Tag: California

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall local leaders nannyism regulation

Discrimination, California-​Style

California, racism, discrimination, government, corruption

How far will a California lawmaker go to try reverse a validly enacted and also very good citizen initiative?

In 1996, California voters passed Proposition 209, the California Civil Rights Initiative, which prohibits the state government from imposing race-​based, ethnicity-​based, or sex-​based preferences.

Prop 209 added a section to the California Constitution stating that the government “shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.”

In 2020, friends of racial discrimination tried to revive racial preferences through a referendum. But voters shot it down, even though proponents outspent opponents 14 to one.

Now California Assemblyman Corey Jackson wants to revive racial preferences another way. His bill, ACA7, would not touch the language of Proposition 209. But it would empower the governor to make exceptions. What exceptions? Any he wishes, as long as he spews the right rationalizations when he does so.

Law professor Gail Heriot, who has launched a change​.org petition to oppose the measure, says that “ACA7’s proponents are hoping that voters will be fooled into thinking that it is just a small exception. In fact, it gives the governor enormous power to nullify Proposition 209.”

ACA7 has passed the House and now goes to the state senate, awaiting the magic of legislative action. Heriot says Californians should let their senators know where they stand on the bill. I don’t disagree.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
general freedom regulation too much government

Unlimited Limits

nanny state

Do politicians understand limits? 

They seem to have this notion that they may limit us every which way … with no natural or civilized limit set upon the limits they may impose.

Take California lawmaker Scott Wiener.

This state senator (District 11‑D.) has introduced a bill to force carmakers to install a gadget limiting vehicle speed to a maximum of ten miles per hour above the speed limit. The murderous gadget would be installed starting with 2027 car models.

I foresee problems. Hence that word “murderous.” Wouldn’t it be kind of dumb to have to go slower than the traffic all around you if that other traffic consists of pre-​2027 vehicles going markedly faster than the speed limit?

Also, mightn’t emergency vehicles often have good reason to zip along faster than this gadget-​imposed maximum?

Not to worry. The Hill reports that emergency vehicles would be exempt, “and the California Highway Patrol could authorize the system’s disabling in certain other cases.”

Touble is, any vehicle can, at any time, become an “emergency vehicle” — if an emergency requires it to move faster than the Wiener-​imposed limit. Do you then call up the California Highway Patrol and ask that the gadget be disabled? What if you have five seconds to act? That’s not much time to beg the California Highway Patrol to give you control over your own property.

I detect hazards in letting government control every aspect of our lives and every movement we make. Can we put on the brakes, please?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
Accountability general freedom

The S‑Word in California

California, immigration, socialism, spending

Frédéric Bastiat called it “spoliation”; California’s Democratic politicians call it social justice.

A bill went into effect last week, offering complete medical coverage to an estimated 700,000 undocumented — illegal — immigrants.  The price tag? 3.1 billion dollars.

Well, not “price tag”: call it a subsidy tag.

California taxpayers will pay for it. Or perhaps U.S. taxpayers will end up with the bill, as Dagen McDowell insisted on Fox News, prophesying that the program “will turn into a national issue” that will, inevitably, “swamp the federal budget.” 

Ms. McDowell also noted that the state’s targeted sugar daddies, the wealthy, “are going to other states, so much that they’ve lost a congressional seat,” all of which must lead to insolvency.

Indeed, the state is running far into the red — the color of the ink on budget columns, not voting columns. The state faces not merely annual deficits and a huge debt, there is also this looming trillion-​dollar debt implied by the unfunded liabilities of the state employee pensions.

There is an old pattern here, which is why I brought up an old author in the first sentence.

First we subsidize the poor. Then we extend the subsidies up the income ladder. Now we give huge subsidies to those who enter the country illegally.

It’s as if Californians have forgotten the nature of income redistribution: you have to have income to redistribute. At some point the wealth being taken from the productive vanishes, as society becomes unproductive and descends into ruin.

There are two meanings of Bastiat’s “spoliation”:

noun
1 the action of ruining or destroying something.
2 the action of taking goods or property from somewhere by illegal or unethical means.

The two are linked. 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Midjourney and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
free trade & free markets political economy too much government

The Not-​Unintended Consequences

Gavin Newsom, California, fast food, regulation

When bad outcomes are obvious, we can no longer call them “unintended consequences,” can we?

Take the case of California’s double-​barreled attack upon “fast food”: last year’s push through the legislature of Assembly Bill 102 and Assembly Bill 1228. These regulatory schemes would have introduced collective bargaining into fast food franchises and enforced much higher minimum wage rates.

The two laws sparked an industry backlash, in the form of ballot referendums to halt the regulatory onslaught, which Steven Greenhut writes about at Reason. “In September, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced a ‘truce,’” Greenhut explains. “The industry pulled its ballot measure and agreed to a $20 minimum wage. In return, Newsom and unions limited the power of the Fast Food Council and removed joint-​liability provisions.”

The concession on hiking the legal wage minimum was agreed to, notice, by the fast food lobbyists. Not the workers. 

As those familiar with elementary economics understand, when the costs of an input (like labor) are increased, alternatives to those inputs will be sought. So we can expect more replacements of workers with automation — as we’ve seen all around the country in fast food, especially at McDonald’s — as well as higher prices.

Which, in a state sporting huge homelessness and unemployment problems, will only hobble the one industry that helps the poorest members of society both in terms of consumer products (inexpensive food) and entry-​level jobs (at fast food joints).

Perhaps California’s Democrats know full well what they are doing. They push crazy policies not because the negative outcomes are “unintended” or unforeseeable.

You see, it’s not disastrous for them.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
too much government

Fiscal Protector

California, condoms, Gavin Newsom

Why doesn’t California Governor Gavin Newsom care about kids?

What is it with this “conservative”? 

Last week, Newsom coldly deployed his veto pen to deny to Golden State public high school students the sex subsidies — in this case, free condoms — that a solid majority of their state legislators had determined were essential to their healthy development.

Senate Bill 541 would have mandated that all public schools make condoms available free to all students, grades nine through twelve. According to an Associated Press report, the legislation would also “have made it illegal for retailers to refuse to sell condoms to youth.” 

The bill’s author, State Sen. Caroline Menjivar, a Los Angeles Democrat, contends the legislation is needed to help “youth who decide to become sexually active to protect themselves and their partners from (sexually transmitted infections), while also removing barriers that potentially shame them and lead to unsafe sex.”

Newsom agreed that free condoms, even if not yet recognized as a fundamental human right, are “important to supporting improved adolescent sexual health.”

His problem? Condoms cost too much. 

“With our state facing continuing economic risk and revenue uncertainty,” explained the governor, “it is important to remain disciplined when considering bills with significant fiscal implications.”

Seems California is already running a $30 billion deficit. Becoming the condom supplier of first resort for 1.9 million hormone-​infused students each year would annually add a few million more to that deficit.

Ah, California … where Gavin Newsom is the voice of fiscal restraint. 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob. 

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
crime and punishment folly too much government

The California Experiment

safety first, California, socialism, globalism, global warming, climate change, control

California is determined to give us the full bleak picture of totalitarianism, American-style.

Anticipating proposed SEC regulations, Newsom’s California is set to impose nonsensical mandates for reporting greenhouse gas emissions and “climate-​related financial risk” that target companies with annual revenue of $1 billion or more (according to the terms of SB253) and $500 million or more (SB261).

Billion-​dollar businesses will have to report all direct and indirect emissions, including emissions produced throughout a business’s supply chain. Business travel. Employee commutes. Penalties for failure to report could be as high as $500,000.

The cost is in time, money, privacy, freedom, with no benefits except to bureaucrats and politicians who enjoy bossing us around and destroying our ability to function.

These requirements are tyrannical in the same way they’d be tyrannical if required of you and me as individuals. 

Do you know all about the emissions produced in delivering the water, electricity, electronics, gas, paper you use each month? 

Care to drop everything you’re doing to find out? 

And submit the data in a bureaucrat-​satisfying format?

We already know what the results of California’s experiment will be. We already know that crushing freedom and giving unfettered power to slave-​masters is not the road to wealth and happiness.

What we don’t know is exactly how far the Tarnished State’s aspiring totalitarians will go. But whatever the consequences, they’ll blame others … or just mutter “Good riddance, we didn’t want that prosperity and those evil businesses anyway.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with DALL-​E2 and PicFinder​.ai

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
crime and punishment government transparency international affairs

The Chinese Biolab in California

California, biolab, China

The abandoned biolab found last December in Reedley, California, was uncovered by local law enforcement — not the Department of Homeland Security, the CDC, the FBI, or any of the federales’ faker’s dozen of intel agencies.

But the locals quickly discovered this was not just an unregistered business, or the anodyne testing service the paperwork for the company promised. What they found in the warehouse was a suspicious array of mice, living and dead, and vials of diseases, kept, we are told, in a careless manner.

Almost as ominously, the business — Prestige Biotech, previously known as Universal Meditech Inc. — is Chinese-​owned and operated. 

And had received government subsidies. 

Ours! Who knows what came from China?

“House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R‑Calif.) and Rep. Jim Costa (D‑Calif.), who represent congressional districts in California’s Central Valley, wrote a letter to the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee seeking a probe into how and why Universal Meditech Inc. was granted two Payment Protection Program (PPP) loans of $74,912 each in April 2020 and February 2021,” explains The Epoch Times.

The company had previously been awarded — but did not qualify for or actually receive — a $360,000 tax credit under California’s CalCompetes GO-​Biz program.

Why wasn’t this tale told for half a year? 

“The FBI,” as Mark Tapscott writes, “imposed a blackout on any public statements about the facility.” 

“[T]he FBI and the CDC and everybody else in the alphabet soup of state and federal agencies” told locals not to comment, says Reedley City Manager Nicole Zieba.

Curiously, the reporting makes no mention of Homeland Security. What is that agency for, again?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder​.ai and DALL-E2

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
deficits and debt election law tax policy

Slasher Needs Slashing

California Assembly, tax, taxes

A perennial bill in the California Assembly, Constitutional Amendment 1, would make it harder for voters to block local tax increases in accordance with the provisions of Proposition 13, which voters passed in 1978.

ACA 1 would shrink the percentage of voters who must approve certain tax increases from two thirds to 55 percent in cases where the money would purportedly be used for infrastructure or public housing.

Passage would further erode the legacy of Prop 13, which in addition to cutting taxes, limiting tax increases, and requiring a two-​thirds legislative majority to increase state taxes, also imposed a two-​thirds threshold for voter approval for special local taxes.

In 2000, voters accepted a lower threshold for approval of school bonds — 55 percent instead of two thirds — enabling billions more in property taxes.

That’s bad enough, but things could easily get worse.

Jon Coupal of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association observes that if enacted, ACA 1 would be used to raise taxes repeatedly in local elections by dint of dubbing all government spending “infrastructure.” 

The infrastructure exemption is an innovation of the 2023 version of the bill (the tricky tricksters never stop).

Moreover, if passed, the amendment would take effect immediately. “Billions of dollars in tax hikes will start that much faster.”

Coupal stresses that the new exactions would be added to property tax bills “above and beyond Prop 13’s one percent cap” on property taxes.

ACA 1 keeps getting reintroduced and, so far, keeps getting killed off, like the mad killer in a teen slasher movie. Only to be revived for the sequel.

Kill it again.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder​.ai and DALL-E2

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
First Amendment rights general freedom judiciary

High Court Too Busy

California, gig, contractor, speech, censorship

What is the U.S. SupremeCourt thinking by refusing even to listen to arguments about the effects of California’s AB5 law, which effectively outlaws certain kinds of freelancing and gig work, on the right to speak out and petition in California?

The case is Mobilize the Message, LLC v. Bona. Plaintiffs were challenging the constitutionality of AB5 because it bans independent contractors from doing door-​to-​door canvassing for candidates or initiative campaigns yet allows independent contractors to do the same kind of work if they’re doing it as newspaper carriers or salesmen.

Of course, if AB5 were completely consistent in its assault on independent contractors, that wouldn’t make it any less injurious to political work and freedom of speech. But the separate and unequal provisions of the act do mean that political workers are being forced to abide by different rules than certain nonpolitical contractors.

That’s not right, not just.

As the Institute for Free Speech puts it, “The only distinguishing feature separating the two [kinds of contractors] is the content of the speech they are paid to promote, a distinction that is presumptively unconstitutional under the First Amendment.”

Lead counsel for the plaintiffs, Alan Gura, says that the Court’s decision will “price political speech beyond the reach of many citizens.”

What’s the deal, are the justices too busy? 

We’re all busy. 

On the other hand, they have a job. A lot of folks in California could use one, too.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder​.ai

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
folly ideological culture too much government

Apocalypse California

Gavin Newsom, California, reparations, racism

The Democratic Party is a victim of its own success. Nowhere can we see that more clearly than in California.

Democrats have succeeded by pushing “victimhood,” gaining power by focusing on special groups, declaring them oppressed and offering compensation — though still never comes the day of full escape from the burden of this oppression.

Many stories of oppression are true.But no sized sliver of truth can guarantee that compensation attempts will redound to the liberation of the aggrieved.

California’s Democrats will face this soon.

Over slavery! And racism.

Never a slave state, California has been flirting, officially, with reparations. Several cities have “explored” the idea. An official “Reparations Task Force,” established by state law, has recommended a formal apology for slavery (in other states, over a hundred-​and-​fifty years ago). It’s also talking about giving away hundreds of billions of dollars in compensation to Black Californians, descendants of slaves or not. 

The task force is scheduled to make explicit and detailed recommendations —  on July 1.

Which puts Democrats on the spot.

Powerful Democrats such as Governor Gavin Newsom. Considered a rising presidential aspirant should the current 82-​year-​old decide not to run again, Newsom signed the law to officially look at reparations … but then seemed less than fond of the price-​tag. More than twice the yearly state budget!

Now the governor is keeping his mouth shut awaiting the final report.

And, as George Skelton at the L.A. Times asks, then what? Well, that is when “the governor and lawmakers will need to emerge from cover, face the public and devise a better response.”

But up until July they can still pretend.

Then, Democrats will have to face the reparations issue squarely — and in the context of the complete failure of their state, the blame for which they cannot place upon Republicans, much less long-​dead racist slave-owners.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder​.ai and DALL-E2

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts