of the card making them distinguishable from licenses issued to U.S. citizens.
Federal law prohibits those who are illegally in the United States from receiving and possessing firearms. In June 30, 2016, ATF sent a letter to firearm dealers informing them they could not transfer firearms to individuals using AB 60 licenses (licenses with “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” on their front) due to the likelihood the individual was in the country illegally and thus prohibited from receiving and possessing firearms.
Recently California started to implement the federal REAL ID Act, which requires state-issued licenses and identification cards to meet federal requirements for verification. AB 60 licenses do not meet these requirements. On January 22,108, DMV started issuing licenses to people who did not apply for or go through the process to acquire a REAL ID. Unfortunately, after January 22, 2018, the licenses issued pursuant to AB 60 and those issued to Californians who didn’t apply for a REAL ID state on their face “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY,” and thus, according to the June 30, 2016 ATF letter, are unacceptable for firearm purchases.
Presumably this problem was corrected by DMV. ATF initially stated that licenses issued pursuant to the AB 60 undocumented individuals differed from those issued to U.S. citizens because on the back of the AB 60 licenses the license stated, “This card is not acceptable for official federal purposes.” Thus, there would be a way to differentiate between licenses issued pursuant to AB 60 and to U.S. citizens who did not apply for a REAL ID license. Unfortunately, this information was incorrect as both AB 60 licenses and the licenses issued to U.S. citizens stated, “This card is not acceptable for official federal purposes” on the reverse side.
NRA and CRPA attorneys pointed this concern out to ATF soon after it was discovered. ATF now realizes that they cannot avoid this problem as these licenses with the same language on the front and back are sent out to U.S. citizens and undocumented individuals alike. Thus, ATF’s position changed, and they are withdrawing the June 30, 2016 letter concerning “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY.”
Lingering Concerns
Not all “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” licenses can be used to acquire firearms. Licenses issued prior to January 22, 2018 with “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” on them were likely issued to individuals who cannot show lawful citizenship status. Firearm dealers are strongly advised to insist on an additional form of identification before accepting a license issued before January 22, 2018 with “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” marker.
Licenses issued after January 22, 2018 that state “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” may or may not have been issued to a person who is within the United States illegally. If a firearm dealer has cause to believe the individual using one of these licenses may be prohibited from possessing firearms, as ATF suggests, the dealer may want to consider asking for additional documentation.
Californians who want to make sure they have zero problems purchasing a firearm in the future may want to consider applying for and acquiring a REAL ID through the DMV. Remember these licenses can be used to board airplanes, gain access to military bases, and other federal facilities in 2020. Californians will not be able to use their non-REAL IDs for these purposes after 2020 and will be required to provide some other form of identification.
California licensed firearm dealers should be aware, however, that the California Department of Justice (“DOJ”) may nonetheless continue to hold the position that any “FEDERAL LIMITS APPLY” licenses cannot be used for the purposes of purchasing a firearm. That position is an unlawful overreach because the question of lawful presence in the United States as it relates to firearm purchases falls directly under ATF’s control. Under California law, one only needs to provide “clear evidence of the person’s identity and age” when attempting to acquire a firearm from a California licensed dealer. “Clear evidence” is defined as a valid California Driver’s License or Identification Card. Because both AB 60 licenses and non-REAL IDs are considered valid California identification, regardless if they satisfy federal requirements or not, both satisfy California’s requirement of “clear evidence of the person’s identity and age.” In addition, ATF has informed NRA and CRPA attorneys that they will be rescinding their previous policy prohibiting the use of such licenses.
Continue to check your inbox and the California Stand and Fight web page for updates on issues impacting your Second Amendment rights and hunting heritage in California.
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/california-adds-up-to-450000-not-a-typo-illegally-to-medicaid-costs-1-billion/
-
California sues, could lose a House seat if an honest census is taken.
What was the bad news again?
-------------------------
California Sues Trump Administration Over Census Citizenship Question. States with large [ILLEGAL] immigrant populations stand to lose seats in Congress, federal funding and electoral college votes.
- Huffington Post today.
-
If only taxpayers had a party that would fight for them the way the Crats fight for illegals. :x
Wasn't that the way it was supposed to be?
:-P
-
https://www.crpa.org/event/gun-laws-for-gun-owners-seminar/?instance_id=238
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/mark-meuser-secretary-of-state-for-honest-elections/
-
nearly half those surveyed support a so-called “Muslim ban”. Punishing immigrants is still popular: 59% said increasing deportations is important.
https://haasinstitute.berkeley.edu/california-survey-othering-and-belonging
-
The other 41 % are the immigrants and few tech titans and Democrat pols who need their votes and cheap labor.
-
California NIMBYs Kill Effort to Make Housing Affordable
https://spectator.org/california-nimbys-kill-effort-to-make-housing-affordable/
The state with the widest income inequality disparity wants separate but not equal.
From the article:
"SB 827, introduced by State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), aimed to limit local governments’ abilities to restrict housing. Under SB 827, developers across the state would have been able to ignore local zoning rules on height, density, and parking near transit hubs. Doing so would have allowed the supply of housing to increase while simultaneously encouraging methods of transportation that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and traffic congestion."
Liberals answer: Not in my backyard.
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/top-stories/ca-supreme-court-nearly-vaporizes-independent-contractor-law-setback-to-gig-economy/
-
second post:
If someone's main source of info about California was this forum, would they know this?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/07/us/california-economy-growth.html?emc=edit_th_180508&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=496411930508
-
If someone's main source of info about California was this forum, would they know this?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/07/us/california-economy-growth.html?emc=edit_th_180508&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=496411930508
Actually yes, their success was discussed recently. http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=1897.msg108400#msg108400
A response mentions that the rounding error surplus is dwarfed by the trillion dollar pension time bomb. http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=1897.msg108411#msg108411
Not much new is in this article; they became no. 5 in the world by formerly being no. 5 in the world and having downturns on a different cycle with Britain. Their growth rate last year was 3%, as was the nation, roughly. In the UK, growth has dropped below 2%.
No one should deny that amazing things in the business and technology world are still coming out of (parts of) California. Their capitalist engine of the successful part of California is still so strong that it can push through the heavy load of state and federal tax burdens, as can Wall Street in Manhattan.
But there is irony in their braggery. We should judge a Leftist state by Leftist criteria. It is not good that the rich are getting richer in their world and not good by anyone's judgment that the poor are getting poorer. Calif takes and spends $200 billion a year while letting homelessness and poverty rates get worse. The state is not a success if you take away the top 1%, top 10%, top quintile, considered to be evil in leftist economic thought. 10% have homes worth a million or more and 40% live in poverty of near poverty: http://www.ppic.org/publication/poverty-in-california/. As stated in the article, our million dollar homes (MN) are better than their million dollar homes. ) You pay extra to be near other rich people.
"The fire chief in San Ramon...total pay of $516,344 in 2016...and nearly 200 police officers across the state make more than $300,000 a year. So, you make more and pay more for everything. Sounds like their dollar is worth less than ours - unless they leave with it.
The question in political economics is not how does Calif compare to Kansas, it is how does Calif under leftist governance compare with Calif if it had a more limited government and more economic freedom. Why isn't their growth rate better than the nation? Why can't they duplicate the success of silicon valley in east LA or the central valley? The success isn't because of high taxes and big government; the success is in spite of it.
Calif was the world's 5th largest economy previously, but lost that when Pelosi and the Democrats took over economic policy in Washington. They got their standing back (ironically) under Trump. Deregulation at least elsewhere helped Apple to sell more i-stuff and google to sell more g-stuff.
From the article: "One of the state’s technology giants, Apple, brought in more revenue in its latest fiscal year — $229 billion — than the entire economic output of Wyoming, five times over."
Yes, but Wyoming has what leftists dream of, far more equal incomes and wealth spread across the state, with the exception of Teton County where rich Californians moved to enjoy the natural beauty without the high taxes. They drove up the housing prices and still vote left!
---------------
Unmentioned in the article is how states like California, especially the prosperous areas, will do under the new tax laws, where people will have to pay real federal income taxes on nearly all of their inflated California incomes. The high Calif tax rates used to be instead of paying the additional in federal taxes. Now they get both, a much truer blue state model.
Irony and hypocrisy, in order to repeal the state and local exclusion, the new 'blue wave' Democrats from the highest income inequality states will have to give tax cuts to the rich! Or watch blue states fall (economically) into the sea.
-
"The question in political economics is not how does Calif compare to Kansas, it is how does Calif under leftist governance compare with Calif if it had a more limited government and more economic freedom"
Agreed 100%.
That said, I am pissed at myself that I totally missed the change in budgetary realities from going bankrupt to surplus. Definitely a glitch in my Search for Truth that I missed this.
-
second post
http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/marcos-breton/article210409949.html
-
Crafty: "I am pissed at myself that I totally missed the change in budgetary realities from going bankrupt to surplus."
Fair enough but I'm not so sure that is the case. (Still bankrupt?)
$6 B is a 'projected' surplus.
The 13.3% tax bracket is highest in the nation. Tax what you want less of. If they haven't found the line of what people will pay without changing their behavior, they must be getting close to it.
The blue state loss of state and local tax deductions is real.
37% federal plus 13.3% state makes the combined rate over 50% and then you pay property taxes (10th worst in the nation), and sales taxes 7.25%) with after tax dollars!
https://www.ocregister.com/2017/03/13/californias-property-tax-burden-10th-worst-in-nation/
California is suing over the loss of the state and local tax deduction but has no grounds to win.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-gop-tax-plan-lawsuit-20180126-story.html
If tax rates don't matter, why sue?
The poor don't pay more with the loss of the state and local tax deduction. Don't californians want the rich to pay more? Do it for the children. http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-election-day-2016-proposition-55-income-tax-1478277671-htmlstory.html
Assuming $6.1 B is accurate, that is a 0.0046 proportion of the 1.3 T pension debt. Celebrate carefully.
https://californiapolicycenter.org/can-californias-economy-withstand-1-3-trillion-of-government-debt/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/ca-voters-beware-theres-a-serious-problem-with-dmvs-motor-voter-system/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/ca-voters-beware-theres-a-serious-problem-with-dmvs-motor-voter-system/
That's pretty funny in a Democratic cognitive dissonance end of the republic sort of way, California's low rate of voter turnout may be caused by the fact that many/most are registered multiple times and vote only once!
We have motor voters too, and now a requirement that landlords provide voter registration to tenants - regardless of their eligibility to vote.
Voting isn't supposed to be overly easy. It doesn't make sense to exert nearly coercive measures to vote on populations known to include citizens and non-citizens, felons and non-felons. It doesn't make sense, that is, unless your goal is to increase vote fraud.
-
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/27/us/politics/franklin-graham-evangelicals-california.html?nl=top-stories&nlid=49641193ries&ref=cta
-
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/389451-dem-money-floods-calif-primaries-to-avert-electoral-disaster?userid=188403
-
https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/05/25/these-california-rebels-are-working-with-trump-not-against-him/?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningBell%22&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWWpabVpUWTJOekZtWWpKbSIsInQiOiJRMzBFdm0rOGlKVXRVZ3VFbzR3MUFrSFExd09jVlRpVzVcLzZTVGJkNVZJWFd3OHdzdUpjckttNGRsUzNiN0Myb3J1ZWtoNlpjb2xGeVRKWWgyT3RHc1Z6SEVIeG5NSEFiUkV1MlQycjQ1XC9wZTdhaGo4WmlNQWRlVTBQYW9pWm5HIn0%3D
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/republican-party-in-california-we-are-number-3/
-
http://www.kget.com/news/local-news/member-of-prominent-farming-family-faces-felony-weapons-charges/1186514586
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2018/06/daniel-zimmerman/california-man-arrested-charged-with-felonies-after-trying-to-comply-with-mandatory-registration-law/
-
http://www.kget.com/news/local-news/member-of-prominent-farming-family-faces-felony-weapons-charges/1186514586
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2018/06/daniel-zimmerman/california-man-arrested-charged-with-felonies-after-trying-to-comply-with-mandatory-registration-law/
Only suckers remain in the People's Republic of Kalifornia voluntarily.
-
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/21/cal-3-new-california-yes-california-feud-over-how-/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=manual&utm_campaign=weekend&utm_term=newsletter&utm_content=weekend
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/13/cal-3-plan-divide-california-three-states-would-cr/
So, Dems now have 2 senators, with this it would be 4-2? Net effect the Dems remain 2 up?
-
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/21/cal-3-new-california-yes-california-feud-over-how-/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=manual&utm_campaign=weekend&utm_term=newsletter&utm_content=weekend
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/13/cal-3-plan-divide-california-three-states-would-cr/
So, Dems now have 2 senators, with this it would be 4-2? Net effect the Dems remain 2 up?
Part of the deal is that 2 join Mexico.
-
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/21/cal-3-new-california-yes-california-feud-over-how-/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=manual&utm_campaign=weekend&utm_term=newsletter&utm_content=weekend
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/13/cal-3-plan-divide-california-three-states-would-cr/
So, Dems now have 2 senators, with this it would be 4-2? Net effect the Dems remain 2 up?
Interesting take - that it benefits Republicans? Do you really trust that Republicans would win in one of these? I doubt that it will pass and I don't see the other states accepting it if it does.
Northeastern Colorado tried to split off:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Colorado
The lines in Cal 3 are arbitrary and no one really gains except maybe Republican voters in the Republican state if there is one. I would rather see a Calif or American overlay plan where in this divided society you can choose which side governs you. )
I don't mind if liberal California secedes as long as we get to keep some ports and they guarantee that good, nation-loving Americans are not kicked out with them. I have conservative relatives living in Berkeley, Hillsborough and Palo Alto.
Merge with Mexico and do that IN Mexico. We'll keep the natural resources, the good weather and the vacated mansions.
-
https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/why-are-there-palm-trees-in-los-angeles?utm_source=Atlas+Obscura+Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=96f5424fb2-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_07_11&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_f36db9c480-96f5424fb2-67722509&ct=t%28EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_7_11_2018%29&mc_cid=96f5424fb2&mc_eid=806da67fcf
-
https://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2018/07/how-californias-cal-3-initiative-will.html?m=1
Thursday, July 12, 2018
How California's "Cal-3" Initiative Will Expose the Left's True Nature
The nation should pay attention and pay attention closely to California's "Cal-3 Initiative," because it will be one of the rare moments an entire political party will expose its true nature to the world. This is a rare sight, even rarer than last year's total solar eclipse, because most political parties have to hide their true nature, lest moderate voters find out what their true agenda is and vote them out of power. In this particular case, "Cal-3" - the initiative to split California into three separate states - will force the American left and democrat party to show Americans their true colors.
How will this happen?
Well the left faces a paradox when it comes to California. It claims California, specifically the cities, are leftist political, economic, and sociological successes. They have banned bags, have emissions standards, pay for illegal aliens' education, and a whole host of other socialist merit badges that renders these municipalities "socialist utopias" in their minds. But these socialist successes are the coastal cities of California, not the ignorant, heathen interior of the state that wishes to secede. And the Californian left LOATHES the "ignorant, CIS gendered, white hick scum" that populate said interior.
So here's a question any moderate...or any American for that matter...should ask themselves:
If the left is so confident in its policies AND it detests the conservative scum in the interior of California, wouldn't they WANT to divorce themselves from the rest of the state? According to them those rural and suburbanite ignoramuses are only holding the intellectually superior left back from achieving their true utopia. Besides, I know I WOULD LIKE to get rid of leftists out of my state/city/county/country, so why wouldn't the left want the same?
And here is where their hypocrisy (and a complete debunking) of their socialist ideology lies.
Deep down inside the left knows it needs those "no good dirty, hickish, ignorant, suburbanite scum" because the left is completely financially dependent on them. They don't want to admit it. They don't even want to admit it to themselves, but the professional left knows an entire "theoretical leftist utopian state" of social workers, guidance counselors, politicians, teachers, environmentalists, non-profits directors, welfare recipients, students, and other varied sorts of parasites cannot survive without an economic host to tax and live upon. The California coastal cities, and their socialist utopian dream, NEED the people they hate the most. The reverse is not true as conservatives do not need socialists because hosts do not need parasites.
This is going to create an interesting situation for California's leftists. They're going to be forced to tacitly admit to the world they need the rest of the state more than the state needs them. This is doubly terrifying for them because it will also prove their "socialist ideology" (which is all these people have) is unsustainable, unfeasible, and simply wrong. But ultimately if the left votes against Cal 3, it shows what they truly want - the continuing of the partial enslavement of other people. And if the voting public can make that connection people will vote in droves for Cal-3 and kick California's coastal cities out into their own little socialist beds they made for themselves. So what's a leftist to do?
Well one thing they can do is come up with red herrings that have nothing to do with what Cal 3 is fundamentally about (sovereignty, freedom, and the right of people to choose). One such measure is already underway where these morally-better-than-you leftists are citing environmental concerns as to why they need to keep sucking off your taxblood you shouldn't break up California. You can expect more cowardly moves like this to obscure their real reason in keeping Californians enslaved to the socialist coastal towns as the vote approaches.
But the biggest thing leftists can do is simply "nothing" because I have some good news for my fine Californian democrat friends. And it's what has been saving the democrat party since the JFK years!
Americans, especially Californians are ignorant, low IQ morons. And nobody is going to be paying attention.
In addition to convincing millions of people to commute and enslave themselves into traffic-congested leftist municipal hell holes, I have to tip my hat to the left in another regard. You have done a SPECTACULAR job in brainwashing a full three generations to become non-thinking conformists who simply...don't think. At best they spew simplistic, feelings-based leftist talking points they've been conditioned to in K-College, but most are more concerned about what's happening on Game of Nice Chairs, their addiction to social media, or what the latest idiocy is in sportsball. And to think the average American idiot, let alone his inferior Californian cousin, is going to be smart enough to make the connection between the left voting against Cal 3 and their continued economic enslavement of working Californians is laughable.
So don't worry California leftists. Your socialist fiefdoms and slave plantations are safe. The slaves aren't even smart enough to realize how California welfare spending has resulted in California traffic, so you have a green light to vote against Cal 3. Nobody is smart enough to see what's really going on.
______________
If you liked this article consider passing it along to a friend or sharing on social media!
Also visit Aaron's other cool sites below!
Podcast
Consulting
YouTube
Books
Patreon
-
Ninth Circuit Upholds Preliminary Injunction Against
Newsom’s Standard Capacity Magazine Ban
In another blow to Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom’s anti-gun agenda, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit issued a ruling in the case of Duncan v. Becerra on Tuesday, upholding a lower court’s decision to suspend enforcement of Proposition 63’s restriction on the possession of magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds.
Following the enactment of Proposition 63, CRPA attorneys sought an injunction against the magazine possession ban, arguing that the law violated the Second Amendment, as well as the due process and takings clauses of the United States Constitution. Federal District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez agreed, issuing a preliminary injunction just days before the law was set to take effect. California quickly appealed the decision.
On appeal, the Ninth Circuit held that Judge Benitez did not abuse his discretion, holding that he applied the correct legal standards and made reasonable inferences based on the record. But one judge on the panel disagreed. Responding to the dissent, the majority noted that it was not within the panel’s authority to re-weigh the evidence of the case, nor could it substitute its discretion for that of the district court. What’s more, referencing the Ninth Circuit’s 2014 ruling in Fyock v. Sunnyvale, which affirmed the denial of an injunction against a local magazine ban, the majority held that simply because a judge disagrees with another district court does not necessarily mean the district court abused its discretion on the matter.
Meanwhile, in the trial court, a motion for summary judgment is pending and a ruling on the merits of the case is expected soon. Regardless of the outcome, the case will most certainly be appealed again to the Ninth Circuit. But by that time, the Supreme Court will likely have a new Justice who respects the right to keep and bear arms as protected by the Second Amendment.
To stay informed on the Duncan case, as well as other important Second Amendment issues affecting California gun owners, be sure to subscribe to NRA and CRPA email alerts. And be sure to visit the NRA-ILA California dedicated webpage at www.StandAndFightCalifornia.com and the new CRPA webpage at www.CRPA.org.
-
https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/health-and-medicine/article218270905.html
And more government agencies!
-
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-jackson-california-poverty-20180114-story.html
-
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-jackson-california-poverty-20180114-story.html
Not enough taxes and government!
-
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-jackson-california-poverty-20180114-story.html
Not enough taxes and government!
Highest welfare benefits and lowest work requirement makes the poor ... not work and stay poor.
Is it even legal, constitutional to trap poor people?
What if it afflicts other races more than whites, and it does, like abortion does, would it be racist? Liberal policies are racist??!!
-
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-jackson-california-poverty-20180114-story.html
Not enough taxes and government!
Highest welfare benefits and lowest work requirement makes the poor ... not work and stay poor.
Is it even legal, constitutional to trap poor people?
What if it afflicts other races more than whites, and it does, like abortion does, would it be racist? Liberal policies are racist??!!
They are. They will never admit it though.
-
Link copied…
Opinion Commentary Cross Country
California Democrats Test the Limits of Anti-Trumpism
They want to campaign on national issues, but voters are focused on progressive failures closer to home.
By Allysia Finley
Oct. 19, 2018 6:46 p.m. ET
Democrats are targeting eight of the 14 California congressional districts currently held by Republicans. Voters in seven of the 14 districts favored Hillary Clinton in 2016. Opposition to Donald Trump has raised Democrats’ hopes that they can topple GOP incumbents in the Golden State, even in the conservative fortress of Orange County, easing their path to a House majority.
But revulsion toward liberal governance in California is growing as its failures compound. This may counteract animus toward Mr. Trump. California Democrats might have an easier time defeating Republicans if all politics were national. Instead, they have to contend with the litany of local problems that their progressive policies have wrought.
For starters, government pension costs are soaring across the state, forcing tax increases and cuts to public services. Seven cities in Orange County are asking voters to approve sales tax hikes in November. Santa Ana, a low-income, predominantly Hispanic city, is seeking to raise its sales tax 1.5 percentage points to 9.25%.
The League of California Cities warned earlier this year that local pension costs were projected to increase 50% by 2024 and could drive some municipalities into bankruptcy. The Los Angeles Unified School District is making emergency budget cuts and layoffs to avoid bankruptcy, yet the teachers union is threatening to strike if its members don’t receive a 6% raise.
Underfunded public pensions are diverting precious taxpayer dollars from transportation and other public-works projects. Last year the Democratic Legislature jammed through a 12-cent gasoline-tax hike meant to fund repairs to rickety roads and congested highways. Other than Hawaii, California’s gas prices are the highest in the country—95 cents a gallon higher than the nationwide average. In June voters recalled Democratic state Sen. Josh Newman—whose Southern California district favored Mrs. Clinton by 13 points—because of his vote for the gas-tax increase. The tax hike is so politically toxic that even progressive Democrat Katie Porter, who is challenging Orange County Republican Rep. Mimi Walters, has been running TV ads declaring, “I oppose higher gas taxes.” GOP Rep. Jeff Denham’s Democratic opponent, Josh Harder, has likewise touted his opposition.
Mr. Newman’s recall deprived Democrats of the legislative supermajority they need to raise taxes without GOP support. But this November Democrats are looking to flip two state Senate and two congressional districts—held by Mr. Denham and David Valadao—in the agriculturally rich San Joaquin Valley. Democrats hold the registration advantage in these districts but are weighed down by their long-running support for unpopular environmental policies that restrict water to farmers in the region. Worries about water are helping keep Messrs. Denham and Valadao afloat despite voters’ disdain for President Trump.
Then there’s the Department of Motor Vehicles fiasco. The sclerotic agency is struggling to meet surging demand for Real ID licenses that will be needed to board domestic flights starting in 2020. Californians wait three to four months for a DMV appointment. Democrats recently charged the agency with automatically registering voters who renew or replace their driver’s licenses. Recently the agency reported that its ill-trained technicians made 23,000 registration errors. All of this is raising questions about government competence. Former Republican Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, who is running for his old job as an independent, has compared the single-payer legislation that his Democratic opponent, Ricardo Lara, sponsored in the state Senate to putting the DMV in charge of health care. Mr. Poizner is ahead in most polls.
The wariness of progressive ideology is most evident in the governor’s race featuring Democratic Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and GOP businessman John Cox. During the state’s open primary, the Democrat sidled up to progressives and public-employee unions, endorsing single-payer health care and a moratorium on charter schools. But Mr. Newsom has lately found himself on defense as Mr. Cox makes hay of the state’s vagrancy epidemic and soaring housing costs. At a recent campaign event in the Orange County exurb of Seal Beach, Mr. Newsom mused: “What happened to our state?” At another campaign stop, in Torrance, he dubbed homelessness “the ultimate manifestation of our failure” and acknowledged that “we own that.”
During a meeting with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board, Mr. Newsom even criticized city officials for condoning vagrancy and drug use. “You can be too permissive, and I happen to think we have crossed that threshold in this state—and not just in this city,” he said.
Mr. Newsom and his liberal allies have raised seven times as much money as his GOP opponent, but Mr. Cox is beating the spread. A KFI-NBC poll this week shows the Republican trailing by 7 points even though Democrats boast a 19-point voter-registration advantage. At this time in 2014, Gov. Jerry Brown led in the polls by more than 20 points.
So where does that put Republican House candidates? Most Republican incumbents in districts that favored Mrs. Clinton won handily in 2016. Mrs. Walters and her fellow Orange County Republican Dana Rohrabacher both carried their districts by 17 points. The electorates in most of these districts remain conservative, but projections of huge liberal turnout give Democrats a polling edge.
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, whose safe Republican district includes Bakersfield, is nonetheless hoping that conservatives will be driven to turn out to support Mr. Cox and repeal the gas tax. The test this November is whether California voters’ distaste for President Trump exceeds their disdain for their own state’s progressive leadership.
Ms. Finley is a member of the Journal’s editorial board.
-
second post
Trump’s California Water Relief
A much-needed review to allow more storage and less waste.
By The Editorial Board
Oct. 19, 2018 7:17 p.m. ET
Donald Trump ran as a champion of the forgotten man, and few have been forgotten more by the political class than California’s parched farmers. On Friday the President made good on a campaign promise to deliver more water to more people.
California has an arid climate in the best of times. Yet tens of billions of gallons of water each year are wasted because of restrictions on pumping in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta that are intended to protect fish including smelt and chinook salmon.
One problem is that California lacks storage capacity in the north to capture the abundant precipitation that falls in the mountains during wet years, such as 2017. Runoff then rushes into rivers that dump into the delta rather than flowing south or into reservoirs for storage for the dry years.
The other major problem is federal regulations, known as biological opinions, that limit the rate at which water in the delta can be pumped to the south of the state. During storm surges, most water is flushed out to San Francisco Bay. In August 59,300 acre feet of water were wasted—enough to sustain 474,000 Californians for a year—and more than one million acre feet may flow out to sea during wet months.
These restrictions are intended to prevent smelt from getting ensnared in the pumps and to maintain a pH balance suitable for fish. Nonetheless fish populations have continued to decline, which some biologists attribute to predatory species like the striped bass and wastewater.
In 2010 federal Judge Oliver Wanger scored the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for “sloppy science and unidirectional prescriptions that ignore California’s water needs.” The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals largely concurred with Judge Wanger’s assessment but concluded that pumping restrictions were necessary to “counteract the uncertainties” of the government’s analysis.
Enter President Trump, who has ordered the Departments of Commerce and Interior by 2019 to review their sloppy science and revise the fish biological opinions. His Friday executive order also directs the agencies to streamline regulatory reviews for western water projects.
A major water storage and delivery project hasn’t been completed in California’s north for decades. A project to raise the height of the Shasta Dam to store more water was stuck in regulatory purgatory for three decades, but the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has finally unclogged the regulatory pipe and plans to award a construction contract next year.
The President’s reprieve couldn’t come at a better time since California regulators this summer proposed again to sharply restrict water deliveries to farms. The state also enacted legislation making water rationing limits permanent. These include limiting indoor use to 55 gallons per day per person and restrictive rules for farm water management.
Most Californians may not like President Trump, but his water decision is another case in which his willingness to challenge political shibboleths will help average people.
Appeared in the October 20, 2018, print edition.
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6337809/California-city-council-candidate-faces-heat-dropping-wheelchair-bound-mom-86-panhandle.html
In their defense, it's one of the last ways of making money in California that hasn't been taxed into oblivion.
-
https://www.electionforum.org/california-2018-voter-recommendations/
-
CD ,
are you in and danger from the fires?
-
Thanks for thinking of me, but even though across the expanse of the Great South Bay we can see those near Malibu at night, we are well away from any actual danger.
-
Sometimes this site hyperventilates, but on the whole it does a good job of what is going down in California.
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/
-
second post
This looks to be a BFD.
https://www.ocregister.com/2018/12/09/decision-on-california-rule-will-impact-who-rules-california/
-
https://www.presstelegram.com/2018/12/16/what-the-high-speed-rail-audit-really-means/
-
https://www.presstelegram.com/2018/12/23/new-study-confirms-business-flight-from-california-accelerating/
-
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/01/california-coastal-elites-poor-immigrants-fleeing-middle-class/
-
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/01/california-coastal-elites-poor-immigrants-fleeing-middle-class/
Many unfortunate, little known facts in there.
"60,000 Californians on average have left for Texas each year of the last decade"
This phenomenon moved both states Leftward.
-
https://news.yahoo.com/gavin-newsom-sets-bold-costly-agenda-california-staking-future-party-success-171713354.html
" The promise part is simple. While newly empowered House Democrats still have to contend with President Trump and a Republican Senate, Newsom will enjoy legislative supermajorities, an estimated $14.8 billion budget surplus and a projected $14.5 billion rainy-day reserve fund.
But this is an abject lie and total coverup :
https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasdelbeccaro/2018/04/19/the-top-four-reasons-california-is-unsustainable/#f8bd1513a239
"According to a January 2017 study, “California state and local governments owe $1.3 trillion as of June 30, 2015.”
So what does crazy shit Newsom propose ?
driving the whole states over the cliff and into the sea.
-
Out on A Rail
The air is so much fresher now
The sea is strangely clam
Like Gilead, Tarzana
Is blessed with healing balm
California’s gold again
No longer lead—with gilding
The reason for our renaissance?
Jerry Brown has left the building
We give him to the DNC
As our gift to the nation
Amazing that an empty suit
Can do such devastation
He sidestepped every issue
Avoided real debates
And left the highest poverty
In all the 50 states
He promised forward thinking
But played us all for fools
His sanctuary policies
Ruined neighborhoods and schools
His one unique achievement
His legacy of fame
A scam of such proportion
It puts boondoggles to shame
I loved my daily train ride
From Grand Central to Mt. Kisko
But man will be on Mars before
His train makes San Francisco
We all live with our choices
You win some and you rue some
So now we have to deal with
His heir in Gavin Newsome
If you want to be real useful
Gavin, just pick up the phone
And re-direct that railway
From LA to San Antone
TarzanaJoe.com
-
and moon beam
claims to have
fixed California with a
22 billion surplus
when after the lied we
see fornians are saddled
with 1.3 trillion in debt/liabilities
and he wants to gift this
form of governing
to the rest of what is soon
go be a past glorious nation.
fornians have smoked the marijuana
the rich will pay for it all
-
https://livelovefruit.com/monsantos-glyphosate-found-100-california-wines-tested/?fbclid=IwAR3jzOL_CGI-rEcFq_flrfcBwra1Wdh6onoQwIOKxZSc4Vav1gRPifP6mCo
-
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/01/14/los-angeles-teachers-strike-fueled-radical-redfored-propaganda-movement/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/california-lost-another-major-employer-to-texas/
-
https://nypost.com/2019/01/10/man-walks-into-mcdonalds-with-dead-raccoon/
-
Florida can compete with this you know , , , :-D
-
Florida can compete with this you know , , , :-D
Florida is much more meth and alligator-centric in newsworthy events. :wink:
-
Link copied…
Opinion Review & Outlook
Death of a California Dream
Gavin Newsom gives up on Jerry Brown’s bullet-train fiasco.
0 Comments
By The Editorial Board
Feb. 13, 2019 6:38 p.m. ET
One of the elevated sections of the high-speed rail under construction in Fresno, Calif. in 2017.
One of the elevated sections of the high-speed rail under construction in Fresno, Calif. in 2017. Photo: Rich Pedroncelli/Associated Press
Like Richard Nixon and the Vietnam War, California Gov. Gavin Newsom inherited a quagmire in the state’s bullet train with no good options. Rather than attempt a full-out retreat, the Governor announced Tuesday that he would cut taxpayer losses by completing a segment in the sparsely populated San Joaquin Valley. But please don’t call it a train to nowhere.
Potomac Watch Podcast
Green New Deal Divides Democrats
Why Republicans don't want another shutdown, and the Green New Deal divides Democrats.
A decade ago California voters approved a $10 billion bond measure to build a 520-mile high-speed train that would supposedly take riders from San Francisco to Los Angeles in two hours and 40 minutes. The choo-choo’s supporters vowed that the federal government and private investors would foot most of the estimated $33 billion bill, and the referendum explicitly stated there would be no subsidy. President Trump’s promise to make Mexico pay for a border wall was more believable.
The Obama Administration chipped in $3.5 billion on the condition the first 160-mile segment be built in the San Joaquin Valley district of Democratic Rep. Jim Costa, a longtime bullet-train supporter who provided a critical vote for ObamaCare. Former Gov. Jerry Brown made the train his special legacy project, his contribution at taxpayer expense to the illusion of stopping climate change. His people sent letter after letter claiming that our editorials were mistaken.
Our criticisms have now been validated by none other than Mr. Newsom. Cost projections for the train have soared to around $80 billion amid litigation, engineering challenges and ordinary government morass. Private investors have run the other way. The state rail authority has spent more than $5 billion acquiring and destroying hundreds of properties but not yet laid tracks. Taxpayers have lost patience, and Mr. Newsom stated the obvious on Tuesday that “there simply isn’t a path to get from Sacramento to San Diego, let alone from San Francisco to LA.”
The new Governor is thus proposing to finish the initial planned route from Merced to Bakersfield, now with the stated goal of revitalizing rural areas that have been parched due to water rationing. Lo, high-speed rail is “about economic transformation and unlocking the enormous potential of the Valley,” which is “hungry for investment” and “good jobs.” Mr. Newsom in his speech also pared back a project championed by Mr. Brown to deliver more water to farmers.
Liberals envision that the bullet train will someday turn Fresno and Merced into Silicon Valley suburbs and ease the Bay Area’s housing shortage. But this too is a dream. As economic consultants William Grindley and Bill Warren document in a recent study, a worker who lives in Fresno would spend 10 hours and 20 minutes each day commuting to San Jose at a cost of $154 round trip—assuming no subsidies.
California’s bullet train provides a miniature model of the Green New Deal. Alas, the main reason liberals like Mr. Newsom are likely turning against it is they are eager to redirect taxpayer money to entitlements and other green largesse.
Appeared in the February 14, 2019, print edition.
-
Looks like Leftist incrementalism to me. They are keeping a middle section that goes from nowhere to nowhere but locks in the federal subsidy. That keeps the issue of funding the rest alive - with more money from the Feds likely if their candidates win.
-
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/02/california-state-taxes-richest-one-percent/?fbclid=IwAR3w02meZ7ASocT9yi0oAgNY_ROvK0_rBdmOqzsDDMISZwSW84xsEk9dDx8
-
https://www.calguns.net/caawid/flowchart.pdf
-
https://www.calguns.net/caawid/flowchart.pdf
FCUK the PRK!
-
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/04/california-assemblys-privacy-committee-votes-weaken-landmark-privacy-law
-
second post
https://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2019/04/23/willful-defiance-bill-senate/?fbclid=IwAR2H3piGxlhHDFAVqPfEQQzjnVUUl7QjRk_kq3kdUy86BT9bip8oEYFHQYk
-
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/newsom-wants-260-million-to-extend-medicaid-to-more-illegal-immigrants-in-california?fbclid=IwAR2-TgcEHP3tsiC_-T_IlL234TFLWQpDK99X601FgKQz2BcJBTcG__vpNO8
-
was wondering so I found this
https://www.heart-valve-surgery.com/arnold-schwarzenegger.php
if he had mechanical he would be on blood thinners and the injury he sustained might have been more dangerous.
-
After all the hoopla, 13 years since 'Inconvenient Truth' 80% of California energy needs are met using fossil fuels.
California imports more of its electricity than any other state.
California has scheduled the shutdown of its only (carbon free) nuclear plant.
California environmental extremists object to (carbon free) large dam reservoirs required to produce major hydroelectric power.
With mismanagement of forests and power lines, California is burning massive fuel with massive Carbon emissions that don't generate a single watt.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/05/26/despite-renewables-mandate-more-than-80-of-california-energy-needs-met-using-fossil-fuels/
OK, fine, but could they spare us all the drama about climate change if they don't plan to do anything real about it themselves.
It's not unique to California. Germany is closing nuclear plants, "concerned" about Carbon and emissions are rising. The more they switch to solar and wind, the more coal they burn, and itws the dirtiest of coal.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2017/10/10/why-arent-renewables-decreasing-germanys-carbon-emissions/#62c884fe68e1
Once again, fine, but spare us the carbon lecture, and contain your real pollutants.
The more you replace nuclear with solar and wind, the more fossil fuels you will need to burn - to fill the gaps on the duck curve.
No one seems to have a valid rebuttal to my assertion, build nuclear or emit carbon.
-
• Unless you live in California, where, we were told just a couple years ago, drought was now a permanent condition because of—wait for it!—climate change. However, California has received 160% of normal rainfall this year (and the official “rain calendar” runs to July 1, so there’s still more time to fill reservoirs already at 100% capacity in many cases), and it was still snowing heavily in California’s high mountains just last weekend. Mammoth Mountain ski resort expects to stay open for summer skiing into . . . August. But never forget: climate science is settled.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/05/loose-ends-84.php
-
https://www.city-journal.org/san-francisco-crime
San Francisco is the nation’s leader in property crime. Burglary, larceny, shoplifting, and vandalism are included under this ugly umbrella. The rate of car break-ins is particularly striking: in 2017 over 30,000 reports were filed, and the current average is 51 per day. Other low-level offenses, including drug dealing, street harassment, encampments, indecent exposure, public intoxication, simple assault, and disorderly conduct are also rampant.
...theft is indisputably booming, and narcotics activity is exploding on sidewalks, parks, and playgrounds. When compounded with other troubles for which the city is now infamous (human feces, filth, and homelessness, which is up 17 percent since 2017), San Franciscans find themselves surrounded by squalor and disorder.
...
“Now people look at the city as an abscess,” he says. “The cost of housing compared to the quality of life is way off. Everyone is talking about it. Crime has been ignored for so long, and it’s gotten so huge. Serial repeat offenders have no problem making bail, especially drug dealers, as they see it as the cost of doing business.”
---------------------------
In 2020 Americans will have the opportunity to bring these successes to the whole nation.
-
https://www.city-journal.org/california-planned-blackouts
It's the unplanned ones you really have to worry about.
-
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/06/california-third-world-state-corruption-crime-infrastructure/
America’s First Third-World State
By VICTOR DAVIS HANSON
June 18, 2019 6:30 AM
A man who said he is homeless stands outside his makeshift home near a housing construction project in San Francisco, Calif., in 2015. (Robert Galbraith/Reuters)
Medieval diseases, gangs, corruption, crime, crumbling infrastructure, out-of-touch wealthy elites …
‘Third World” is now an anachronistic geographical term of the old Cold War. But after 1989, “Third World” was reinvented from a political noun into an adjective to mean more than just Asian, African, and Latin American nations nonaligned with either the West or the Soviet bloc.
Rather, the current modifier “Third World” has come to transcend geography, politics, and ethnicity. It simply denotes poor failed states all over the globe of all races and religions.
Third World symptomologies are predictably corrupt government, unequal or nonexistent applicability of the law, two rather than three classes, and the return of medieval diseases. Third World nations suffer from high taxes and poor social services, premodern infrastructure and utilities, poor transportation, tribalism, gangs, and lack of security.
Another chief characteristic of a Third World society is the official denial of all of the above, and a vindictive, almost hysterical state response to anyone who points out those obvious tragedies. Another is massive out-migration. Residents prefer almost any country other than their own. Think Somalia, Venezuela, Cuba, Libya, or Guatemala.
Does 21st-century California increasingly fit that definition — despite having the nation’s most amenable climate and most beautiful and diverse geography, with major natural ports facing the dynamic Asian economies, and being naturally rich in timber, agriculture, mining, and energy, and blessed with a prior century’s inheritance of effective local and state government?
The California Manor
By many criteria, 21st-century California is both the poorest and the richest state in the union. Almost a quarter of the population lives below the poverty line. Another fifth is categorized as near the poverty level — facts not true during the latter 20th century. A third of the nation’s welfare recipients now live in California. The state has the highest homeless population in the nation (135,000). About 22 percent of the nation’s total homeless population reside in the state — whose economy is the largest in the U.S., fueling the greatest numbers of American billionaires and high-income zip codes.
But by some indicators, the California middle class is shrinking — because of massive regulation, high taxation, green zoning, and accompanying high housing prices. Out-migration from the state remains largely a phenomenon of the middle and upper-middle classes. Millions have left California in the past 30 years, replaced by indigent and often illegal immigrants, often along with the young, affluent, and single.
If someone predicted half a century ago that a Los Angeles police station or indeed L.A. City Hall would be in danger of periodic, flea-borne infectious typhus outbreaks, he would have been considered unhinged. After all, the city that gave us the modern freeway system is not supposed to resemble Justinian’s sixth-century Constantinople. Yet typhus, along with outbreaks of infectious hepatitis A, are in the news on California streets. The sidewalks of the state’s major cities are homes to piles of used needles, feces, and refuse. Hygienists warn that permissive municipal governments are setting the stage — through spiking populations of history’s banes of fleas, lice, and rats — for possible dark-age outbreaks of plague or worse.
High tech does its part not to clean the streets but to create defecation apps that electronically warn tourists and hoi polloi how to avoid walking blindly into piles of sidewalk excrement. In Californian logic, public defecation butts up against progressive tolerance, so it is exempt from the law. Yet for a suburbanite to build a patio without a permit, for example, costs one dearly in fines. Indeed, a new patio without a permit can be deemed more dangerous to the public health than piles of excrement in the public workplace.
One out of three Californians who enters a hospital for any cause is now found to be suffering from either diabetes or pre-diabetes, an epidemic that hits the Hispanic community especially hard but for a variety of reasons has not led to effective public-health efforts and sufficient publicity. State-run dialysis clinics now dot the towns and communities of the Central Valley — a tragic symptom of dietary culture, massive illegal immigration, and poor public-health education.
Infrastructure Is for the Unwoke
California’s transportation system, to be honest, remains in near ruins. Despite the highest gas taxes in the nation, none of its major trans-state freeways — not the 99, not I-5, not the 101 — after 70 years off use, are yet completed with six lanes, resulting in dangerous bottlenecks and wrecks. Driving the 99 south of Visalia, or the 101 near Paso Robles, or the 5 north of Coalinga is right out of Road Warrior — but not as dangerous as the fossilized two-line feeder lines such as 152 into Gilroy, or the 41 west of Kettleman City. The unspoken transportation credo of Jerry Brown’s aggregate 16 years as governor apparently was “If you don’t build it, maybe they won’t need it.”
Meanwhile the concrete carcass of the recently cancelled multibillion-dollar high-speed rail system dots the skyline over Fresno. Bureaucrats now insist that more billions must be spent to ensure that a short segment of the least traveled route will be finished, though they obviously do not anticipate spurring a new tourist or commercial corridor between Merced and Bakersfield.
High-speed-rail gurus insist on salvaging something of the boondoggle not because they have an economic rationale justifying more dollars — they would be far better invested in improving freeways, airports, and rails — but largely out of pride and shame that demand some small token rescued from a very bad pipe dream.
In 1973, when I first visited and lived in Greece, the roads were medieval. The old Hellinikon Airport was dysfunctional, if not creepy. Highway rest stops were filthy. I have lived in or visited Greece in the ensuing 45 years since, including occasionally after the 2008 meltdown and European Union standoff. And yet today, the freeways, chief airport, and rest stops of relatively poor Greece are in far better shape than are California’s. LAX’s poor road access, traffic, uncleanness, crowds, and chaos seem premodern compared with the current Athenian airport.
It is an eerie experience to see America’s once premier state, currently at its supposed acme, now resemble Greece of the colonels a half-century ago, while 2019 Greece seems more like a functioning 1973 California. Athens and Thessaloniki are still dirty in a few places, and there are homeless and illegal immigrants. But one does not see needles and feces on the sidewalks, and it is safe to walk in the evening. Greek public restrooms, once notorious, are far more sanitary than those at rest stops in Fresno, San Francisco, or Los Angeles.
Power outrages are characteristic of Third World countries. Here in California we are advised to brace for lots of them, given that our antiquated grid apparently contributes to brush fires on hot days. As a native, I do not remember a single instance of our 20th-century state utilities shutting down service in the manner that they now routinely promise.
California for Others
Crime the last three years has increased. It is epidemic in local jails. San Francisco has the highest property-crime rate per capita of any major city. The California prison system is a mess, and sanctuary cities ensure that illegal aliens charged with crimes will not be deported. Pick up a McClatchy paper and you’ll see that the day’s fare of Central Valley criminality, even after sanitization and editorialization, is mind-boggling.
California’s cycles of wet boom years and dry bust years continue because the state refuses to build three or four additional large reservoirs that have been planned for more than a half-century, and that would store enough water to keep California functional through even the worst drought. The rationale is either that it is more sophisticated to allow millions of acre-feet of melted snow to run into the sea, or it is better to have a high-speed-rail line from Merced to Bakersfield than an additional 10 million acre-feet of water storage, or droughts ensure more state control through rationing and green social-policy remedies.
Twenty-seven percent of Californians were not born in the United States, a large minority of them residing in the United States illegally. Yet California’s universities and popular culture are at the forefront of salad-bowl and identity-politics policies that obstruct assimilation, integration, and intermarriage — the historical remedies for the natural tensions that arise within multiracial and multiethnic societies. In this perfect storm, at the very moment the world’s poorest citizens from Oaxaca and Central America flooded into America, de facto rejecting the protocols of their home, their hosts’ messaging to them was that they should lodge complaints about the social injustice of their new home and romanticize the culture that they had just forsaken for good cause.
California schools are usually in the bottom decile of national rankings. No one in polite conversation asks why that is so, given that the state’s K–12 schools used to be among the most competitive in the United States.
Yet, again in medieval fashion, the professional schools and science and technology departments of California’s premier research universities — Cal Tech, Stanford, UC Berkeley, UCLA, USC — are among the highest-rated in the world. Imagine something like the scribal oases of Padua, Oxford, or Paris in an otherwise frightening 13th century. If one wishes to be schooled as an electrical engineer or cancer researcher, California is an attractive place; if one wishes to be a knowledgeable graduate of a public elementary and high school, it most certainly is not.
California’s Department of Motor Vehicles is perhaps the worst public-service entity in the United States. To enter any branch office is to venture into a Dante’s Inferno of huge lines, chaos, unkept rest rooms, and rude and often incompetent unionized employees. The only efficient DMV office in the state is the unmarked and secret branch in Sacramento reserved for state legislators and grandee insiders who oversee the DMV for the rest of the population. For a fee, concierge private auto clubs and firms often duplicate some DMV services, a de facto admission that the state needs something else besides itself to offer basic services. I once asked a DMV clerk, after a long wait in line, if it was right to be wearing a purple SEIU organizing T-shirt; she replied, “Do you still want to be served?”
The DMV scandals are multifarious: Thousands of motor-voter registrations sent to the wrong people, including illegal aliens supposedly ineligible to vote; corrupt employees who sell commercial truck driver’s licenses to the unqualified; and private corporations and occasionally individuals selling hard-to-obtain reservations and appointments.
California now has the nation’s highest basket of sales, gas, and income taxes. With a state surplus, and a slowing economy, one would think that the legislature and governor would pause before even considering raising more taxes. After all, new federal tax law limits write-offs of state and local taxes to $10,000 — radically spiking upper-bracket Californians’ federal tax liabilities.
Yet the rule in California is to punish the upper middle class while pandering to the rich and romanticizing the poor. Thus, the legislature is now considering a punitive new inheritance tax, and it just imposed an Internet sales tax.
Again, the message is that if Californians can survive a recent 13.3 percent top state-income-tax rate, and a vast increase in their federal tax liability, then certainly they can be easily squeezed further after death to pony up 40 percent of their already taxed estates that are over $3 million in value. Translated, that can mean that a tract house in Los Angeles or the Bay Area and a modest 401K are proof that you did not build your wealth on your own, so the state has a second shot at appropriating your postmortem capital, to ensure that your children will see no benefit from your parsimony and thrift.
California’s apocalyptic present has created an alternate universe, in good Third World style, of pay-for-play services. To avoid the emergency room (the last time I used one, two gangs squared off in the waiting room, to continue what their wounded members were under treatment for), progressive Californians often pay for concierge medicine and anything private to avoid at all costs using any state services.
The coastal corridor elite often put their kids in tony prep schools that have sprung up or vastly expanded, in the fashion of the 1960s white Southern academies that were designed to circumvent federal desegregation edicts. Elite progressives mimic old-style, 1960s segregationists but feel that their children’s green and multicultural curricula offer enough penance to assuage their guilt over abandoning the state’s much praised “diverse” schools.
Our Dreams, Your Nightmares
What caused this lunacy?
A polarity of importing massive poverty from south of the border while pandering to those who control unprecedented wealth in Silicon Valley, Hollywood, the tourism industry, and the marquee universities. Massive green regulations and boutique zoning, soaring taxes, increasing crime, identity politics and tribalism, and radical one-party progressive government were force multipliers. It is common to blame California Republicans for their own demise. They have much to account for, but in some sense, the state simply deported conservative voters and imported their left-wing replacements.
In a reductionist sense, perhaps if former governor Jerry Brown knew that he would one day retire to Delano and drive the 99 daily, rather than to Grass Valley, with several state pensions in his bank account, or if Dianne Feinstein dwelled in an East Palo Alto or Redwood City residence rather than in Pacific Heights, or if all the Pelosi grandchildren had to attend state public schools, then the architects of 21st-century California might have had to live with the consequences of their own dreams and been less eager to inflict their nightmares on the other 40 million Californians.
172
But then again, such a radical divergence between a few insider elites and a massive underclass, with little in between, is perhaps what best defines “Third World.”
-
https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasdelbeccaro/2017/02/22/ca-the-physical-collapse-of-a-social-state/?fbclid=IwAR1wIPlNxeITQxY6ElqQnBn_W6AfDR0NwNbWdz9mefewobnN-9tfeGFgEEY#3316f1b76bdb
-
https://www.pe.com/2019/06/30/vacancy-taxes-californias-latest-crazy-idea/
-
did Willy ditch Kamala for this babe?:
https://heavy.com/news/2019/01/sonya-molodetskaya-willie-brown-partner/
just another poll who like to live the high life .
but it is ok
he is such a good Democrat - for the people ! :roll:
-
According to the article Willie had been separated from his wife for over ten years when he was dating Kamala.
-
According to the article Willie had been separated from his wife for over ten years when he was dating Kamala.
:roll:
Did Willie’s wife know about the separation? I’m sure that is being actively retconned.
-
http://raconteurreport.blogspot.com/2019/07/disasterpiece-theatre-1994-edition.html?m=1
Food (and water) for thought.
-
huge dem advantage .
no not due to prop 187 but to higher taxes etc:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/08/why-gop-declined-in-california/
I don't buy it . Of course it is immigration .
-
The hypothesis has merit IMHO. Top Dog Eric Knaus would be an example. He picked up his business telephone comm business and moved to Houston.
-
https://fee.org/articles/data-show-california-is-a-living-example-of-the-good-intentions-fallacy/?fbclid=IwAR18dSUWirr0-rjO9eUWjNBQhNsXVpSUk6fhQp2Nt_hlFFeUdghebuu6ctM
-
https://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickgleason/2019/04/16/no-californias-finances-are-not-back-in-black/?fbclid=IwAR2Q2R7p9noePMD-W4zHf6_KZw3xHjQg5zvlga7ehKc3gtQH8lOer2yWnko#332050ab37b5
-
"The truth is that there is no revenue surplus had by California state government. In fact, the state’s long-run obligations far exceed projected revenue collections to the tune of $1 trillion in unfunded pension liabilities alone. When factoring in the cost of non-pension benefits for state workers, such as health care for retired government employees, the debt facing California taxpayers rises further. "
The lying deceitful manipulative scheysters who run our governments.
That is the same as if the Feds said they have no soc. sec. or medicare to finance and thus leaving out those numbers can lies and say we are doing better.
The cowards are going to drive as all over the cliff.
The private sector is going to spend forever paying for the government's employees to retire in the states living off us, and in the fed SS and Medicare will default.
-
https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/state-appeals-court-throws-out-sole-conviction-against-immigrant-who-fatally-shot-kate-steinle?fbclid=IwAR2GuGHNKSKhC7fvTEJe2k2WGkfSe_kpU8GBHQAJhcdjbZzJG-sR2NluoQQ
https://www.pasadenastarnews.com/2016/08/09/how-many-businesses-have-left-california-this-report-claims-to-have-an-answer/?fbclid=IwAR0LVcEN3_uganQuWO1IpEmzRkdeNGZ1vInEpTujz_EtGR2TK0ZNA1d5WB0
https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2018/06/03/why-nearly-half-of-san-francisco-bay-area.html?fbclid=IwAR2hw81c2J97JbD2Zuf1FVIDrpEf5efp8afV_dM_404975_2GuGZ93bG47o
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFNaRGcZ28Y
South Park version
-
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2019/09/09/why-california-must-declare-a-state-of-emergency-on-homelessness-or-get-a-governor-who-will/?fbclid=IwAR11vpQiZVviQlQOMs0Xcj9DKmKLkjGsDJFoPdtaswkrzfTAKdcs12gv0eQ#47132b6564f5
-
https://offgridsurvival.com/california-officials-declare-ham-radio-no-longer-a-benefit/?fbclid=IwAR1PXGfYXYkjvaqkgXyZekMbQVWYjVPWndATSjeKcEpi36gK6Myga2vryAY
-
California: Governor Newsom Signs Anti-Gun Bills into Law
Today, Governor Newsom signed seven anti-gun bills into law — continuing the assault on our Second Amendment rights in the Golden State. These new laws pile onto the hundreds of existing laws and, like the others, will be equally ignored by criminals. Your NRA will not back down while we explore further action on these new laws.
Assembly Bill 12, sponsored by Assembly Member Jacqui Irwin (D-44), would extend the duration of California’s “gun violence restraining order” law from one year to a period of up to five years. Meaning a person could be prohibited from owning and possessing firearms for five years at a time without ever being adjudicated as dangerously mentally ill or convicted of a crime.
Assembly Bill 61, sponsored by Assembly Member Philip Ting (D-19), would expand the list of those eligible to file “gun violence restraining orders” beyond the currently authorized petitioners, which include immediate family and law enforcement. The new list is expanded to employers, coworkers and employees of a secondary or postsecondary school that the person has attended in the last 6 months. GVRO’s can remove a person’s Second Amendment rights, not based on criminal convictions or mental health adjudications, but based on third party allegations, often without due process until weeks after a person’s rights have been suspended.
Assembly Bill 879, sponsored by Assembly Member Mike Gipson (D-64), would require precursor firearms parts to be sold/transferred through a licensed precursor parts dealer in a similar process to the new laws regarding ammunition purchases. It would further create a registry of these parts and a new crime for transfer of precursor parts without the involvement of a licensed precursor parts dealer to anyone under 21 years of age or prohibited from owning firearms. Precursor parts include items such as unfinished frames and receivers.
Assembly Bill 893, sponsored by Assembly Member Todd Gloria (D-78), would prohibit the sale of firearms and ammunition at the Del Mar fairgrounds located in the 22nd District Agricultural Association on and after January 1, 2021.
Assembly Bill 1297, sponsored by Assembly Member Kevin McCarty (D-7), would remove the maximum fee a local authority can charge on the concealed carry permit application.
Assembly Bill 1669, sponsored by Assembly Member Rob Bonta (D-18), would raise the fees paid by consumers when purchasing firearms. The DROS account has generated a massive surplus at times, so much so that tens of millions of dollars that have been utilized to fund other DOJ programs, including a $24 million dollar loan to the Armed Prohibited Persons System (APPS) just a few years ago. This legislation appears nothing more than an effort to put more cost constraints on gun owners to foot the bill for the massive cost pressures the legislature has put on DOJ in recent years including ammunition background checks and long gun registration.
Senate Bill 61, sponsored by Senator Anthony Portantino (D-25), as amended would expand California’s existing one handgun a month law to also apply to handguns or centerfire semi-automatic rifles, with limited exceptions. Further the bill expands the prohibition on acquisition of firearms by a person under 21 years of age by eliminating the existing exception for 18-20 year-olds with a valid hunting license.
Continue to check your inbox and the California Stand and Fight webpage for updates on issues impacting your Second Amendment rights and hunting heritage.
-
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2019/10/12/oops-californias-expensive-solar-panels-to-fight-climate-change-dont-work-during-blackout-838403
-
https://cssrc.us/content/gov-newsom-grants-clemency-21-convicted-murders-gang-members-drive-shooters?fbclid=IwAR3Y6p3g7Sw89dgMu9Xo5Xr9HzfCb9JuHMcyxCKoASYJUtzmFFmMGPxKtXk
-
https://thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/north-korea-publishes-satellite-image-of-california-at-night-t20968.html
Who is the oppressed third world country now?
-
Some quality trolling there :-o :-D :-D
-
https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/10/20/californias-war-on-citizenship/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=californias-war-on-citizenship&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTXpNNVlUUXdZVGhsTkdRNCIsInQiOiJFOFNOY1NDMUluRjlXblFSUmZ1bG9UMEp1TFFhdk1wXC94Q3RXVDg2YnpmME5RNnp6TGhpcU9aY3d4UnpJQ1pTc0tLblozYkFSU3d0ZExraGhXc2I5d3VuMFB0SGFQaHdjN1dZOUcxb1NPQUt5RmdDVTViZWFBRWpPYml4cHplZHYifQ%3D%3D
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/los-angeles-city-attorney-petty-crimes-are-now-legal-in-our-city/?fbclid=IwAR1GEhVLWc1EhqoxKhFvoKEoeC0ffhYQYigAazCFz48Gq9l9huPYVu6RPg4
-
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/california-blackouts-pge-jarrett-stepman?fbclid=IwAR1wPwQLpnOZG1DrbwrNC_6X7ZgcOmRwv47fsgzjo5qiXQYNxxFEWCudzP0
-
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/california-blackouts-pge-jarrett-stepman?fbclid=IwAR1wPwQLpnOZG1DrbwrNC_6X7ZgcOmRwv47fsgzjo5qiXQYNxxFEWCudzP0
https://daysofsunshine.blog/2019/10/13/california-has-much-much-bigger-problems-than-wildfires/
-
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/california-blackouts-pge-jarrett-stepman?fbclid=IwAR1wPwQLpnOZG1DrbwrNC_6X7ZgcOmRwv47fsgzjo5qiXQYNxxFEWCudzP0
https://daysofsunshine.blog/2019/10/13/california-has-much-much-bigger-problems-than-wildfires/
"[Calif] choosing to invest in new green projects rather than make the necessary safety upgrades to its existing transmission systems. Those investment decisions are how California got the deadliest wildfire in state history last year."
$100B on failed high speed rail would have buried quite a few lines. If solar provided anything near what its proponents say, the connecting lines wouldn't be necessary.
Both the drought and the winds are human caused we are told, but for some unexplained reason it is localized to Calif, as other regions are experiencing record rainfall with minimal forest fire risk: "Wettest year on record in US"
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2019/09/10/multiple-rain-waves-through-thursday-wettest-year-on-record-is-us
Calif gets roughly 0% of its energy from coal, 3 million tons per year versus China at 3.4 Billion tons per yer, an impressive accomplishment, but aren't those fires emitting more heat and CO2 per square mile than fossil fuels?
https://www.livescience.com/1981-wildfires-release-cars.html
-
Wildfires Caused By Bad Environmental Policy Are Causing California Forests To Be Net CO2 Emitters
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2019/02/25/wildfires-caused-by-bad-environmental-policy-are-causing-california-forests-to-be-net-co2-emitters/#11e9da255e30
Forbes makes a point I tried to make yesterday.
If you truly cared about CO2 emissions, you would invest in this and not that. Clearing underbrush, not solar panels, for example. The obsession with 'climate change' detracts from real causes, real actions and real solutions.
"This is California’s big secret: it’s not climate change that’s burning up the forests, killing people, and destroying hundreds of homes; it’s decades of environmental mismanagement that has created a tinderbox of unharvested timber, dead trees, and thick underbrush."
"the timber harvest infrastructure is less than one-third of what it was 30 years ago"
---------------------------------------------
The federal government owns 46% of Calif land, 85% of Nevada. The state and federal government make the rules for private land as well.
https://ballotpedia.org/Federal_land_ownership_by_state#Federal_land_by_state
-
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/18/771486828/california-can-expect-blackouts-for-a-decade-says-pg-e-ceo?fbclid=IwAR3YmIDR-5xxjbeZUciSr2cfquKoAvKsMai0Zy_zhGbo6gmyuObMaLqvUYg
-
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/384280.php
'Oh, I'm covered in brown, and the skies are grey...'
-
Fk , , ,
-
2 judges stopped prop 187
and now California controlled by illegals and libs
https://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/what-happened-to-california-republicans/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/day-of-infamy-newsom-releases-illegal-alien-murderer-from-prison-hides-him-from-ice/
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST9jCgYk4tQ&fbclid=IwAR2pPea8XkiaR27PTyPOs9xkj-DoNpfrJ8R62AbifpDkAVqhG58Mv9ot4ZA
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST9jCgYk4tQ&fbclid=IwAR2pPea8XkiaR27PTyPOs9xkj-DoNpfrJ8R62AbifpDkAVqhG58Mv9ot4ZA
Hey, EBT cards and free healthcare for illegal aliens requires lots of revenue streams!
-
https://vimeo.com/373532022?ref=fb-share&1&fbclid=IwAR3OQ2eN1NMWUz4jWxLovVGJccXnxuX1tTqNVZrWNB7UdrxhqX2Hb-qrNqY
-
https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/article238203004.html
-
https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/article238203004.html
It's not a bug, it's a feature.
-
I get the Cog Diss of the Left and California threads confused. This fits in either.
(https://static.pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/DEA57C3B-512E-4A6D-9C05-BD09EC78F94D-776x800.jpeg)
Leftists helping workers. Ugh. With friends like that, who needs enemies?
-
https://freebeacon.com/issues/california-blocks-release-of-spending-records/?utm_source=Freedom+Mail&utm_campaign=2477b768dc-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_12_18_08_32_COPY_02&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b5e6e0e9ea-2477b768dc-45632137
-
Isn't this the same logic that contributed to the failure to act on the warning signs of the Parkland shooter?
https://www.kron4.com/news/california/california-public-schools-cant-suspend-students-for-disobeying-teachers-new-law-says/
-
Video Clip
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLkF6zLxg_U&feature=share
Text found at URL
===============
The connections date back at least 80 years, to when Jerry Brown’s father, Pat Brown, ran for San Francisco district attorney, losing in 1939 but winning in 1943, with the help of his close friend and Gavin Newsom’s grandfather, businessman William Newsom.
As mayor, Newsom became nationally recognized for ordering the distribution of marriage licenses to same-sex couples. And the shop with the mop sink upstairs, PlumpJack Wines, grew into a line of successful restaurants, hotels, and wineries managed by Newsom’s sister, Hilary.
A Times review of campaign finance records identified eight of San Francisco’s best-known families as being among Newsom’s most loyal and long-term contributors. Among those patrons are the Gettys, the Pritzkers and the Fishers, whose families made their respective fortunes in oil, hotels and fashion. They first backed him when he was a restaurateur and winery owner running for a seat on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 1998, and have continued their support through the governor’s race.
They are not Newsom’s largest donors: The families in total have given about $2 million of the $61 million that donors have contributed to his campaigns and independent committees backing those bids. But they gave while he was a relative unknown, providing crucial support to a political newcomer in the years before his campaign accounts piled high with cash from labor unions, Hollywood honchos, tech billionaires and donors up and down the state.
Gavin Newsom is succeeding someone who could be considered his quasi-uncle, since his inauguration continues the decades-long saga of four San Francisco families intertwined by blood, by marriage, by money, by culture and, of course, by politics – the Browns, the Newsoms, the Pelosi's and the Gettys.
Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) defeated businessman John Cox (R) in the general election on November 6, 2018, for governor of California.
President Donald Trump (R) endorsed Cox and former President Barack Obama (D) endorsed Newsom in the race. The forecasting outlets Ballotpedia covered rated the race either Safe Democratic or Solid Democratic in the month leading up to election day.
Fast forward two decades. Gov. Pat Brown’s administration developed Squaw Valley for the 1960s winter Olympics and afterward awarded a concession to operate it to William Newsom and his partner, John Pelosi.
The Squaw Valley concession was controversial at the time and created something of a rupture between the two old friends.
William Newsom wanted to make significant improvements to the ski complex, including a convention center, but Brown’s Department of Parks and Recreation balked. Newsom and his son, an attorney also named William, held a series of contentious meetings with officials over the issue.
An eight-page memo about those 1966 meetings from the department’s director, Fred Jones, buried in the Pat Brown archives, describes the Newsoms as being embittered and the senior Newsom threatening to “hurt the governor politically” as Brown ran for a third term that year against Ronald Reagan.
After Newsom retired from the bench in 1995, he became administrator of Gordon Getty’s own trust, telling one interviewer, “I make my living working for Gordon Getty.” The trust provided seed money for the Plump Jack chain of restaurants and wine shops that Newson’s son, Gavin, and Gordon Getty’s son, Billy, developed, the first being in a Squaw Valley hotel.
Yet the early hand he received in politics and business continues to form the basis of criticism against him. Newsom’s opponents in the mayor’s race painted him as privileged and out of touch. In the gubernatorial contest, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Treasurer John Chiang, both Democrats, are beginning to do the same.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MF5HumSCUTc&feature=share
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MF5HumSCUTc&feature=share
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” -John F. Kennedy
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLkF6zLxg_U&feature=share
-
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/How-will-childhood-among-radicals-impact-Chesa-14948972.php
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZNILgQ27uk
-
Two Enemies’ Quiet Deal on Homelessness
Even as President Trump publicly rails against California leaders, senior officials in his administration are quietly making significant progress toward a potential deal to give Los Angeles federal funds and land to help shelter its growing homeless population.
The movement follows a series of phone calls involving Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson, L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti and L.A. County Supervisor Kathryn Barger. On Thursday, Garcetti sent Carson and Trump a letter formally asking for help. Officials would not say how much money is on the table or how close they are to an agreement.
A deal offers potential risk for both men, but also potential reward. Trump has suggested he sees a chance to play hero in the face of what he calls failing Democratic leadership. And Garcetti, who endorsed Joe Biden for the Democratic nomination for president the same day he sent Trump his letter, has tried to cast himself as a bridge builder who will do anything to help the city.
LA Times
-
"quietly making significant progress toward a potential deal to give Los Angeles federal funds and land to help shelter its growing homeless population."
- Maybe they could set aside some land south of the border to house the millions of 'Unauthorized Immigrants' caught in this crisis - and name it Mexico.
-
"quietly making significant progress toward a potential deal to give Los Angeles federal funds and land to help shelter its growing homeless population."
- Maybe they could set aside some land south of the border to house the millions of 'Unauthorized Immigrants' caught in this crisis - and name it Mexico.
An idea so crazy, it just might work!
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/democrats-to-kill-off-vacation-homes-in-california/
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FveZk-aa5m4&feature=youtu.be
-
https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/01/16/california-now-pushing-free-health-care-for-illegal-immigrant-seniors/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=california-now-pushing-free-health-care-for-illegal-immigrant-seniors?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningBell&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTURJeU1tVmtaak5sTWpVNSIsInQiOiJVVlc2OFwvamtxNFQyZWtBa20yV2FFSnlPOHlyVFBCSnlyc3duZ0NrQklERVB6QkY2R1IzMm5XNks5SVFRa0grQWdxcDhBT0pXSEtQajZ2Ym9NNnhpR0R4V2FzZHdPc1BtQXlUWjF4VWpIQm4rbTl2OTNoWW1PQWpBKzhNQTE2Y1gifQ%3D%3D
-
body mass index (BMI) is discriminatory to gender nonbinary students.
https://www.foxnews.com/health/california-gavin-newsom-moves-pause-student-fitness-tests-citing-bullying-concerns
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/trump-making-surprise-visit-to-central-valley-next-week/
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/trump-making-surprise-visit-to-central-valley-next-week/
Great news! It's time to take Calif seriously. Run a 50 state campaign. Margin of victory (or defeat) matters. Change the momentum. Look at how energized the Left is to someday win Texas. Not all Californians are Leftist, coastal elites!
Trump went into Ilhan Omar's district Leftist Mpls and called out her radicalism. He brought out the rest of the state. Why not call out the people who are destroying California - in California?
Republicans need wins there to take back the House and Trump needs to win back the House to have any real success in his second term. [Losing the House was his biggest failure.]
Surrendering Calif to the Leftists helps no one.
-
https://www.instagram.com/tv/B8jXOyeprXW/?igshid=enm3swu7klao
-
https://videos.recoilweb.com/watch/channel/gun-room/zBA82lFAlNja-recoiltv-gun-room-kalikey-bolt-system
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/california-government-outlaws-freelance-work/
-
https://news.yahoo.com/los-angeles-releasing-inmates-urging-033455287.html
Why not?
-
Fk , , ,
-
https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/03/18/coronavirus-san-jose-orders-gun-store-to-close-in-one-of-first-tests-of-essential-under-shelter-order/
-
https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/03/18/coronavirus-san-jose-orders-gun-store-to-close-in-one-of-first-tests-of-essential-under-shelter-order/
If you wait until crisis times to buy a gun, it's probably too late anyway....
-
https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/03/18/coronavirus-san-jose-orders-gun-store-to-close-in-one-of-first-tests-of-essential-under-shelter-order/
If you wait until crisis times to buy a gun, it's probably too late anyway....
That is the lesson of March 2020, that the preppers already knew. If they can run out of and prevent the sale of things as safe and simple as sanitisers, masks and toilet paper (and food?), the whole second amendment thing must be anticipated, not bought when you need it - or after you need it. Gun isn't right for everyone but if people start needing to stockpile cash and other things others might desperately need, you need a plan.
-
Yup. A week ago, you could get a decent AR-15 for around 500 bucks. Not to mention magazines and bulk ammo dirt cheap. Not so much now.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/03/18/coronavirus-san-jose-orders-gun-store-to-close-in-one-of-first-tests-of-essential-under-shelter-order/
If you wait until crisis times to buy a gun, it's probably too late anyway....
That is the lesson of March 2020, that the preppers already knew. If they can run out of and prevent the sale of things as safe and simple as sanitisers, masks and toilet paper (and food?), the whole second amendment thing must be anticipated, not bought when you need it - or after you need it. Gun isn't right for everyone but if people start needing to stockpile cash and other things others might desperately need, you need a plan.
-
This is why MS-13 didn't rush out to buy TP and water. They will be going door to door collecting instead...
https://concealednation.org/2020/03/anti-gun-people-now-want-guns-and-theyre-surprised-you-cant-buy-them-online-and-have-them-shipped-to-their-homes/
Yup. A week ago, you could get a decent AR-15 for around 500 bucks. Not to mention magazines and bulk ammo dirt cheap. Not so much now.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/03/18/coronavirus-san-jose-orders-gun-store-to-close-in-one-of-first-tests-of-essential-under-shelter-order/
If you wait until crisis times to buy a gun, it's probably too late anyway....
That is the lesson of March 2020, that the preppers already knew. If they can run out of and prevent the sale of things as safe and simple as sanitisers, masks and toilet paper (and food?), the whole second amendment thing must be anticipated, not bought when you need it - or after you need it. Gun isn't right for everyone but if people start needing to stockpile cash and other things others might desperately need, you need a plan.
-
Last night, the Los Angeles County Sheriff announced that he would be suspending efforts to close down gun stores after receiving an opinion from Los Angeles County counsel that gun stores could in fact be classified as essential businesses under the Governor's executive order. This comes as the Los Angeles Mayor announced that the Department of Water and Power will shut off services to non-essential businesses that don't comply with the "safer at home" ordinance.
Your NRA-ILA will continue to monitor this situation and will report on further developments.
-
California: Los Angeles Sheriff Reverses Course Again and Orders Gun Stores to Close to the Public!
Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva took to twitter to announce he is once again ordering the closure of guns stores to almost all retail traffic. This comes after the closure was announced, then lifted, but is now back in place. The Sheriff issued the below statement, placing extreme limitations on firearm stores and how they can conduct business.
In this case, a single official is unilaterally restricting the ability of law-abiding citizens to exercise their right to defend themselves and their loved ones. To contact the Los Angeles County Sheriff's office to comment, please hit the following link https://lasd.org/commendation-and-complaint-form/ or call (800) 698-TALK. Please do not call an emergency or dispatch number.
-
California: Los Angeles Sheriff Reverses Course Again and Orders Gun Stores to Close to the Public!
Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva took to twitter to announce he is once again ordering the closure of guns stores to almost all retail traffic. This comes after the closure was announced, then lifted, but is now back in place. The Sheriff issued the below statement, placing extreme limitations on firearm stores and how they can conduct business.
In this case, a single official is unilaterally restricting the ability of law-abiding citizens to exercise their right to defend themselves and their loved ones. To contact the Los Angeles County Sheriff's office to comment, please hit the following link https://lasd.org/commendation-and-complaint-form/ or call (800) 698-TALK. Please do not call an emergency or dispatch number.
"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." - Whatever.
There will someday be court cases on some of the powers we see exercised today.
But abortion is an essential service, mostly because of its prominence in the constitution...
-
How California Has Avoided a Coronavirus Outbreak as Bad as New York’s…So Far
Earlier stay-at-home orders and a less dense population have helped state manage pandemic, but risk remains high, particularly in L.A.
By Alejandro Lazo in San Francisco and Christine Mai-Duc in Los Angeles
April 8, 2020 8:39 am ET
1
In New York, emergency rooms are overcrowded and refrigerated trucks house dead bodies in the street. In California, thousands of hospital beds are sitting empty and the state recently lent 500 ventilators to harder-hit states.
Despite having the nation’s largest population, frequent travel with China and the first confirmed case of community spread in the country, California has only 15,865 cases of Covid-19 and 374 deaths as of Tuesday, compared with 138,863 cases and 5,489 deaths in New York state, according to their public health departments.
Projected hospital beds needed in California for Covid-19 patients each day
Projected peak
15,000
Date projection
was made
March 26
March 29
10,000
March 30
March 31
April 1
April 5
5,000
Reported
hospitalizations
0
April 1
15
May 1
15
Sources: Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (projected); The COVID Tracking Project (reported)
Lindsay Huth/THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
Experts attribute the relatively low numbers to California taking some of the earliest and most aggressive social-distancing measures in the country, as well as to its cities having less dense populations than New York’s. But they caution that the state is still far from its projected peak in cases, currently foreseen in May, and that, if the situation takes a turn for the worse, the death toll in a state with 40 million people could be astronomical.
“I hope and pray that doesn’t happen,” Dr. Grant Colfax, the director of San Francisco’s health department, said of a major outbreak. “It’s certainly still plausible.”
The number of people with coronavirus being treated in intensive care units across California hit 1,108 Tuesday, more than five times the number on March 27, when the California Department of Public Health began reporting the numbers.
Researchers at the University of Washington are currently projecting 1,783 people will die from the coronavirus in California by early August, compared with an initial projection of 6,100 made March 26, said Dr. Ali Mokdad, an epidemiologist at the school. That figure could fall even further.
By contrast, New York is projected to see 15,618 deaths in the same period, a number that has ticked upward in recent days, according to Dr. Mokdad.
After amassing more than 10,000 ventilators over the past few weeks in preparation for a surge, Gov. Gavin Newsom said Tuesday that he would lend up to 500 to other states. California has also launched plans in the past few weeks to add tens of thousands of new hospital beds and recruit additional health-care workers, many of them recently retired.
The most resilient metro region in California may be the San Francisco Bay Area, where six counties issued the nation’s first stay-at-home orders to a large population on March 16. Those six counties had 3,583 confirmed cases and 101 deaths, as of Tuesday, according to Johns Hopkins University data.
Dr. Robert Wachter, chair of the department of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, said technology companies played a large role in reducing social contact in the region and setting a take-it-serious tone.
By the end of the first week of March, Facebook, Google, Twitter, Microsoft and Salesforce were among those to institute work-from-home policies for most of their employees. Many tech companies have continued paying contract service workers such as janitors and cooks while they stayed home.
“Nobody feels like we are out of the woods, but unless something pretty big changes in the next couple of weeks then, yes, we have flattened the curve and we are likely to stay on the much more benign side of this than what you are seeing in other places,” Dr. Wachter said.
Officials in Los Angeles are more cautious about the future and still bearing down for what could be a surge of cases. The city issued stay-at-home orders on March 19, and the same day Mr. Newsom did so for the entire state. On Tuesday, L.A. county officials reported 22 new coronavirus deaths, among the highest since the pandemic began, bringing the death toll to 169. The city’s total number of cases is nearly 7,000.
Without everyone taking every possible precaution, our numbers could start skyrocketing,” said Los Angeles County public-health director Barbara Ferrer on Monday. She said this week would be critical to America’s second-most-populous metro area keeping the pandemic under control and urged residents to avoid venturing outside, even for grocery shopping.
Still, L.A.’s hospitals aren’t yet at capacity. Dr. Jeffrey Smith, chief operating officer of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Beverly Hills, said his team has been converting as many spaces as possible into critical-care beds to care for severely ill patients who may require ventilators.
“We are not really anticipating the surge for a couple of weeks, and so we are using this time to prepare just as quickly as we can,” he said.
Officials in Los Angeles are more cautious about the future and preparing for what could be a surge of cases in a couple of weeks’ time.
PHOTO: MARIO TAMA/GETTY IMAGES
Beyond California’s biggest cities, no major outbreak cluster has developed similar to the one in Westchester County, N.Y., which resulted in more than 1,000 people being quarantined after a well-attended bat mitzvah and funeral.
But that could change quickly. Officials are closely watching Sacramento County, where a church has been identified as the source of a significant outbreak.
“The models mean nothing if we begin to step back and change our behavior by getting cabin fever,” Mr. Newsom said in a press conference Monday.
-
Far less reliance on mass transit, it would seem to me, and lower population density.
'Collisions increase with the square of density.'
Bus seen in Minneapolis today says, "Essential travel only", whatever that means.
-
https://news.yahoo.com/gavin-newsom-declares-california-nation-160012325.html
-
https://news.yahoo.com/gavin-newsom-declares-california-nation-160012325.html
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/386779.php
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/newsom-praises-trump-leadership-hell-freezes-over/
-
Judicial Watch Exposes Deep State Leaks to Washington Post
Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, a distinguished public servant, was briefly national security advisor to President Trump until allegations surfaced in the Washington Post that he had been in communication with Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak.
Flynn’s lawyers alleged in a November 1, 2019, court filing that James Baker, the Pentagon’s Director of the Office of Net Assessment, “is believed to be the person who illegally leaked” the transcript of Flynn’s December 29, 2016, telephone calls with the ambassador to David Ignatius, a Washington Post reporter.
We went to court to uncover the details, and we now have received 143 pages of records from the Department of Defense that reveal extensive communications between Baker and Ignatius.
The Washington Post published Ignatius’ account of the calls on January 12, 2017, setting in motion a chain of events that led to Flynn’s February 13, 2017, firing as national security advisor, and subsequent prosecution for making false statements to the FBI about the calls. U.S. Attorney John Durham is reportedly investigating the leak of information targeting Flynn.
Citing “the government’s bad faith, vindictiveness and breach of the plea agreement,” Flynn’s attorney, Sidney Powell, moved in January 2020 to withdraw Flynn’s 2017 guilty plea during the Mueller investigation. Flynn claims he felt forced to plead guilty “when his son was threatened with prosecution and he exhausted his financial resources.” Last week, prosecutors provided Flynn’s defense team with documentation of this threat, according to additional papers Flynn’s lawyers filed on April 24, 2020, in support of the motion to withdraw.
We obtained the records in our November 2019 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed after the DOD failed to respond to a September 2019 request (Judicial Watch v. Department of Defense (No. 1:19-cv-03564)). We were seeking:
• All calendar entries of Director James Baker of the Office of Net Assessment.
• All records of communications between ONA Director James Baker and reporter David Ignatius.
The communications we requested occurred May 2015 through September 25, 2019.
The records we have received include an exchange on February 16, 2016, with the subject line “Ignatius,” in which Baker tells Pentagon colleague Zachary Mears, then-deputy chief of staff to Obama Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter, that he has “a long history with David” and talks with him regularly.
In an email exchange on October 1, 2018, in a discussion about artificial intelligence, Baker tells Ignatius: “David, please, as always, our discussions are completely off the record. If any of my observations strike you as worthy of mixing or folding into your own thinking, that is as usual fine.” Ignatius replies, “Understood. Thanks for talking with me.”
Here are Ignatius and Baker’s email exchanges by year:
• In 2015, Ignatius and Baker had a total of seven email conversations to set up meetings or calls, two simply to compliment one another and one exchange where Ignatius invited Baker to speak at the Aspen Strategy Group conference.
• In 2016, Ignatius and Baker had a total of 10 email exchanges to set up meetings or calls and two to compliment each other.
• In 2017, Ignatius and Baker had a total of 10 email exchanges to set up meetings, one exchange where Ignatius forwarded one of his articles, and one exchange where Ignatius asks Baker for his thoughts on the JCPOA (the Iran nuclear deal), because Baker wasn’t available on the phone.
• In 2018, Ignatius and Baker had a total of nine email exchanges to set up meetings, four where Ignatius forwarded articles and one where Ignatius asks Baker for tips on what to say at a quantum computing conference where he was speaking.
These records confirm that Mr. Baker was an anonymous source for Mr. Ignatius. Mr. Baker should be directly questioned about any and all leaks to his friend at the Washington Post.
In a related case, in October 2018 we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense seeking information about the September 2016 contract between the DOD and Stefan Halper, the Cambridge University professor identified as a secret FBI informant used by the Obama administration to spy on Trump’s presidential campaign. Halper also reportedly had high-level ties to both U.S. and British intelligence.
Government records show that the DOD’s Office of Net Assessment (ONA) paid Halper a total of $1,058,161 for four contracts that lasted from May 30, 2012, to March 29, 2018. More than $400,000 of the payments came between July 2016 and September 2017, after Halper reportedly offered Trump campaign volunteer George Papadopoulos work and a trip to London to entice him into disclosing information about alleged collusion between the Russian government and the Trump campaign.
Flynn’s attorney told the court that Baker was Halper’s “handler” in the Office of Net Assessment in the Pentagon.
In an interview with Lou Dobbs, I discussed the possibility that Judge Emmet Sullivan would look at all of this and throw the Flynn case out or that Attorney General William Barr would cancel the prosecution. “Flynn was ambushed,” I say in the interview. “He is the victim of a coordinated leak campaign.”
I know that President Trump is taking a good hard look at this. While the FBI is under renewed scrutiny over its disgraceful handling of the Flynn matter, it’s clear we need to look closely at the Defense Department as well.
Judicial Watch Sues California to Stop Governor Newsom’s Initiative to Provide $75 Million in Cash Benefits to Illegal Aliens
Leftists at the federal and state levels aren’t letting this health crisis go to waste, using it as a cover to enact their radical agenda. As usual, California is taking the lead.
We just filed a lawsuit in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, on behalf of two California taxpayers, Robin Crest and Howard Myers, asking the court to stop the state from expending $75 million of taxpayer funds to provide direct cash assistance to unlawfully present aliens (Crest et al. v. Newsom et al. (No. 20STCV16321)).
Our suit alleges that California Governor Gavin Newsom overstepped his authority and violated federal law when, without affirmative state legislative approval, he took executive action to create the “Disaster Relief Assistance for Immigrants Project” and provide cash benefits to illegal aliens who otherwise are ineligible for state or federal insurance or other benefits due to their unlawful presence in the United States.
On April 15, 2020, Governor Newsom announced his new executive initiative to provide direct assistance in the form of cash benefits to illegal aliens. The initiative, known as the “Disaster Relief Fund” or the “Disaster Relief Assistance for Immigrants Project,” would spend $75 million to provide direct cash payments to illegal aliens and cost an estimated additional $4.8 million to administer. Governor Newsom’s executive initiative would provide one-time cash benefits of $500 per adult / $1,000 per household to 150,000 unlawfully present aliens in California. These benefits are not provided to U.S. citizens residing in the state.
Under federal immigration law, 8 U.S.C. § 1621(a), unlawfully present aliens generally are ineligible for State or local public benefits. Section 1621(d) requires a state legislature to enact a state law that affirmatively provides for such benefits for illegal aliens:
A State may provide that an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States is eligible for any State or local public benefit … only through the enactment of a State law … which affirmatively provides for such eligibility.
Our suit alleges that the California State Legislature has not enacted any law that affirmatively provides that unlawfully present aliens are eligible for the $75 million of cash public benefits announced by Newsom.
The lawsuit seeks to enjoin California “from providing $75 million of taxpayer funds to unlawfully present aliens in violation of federal law and expending an estimated additional $4.8 million of taxpayer funds as well as additional taxpayer-financed resources on the administration of those payments.”
Governor Newsom has no legal authority on his own to spend state taxpayer money for cash payments to illegal aliens. The coronavirus challenge doesn’t give politicians a pass to violate the law. If California politicians want to give cash payments to illegal aliens, they must be accountable and transparent, and, as federal law requires, pass a law to do so.
-
second post
https://www.wnd.com/2020/05/fresno-fines-furniture-store-5000-selling-online-outside-pick-just-like-restaurant/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=PostTopSharingButtons&utm_campaign=websitesharingbuttons
-
https://patriotpost.us/articles/70455-newsoms-$1b-shady-mask-deal-with-china?mailing_id=5034&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.5034&utm_campaign=digest&utm_content=body
-
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-12/coronavirus-beaches-reopen-los-angeles-county-move-toward-new-normal
-
https://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2020/05/19/illegal-aliens-jam-phone-lines-as-california-offers-500-each-in-coronavirus-relief/#
I am going south of the border to demand my 12,500 pesos!
could buy a whole lot of tequila for that.
they can keep the worms though
-
Judicial Watch Sues to Stop California Governor Newsom’s “Vote by Mail” Mandate
Plaintiffs Include Voters and Congressional Candidate Darrell Issa
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced yesterday it filed a lawsuit to stop the special, statewide vote-by-mail mandate issued by California Governor Gavin Newsom. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit include former U.S. Representative Darrell Issa (a candidate in the upcoming November election) and individual California voters from across the political spectrum. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court in Sacramento against Gov. Newsom and California Secretary of State Alex Padilla (Darrell Issa, et al. v. Gavin Newsom, et al. (No. 2:20-cv-01044)).
The Judicial Watch complaint argues that Newsom’s Executive Order N-64-20, requiring all California counties to conduct all-mail ballot elections, violates the U.S. Constitution and California state law. According to the U.S. Constitution, only state legislatures may determine the “Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives,” and only state legislatures may establish the manner in which electors to the Electoral College are appointed. The lawsuit points out that “[n]either defendant in this case is a ‘Legislature,’” as required under the Constitution, and “[t]he California Legislature never delegated to [Newsom] its authority under the Elections Clause or Electors Clause to regulate the manner of conducting elections for senators, representatives, or presidential electors.”
Judicial Watch also contends that Newsom’s mandate violates the California Voter’s Choice Act of 2016, which grants counties the option to qualify for and opt in to a system of mail-in voting. Judicial Watch argues the law reflects the legislature’s deliberate choice to delegate to each county the decision about whether to qualify and opt in to the all-mail ballot system. During the March 3, 2020 primary election, only 15 of California’s 58 counties qualified and opted-in to the all-mail balloting system.
The lawsuit alleges the plaintiffs will be harmed by Newsom’s mandate for all-mail voting because it imposes an entirely new election system that ignores the extensive qualifications required by California law before a county can opt in to all-mail balloting. Judicial Watch argues its plaintiffs will be at risk of having their votes thrown out or diluted by invalid votes under Newsom’s illegal system, and that Mr. Issa will have to expend additional resources to respond to the illegal mandate during his campaign.
“Governor Newsom’s vote-by-mail mandate is unconstitutional and may cause the votes of countless voters to be thrown out or not counted,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “California law prohibits blindly mailing out ballots to every registered voter in the state. This scheme raises the risk of Election Day chaos as well as voter fraud.”
In 2018, California settled a federal lawsuit with Judicial Watch and began the process of removing up to 1.6 million inactive names from Los Angeles County’s voter rolls. Judicial Watch late last year sent notices to 11 additional California counties warning them of voting list maintenance issues. Judicial Watch recently sued North Carolina and Pennsylvania to force them to clean up their voter rolls.
###
-
Democrats Bite the Bullet Train
The coronavirus may finally kill Jerry Brown’s boondoggle to nowhere.
By The Editorial Board
May 29, 2020 6:50 pm ET
In the very small department of coronavirus silver linings, a budget crunch in California is causing Democrats to re-examine some wasteful spending. This includes, fiscal saints be praised, former Gov. Jerry Brown’s bullet train to nowhere.
Gov. Gavin Newsom last year scaled back progressive ambitions for a 500-mile high-speed train from Orange County to San Francisco due to cost overruns, logistical headaches and legal challenges. Instead the state would build a 171-mile starter train between Bakersfield and Merced in the Central Valley.
Democrats now want to shorten the line to the 120 miles of track already under construction and run lower-cost diesel trains in lieu of cleaner electric ones. Recall that the train’s original purpose was to reduce carbon emissions. California’s 2008 bond initiative also said the train “will not require operating subsidy.”
The state High-Speed Rail Authority now projects the 171-mile stretch would cost $20 billion to build and lose between $40 million and $90 million a year. Even that assumes millions of people living in the Central Valley each year will ride the train to Merced and then use commuter rail to connect to San Jose.
As economic consultants William Grindley and Bill Warren have pointed out, a round-trip between Bakersfield and San Jose would take 12 hours and 10 minutes and cost $189 without a subsidy and $104 with a subsidy.
Assembly Democrats are pushing legislation that would allow $5 billion to be redirected from the Central Valley choo-choo to commuter trains in Southern California and Bay Area. This would relieve highway congestion and perhaps ease housing demand in dense coastal cities. Democrats in Sacramento deserve credit for setting new pandemic priorities.
Meantime, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo this week hit up President Trump to finance retrofitted rail tunnels under the Hudson River, an expansion of the Second Avenue subway—the first stretch cost $2.5 billion per mile—and a tram from Manhattan to LaGuardia Airport. Mr. Cuomo says New York needs a public-works blowout to recover from the pandemic.
But unemployed bartenders, barbers and baristas can’t quickly become engineers. And if he wants to put laid-off construction workers back to work, how about approving the three natural gas pipelines that he has blocked that don’t need government money?
-
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/los-angeles-mayor-eric-garcetti-013740738.html
-
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/gov-newsom-wants-to-close-prisons-as-pandemic-shreds-californias-budget/ar-BB14IeL6?ocid=sf2
-
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-13/when-silicon-valley-goes-dark-this-time-there-will-be-no-refuge
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/sheriff-warns-la-county-cuts-will-eliminate-sexual-assault-investigations-unit/
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/newsom-pardons-13-commutes-21-sentences-including-murderers/
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zq_z6ldrKmk
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zq_z6ldrKmk
Live from Santa Monica
The play-by-play person never clarifies if it's number one or number two they are broadcasting.
-
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/07/california-release-18000-prisoners-end-august-slow-spread-covid-19/
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7BDY_folcQ&feature=share
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/santiago-cruz-inmate-serving-125-years-to-life-in-prison-released-due-to-coronavirus/
-
How do you study California and Gov Newsom without a sanity benchmark, like South Dakota and Gov Kristi Noem?
https://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/982383/1
Kristi Noem: South Dakota Opts Out of Trump's Unemployment Bonus
(https://www.newsmax.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=6846a7ba-0eec-461e-984f-de477d25285b)
South Dakota's Governor Kristi Noem holds the U.S flag riding a horse during the Monster Energy Team Challenge, on July 11, 2020.
Read Newsmax: Gov. Kristi Noem: South Dakota Opts Out of Trump's Unemployment Bonus
Urgent: Do you approve of Pres. Trump’s job performance? Vote Here Now!
South Dakota is the first state to decline President Donald Trump's executive order to restart the coronavirus unemployment bonus at a rate of up to $400 per week, The Washington Post reported.
Republican Gov. Kristi Noem, a rising star in the party, declined the bonus payments for those unemployed in her state because it never shut down during the global coronavirus pandemic.
"My administration is very grateful for the additional flexibility that this effort would have provided, but South Dakota is in the fortunate position of not needing to accept it," Noem said.
----
Nancy Pelosi and Gavin Newsom not asked for comment.
-
There are parts of America that are still America!
How do you study California and Gov Newsom without a sanity benchmark, like South Dakota and Gov Kristi Noem?
https://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/982383/1
Kristi Noem: South Dakota Opts Out of Trump's Unemployment Bonus
(https://www.newsmax.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=6846a7ba-0eec-461e-984f-de477d25285b)
South Dakota's Governor Kristi Noem holds the U.S flag riding a horse during the Monster Energy Team Challenge, on July 11, 2020.
Read Newsmax: Gov. Kristi Noem: South Dakota Opts Out of Trump's Unemployment Bonus
Urgent: Do you approve of Pres. Trump’s job performance? Vote Here Now!
South Dakota is the first state to decline President Donald Trump's executive order to restart the coronavirus unemployment bonus at a rate of up to $400 per week, The Washington Post reported.
Republican Gov. Kristi Noem, a rising star in the party, declined the bonus payments for those unemployed in her state because it never shut down during the global coronavirus pandemic.
"My administration is very grateful for the additional flexibility that this effort would have provided, but South Dakota is in the fortunate position of not needing to accept it," Noem said.
----
Nancy Pelosi and Gavin Newsom not asked for comment.
-
State Panel to Investigate Complaints of Calpers Investment Conflict
California’s Fair Political Practices Commission says it will probe conflict-of-interest and disclosure complaints tied to former investment chief Ben Meng
Several board members at Calpers are seeking more information about the circumstances surrounding the resignation of former investment chief Ben Meng. The pension fund’s headquarters are in Sacramento, Calif.
PHOTO: MAX WHITTAKER FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
By Heather Gillers and Dawn Lim
Updated Aug. 17, 2020 6:35 pm ET
SAVE
PRINT
TEXT
111
California officials said they opened an investigation into whether the former investment chief for the nation’s largest pension fund violated state conflict-of-interest laws by holding personal investments in private-equity firms in which the fund is also an investor.
Several board members at the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, known as Calpers, are seeking more information about the circumstances surrounding the Aug. 5 resignation of former investment chief Ben Meng, including when Chief Executive Marcie Frost learned about possible investment conflicts and what procedures the fund has in place to keep investment officials from running afoul of conflict-of-interest rules.
Calpers this month referred an internal review concerning Mr. Meng’s personal investments to California’s Fair Political Practices Commission, according to a person familiar with the matter. The commission said Monday it received two formal complaints regarding Mr. Meng’s investments and his disclosure of them, and will investigate both. The commission investigates civil violations of laws concerning political campaign spending disclosures and public officials’ conflicts of interest and can levy fines of up to $5,000 per violation.
Mr. Meng’s abrupt exit sent shock waves through the pension fund, which has grappled with chronic turnover and has on hand only about 70% of assets needed to meet future pension promises.
NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP
Markets
A pre-markets primer packed with news, trends and ideas. Plus, up-to-the-minute market data.
PREVIEW
SUBSCRIBE
Unlike his predecessors, Mr. Meng had investment experience on Wall Street. In his first full year, Calpers reversed a streak of underperformance relative to other large pension plans, earning 4.7% for the 12 months ended June 30 despite losses in the first quarter during the early days of the pandemic. Months before his departure, he had embarked on a push to address Calpers’s shortfall and hit the pension’s ambitious investment target by borrowing against the fund.
One focus of the review, launched in April, was Mr. Meng’s personal ownership of Blackstone Group Inc. shares in 2019 during the period Calpers pledged $750 million to a private-equity fund managed by the firm, a person said. Mr. Meng disclosed between $10,001 and $100,000 of shares on forms submitted shortly after he became investment chief in January 2019 and in April of this year.
A Calpers spokesman declined to comment on any role Mr. Meng played in the pension fund’s Blackstone investment and on the commission’s investigation.
Ben Meng stepped down as Calpers’s investment chief on Aug. 5.
PHOTO: CALPERS
There is no evidence that Mr. Meng attempted to benefit personally from his work at Calpers. Public officials can run afoul of state law simply by participating in government decisions that create the appearance of a conflict of interest. Tom Byrne, who chaired the New Jersey State Investment Council between 2015 and 2018, said he left the room during discussions on Blackstone and recused himself from decisions involving the firm. The investment firm he runs held shares in Blackstone for clients around that time.
Calpers has faced pressure to avoid the appearance of impropriety ever since a bruising scandal in the 2000s that led Calpers’s former CEO to plead guilty to involvement in a bribery scheme. As an investor, Calpers has pushed companies to practice sound corporate governance.
Calpers asks investment staff to disclose personal investments upon arriving and then annually for the previous year. Individuals take mandatory training on conflicts of interest, and officials have opted to recuse themselves on investments for a variety of reasons, people familiar with the pension’s practices said.
A Calpers spokesperson declined to say whether Mr. Meng’s initial disclosure of Blackstone shares, more than a month before the March 2019 Blackstone commitment, raised any flags for Calpers, or whether the fund took steps to protect him from running afoul of conflict-of-interest rules.
Mr. Meng said at the start of his tenure that he intended to expand Calpers’s private-equity portfolio, a longstanding Calpers goal as the fund seeks to earn annual returns of 7% in an era of low interest rates. Blackstone ranks among the largest private-equity managers.
Calpers didn’t flag any problems with Mr. Meng holding Blackstone shares until 2020, a person familiar with the matter said, and he subsequently sold the stock.
Institutions can help prevent problems by monitoring investments, pre-screening decisions and flagging potential conflicts for officials in real time, experts said.
“If you’re going to say [officials] can continue to own stock, proactively be involved,” said Robert Rizzi, a partner with the law firm Steptoe & Johnson LLP who teaches government ethics at Harvard Law School. “Otherwise you’re just creating a trap for the unwary.”
An Aug. 2 post on the blog Naked Capitalism called attention to Mr. Meng’s disclosures. In the following days, Calpers referred its internal findings to the state, according to a person familiar with the matter. A Calpers spokesman said that action wasn’t prompted by the blogger.
Several board members are questioning the way Calpers has handled the issue.
State controller Betty Yee called for a review of Calpers’s conflict-of-interest policies, “the CEO’s oversight and implementation of these policies, and any additional safeguards necessary to ensure this does not happen again.”
Another board member, Margaret Brown, said, “I’d like to know when did this come to the Calpers’ staff’s attention, who noticed it, what was done, what procedures and policies we have in place.”
Board Chairman Henry Jones said, “Our CEO advised me of this issue when she became aware of it. It had been scheduled to be brought to the Board upon completion of the investigation.” He previously said the issues over Mr. Meng’s investments are “private personnel matters and already have been addressed according to our internal compliance protocols.”
People close to Mr. Meng said that even before the internal review the investment chief was worn down by the public spotlight. Mr. Meng came to Calpers from a job as deputy chief investment officer of China’s State Administration of Foreign Exchange, the agency in charge of the country’s more than $3 trillion in foreign reserves. Before that he worked at Calpers from 2008 to 2015 and had stints at Morgan Stanley as well as Barclays Global Investors. Mr. Meng is from China and became a U.S. citizen.
As U.S.-China ties soured, Mr. Meng’s past role with China’s State Administration of Foreign Exchange prompted some Washington politicians to call attention to Calpers’s Chinese investments. To try to fend off the attacks, Calpers representatives spoke with various Washington lawmakers.
In February, Calpers representatives met with Rep. Jim Banks’s staff in Washington. The Indiana Republican had questioned Calpers’s holdings of Chinese companies and Mr. Meng’s ties to China. The Calpers representatives told Rep. Banks’s staff that they were concerned Mr. Meng would step down if the criticisms kept coming, people said. Mr. Banks’s staff said this wasn’t a personal attack but an effort to highlight a national security issue.
Mr. Meng confided to acquaintances that he was troubled by that mounting scrutiny, associates said. After the conflict-of-interest questions became public, Mr. Meng decided to resign rather than deal with another controversy, people familiar with the matter said. “It’s important for me to focus on my health and on my family,” Mr. Meng said in a statement, “and move on to the next chapter in my life.”
On a call with investment staff this month, interim investment chief Dan Bienvenue said Calpers would continue with its investment plan. Calpers hopes to find a replacement who is also an experienced investor, said a person familiar with Calpers’s plans.
Write to Heather Gillers at heather.gillers@wsj.com and Dawn Lim at dawn.lim@wsj.com
Copyright ©2020 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
MOST POPULAR VIDEOS
[
-
suppose Sharpton et al will be invited for their input:
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2020/08/30/california-to-set-up-task-force-to-examine-slavery-reparations-n865355
I ain't paying .
-
California’s Radical Indoctrination
A bill would establish a K-12 curriculum in the ‘four I’s of oppression.’
By The Editorial Board
Aug. 30, 2020 7:10 pm ET
Conservatives and fair-minded liberals are alarmed that high schools are drawing up plans to teach the “1619 project,” the New York Times ’ revisionist account of race and the American founding, in history classes. The reality is turning out to be worse. The largest state in the union is poised to become one of the first to mandate ethnic studies for all high-school students, and the model curriculum makes the radical “1619 project” look moderate and balanced.
Last year California’s Assembly passed its ethnic-studies bill known as AB 331 by a 63-8 vote. Then the state department of education put forward a model curriculum so extreme and ethnocentric that the state Senate’s Democratic supermajority balked. The curriculum said among other things that “within Ethnic Studies, scholars are often very critical of the system of capitalism as research has shown that Native people and people of color are disproportionately exploited within the system.”
The bill was put on ice, but protests and riots in recent months gave Sacramento’s mavens of racial division more leverage. The education department delivered a new draft model curriculum this month, and AB 331 has been revived. It passed a Senate committee Aug. 20 and is expected to go before the full body soon. If Gov. Gavin Newsom signs it, the legislation would require all school districts to offer a semester-long ethnic studies class starting in 2025.
The model curriculum now on the education department’s website says the course should “build new possibilities for post-imperial life that promotes collective narratives of transformative resistance.” Yes, this is a course for K-12 students. It suggests teachers provide “examples of systems of power, which can include economic systems like capitalism and social systems like patriarchy.” Students can then be taught “the four ‘I’s of oppression”—ideological, institutional, interpersonal and internalized.
The state guidance includes more than 200 pages of approved course outlines. Some of these seem to mandate student political activities, potentially raising First Amendment concerns. “Students acquire tools to become positive actors in their communities to address a contemporary issue and present findings in a public forum,” says one outline. Among the approved topics: “Racism, LGBTQ rights, immigration rights, access to quality health care, income inequality,” and so on. What about the fifth “I” of indoctrination?
It’s not a coincidence that many radical left movements are infused with anti-Semitism. They posit theories of control by shadowy capitalist groups that often echo anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. One course outline tips its hat at this. “Students will write a paper detailing certain events in American history,” it says, “that have led to Jewish and Irish Americans gaining racial privilege.”
This is ugly stuff, a force-feeding to teenagers of the anti-liberal theories that have been percolating in campus critical studies departments for decades. Enforced identity politics and “intersectionality” are on their way to replacing civic nationalism as America’s creed. Liberals who consider themselves moderate and don’t understand the sense of urgency and assault felt by so many Americans ought to read this curriculum. And responsible statesmen in Sacramento ought to stop it.
-
Hard to believe either Calif or K-12 could get worse. Did anyone tell them the 1619 project was debunked and the author admitted she was at least partly joking?
Tell the black and minority kids that can't make it without government help, don't bother try.
Tell the white kids they have privilege with the police and society, don't need to work hard or follow the rules.
What could go wrong?
-
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/09/the-decline-and-fall-of-california-in-two-maps.php
-
https://babylonbee.com/news/u-haul-introduces-armored-war-rigs-for-californians-trying-to-flee-states-post-apocalyptic-wasteland
-
Posted that on my FB page three days ago!
-
(https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/058/277/229/original/76e282ff80420ac4.png?1600090590)
It's close though.
-
(https://i1.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2020/09/lHEX4Ur.gif?resize=600%2C435&ssl=1)
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/09/the-week-in-pictures-desperate-despacito-edition.php
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeCaYaG-ZRM
-
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/mcclintock-on-the-ballot-propositions/
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/california-halting-new-unemployment-claims-for-2-weeks-during-reset-with-staff-technology/
-
Hope for California’s Schools
Gavin Newsom vetoes a K-12 curriculum in Marxist indoctrination.
By The Editorial Board
Oct. 1, 2020 7:26 pm ET
Since California became a one-party state, a major responsibility of the Governor has been to protect its citizens from extremist legislation that sails through the Democratic-supermajority Legislature. Former Gov. Jerry Brown sometimes played that role, and Gov. Gavin Newsom did the same Wednesday by vetoing an anti-American K-12 curriculum mandate.
The bill, known as AB 331, would have made a semester-long course in “ethnic studies” a graduation requirement at the state’s public schools. The history of ethnic groups in America is rich and fascinating, but the model curriculum designed by the state Board of Education touches on that history only tangentially. Instead it’s an openly political document that champions racial identity politics, indicts the American creed, and orders students to join modern left-wing activist movements.
Mr. Newsom put it more delicately in his veto message: “Last year, I expressed concern that the initial draft of the model curriculum was insufficiently balanced and inclusive and needed to be substantially amended. In my opinion, the latest draft, which is currently out for review, still needs revision.”
The curriculum recommends teaching students “the four ‘I’s of oppression” and academic concepts like “intersectionality,” “internalized oppression” and “transformative resistance.” Instead of a dynamic, imperfect, pluralistic republic with common ideals, students would be taught to see their country as an organized conspiracy against victim groups.
Some of the most vocal opposition came from Jewish organizations. The first draft had promoted viciously anti-Israel content. The second draft contained an assignment on Jewish and Irish Americans “gaining racial privilege.” A letter to Mr. Newsom in September argued that the curriculum could fuel anti-Semitism.
Disgracefully, AB 331 passed the California state Legislature with supermajorities—33-4 in the Senate and 62-12 in the Assembly. Yet the Legislature by tradition hasn’t overridden a Governor’s veto in decades. Mr. Newsom’s veto message says he wants a more balanced curriculum that “is inclusive of all communities.”
We hope the state drops the effort. This enterprise cannot be corrected merely by trying again to address bias against Jews, which is a symptom of deeper rot in the post-modern project of identity politics. Unless California tears up the curriculum and goes back to the drawing board, the course would indoctrinate and divide. Credit to Mr. Newsom for bucking pressure and giving American ideals a fighting chance in Golden State schools.
-
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/10/californias-illogical-reparations-bill/
"In that context, Assembly Bill 3121 can be understood — as a loud virtue signal to make up for failed responses to concrete crises."
or a concerted effort to keep the Black vote by promising to redistribute wealth to them.
-
California Utility May Cut Power to 1 Million People
By The Associated Press
October 24, 2020 Updated: October 24, 2020
Print
SAN FRANCISCO—Pacific Gas & Electric may cut power to over 1 million people on Sunday to prevent the chance of sparking wildfires, the utility announced Friday.
The nation’s largest utility said it could black out customers in 38 counties—including most of the San Francisco Bay Area—as weather forecasts called for a return of bone-dry, gusty weather that carries the threat of downing or fouling power lines or other equipment that in recent years have been blamed for igniting massive and deadly blazes in central and Northern California.
The safety shutoffs were expected to begin as early as Sunday morning and last into Tuesday, affecting 466,000 homes and businesses, or more than 1 million residents assuming between two and three people per home or business customer.
Cuts are predicted to encompass parts of the Sacramento Valley, the northern and central Sierra Nevada, upper elevations of the San Francisco Bay Area, the Santa Cruz Mountains, the Central Coast and portions of southern Kern County.
The projected shutoffs included 19,000 customers in parts of Butte County, where a 2018 blaze ignited by PG&E equipment destroyed much of the town of Paradise and killed 85 people.
Forecasts call for the “the driest humidity levels and the strongest winds of the wildfire season thus far,” a PG&E statement said.
Glass Fire burns a hillside
The Glass Fire burns a hillside above Silverado Trail in St. Helena, Calif., on Sept. 27, 2020. (Noah Berger/AP Photo)
The National Weather Service issued red flag warnings for many areas, predicting winds of 35 mph or higher in San Francisco and lower elevations and up to 70 mph in some mountains. The concern is that any spark could be blown into flames sweeping through tinder-dry brush and forestland.
“On a scale of 1 to 10, this event is a 9,” Craig Clements, director of San Jose State University’s Fire Weather Lab, told the Bay Area News Group. “Historically our biggest fires are in October. We are in a critical period.”
The National Weather Service said the conditions could equal those during devastating fires in California’s wind country in 2017 and last year’s Kincade Fire.
Fire officials said PG&E transmission lines sparked that Sonoma County fire last October, which destroyed hundreds of homes and caused nearly 100,000 people to flee.
Epoch Times Photo
A Pacific Gas & Electric sign is displayed on the exterior of a PG&E building in San Francisco, Calif., on April 16, 2020. (Jeff Chiu/AP Photo)
The public safety power shutoff, or PSPS, would be the fifth this year, including one that began Wednesday and was scheduled to end late Friday.
Southern California, meanwhile, is continuing to cool down with patchy drizzle. Forecasters said light rain was expected Saturday night through early Monday, with light mountain snow possible Sunday night, followed by Santa Ana winds.
Eight of the 10 deadliest fires in California history have occurred in October or November. Some of the largest also have occurred since August of this year.
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, known as Cal Fire, said 5,500 firefighters were working Friday to fully contain 19 wildfires. Two-dozen new fires were contained Thursday despite red flag conditions.
More 8,600 wildfires have scorched well over 6,400 square miles and destroyed about 9,200 buildings in California this year. There have been 31 deaths.
All of the huge fires have been fully or significantly contained, but more than 6,000 firefighters remain committed to 19 blazes, including a dozen major incidents, Cal Fire said.
Many of this year’s devastating fires were started by thousands of dry lightning strikes. But some of the fires remain under investigation for potential electrical causes.
Epoch Times staff contributed to this report.
-
The IGS poll found a majority of registered voters (53 percent) said they would vote for Prop 13 if it were up for another vote, while just 18 percent of voters said they would oppose it..
The IGS poll also found astonishingly high discontent with the state’s taxes and regulations. An all-time record 81 percent of respondents said state and local taxes are too high with most of those voters (48 percent) saying taxes are "much too high." Voters resoundingly agreed (78 percent) that onerous taxes are driving people and businesses out of the state.
https://escholarship.org/content/qt9pc8r575/qt9pc8r575.pdf?utm_campaign=Unleash%20Prosperity%20Hotline%20%23167&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Mail
California’s Proposition 13 was enacted in 1978 by almost two-thirds of Golden State voters. This ushered in the era of tax cutting throughout the nation – and ushered in the Reagan Revolution.
For more than four decades now the left in California has detested this property tax cap and has blamed every problem from lousy schools, to homelessness to forest fires on the tax limit. At least a dozen times the leftists have tried to repeal or rollback this symbol of tax restraint – and everytime they have lost. In the most liberal state in the country.
This year a ballot measure to weaken Pro p 13 was backed with millions of dollars of ads financed by unions as well as Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s foundation. Voters stomped it by a margin of 700,000 votes.
This week a new poll from the Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies found voters increasingly identify the root of California’s problems as excessive taxation and regulation.
Who knew?
-
"This year a ballot measure to weaken Pro p 13 was backed with millions of dollars of ads financed by unions as well as Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s foundation. Voters stomped it by a margin of 700,000 votes. "
Disgusting
Zuckerberg
as for unions no surprise there
-
https://patriotpost.us/articles/76330-another-soros-backed-da-undermines-rule-of-law-2020-12-09
-
most Californians see its future as tarnished. In a wide-ranging new survey of attitudes toward the economy, 6 in 10 residents said they expect California’s children to be worse off financially than their parents.
https://www.ppic.org/publication/ppic-statewide-survey-californians-and-their-economic-well-being-december-2020/cVghZ0YiL4jt8usD4sQDKgY3PXoEqfepez51X29-Hc953k2-46miWmr5T-3u6oDmktNfqIFmo_0Cxc12uEaU0AdMtXB0vIGTBRMDNHXhROcowtg2KgFA36BRHnL2ypIUN0vxlnLWCe5aFij5Q8b1mngIr761m-8ycdSTc1PY6InSVmvzYbLUiP17XaTeQY16lxvfwQs1wxBLw7sh1n5QH4YlGsHFeDMDkqB9Gne5Pt-GgbZkepmY1UNzy8s4PMf2-WS_Q
—----------------
Isn't leaving less and less opportunity to the next generation what they are voting for?
That great land is losing its best people.
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9062651/Judge-deals-blow-Gavin-Newsoms-lockdown-order-landmark-strip-club-ruling.html
-
to heck with article
where are the pictures of the girls?
do they take tips in form of bitcoin?
come to think of it
this might be good way to promote cryptocurrenct
strippers for cryptos,,,,,
-
https://cms.zerohedge.com/political/california-sheriff-refuses-release-1800-inmates-after-judges-order?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9062651/Judge-deals-blow-Gavin-Newsoms-lockdown-order-landmark-strip-club-ruling.html
Not all heroes wear capes! Some wear even less!
-
https://nationalfile.com/california-lawmakers-want-wealth-tax-that-will-follow-taxpayers-when-they-inevitably-move-to-cheaper-states/
-
how obnoxious
liberal morons
so as people escape
due to high taxes their response is to tax ("the rich")
more :roll:
screw most of Hollywood
-
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/12/25/george-clooney-trashes-trump-as-a-charismatic-carnival-barker/
george
how about you stop telling us who to vote for, how to live , and pay your taxes and with NO deductions pal
just
pay
your "fair share"
which should be hundreds of millions a yr
-
https://i0.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2020/12/IMG_3677.jpeg?resize=553%2C600&ssl=1
(https://i0.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2020/12/IMG_3677.jpeg?resize=553%2C600&ssl=1)
-
How perfect!
-
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/dec/31/california-immigration-mexico-coronavirus-us?utm_source=pocket-newtab
-
(https://mcusercontent.com/dc8d30edd7976d2ddf9c2bf96/images/ae5c12a8-5495-4cad-a967-bd1921e674b5.jpg)
https://mcusercontent.com/dc8d30edd7976d2ddf9c2bf96/images/ae5c12a8-5495-4cad-a967-bd1921e674b5.jpg
-
worth a try
though likely a waste of time:
https://www.westernjournal.com/young-not-stupid-newsoms-recall-election-almost-certain-happens-next/
-
worth a try
though likely a waste of time:
https://www.westernjournal.com/young-not-stupid-newsoms-recall-election-almost-certain-happens-next/
This source says he still has about 50% approval.
https://www.ppic.org/blog/what-approval-ratings-say-about-recalling-governor-newsom/
I have to think the opponents might all show up to vote, making it a more even bet.
Remember, the choice isn't Newsom or a Trump. They will still elect a liberal, so people who like a different liberal can vote to recall too.
-
https://www.targetliberty.com/2021/03/the-only-growth-industry-in-san.html?m=1
-
Apparently someone was murdered in his home a couple blocks from where we lived until October. There was a police chase with four arrests that entailed a neighborhood lockdown.
-
why not ?
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/03/24/report-tom-steyer-polls-a-run-against-gavin-newsom-in-california-recall/
( I'll tell you why not - he is just as bad for the state as Newsom )
-
https://twitter.com/BoardwalkVenice/status/1382347335397642240
-
".https://twitter.com/BoardwalkVenice/status/1382347335397642240 "
what is going on ?
-
https://twitter.com/BoardwalkVenice/status/1382347335397642240
Lawless America. Victims can call 911 if they need protection and have a social worker come out with 3 month lead time for an appointment.
I pay more than 100% of my take home income in property taxes. I wonder how much property tax these oceanfront "homeless camp" residents pay.
-
"I pay more than 100% of my take home income in property taxes. I wonder how much property tax these oceanfront "homeless camp" residents pay."
people like us have zero representation in Federal government
Reagan was an exception
that was it as far as I can remember
Trump for me - not really
W with cut in gains tax - a bit
on the Dem side - never
we are only looked at as a source of money for themselves
in the end few to no Republican ever did squat for me in the realm of taxation
like Rush used to say - the treasury is the source of their power
-
"we are only looked at as a source of money for themselves
in the end few to no Republican ever did squat for me in the realm of taxation
like Rush used to say - the treasury is the source of their power"
It is even more cynical than that. Revenues to the Treasury actually grow faster under pro-growth policies - and they don't care. They don't really want more money to pay for all the programs; they want their own power and control over all of it, and all of us.
-
Covid-19 Rates in Los Angeles Have Gone From Worst to Among the Best
Theories on why infections, deaths and hospitalizations have plummeted include high immunity from past spikes and a less infectious variant
Los Angeles County, home of the Santa Monica Pier, now has one of the lowest rates of infection per capita of the nation’s 10 most populous counties.
LOS ANGELES—At the start of the year here, hospitals were full, restaurants were empty, and three times more Covid-19 cases were being reported every day than in any other U.S. county.
Now Los Angeles County has one of the lowest rates of infection per capita of the nation’s 10 most populous counties. Restaurants are packed, hospitals have open beds, and researchers are studying possible reasons for one of the pandemic’s biggest turnarounds, which has occurred despite vaccination rates lower than the national average. Their theories include high immunity caused by previous spikes and a common variant in California that may be keeping out more infectious strains.
As case rates have fallen across the country in recent months, California has led the way. It now has the lowest per capita Covid infection rate in the continental U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, thanks in large part to Los Angeles County, where a quarter of the state’s 40 million people live.
About 20% of Covid tests were coming back positive in Los Angeles County in early January, with more than 15,000 new cases and 250 deaths reported most weekdays and more than 1,600 intensive care beds taken by coronavirus patients. In the past week, the positivity rate has been hovering around or below 1%. There are around 400 new cases and fewer than 50 deaths reported most days and just under 500 people are currently hospitalized with Covid-19.
“It’s a dramatic decrease,” said Barbara Ferrer, Los Angeles County’s director of public health. She said it would take months before there were definitive answers about why the Covid rates have come down so sharply, but several factors are likely at play.
Over the course of the pandemic, Los Angeles County has confirmed 1.18 million Covid-19 cases. But close to 40% of the population may have actually been infected already, said Shira Shafir, an associate professor of epidemiology at the University of California, Los Angeles. That isn’t high enough for herd immunity, but may have left a large chunk of population not susceptible to the virus.
In addition, a California variant, which emerged late last year as a cause for rising infections here, may be keeping out the more dangerous U.K. variant that has driven rising infection rates in the Midwest, according to health researchers. The California variant is 20% more transmissible than the original strain of Covd-19, while the U.K. variant, is about 50% more transmissible, according to the CDC.
Vaccinations are spreading fast but lag the national average. Just over 37% of Los Angeles County residents 16 or older received at least one dose as of April 9. According to the latest data from the CDC, 51.5% of all American adults have received at least one dose
“You have fewer susceptible people, more people getting vaccinated, and we’re still holding steady on our safety requirements,” Dr. Ferrer said.
Unlike states that reopened their economies entirely last month, such as Texas and Arizona, California has been slow to relax regulations. And Los Angeles officials have chosen to keep some in place even when state rules allowed them to scale back.
Restaurants were closed, even for outdoor dining, for more than two months over the winter, along with schools, gyms, museums and movie theaters. Those measures helped the county to get where it is today, Dr. Ferrer said.
In the past few weeks, Los Angeles has been one of the last major metro areas in the country to begin reopening. Public school students are returning to classrooms part-time, while restaurants, gyms and museums are welcoming limited numbers of people. In trendy neighborhoods like Echo Park, would-be diners are crowding sidewalks, waiting for an available table.
“Every day, I had to check the numbers to see if I could cover payroll or not,” Armando De La Torre, 61, who owns a small chain of taco restaurants in Los Angeles called Guisados, said of the situation a few months ago. “Now things are getting better every week.”
Hospitals—which in January were so overrun with Covid patients that hallways, waiting rooms and doorways were used to treat patients—now have more than 1,000 available beds.
But health researchers and local officials said the threat of another surge in cases will persist until at least 70% of the population is vaccinated or have some form of immunity.
“I think for right now, until we get more of the population vaccinated and approach more towards herd immunity, we always have a certain level of risk of outbreak and additional surges,” said Johnese Spisso, chief executive of the UCLA Hospital System.
Dr. Ferrer said she remained particularly concerned about low vaccination rates among Black and Latino men, 19% and 17% of whom have received at least one shot, respectively. They have also been among the groups hardest hit by Covid-19.
The public health director said she works at least once a week at a county vaccination site and often encounters people who don’t think they need to be vaccinated, either because they already had the virus or don’t believe they will get it.
“We’re not going to have herd immunity until June,” she said. “But as more people get vaccinated, we’ll be in a better position to hold our own against the virus.”
MORE ON THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC
-
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-04-23/california-national-guard-fighter-jet-election-coronavirus-protests
-
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/05/the-next-reality-candidate/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202021-05-07&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart
-
https://rumble.com/vgzd3l-oan-poll-finds-over-60-percent-of-people-want-tulsi-gabbard-to-replace-gavi.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=One+America+News+Network&ep=1
-
When I was living in Hermosa Beach, visiting this was a beautiful drive/ride.
https://www.palosverdespulse.com/blog/2020/10/25/wayfarers-chapel-architecture-and-history-by-philip-wahba?fbclid=IwAR3tMpr4VGoJM4ZxWpzTPTyNS906DOJLFe_iReEgb6vY7roR9EJbHHjUN84
-
https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/la-county-sheriff-will-issue-conceal-carry-permits-homicides-skyrocket-95-2020?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=brief-FP&utm_campaign=dailyam&utm_content=2021-06-05&ats_es=639c4dfcf4902e5be56a6038ef508105
-
https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/californias-budget-will-give-illegal-aliens-free-healthcare_3882063.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-07-01&mktids=b869ce14e25264f8ffc9215e3dc220c6&est=Sy2vqVLZypo2ccrGRhrRnv%2BbxMyBZjDXOnS9YHjuppIFwuWtvcc3NKaGxd9%2BM2j1zA1F
-
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/jul/12/california-ban-students-who-refuse-wear-masks/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=Ir96CV3OAh8y7Rlyd5YOcVsXl5735exmPDzEvSpso8ttzv%2BRd9%2FciYpYvT5vEXgj&bt_ts=1626138041804
-
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/los-angeles-county-reimposes-indoor-mask-mandate-including-for-vaccinated-people/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=breaking&utm_campaign=newstrack&utm_term=24463904
-
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/07/horror-woman-screams-attacked-robbed-carjacked-san-francisco-bay-area-parking-garage-broad-daylight-video/
But the victim probably is a registered dem.
So she voted for this!
-
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/watch-california-shoplifters-stroll-out-tj-maxx-arms-full-merchandise?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter
-
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2021/07/26/barbara-boxer-attacked-robbed-in-california-n2593141
-
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/jul/27/larry-elder-leads-gop-pack-likely-voters-split-new/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=evening&utm_term=evening&utm_content=evening&bt_ee=M5Yt1phGDFOIWRxNzaHk9NICc7I4i2oC3BID2xKznvXVXqgmO%2F5igFqLziNnCiEG&bt_ts=1627417543710
-
When does Gov Larry Elder get his own thread? ) ) )
For him to have a serious podium will affect way more than California!
KABC poll, 51% Remove - 40% Don't.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2021/governor/ca/2021-california-governor-recall-election-7360.html
Sean Trende of RCP looks at both sides of it (before that poll changed everything). Concludes Gov. Larry is a real possibility:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2021/08/05/could_newsom_actually_be_recalled_146197.html
They mail a ballot to everyone (and then some). Dems greatly outnumber R's. More energy is presumed to be on the remove side. How excited can you get about keeping Newsome?
I would add, the 35-40% of Californians who lean Republican would be one hell of a state in themselves, enough people to win an election in any other state. They must be more than a little bit frustrated being ruled by the Left.
Here's your new Gov:
https://issuesinsights.com/2021/08/04/the-governor-california-voters-dont-deserve-but-surely-need/
(https://i1.wp.com/issuesinsights.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Screen-Shot-2021-08-03-at-1.13.33-PM.png?w=806&ssl=1)
More conservative than Trump but hard to label a white nationalist.
I sent him $100 the day he announced. electElder.com
-
Mail in voting=Newsome wins.
When does Gov Larry Elder get his own thread? ) ) )
For him to have a serious podium will affect way more than California!
KABC poll, 51% Remove - 40% Don't.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2021/governor/ca/2021-california-governor-recall-election-7360.html
Sean Trende of RCP looks at both sides of it (before that poll changed everything). Concludes Gov. Larry is a real possibility:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2021/08/05/could_newsom_actually_be_recalled_146197.html
They mail a ballot to everyone (and then some). Dems greatly outnumber R's. More energy is presumed to be on the remove side. How excited can you get about keeping Newsome?
I would add, the 35-40% of Californians who lean Republican would be one hell of a state in themselves, enough people to win an election in any other state. They must be more than a little bit frustrated being ruled by the Left.
Here's your new Gov:
https://issuesinsights.com/2021/08/04/the-governor-california-voters-dont-deserve-but-surely-need/
(https://i1.wp.com/issuesinsights.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Screen-Shot-2021-08-03-at-1.13.33-PM.png?w=806&ssl=1)
More conservative than Trump but hard to label a white nationalist.
I sent him $100 the day he announced. electElder.com
-
Paul Krugman's pathetic defense of Gavin Newsom
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/paul-krugmans-pathetic-defense-of-gavin-newsom
Now that the Left is causing it, income inequality doesn't matter, high GDP matters. Author calls out the hypocrisy and failure of the Paul Krugman Left arguments.
-
https://babylonbee.com/news/desperate-californians-cling-to-landing-gear-of-last-jet-leaving-lax
I recently spent a bit of time driving through VDH country (Central California). Very depressing, especially Fresno.
-
GM
you post the most busting out loud videos
:-D
-
https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/a-world-gone-mad-venice-community-wrestles-with-continuing-homeless-crisis_4101213.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-11-13&mktids=fabc7961f1f9d0021546a15a0dfcbe24&est=xLAnu62cqZTXzpoLPFYadcta1eXVZcqPoIIo5JOAfSZuUkrhhEZAykqVWJbk%2B3eVuwYl
-
https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/a-world-gone-mad-venice-community-wrestles-with-continuing-homeless-crisis_4101213.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-11-13&mktids=fabc7961f1f9d0021546a15a0dfcbe24&est=xLAnu62cqZTXzpoLPFYadcta1eXVZcqPoIIo5JOAfSZuUkrhhEZAykqVWJbk%2B3eVuwYl
I was amazed to read this:
“It’s a world gone mad,” Venice resident Deborah Keaton told The Epoch Times. “It’s our own making too. I’m a liberal, a Democrat, and we voted for these measures that decriminalize a lot of this behavior, and so there’s no repercussions for these guys.”
-
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/meanwhile-in-non-covid-news-everything/comments?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjo1ODg4MTI0MCwicG9zdF9pZCI6NDQzOTA3MTEsIl8iOiJKK1dFNCIsImlhdCI6MTYzNzU1OTE2NSwiZXhwIjoxNjM3NTYyNzY1LCJpc3MiOiJwdWItMzYzMDgwIiwic3ViIjoicG9zdC1yZWFjdGlvbiJ9.BV0A8QpJpwZ71abxEZBznWkF05kTl4jyzQJQrBPc10w
-
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
Federal Appeals Court Upholds California Ban on Large High-Capacity Ammunition Magazines
By Katabella Roberts December 1, 2021 Updated: December 1, 2021 biggersmaller Print
A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld California’s ban on large-capacity ammunition magazines, reversing a San Diego federal judge’s rule that it was “unconstitutional” and handing a victory to Gov. Gavin Newsom and gun-control advocates.
The California law, which was enacted in 2016, bans the possession of large-capacity magazines (LCMs) that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The law also bans the manufacture and imports of LCMs.
Share
Earn up to $11 for every friend who reads this article.
You can earn points by sharing articles to friends. With points, you can redeem for gift cards from 100+ top brands, or other benefits. Learn more
Under the law, owners of LCMs can modify them to accept ten rounds or fewer and sell their magazines to firearm dealers or remove them from the state. The law provides several exceptions to the ban on large-capacity magazines, including possession by active or retired law enforcement officers, security guards for armored vehicles, and holders of special weapons permits.
U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez in San Diego previously blocked the ban, claiming that the law is illegal because it violates the Second Amendment right of gun owners under the U.S. Constitution.
The state government, through the law, “bans an entire class of very popular hardware—firearms that are lawful under federal law and under the laws of most states and that are commonly held by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes,” Benitez, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote in his 94-page ruling at the time.
A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit in August 2020 upheld District Judge Benitez’s original decision.
But an 11-member en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit of Appeals on Tuesday voted 7–4 to issue a ruling (pdf) that reverses that decision on the California law.
The court said it applied a “two-step framework to review the Second Amendment challenge, asking first whether the challenged law affects conduct protected by the Second Amendment, and if so, what level of scrutiny to apply.”
Panel members noted that the law bolstered public safety rationale in reducing gun violence and does not outlaw the weapon entirely but rather places a limit on the size of the magazine that may be used with firearms.
“The record demonstrates that the limitation interferes only minimally with the core right of self-defense, as there is no evidence that anyone ever has been unable to defend his or her home and family due to the lack of a large-capacity magazine,” the panel wrote, adding that “the limitation saves lives.”
Panelists also noted that “in the past half-century, large-capacity magazines have been used in about three-quarters of gun massacres with 10 or more deaths and in 100 percent of gun massacres with 20 or more deaths, and more than twice as many people have been killed or injured in mass shootings that involved a large-capacity magazine as compared with mass shootings that involved a smaller-capacity magazine.”
Subsequently, the Court of Appeals ruled that California’s ban “on legal possession of large-capacity magazines reasonably supported California’s effort to reduce the devastating damage wrought by mass shootings.”
Panel members added that the law, “does not, on its face, effect a taking” because “the government acquires nothing by virtue of the limitation on the capacity of magazines,” and that because LCMs owners are allowed to modify or sell their nonconforming magazines, the law also “does not deprive owners of all economic use.”
The Epoch Times has contacted District Judge Roger T. Benitez for comment.
The decision comes as a victory for Gov. Gavin Newsom and gun-control advocates.
“Weapons of war don’t belong on our streets,” Newsom wrote on Twitter on Tuesday. “This is a huge victory for the health and safety of all Californians.”
Chuck Michel, president of the California Rifle & Pistol Association said in a statement, “Sadly, the court reversed CRPA’s historic wins in both the district court and before the three-judge Ninth Circuit panel that upheld the district court’s ruling,” adding that his group will appeal to the Supreme Court.
“We are truly disappointed that the Ninth Circuit en banc panel decided to go against the solid constitutional reasoning of other judges to strike down this win for gun owners,” Michel said.
“We will be appealing to the Supreme Court for a final determination because gun owners deserve to have someone fighting for them and their rights. The Second Amendment is a fundamental right, and it is time that courts stop treating that right like a second-class gift from government.”
-
https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/train-derailment-los-angeles-package-theft-cargo-lincoln-heights-union-pacific/2798219/
-
https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/train-derailment-los-angeles-package-theft-cargo-lincoln-heights-union-pacific/2798219/
What bad luck the dem run cities and states are experiencing.
-
location unknown
https://michaelyon.locals.com/upost/1548201/more-video-of-train-robberies
-
https://img.patriotpost.us/01FT8QW5B2ND6VJYB9ZQVRG3MP.jpeg?w=910&dpr=1&q=75
-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10594717/California-officials-RAIDED-preschool-suspected-masking-breaches-interviewed-toddlers.html
-
https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/102/106/355/original/1b1bb525a60fcd46.mp4
-
for companies with >500 employees
https://populistpress.com/california-looks-to-cut-weekly-work-hours-down-to-32_4398157-html/
just doesn't end ....
-
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/04/horror-armed-thieves-run-woman-steal-watch-roving-los-angeles-gangs-target-citys-wealthiest-video/
-
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/usps-stops-service-santa-monica-neighborhood-following-attacks-mail-carriers
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/04/horror-armed-thieves-run-woman-steal-watch-roving-los-angeles-gangs-target-citys-wealthiest-video/
-
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/were-taking-back-our-street-sacramento-man-barricades-street-stop-out-control-crime?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=639
-
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/were-taking-back-our-street-sacramento-man-barricades-street-stop-out-control-crime?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=639
He will be arrested.
Anarcho-tyranny is how things work now.
-
https://www.theepochtimes.com/supreme-court-refuses-to-hear-truckers-challenge-to-ab5-californias-anti-freelancing-law_4573995.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-07-03-3&utm_medium=email&est=m3fxY0s3otPcBSTdQiaH8LDIti8dBoybTpgsOTfm15QxUx3tWYXR8cKpqa%2Fn5MVWuLy%2F
-
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1544672145321693187
-
https://www.toddstarnes.com/us/breaking-los-angeles-to-implement-mask-mandate/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=todd-starnes-newsletter&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=firefly
-
Newsom unveils plan to increase water supply in California
BY VALERIE RICHARDSON THE WASHINGTON TIMES
California Gov. Gavin Newsom released a plan Thursday to increase the state’s water supply, calling for more storage, recycling and desalination plants to help the state adapt to a “hotter, drier future.”
Standing outside a desalination project in Antioch, the governor outlined strategies in a 16-page document focused on accelerating infrastructure projects as opposed to hiking conservation targets, saying that he wants to tackle the issue “not just from a scarcity mindset.”
“I think so much of the ... conversation here in the state has been about conservation, scarcity, but that’s a relatively small component of the strategy we are introducing today,” Mr. Newsom said at a press conference . “What we are focused on is creating more supply. What we are focused on is creating more water.”
In its release, the governor’s office warned that “extreme weather patterns caused by climate change” could cause the state to lose up to 10% of its water supply by 2040, but that the proposed actions could add enough water to cover 8.4 million households by 2040.
The document, “California’s Water Supply Strategy,” called for creating storage space for up to 4 million acre-feet of water by expanding and creating groundwater and reservoir capacity, as well as speeding up dam repairs; recycling and reusing 800,000 acre-feet of water annually by 2030; saving 500,000 acre-feet through conservation, and desalinating ocean and salty waters.
“These actions are identified broadly in the Newsom Administration’s Water Resilience Portfolio — the state’s master plan for water released in 2020 — but they will be expedited given the urgency of climate-driven changes,” said the governor’s office.
The Democratic governor also took a page from the Republican playbook by taking a shot at the environmental regulations that delay infrastructure projects, saying he would bulldoze through the “regulatory thickets” and fast-track the agenda through executive orders and legislative efforts.
“The time to get these damn projects is ridiculous. It’s absurd. It’s reasonably comedic,” Mr. Newsom said. “And in so many ways, the world we invented from an environmental perspective is getting in the way in moving these projects forward so we can address the acuities of Mother Nature. Permits that take years and years and years.”
From reducing regulations to building reservoirs, there was plenty in his plan to raise the hackles of the state’s powerful environmental movement, but Mr. Newsom stressed that the state needs to get away from the constant focus on scarcity.
“We’ve got to get away from that mindset,” he said. “There’s a lot more abundance out there if we’re more creative in terms of how we approach things.”
The biggest-ticket item was $27 billion by 2040 to reach the plan’s targets for recycling wastewater into drinking water. Much of the rest of the strategy would be funded by billions already earmarked by the state legislature, as well as $7.2 billion from Proposition 1, the 2014 state water bond, for seven projects.
The state is now stuck in a third straight year of drought, but Mr. Newsom has resisted state conservation mandates
-
Um, the man has been in high office in the governing party, mayor, Lt. Gov or Governor, since 2004.
Newsom: "The time to get these damn projects is ridiculous. It’s absurd. It’s reasonably comedic,” Mr. Newsom said. “And in so many ways, the world we invented from an environmental perspective is getting in the way in moving these projects forward so we can address the acuities of Mother Nature. Permits that take years and years and years.”
Weren't these reforms on the ballot every year since Pete Wilson? Sounds like state government, federal government and voters supporting bureaucratic government are the problems more than climate variations. Reading just this part I thought maybe he was resigning, switching parties or supporting for Larry Elder or Lanhee Chen for Governor.
At the rate people are moving away, maybe the problem will solve itself by 2040.
But good that he finally wants to do something about it.
-
https://www.yahoo.com/news/california-lawmakers-approve-landmark-fast-231247792.html
their latest voting block
to protect against the evil capitalists .....
expand unions
and more legal work for the shysters involved
-
California Governor Signs ‘Most Aggressive’ Package of Green Laws
By Caden Pearson September 17, 2022 Updated: September 17, 2022biggersmaller Print
California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday announced a sweeping package of what he called the country’s “most aggressive” climate measures to “accelerate the state’s transition” to non-conventional energy sources.
The package includes 40 bills that appear to provide new green rules on laws related to things ranging from large-scale industry to the family home and private and public transportation.
The Democratic governor’s office said in a statement the package of climate change-focused measures aims to cut pollution and target “big polluters.”
It comes as America’s most populous state has struggled to provide stable electricity for residents amid a heat wave, which saw the state asking residents to use less power and suggest the best times to use air conditioners or charge electric cars.
“This month has been a wake-up call for all of us that later is too late to act on climate change. California isn’t waiting any more,” Newsom said in a statement. “Together with the Legislature, California is taking the most aggressive action on climate our nation has ever seen.”
“We’re cleaning the air we breathe, holding the big polluters accountable, and ushering in a new era for clean energy,” he continued. “That’s climate action done the California Way—and we’re not only doubling down, we’re just getting started.”
In July, Newsom called for “bold actions” to combat climate change. He declared his climate-focused vision for California involves a push to achieve 90 percent “clean energy” by 2035, “carbon neutrality” by 2045, “setback measures” to target oil drilling, carbon capture programs, and to “advance nature-based solutions” to remove carbon from “natural and working lands.”
40 Green Bills
Newsom’s office said his sweeping package of measures will create four million new jobs over the next 20 years, cut air pollution by 60 percent, and reduce state oil consumption by 91 percent.
How this would be achieved was not explained in the governor’s news release.
The package of measures, the governor’s office said, will save the state $23 billion by avoiding damage from pollution. It further aims to cut fossil fuel use in buildings and transportation by 92 percent and refinery pollution by 94 percent.
The governor named a list of the 40 new green bills, which touch on things from the broad scope of the climate to more everyday matters such as community air quality, electricity supply, vehicle permits, and gas pricing.
Some of the bills, which were all named in the governor’s news release, include:
AB 1279: “The California Climate Crisis Act”
AB 1389: “Clean Transportation Program: project funding preferences”
AB 1749: “Community emissions reduction programs: toxic air contaminants and criteria air pollutants”
AB 1857: “Solid waste”
AB 1909: “Vehicles: bicycle omnibus bill”
AB 2075: “Energy: electric vehicle charging standards”
AB 2622: “Sales and use taxes: exemptions: California Hybrid and Zero-Emission Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Project: transit buses”
AB 2836: “Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment Program: vehicle registration fees: California tire fee”
SB 529: “Electricity: electrical transmission facilities”
SB 1063: “Energy: appliance standards and cost-effective measures”
SB 1205: “Water rights: appropriation”
SB 1230: “Zero-emission and near-zero-emission vehicle incentive programs: requirements”
SB 1322: “Energy: petroleum pricing”
SB 1382: “Air pollution: Clean Cars 4 All Program: Sales and Use Tax Law: zero emissions vehicle exemption”
How the package of new green laws and regulations might impact, for example, standards required for cars to be permitted on Californian roads; how and when homes can be cooled; the source of electricity allowed to be supplied to homes; the manufacturing of everyday appliances and products, etc., were not outlined in the governor’s news release.
This latest pronouncement comes on the heels of Newsom enacting regulation to phase out sales of new gas-powered cars by 2035
-
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/violence-california-reaches-epidemic-levels-our-society-rapidly-deteriorates-all-around
-
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/violence-california-reaches-epidemic-levels-our-society-rapidly-deteriorates-all-around
https://twitter.com/Timcast/status/1570379443180388355
Not newsworthy.
-
https://www.axios.com/2022/09/18/ron-desantis-migrants-lawyers-criminal-investigation
OTOH look at the demographics :
Race and ethnicity
Racial and ethnic composition as of the 2020 census
Race and ethnicity[185] Total
Hispanic or Latino[note 3] 39.4%
White (non-Hispanic) 38.3%
Asian (non-Hispanic) 17.0%
African American (non-Hispanic) 6.4%
Native American (non-Hispanic) 1.3%
Pacific Islander (non-Hispanic) 0.7%
Other (non-Hispanic) 1.3%
or foreign born:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/312701/percentage-of-population-foreign-born-in-the-us-by-state/#:~:text=As%20of%202020%2C%2026.6%20percent,other%20than%20the%20United%20States.
-
Kalifornians in TX
https://youtu.be/HlDWzN6TW5Y
-
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/california-giving-1-050-inflation-191822518.html
just before and election it starts of course
spreading other people's money around ......
-
this is what happens in state run by crats:
https://www.breitbart.com/economy/2022/11/16/shock-california-projects-25-billion-deficit-after-98-billion-surplus/
+ $400 checks to offset gas price increases (bribe voters)
[not sure if this was before or after recall]
DEMOCRATS + SURPLUS = PARTY TIME !!!! yeehah !
-
Dang , , ,
-
https://www.foxbusiness.com/industrials/largest-water-provider-us-declares-drought-emergency
-
https://dailycaller.com/2022/12/23/san-francisco-spent-550k-4-years-trash-can/
20k is a lot but really you (they) would pay any price!
-
https://theconversation.com/how-california-could-save-up-its-rain-to-ease-future-droughts-instead-of-watching-epic-atmospheric-river-rainfall-drain-into-the-pacific-197168?fbclid=IwAR0q5dKswZ9HBeuce4FQQIfi1d8d-W77PlcFxREBpYm00DHJoBjkwhvjy-k
-
https://hotair.com/tree-hugging-sister/2023/05/19/15-yrs-billions-not-a-mile-of-track-running-out-of-money-what-am-i-n552059
-
Wow.
Who could have seen this coming?
-
https://survival-situation.com/videos/nearly-300-arrested-dozens-of-guns-recovered-following-operation-in-fresno-ca/
-
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/06/04/republican-bill-to-exempt-turbans-from-motorcycle-helmets-advances-in-california/
choice should no longer be
if you do not want to wear a helmet because of turban then maybe you should not ride motorcycles because that is the law that applies to everyone else
but should
be , if you are sikh you are not obliged to wear helmet and you accept you risk death or serious head injury but no one else has that right.
why is everything ASS backwards in this country now?
-
Democracy Dies Again in California
Democrats retaliate against business with a new wage-fixing board to stop a ballot measure.
By The Editorial Board
June 29, 2023 6:37 pm ET
The early 20th-century progressive era gave birth to California’s ballot referendum that lets citizens overturn state laws. Now Democrats in Sacramento are resurrecting a zombie wage-fixing board to end-run a referendum. Welcome to the modern progressive movement against democracy in the Golden State.
Labor unions are miffed that business groups have qualified a referendum for the November 2024 ballot to invalidate a new state law that establishes a 10-member council to set wages, benefits and working conditions at fast-food chains. As retribution, they’re threatening to impose government control over all businesses.
The budget that Democrats plan to vote on this week includes $3 million to revive the state’s dormant Industrial Welfare Commission, which was established in 1913 to improve working conditions for women and children. California’s constitution and labor code grant the commission sweeping powers to set wages, hours and working conditions for any industry.
The Governor appoints its five members, who must include two representatives of labor unions, two from employers and one from the general public. GOP Governors in the 1980s and 1990s restrained business regulation. In 2004 Democrats de-funded the commission to prevent then GOP Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s appointees from repealing earlier orders.
Commission orders regulating overtime, minimum wages, meal breaks and rest periods, among other things, are still in effect for 17 mostly lower-wage industries. Those include housekeeping, film production, dry-cleaning and agriculture. Deferential state courts have upheld the legality of the commission and its orders.
Resurrecting the commission is an insurance policy if voters reject the fast-food law and a form of blackmail to extort businesses to drop the referendum. The commission could impose the same mandates as the fast-food council and needn’t abide by California’s Administrative Procedure Act, which establishes rule-making procedures and due-process requirements for agencies.
Fast-food restaurants aren’t the only targets. Democrats want the commission to expand government control over industries such as trucking and home-health aides that unions have struggled to organize. “The fast food industry is one of the industries with the problem, but it’s not the only industry,” says State Sen. Maria Elena Durazo.
The re-established commission could impose joint-employer liability on corporations and contractors, require businesses to give unions access to their workplaces and even declare a four-day work week. Democratic legislators wouldn’t have to take tough votes while businesses would have virtually no political or legal recourse. Unlike state laws, commission orders can’t be overturned by voters. They also can’t block the commission’s resurrection because its funding is included in the state budget.
Businesses don’t need any more reasons to leave the Golden State, but Democrats are giving them one anyway
-
https://americanwirenews.com/hollywood-residents-plead-for-help-as-homeless-take-over-naked-people-running-around-near-schools/?utm_campaign=james&utm_content=7-25-23%20Daily%20PM&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_source=Get%20response&utm_term=email
-
California's bad math: Nearly 600 STEM professionals have signed a letter sent to the California Department of Education objecting to the newly proposed woke mathematics curriculum, warning that the new framework will serve to hold back the development of low-income children in the STEM fields. Speaking of inconvenient math, a recent study found that California's decreasing population, now three straight years in a row of people moving out, is having a significant negative impact on tax revenue. In 2021, the Golden State lost over $341 million in tax revenue thanks to its shrinking population. But the bad math isn't just lost tax revenue. Another study found that emergency room wait times in California have drastically increased over the last decade, leading to overcrowding as "capacity has largely failed to match the rise in patient demand." Despite recent losses, California's population grew by 4.2% between 2011 and 2021, but the number of emergency departments decreased from 339 to 326. That might be another reason people are fleeing the state.
-
takes 6 months
these are the reasons listed for expedition:
California will expedite the licensing process for certain individuals. This will mean that your application will be automatically sent to the front of the line for processing.
This can save months of waiting for licensure.
pay particular attention to lines 3 and 5:
To get an expedited license, you must meet one of these requirements:
Honorably Discharged Veteran of the Armed Forces
Practice in Medically Underserved Areas or Populations
Intend to provide abortions within the scope of practice of your medical license;
Spouse or Domestic Partner of an Active Duty Member of the United States Armed Forces
Admitted to the United States as a Refugee, Granted Asylum, or Have a Special Immigrant Visa Status.
-
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/california-voters-put-effort-to-micromanage-fast-food-restaurants-on-hold-dems-may-do-it-anyway/?bypass_key=eGgzNGIzTVRZT3I5Ly9lWkFScmNJQT09OjpRemRPTHpsc1Z5dFBWbWx0VWtoS0syaEtjemxTZHowOQ%3D%3D?utm_source%3Demail&utm_medium=breaking&utm_campaign=newstrack&utm_term=32600359&utm_source=Sailthru
-
instead of enforcing laws and cracking down on thieves
the plan is to crack down on the businesses and their employees:
https://www.newsweek.com/california-bill-employees-confronting-shoplifters-key-vote-1824941
the stupidity of this speaks for itself
could the Dems be taking campaign contributions from gangs?
:x
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gn-FWK_hSA&t=125s
-
Contemplated posting this in humor, though ultimately it’s not funny:
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2023/10/21/even-for-san-francisco-this-story-is-almost-too-bizarre-to-believe-n1736886
-
https://freebeacon.com/?post_type=post&p=1835544
-
yes and all the while the fat cats have their four yr celebrity big shot party celebrating their Democrat candidate in Hollywood
Speilberger Streisgold Katzenplatinum geffenstein silverReiner
etc
as Michael Savage would say....
-
California is not doing so well and Governor Gavin Newsom is beginning to panic and trying to grasp at straws.
But he forgot he banned straws.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/12/the-week-in-pictures-context-edition.php
-
Of course,
ex major league baseball player Steve Garvey who is running as Republican is third behind another crat.
https://ktla.com/news/california/new-poll-shows-widening-gap-in-californias-u-s-senate-race/
I don't want to have to see / listen to Schiff in the Senate :x
He belongs behind bars.
-
this poll has Steve running second:
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/steve-garvey-second-california/2023/12/15/id/1146153/
-
https://babylonbee.com/news/clarence-the-angel-takes-gavin-newsom-to-florida-to-show-him-what-california-could-look-like-if-hed-never-been-born
-
https://washingtonstand.com/news/california-extends-free-gender-transition-procedures-to-illegal-immigrants
-
https://washingtonstand.com/news/california-extends-free-gender-transition-procedures-to-illegal-immigrants
President of Argentina, someone we can learn from, says stop using the word free for things that cost money. But this story is outrageous. Elective surgery such as this shouldn't be 'free' to citizens, adults or minors, and shouldn't be included in insurance unless people sought out that coverage.
-
"free" trans treatments for illegals
our country is gone.....
-
went from 100 bill surplus to 38 bill deficit in 1 yr.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/01/11/gavin-newsom-wants-to-raid-californias-rainy-day-fund-to-help-fill-38-billion-deficit/
Lets not forget the tax revenue in 2022 for California:
Yes the largest state but no one else even close :
https://www.statista.com/statistics/248932/us-state-government-tax-revenue-by-state/
Add to this the ~ 150 billion they got from Federal Covid money in 2022 :
https://calbudgetcenter.org/resources/american-rescue-plan-provides-assistance-to-millions-of-californians/#:~:text=About%202.7%20million%20Californians%20are%20expected%20to%20benefit,by%20the%20Institute%20on%20Taxation%20and%20Economic%20Policy.
If the Dems win our 34 trill budget could only go up.
Hopefully Trump after the election will talk more about spending cuts though he has never been a fiscal conservative except for some tax cuts.
-
Jackasses don’t like their self-inflicted asshattery mentioned by those fleeing CA due to it:
https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=14813
-
https://washingtontimes-dc.newsmemory.com/?token=56988ef2a35f158944f618fd528ebd1e_65ba60ea_6d25b5f&selDate=20240131
-
https://washingtontimes-dc.newsmemory.com/?token=56988ef2a35f158944f618fd528ebd1e_65ba60ea_6d25b5f&selDate=20240131
Economic morons. Real "minimum wage" is zero. Most people have no employees, hire no one and pay them nothing.
Socialism / Communism is when government owns the means of production. Fascism is when the Government mandates exactly how the "private sector" must run the "private sector", cf. housing, transportation, energy, healthcare, education, hiring, DEI, etc.
Strange that they keep doing more and more of this and call us the fascists.
The other counter-intuitive observation is that Left wingers actually have a stronger belief in the resilience of the private sector than conservatives do. They think businesses can absorb any and all tax and regulatory cost and never miss a beat.
Wish it were that simple.
-
https://nypost.com/2024/02/01/news/dennys-shutters-only-location-in-oakland-after-more-than-54-years-due-to-high-crime/
Big deal, right? Except 54 years there is probably a pretty prime location, and crime getting worse in Oakland is saying something.
The most shoplifted Walgreens in the US:
https://www.thestreet.com/retailers/heres-what-its-actually-like-at-the-most-shoplifted-walgreens-in-the-u-s
I wonder if it's in a red city or state... No. It's in San Francisco of course.
Also leaving, Navy, Banana Republic, Crate & Barrel, AmazonGo, Saks Off Fifth, Anthropologie and Office Depot.
Then there is KPMG leaving the $400 million KPMG building, San Francisco:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12974813/San-Francisco-KMPG-mall-vacant-homeless-crime.html
Apple employees, move from Calif to Texas or lose job:
https://www.chron.com/culture/article/apple-california-texas-austin-18610773.php
-
I wonder what our economy would look like without the big 7?
where are all the SF IT people going to shop or eat?
-
about shoplifting
Can anyone explain to me what the heck is so funny about this reality?:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/02/01/watch-newsom-shocked-to-hear-californians-blame-him-for-shoplifting-problem/
look at the laughing idiot on the upper right then others grinning from ear to ear later on......
just more middle fingers to American citizens from elites.....
-
Enjoined for seeking to abrogate the second amendment by extra-constitutional means by making it difficult to purchase ammo:
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20240201/judge-enjoins-california-s-unconstitutional-ammunition-background-check-law-again
-
about shoplifting
Can anyone explain to me what the heck is so funny about this reality?:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/02/01/watch-newsom-shocked-to-hear-californians-blame-him-for-shoplifting-problem/
look at the laughing idiot on the upper right then others grinning from ear to ear later on......
just more middle fingers to American citizens from elites.....
Two things that didn't come out of the DeSantis Newsom debate, DeSantis wasn't put on a glidepath to the GOP nomination and Newsom could not put lipstick on a pig. He proved that even the very slickest couldn't make tyranny look better than liberty when faced with real world data.
-
IIRC I posted on this topic several years ago. Its status hasn’t changed, but billions more have been tossed down the drain:
Biden, Buttigieg, and Bullet Trains
Both pols are on board a boondoggle for the ages.
February 6, 2024
By K. LLOYD BILLINGSLEY
California High-Speed Rail Authority
This month, The Hill reports, Joe Biden will travel to East Palestine, Ohio, site of a train derailment that spilled toxic chemicals into the community and forcing evacuations. Biden’s visit comes “roughly one year” after the February 3, 2023 incident. As embattled residents might recall, federal Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg also took his time showing up.
“It took him three weeks” to visit the stricken community, Newsweek reported. Asked if he had done a good job as Transportation Secretary, Buttigieg said he was “proud” of what the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) had done. On his own performance the former presidential candidate was rather vague.
Jennie Taer, a reporter for the Daily Caller asked Buttigieg, “What do you have to say to the folks in Ohio, East Palestine, who are suffering right now?” Secretary Buttigieg responded that he was “taking some personal time” and referred the reporter to comments he already made. Asked when he would be traveling to Ohio, Buttigieg said he would “share that when I’m ready.”
Buttigieg acknowledged that he “could have spoken out sooner,” and said the incident was “a lesson for me.” The Secretary told CNN he failed to anticipate the political fallout, despite months of transportation problems such as flight cancellations. Those difficulties did not affect the secretary, fond of taking trips on private jets funded by taxpayers.
By early January, 2023, the Transportation Secretary had taken at least 18 trips on private jets, including a trip to Montreal to receive an award. In April of 2022, Buttigieg flew on a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Cessna Citation 560XL from Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport to an executive airport near New York City. En route, the Secretary held a 40-minute meeting with Deborah Archer, president of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
Despite his comfy jet-set ways, Secretary Buttigieg remains a booster of rail projects such as California’s vaunted “bullet train,” which promised to speed passengers from Los Angeles to San Francisco at more than 200 mph. In 2021, the federal Transportation Secretary went on record that California’s high-speed rail project could be funded through the pending $2.3 trillion infrastructure program.
At the time, the state’s High-Speed Rail Authority (HSRA) had yet to acquire more than 500 pieces of property from the rightful owners, and money was also an issue. More than three years after the expected completion date of 2020, the $10 billion bond issue has been burned up and the estimated $33 billion for the entire project is now inadequate for the single route from Bakersfield to Merced.
“There is no path to completion for the fantasy rail system that was falsely sold to voters 15 years ago,” observes UCLA economics professor Lee Ohanian. “The only reasonable decision is to end a project that should never have begun.” Buttigieg and Biden don’t think so.
Last December, Secretary Buttigieg’s Department of Transportation, gave the HSRA a grant of more than $3 billion“for continued progress on the country’s first electrified 220-mph high-speed rail system.” HSRA CEO Brian Kelley called the money “just a great leap forward,” and “Speaker Emerita” Nancy Pelosi, issued a “thank you to President Biden and Secretary Buttigieg for their recognition of the importance of high-speed rail to California and to our nation.”
Pelosi’s one-time nephew Gov. Gavin Newsom proclaimed, “this show of support from the Biden-Harris Administration is a vote of confidence in today’s vision and comes at a critical turning point, providing the project new momentum.” Taxpayers across the nation have a right to wonder about the status of the project at this “critical turning point.”
California’s rail project boasts a Sacramento headquarters and three regional offices. So far it’s working as a sinecure for ruling-class types such as board member Lynn Schenk, a former member of congress and chief of staff for Gov. Gray Davis. Entering the fourth year after the original completion date, California’s bullet train has yet to carry a single passenger. It’s a boondoggle for the ages, with Buttigieg and Biden all aboard.
K. LLOYD BILLINGSLEY is a Policy Fellow at the Independent Institute and a columnist at American Greatness.
Bureaucracy and GovernmentContemporary PoliticsEconomistsEconomyEnergy and the EnvironmentFiscal Policy/DebtGovernment and PoliticsGovernment PowerGovernment Waste/PorkLand UseLaw and LibertyPhilosophy and ReligionPolitical TheoryProperty Rights, Land Use, and ZoningRegulationState and Local Fiscal PolicyTaxesTaxes and BudgetTransportation
https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=14821
-
I’m glad I’m no longer in the restaurant biz, particularly in CA. Nitwits on the state employee dole that have never had to make a payroll take a thin margin and make impossibly thinner:
The Perils of Running a Restaurant (or Any Business) in California
The Beacon / by Adam Summers / February 09, 2024 at 04:09PM
It is no secret that the state and local governments make California a very difficult place to do business. The Golden State maintained its perennial position of the worst business climate in the country in Chief Executive magazine’s annual “Best and Worst States for Business” survey of hundreds of CEOs from across the nation. (Texas, Florida, and Tennessee once again topped the list.) But things are particularly bad for restaurant owners, and substantial increases in the minimum wage are only making them worse.
California’s minimum wage rose from $15.50 an hour to $16 an hour at the start of the year, but a couple of bills passed last fall will boost it significantly higher for a couple of industries. Assembly Bill 1228 will boost the minimum wage for fast-food workers to $20 an hour beginning in April—a 29 percent jump in just four months—and Senate Bill 525 will raise it to $23 an hour for healthcare employees (including support staff such as janitors and cleaning crews, security guards, and hospital gift shop workers) in June, rising to $25 an hour in 2026.
In a recent column for The Hill, I discussed the negative, but entirely predictable, effects of such increases in the minimum wage (which are often ignored by the proponents of such measures):
The economic implications are all too familiar, as we have seen this scenario play out over and over again. A portion of the increase in labor costs for minimum wage workers will be passed along to consumers through higher prices. Indeed, within weeks of the fast food minimum wage bill, Assembly Bill 1228, being signed into law in September, McDonald’s and Chipotle announced that they would be forced to raise food prices in California.
Some workers will benefit, but many others will see their hours cut and benefits slashed or end up losing their jobs to compensate for the higher costs. Pizza Hut restaurants across the state are already planning on eliminating more than 1,200 delivery driver positions (a number that is likely to grow) in response. And in New York City, which just raised its minimum wage to $17.96 an hour last month, companies such as Uber and DoorDash are compensating by imposing higher delivery fees, and food delivery workers are seeing fewer tips and reduced hours and scheduling flexibility.
Plus, there will also be fewer jobs in the future, so many others will never get hired in the first place—and it will now be much more difficult for low-skill workers and those new to the job market to get jobs since they now must compete against workers with skills worth $20 an hour.
Automation, such as ordering kiosks, will increase and human-provided service will decrease. Less money will be left over for other innovations or investments in the business. Businesses that are already struggling to get by will close, leading to even more job losses.
Now, we are hearing more evidence of the harm already being caused to restauranteurs and their employees. KRCR-TV, the local ABC affiliate covering Redding and Chico, California, recently interviewed Che Stedman, owner and executive chef of Moonstone Bistro, described as “a popular fine-dining restaurant in west Redding,” which is being forced to eliminate its lunch service due to the new minimum wage law. Steadman explained how, as a fine-dining establishment, his employees would not directly be affected by the minimum wage hike, but the ripple effects of the law certainly would push up their wages—and the restaurant’s expenses.
“We want to be able to hire people,” emphasized Stedman. “But anybody, if they have experience, now wants much more than $20 an hour. And if they have no experience, their opening ask is $20 an hour. Why wouldn’t it be?”
“If you can make $20 an hour at Taco Bell, with no experience, how much money do you think I’m going to have to pay a cook, who actually has experience?” Stedman continued. “I have to compete with that. Worse, I have to compete for somebody who has zero cooking experience. None, none at all!”
In a statement to the news station, Che and his wife and co-owner, Tanya Stedman, bristled at the idea that they might not be valuing their workers sufficiently by criticizing the wage hike and pointed out the plethora of costly government taxes and regulations—on top of normal business expenses—that they have to endure, noting that there is only so much that business owners can take.
We, as business owners, do not feel that we are the ones exploiting people. We pay huge taxes, fees, licenses, inspections, workman’s comp, insurance, you name it. We do this for the right to work really hard, and to create jobs. Yet, we are being told that WE are the reason why people can’t afford their rent. We are told we should pay everyone more, while we work harder, and for less. Employers are unprotected. We have no rights. We don’t get overtime or breaks. The only thing we get is what’s left over after everyone else takes their cut. At some point, the risk outweighs the reward.
For us, we cannot accept more liability and expense. We have to pay our rent, too. So we are reducing our costs. Reducing our liability. We are concentrating our efforts on the area that is most successful. Tanya and I, as most other business owners, are tired of hearing how it’s our fault people can’t afford their lives; tired of being told we need to work harder so other people can have more; tired of being told we should be happy with having less, working more, being liable and responsible for everyone and everything, so other people can have a better life.
In other words, California is becoming like the world of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged.
Marcus Walberg, owner, along with his family members, of four Fatburger franchises in Los Angeles, related a similar tale to Business Insider.
Doing business in California “has been more strained now than any time I can remember,” Walberg told Business Insider. Asked about the effects of the $20 an hour minimum wage, he added, “I feel there will be a lot of pain to workers as franchise owners are forced to take drastic measures.”
In what will certainly become a familiar theme in the industry, Walberg said he would be forced to raise prices, implement a hiring freeze, and cut employee hours and benefits. Despite his reservations about raising prices in a climate where “customers are already complaining that prices are too high,” he anticipates having to raise them in the range of 8-10 percent, on top of an 8 percent increase last year.
As for employees, “We’re not hiring new people to fill jobs,” Walberg said. “We’re being very tight on schedules.”
In addition, he has had to eliminate paid vacation time in anticipation of the minimum wage hike in April, asserting that “We just can’t afford to do that anymore,” even though it “is a real shame.”
Like Stedman at the Moonstone Bistro, Walberg is concerned about the “domino effect” of the minimum wage hike on more skilled and higher-earning employees, who will naturally look for additional compensation or seek other opportunities elsewhere.
“If you’re the shift leader and you’re responsible for making sure everyone got their breaks, you’re not going to do all that extra work for the $20 [an hour] minimum wage,” he said, noting that the same would be paid to “the guy who cooks the burger and goes home.”
“An entry-level manager is now going to want more than $20 an hour,” Walberg added. “All that translates back to the customer having to pay more money because the landlords aren’t going to drop the rent. The money has to come from somewhere.”
As I noted in my column for The Hill, this form of price control affects not only current workers but also potential future workers, particularly those who are new to the job market or who otherwise have lower job skills and fewer employment opportunities.
As Walberg explained, for example, fast-food restaurants will now be less likely to hire an inexperienced teenager. “What you will lose: the kids getting their first job at McDonald’s,” he said.
This all has a rather perverse effect on many lower-skilled workers. By forcing them to compete with higher-skilled workers and eliminating their sole leverage—the ability to voluntarily work for a lower wage—policymakers are not helping them up the ladder of economic opportunity. They are cutting off the bottom rungs and making success that much more difficult.
The post The Perils of Running a Restaurant (or Any Business) in California appeared first on The Beacon.
https://blog.independent.org/2024/02/09/perils-of-running-a-restaurant-in-california/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=perils-of-running-a-restaurant-in-california
-
This is a great post exposing s terrible policy. We blame state regulators but the root problem I'm sorry to say is the economically illiterate public.
Minimum wage and rent control are two policies still floating around that 100% of honest economists know hurt the people they are intended to help. And that's just the tip of the tax and regulatory iceberg.
Let's say you and your kid start a lemonade stand and it became successful. Name every law you might potentially be breaking along the path to 'success' (jail) and minimum wage laws would just be one. You couldn't do it, there are so many. I couldn't do it and I have a degree in it. I don't know anyone who could do it. Now try that in California.
Strange that it's legal to stand on a street corner and shake people down for money with no product or service provided whatsoever and report none of it, but if you try to make a legitimate business, everthing you do is against the law.
The highest cost of regulations is unmeasurable, the cost of new businesses not starting.
What minimum wage law should say is that if you want $20 for your wage you must provide minimum of $20 of value every hour., and really it's much more than that.
Every California legislator and voter should understand minimum wage is zero.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEnE_pxI7Xs
-
https://amgreatness.com/2024/02/21/irreconcilable-differences-californias-gop-falters-from-within/
-
$75 billion spending deficit forecast for CA, much of it due to services provided to illegals. As the piece points out, if Newsom is plan B to President Memory Ward, this deficit will serve as a millstone.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2024/02/californias-budget-deficit-is-even-worse-than-originally-projected/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=californias-budget-deficit-is-even-worse-than-originally-projected
-
Even a slickster like Newsom is going to have a real hard time explaining this one!
-
… due to nearby human trafficking operation, among other jaw dropping concerns:
https://legalinsurrection.com/2024/02/oakland-ca-losing-catholic-school-due-to-crime-and-human-trafficking/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=oakland-ca-losing-catholic-school-due-to-crime-and-human-trafficking
-
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/02/new_20_minimum_wage_law_in_california_set_to_take_effect_but_people_notice_an_obscure_exemption.html
How corrupt can they get?
-
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/california-senate-race-steve-garvey-in-statistical-tie-for-first-place-with-adam-schiff/ar-BB1jaQ3Y?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=5ac43e1c6fcc4437a0fa8e9c1d2354bf&ei=13
:-D
-
Panera Bread and California Circuses
Gov. Gavin Newsom, the $20 minimum wage, and an exemption for a donor.
By The Editorial Board
March 1, 2024 6:36 pm ET
Wonder Land: Whether it’s members of Congress, protesters in the street, even golf tournaments—it’s hard not to notice the rising tide of jerk-like behavior. Images: Storyblocks/TikTok/BidenHQ Composite: Mark Kelly
California is living up to its reputation as the entertainment capital of the world. Witness the political circus unfolding in Sacramento over a doughnut hole that Democrats baked into the state’s $20 fast-food minimum wage for Panera Bread franchise owner Greg Flynn, a donor to Gov. Gavin Newsom.
Democrats last autumn enacted a bill that raised the state minimum wage for fast-food workers to $20 an hour from the current $16 for all workers. But what do you know? The legislation carves out an odd exemption for restaurants that produce and sell bread, which appears to cover only Panera and a couple of bakery chains.
Bloomberg News reported this week that Mr. Newsom pushed for an exemption for Panera as a favor for Mr. Flynn. The franchise king donated $100,000 to Mr. Newsom’s 2021 campaign to fend off a recall and $64,800 to support his re-election. The Governor no doubt would appreciate similar backing when he runs for President.
According to our sources, however, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) rejected a broad carve-out for fast-casual restaurants. The union conceded to an exemption for bakeries—but only for those that baked and sold bread before Sept. 15 of last year. McDonald’s can’t start baking brioche buns to win an exemption.
Mr. Flynn says he opposed the bill, never asked for a special exemption, and suggested only that its “language defining ‘fast food restaurant’ should be amended to exclude fast casual restaurants.” He says he met with the Governor’s staff with other restaurant owners, but he was “surprised when the exemption appeared in the final legislation.”
As we explained last autumn, Democrats were scrambling to jettison a referendum to repeal their 2022 Fast Recovery Act. That law established a state council with sweeping powers to dictate wages, benefits and working conditions for fast-food workers. Unions didn’t want to spend tens of millions of dollars to defend it at the ballot box.
Democrats then decided to repeal the 2022 law and rushed through legislation that established the $20 minimum wage and a state board with more modest authorities over fast-food restaurants. The 25% wage increase, which takes effect in April, will wallop restaurants, especially in lower-income areas.
The lesson for California businesses is that if you want protection from the labor mob that runs Sacramento, you better pass the cannoli. Panera may have to raise wages anyway to compete for workers, but perhaps not if the $20 minimum forces fast-food restaurants to lay off employees or drives them out of business.
After news of the Panera pander went viral on TikTok, Mr. Newsom denied paternity. His spokesperson called the Bloomberg Story “absurd,” and said that “the governor never met with Flynn about this bill.” Assembly Member Chris Holden, the bill’s lead sponsor, also denied knowledge of the carve-out’s conception. Behold the immaculate exemption.
The Governor’s spokesperson added that his legal team doesn’t believe Panera is exempt under the law. If that’s the case, Mr. Flynn may want to ask for his money back. On the other hand, the SEIU, which has donated more than $100,000 to Mr. Holden’s political campaigns, is certainly getting its money’s worth.
Mr. Holden is now pushing a bill that adds exemptions for fast-restaurants in airports, hotels, sports stadiums, theme parks, casinos, state parks and corporate office campuses. Our sources say unions have lobbied for these carve-outs because they fear that the $20 minimum wage could make it harder to organize workers at these venues. Plenty of other Democratic donors, including Silicon Valley giants, could also benefit from these exemptions.
When government is all-powerful, as it is in California, this is how politics works. Politicians pass a punishing law for a special interest, then offer exemptions to donors who can pay the going protection rate. The business model was invented in Sicily.
-
They cite inflation and the CA regulatory climate. Unaware of the irony, CA insurance commission says they plan to investigate:
https://legalinsurrection.com/2024/03/state-farm-cuts-72000-california-home-and-apartment-insurance-policies/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=state-farm-cuts-72000-california-home-and-apartment-insurance-policies
-
"Unaware of the irony, CA insurance commission says they plan to investigate:"
- this says it all, although unaware dramatically understates their hostility to the freedom required in the concept of forming private contracts. How can you have consenting parties, essential element of a contract, if the parties don't have the right to not consent?
And they would argue back to me, without using the f word, doug, welcome to california, what is it you don't understand about fascism?
-
Heck, they aren't even attempting to hide the ample thumb atop the scale, scales of "justice" in this case:
Kamala Donor Judge Disbars John Eastman for Representing Trump
Corrupt California State Bar which protected corrupt lawyers, targeting Trump's lawyer.
March 28, 2024 by Daniel Greenfield 12 Comments
Corrupt. Totalitarian. Par for the course.
I was privileged to listen to John Eastman speak twice and lay out his case at David Horowitz Freedom Center events, including at the Restoration Weekend in New Orleans and at an event in Los Angeles. Both times, Eastman spoke compellingly about what he had gone through in the lawfare campaign to destroy him for representing Trump.
That includes the California bar’s effort to disbar him. An effort that has at least temporarily succeeded.
A California judge on Wednesday recommended disbarring a lawyer at the center of former President Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
State Bar Judge Yvette Roland found John Eastman culpable on 10 of the 11 counts filed by the California State Bar last year. The state bar sought to strip Eastman’s license to practice law in the state over “false and misleading statements” about purported election fraud and his role in “provoking” the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.
“In view of the circumstances surrounding Eastman’s misconduct and balancing the aggravation and mitigation, the court recommends that Eastman be disbarred,” Roland wrote in a 128-page decision.
This is the work of an abusive kangaroo court and a political appointee.
Yvette Roland, who had specialized in employment law, as a president of the Black Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles, had been appointed to the State Bar Court by former Speaker Toni Atkins, whose main claim to fame was being the first lesbian in that position, and who tried to climb to the governorship on her record of Trump bashing.
Judge Yvette Roland donated to Kamala Harris in the past, as well as Obama. She’s a partisan Democrat handing down a partisan ruling that penalizes political opposition.
It’s par for the course in California, which has become a totalitarian one-party state, not so much because of a disproportionate demographic political tilt, as because the state became a test lab for leftists using every possible tool to suppress the opposition. Now that’s going nationwide.
Eastman will appeal, but the point here is intimidation as much as anything else.
Now the California State Bar Court has itself been notoriously enmeshed in scandals and been accused of corruption.
The State Bar of California has failed to effectively discipline corrupt attorneys, allowing lawyers to repeatedly violate professional standards and harm members of the public, according to a long-awaited audit of the agency released Thursday.
The audit of the State Bar was ordered last year by the Legislature in the wake of a Los Angeles Times investigation that documented how the now-disgraced attorney Tom Girardi cultivated close relationships with the agency and kept an unblemished law license despite over 100 lawsuits against him or his firm — with many alleging misappropriation of client money.
Earlier this month, a Chicago law firm accused Girardi and other lawyers at his defunct firm of running “the largest criminal racketeering enterprise in the history of plaintiffs’ law,” pocketing millions from clients, vendors and fellow attorneys.
That Girardi’s serial misconduct went unchecked for decades has forced a reckoning among the legal establishment. In addition to the State Bar’s acknowledgement of past mistakes, the agency has also been conducting a broad investigation into whether its own employees or other agency insiders helped Girardi skirt scrutiny. That investigation is ongoing, Duran confirmed.
Until recently, this was all playing out with allegations of RICO violations by the State Bar and million-dollar gifts.
Disbarred Los Angeles lawyer Tom Girardi funneled more than $1 million in gifts and payments to an investigator at the State Bar of California and the investigator’s wife, a USC accounting professor, according to a report released Friday.
The long-anticipated report, the result of a year-and-a-half investigation by a law firm working for the State Bar’s governing board, detailed how Girardi cultivated and sustained an “extensive network of connections at all levels” of the agency tasked with regulating California’s legal profession and described corruption beyond what is publicly known.
The law firm’s investigation also documented how numerous State Bar officials with close ties to Girardi killed complaints that came into the agency or improperly closed cases about the lawyer’s alleged misconduct.
After failing to take action against lawyers who were allegedly committing massive fraud, the State Bar went after John Eastman for… having the wrong politics.
That’s the California Democratic machine in a nutshell.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
https://www.frontpagemag.com/kamala-donor-judge-disbars-john-eastman-for-representing-trump/
-
Outrageous. Chapman was Dean of the Chapman University Law School.
Zacarias Moussaoui has a right to have legal counsel advocate on his behalf. Donald Trump doesn't.
Of course they are trying to scare all good lawyers from ever assisting Trump.
I think it's called, operation backfire.
-
A follow up to a piece I believe Crafty originally posted regarding a tax carve out in a recent minimum wage bill that contained a very specific carve out for a Newsom donor:
California’s ‘Paneragate’ Shows How Lobbyists Are Now Crafting Laws
March 25, 2024
By LEE E. OHANIAN
Office of the Governor of California
Also published in California on Your Mind Tue. March 19, 2024
Bloomberg recently broke a story about a bizarre exemption from California’s new fast-food franchise regulations—which include a $20 minimum wage and oversight of working conditions from a politically appointed council—for those franchises that “produce and sell bread as a standalone item.” The exemption first drew media attention last fall when it was signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom. When a reporter asked Newsom about the strange carve-out, Newsom responded, “That is how the sausage is made,” with no further explanation.
Newsom now regrets his “sausage” comment from last September, because Bloomberg was told that the exemption is not just your generic sausage but was included to satisfy none other than Newsom. Why? Because a key beneficiary of the exemption was Greg Flynn, the owner of 24 Panera Bread franchises in the state. Flynn and Newsom attended the same high school, they had a business transaction about 10 years ago, and Flynn has contributed over $160,000 to Newsom’s campaigns.
Bloomberg’s story went viral, including articles in the New York Times and the Washington Post. After the story broke, Newsom responded a few days later that the appearance of “pay for play” for Flynn was “absurd,” but he again provided no explanation for how the exemption came to be.
State lawyers are now claiming that Panera is in fact not exempt, even though they produce bread on site and sell it as a standalone item. Why? Because the lawyers are now saying the exemption requires that the bread dough must be made from scratch on the premises. Panera bakes the bread on site, but the dough is made at another facility. Regarding the exemption, the law says nothing about where bread dough is made to qualify for the exemption. This is obviously revisionist history that happens to be extraordinarily politically convenient for Newsom and state legislators.
Flynn has not commented on whether or not Panera is exempt from the law, but he stated he would pay the $20 minimum wage, which will take an uncomfortably hot political spotlight off him.
Since the Bloomberg story broke, the claim that Flynn’s relationship with Newsom had nothing to do with the exemption is becoming harder to swallow, and the degree of influence that political lobbyists had on the bill is being shown to have been far beyond any previously reported.
No one in Sacramento is willing to say why or for whom the exemption is there. The bill covers the state’s major fast-food franchises, including McDonald’s, Burger King, Taco Bell, Jack in the Box, Wendy’s, Del Taco, Chipotle, Panda Express, Jersey Mike’s, and Carl’s Jr., among others. None satisfy the exemption. So just who qualifies? KCRA, the NBC news affiliate in Sacramento, confirmed Bloomberg’s story with multiple sources who indicated that the law’s exemption was included to obtain approval by the governor and reflects Flynn’s influence. There are no plausible explanations for the carve-out other than Panera. In fact, there are no alternative explanations for the exemption whatsoever.
Someone knows—perhaps many people know—but won’t talk. Certainly, the author of the bill would know, yes? No. Assemblyman Chris Holden wrote the bill, but he doesn’t know how the Panera exemption got there. How is this even possible? Because Holden was not part of the final negotiations on the bill.
So, just who was crafting the legislation if the bill’s author wasn’t? The Service Employees International Union (SEIU), that’s who. Despite the unwillingness of those involved to go on the record, KCRA reporter Ashley Zavala, who has been covering the story closely, managed to get an SEIU director to admit that there was a political impasse regarding the bill’s final negotiations and that state leaders asked the SEIU to “figure this out.”
There is a line between political advocacy and political influence. And beyond that, there is a line between political influence and who ultimately makes policy. “Paneragate” shows that both of those lines have been blatantly crossed. Advocacy groups provide input. They certainly don’t write laws. Even worse, the SEIU required those involved in finalizing the bill to sign nondisclosure agreements. The SEIU claims this was done to create an atmosphere of trust. I suspect everyone else sees it as a way of keeping those involved from talking about what appears to be “pay for play.” The use of nondisclosure agreements in the legislative process is highly unusual and clearly flies in the face of political transparency.
The involvement of the SEIU, one of the largest labor unions within the state, has a huge political influence component itself, because California’s new fast-food law exempts franchisees who have a collective bargaining agreement. In California, more than 300,000 employees work in fast-food franchises, with few covered by a union contract. By creating a fast-food minimum wage that significantly exceeds the statewide minimum of $16 per hour, and by creating a fast-food employee relations oversight council, the new law has made collective bargaining much more palatable for franchisees. Like California’s awful 2020 law that forces many independent contractors to become employees (AB 5), the new fast-food law is a union payoff.
Nineteen Republican state lawmakers have signed a letter sent to state attorney general Rob Bonta requesting that his office investigate Paneragate. Thus far, Bonta, who was originally appointed to his position by Newsom, has not responded to the request, and I can’t imagine he ever will pursue an investigation.
To sum up, here’s what’s in Newsom’s “sausage”: A nondisclosure agreement crafted by a labor union negotiating the final stages of legislation, without the author of the bill. A one-off political carve-out that no one will own, and that ex post facto appears to benefit no one, despite multiple sources reporting it was created for a significant Newsom donor. An attorney general who is unresponsive to an investigative request from 19 lawmakers.
California needs new political transparency laws. A good model would be Florida’s transparency law, which permits anyone to inspect and copy any state, local, or municipal record. No nondisclosure agreements there.
Paneragate shows just how far California lawmaking has declined. And what should be an embarrassing stain on the state’s political leadership is simply business as usual, with all involved parties clamming up and hoping it dries up and blows away. Why do we accept such an abysmal level of governance?
LEE E. OHANIAN is a Research Fellow at the Independent Institute, Senior Fellow
https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=14887
-
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/california-s-20-minimum-wage-forces-mass-fast-food-layoffs/ss-BB1kTBU3?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=f6243d762c264438a99d15526bb81e3b&ei=13#image=1
-
The government policies forced the business out of business, and now they get sued for closing. Welcome to the Third Reich, I mean California, and as California goes, so goes the nation.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/04/san_francisco_to_allow_residents_to_sue_fleeing_groceries_that_don_t_give_six_months_notice_before_closing.html
One more time, are you fkg kidding me?
-
https://www.theepochtimes.com/article/democrats-used-a-bold-strategy-to-turn-colorado-blue-now-the-gop-wants-to-win-it-back-5624966?src_src=epochHG&src_cmp=rcp
Can Colorado be flipped back? (Minnesota too.)
Cut 10 points off their margin. Margin of victory or defeat matters.
1. Message
2. Money
3. Winning strategy
All intertwined.
GOP needs to be more competitive in Colorado (and California) (and MN) (and Virginia) and so on.
We are currently vacationing in Berkeley, studying the blue model up close.
-
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2024/04/12/audit-finds-blue-state-cant-account-for-24-billion-supposedly-spent-homeless-crisis-1452001/?utm_campaign=bizpac&utm_content=Newsletter&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_source=Get%20Response&utm_term=EMAIL
-
https://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/products/rescond.pdf
Thanks to Climate Change ( :wink:)
all reservoirs are above historical averages:
https://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/products/rescond.pdf
The Greens look like this => :-o :cry: