|
a
running commentary by our trusted california contributors...
|
CRO
Blog archive index
|
The
Bear Flag
League
|
|
[3/31/06
Friday]
[Nick
Winter-administrative editor] 12:14 am [permalink]
Good
riddance Now
that Reiner is gone, let's fix First 5 [from the San Diego Union Tribune]
The news that actor-director-activist Rob Reiner has finally resigned as chairman
of the
First
5 commission couldn't
be more welcome.
However
one feels about children's causes, Reiner's role in First
5's decision to use $23 million in taxpayer funds to pay
for "preschool for all TV ads as he gathered signatures
for his "preschool for all initiative is indefensible.
That Reiner depicted the criticism coming his way as being
entirely politically motivated is a contemptible insult
to the taxpayers who paid for his scam.
Unfortunately,
Reiner's departure is unlikely to do anything to change
the culture at First 5 [more at SD
Union Tribune]
[3/30/06
Thursday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
Voter Guide The Secretary of State has issued
the Voter Guide that will be mailed to every voter for the June 2006 Primary
election. You can see it now at: http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/elections_viguide06.htm
I always
read the ballot statements filed by candidates. They give good
insight into the priorities of the candidate. I also find that
these statements are one of the cheapest ways to communicate
with voters and I appreciate candidates who take the time and
spend the money to reach out to the voter. What is interesting
is who agrees with me and makes this effort.
On the Republican
side of the ballot Governor Schwarzenegger did not place a
ballot statement but he really has no opposition this June.
Senator Tom McClintock running unopposed for Lieutenant Governor
did buy a statement slot to remind Republicans of his leadership
and to offer voters his web site to find out more. The candidates
for the nomination for Controller and Treasurer did submit
ballot statements so that voters will learn more about Tony
Strickland, Abel Maldonando, Claude Parrish and Keith Richman.
Needless to say I put in a ballot statement, but my opponent
did not.
It gets really
interesting on the Democratic side as three candidate for governor
got ballot statements but neither Phil Angelides nor Steve
Westley who are battling head to head did so. Both their campaigns
missed a wonderful opportunity to present themselves to Democratic
voters. The main candidates for lieutenant governor, secretary
of state, controller, treasurer, and insurance commissioner
all paid the fee to get their statements in the voter guide.
In another missed opportunity neither Jerry Brown nor Rocky
Delgadillo running for attorney general reached out to voters
in this way.
Those that
missed this opportunity will have to make up for it in some
other way and this will cost even more money. Let's check after
the election to see how much difference these ballot statements
did make. [Leonard
Blog]
[3/29/06
Wednesday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
Budget Pop Quiz Every
year the Legislative Analyst's Office invites the Capitol press corps to
take its budget quiz and offers a box of doughnuts to the reporter who gets the
most correct answers. This year, no reporters even attempted to answer the questions.
Perhaps that's because the LAO changed the prize from the traditional doughnuts
to muffins and bagels. Or perhaps it's because even the reporters who cover the
state cannot make heads nor tails of this stuff. Judge for yourself with the
sample questions below. The answers
are at the end of this post.
1. The Department
of Motor Vehicles (DMV) faces a statutory deadline of October
2006 to set up a new computer system so it can suspend the
registration of vehicles when their owners fail to provide
evidence to the state that they have auto insurance. Which
of the following events has occurred during the development
of this project?
a) In February
2005, DMV proposed to contract out the new computer system
to a vendor.
b) In May 2005, DMV proposed instead to hire staff to carry out the project.
c) In July 2005, DMV changed its mind and again proposed to hire a vendor.
d) All of the above occurred and the project is unlikely to be completed
by the October 2006 deadline.
2. The School
Land Bank Fund is expected to have a $59 million balance at
the end of 2006-07 that can be used to acquire property and
earn lease revenues for the support of public education. How
much has been spent for these activities in the last five years?
a) Nothing.
b) $12 million.
c) $114 million.
d) $256 million.
3. The budget
proposed a new human resources initiative to assist state departments
in coping with the expected retirement of up to 100,000 "baby
boom" state employees during the next decade. The new
initiative would be supported by a staff of how many state
employees?
a) 100.
b) 25.
c) 8.
d) 1.
4. The state
has budgeted more than $200 million to pay for emergency repairs
at schools to address conditions that pose a threat to the
health and safety of students or staff. Almost none of the
money has been allocated to districts. What does the LAO identify
as one of the reasons why?
a) School
districts are reluctant to spend money on repairs because
it is uncertain if the state will reimburse them for after-the-fact
work.
b) Schools already had sufficient unspent bond funds available for these
projects.
c) Continued litigation over the school repair issue has held up release
of the funds.
d) Because of recent statewide school facility investments, only a limited
number of school district have outstanding emergency repair needs.
Answers to
the Budget Quiz
1) D 2) A 3) D 4) A
[3/28/06
Tuesday]
[Jim
Kouri - columnist]
- 12:05
am [permalink]
The Illegal Immigration Reform Scam This
weekend, thousands of activists and illegal aliens have
been rallying in Los Angeles to protest against plans to
further criminalize so-called undocumented workers. The
protest's main organizer Javier Rodriguez has ties to the
radical left group MEchA, which believes Mexicans have
a right to repopulate lands stolen from them by the United
States.
The mainstream
news media put a happy-face on the protest, which is part of
a series of such events throughout the nation. While the news
reporters talked about illegal workers who perform jobs Americans
refuse to perform, they continue to avoid mentioning the tens
of thousands of illegal immigrants who prey on men, women and
children -- US citizens. It is these innocent Americans who
are murdered, raped and robbed because of an insane immigration
policy. Criminal aliens are entering the US in
the tens of thousands and remaining here as they join violent gangs such as
MS-13, or they choose to commit their mayhem solo.
Meanwhile,
a number of Americans are being intentionally confused by US
lawmakers who are debating legislation that would reform immigration.
The news media help in creating this confusion. Did you ever
read about the fact that in the past 5 months the US Border
Patrol has detained 42,000 illegals who were convicted criminals
or persons wanted for crimes committed at our borders? Last
year, the Homeland Security Department reported that 140,000
detainees apprehended at the border had criminal
records at the time of their arrest. These are the illegal being intercepted,
what about the ones who get through?
One bill
would set up a Guest Worker Program. Wow, now that will help
to protect Americans. Another would make violation of immigration
law a felony instead of a misdemeanor; and yet another would
allow the governent to build a security fence on our southern
border. In addition, we have politicians and immigration advocates
lying about what's contained in these bills or using vitriolic
language in their opposition to cracking down on illegal immigration.
One politician
accused her opponents of trying to create a police state. Another
threatened to filibuster tough illegal immigration laws. And
the immigration activists fabricate what's actually contained
in these bills, creating illusions of police officers dragging
innocent immigrants from their homes and crowding them into
jail cells. And that's mild compared to the rhetoric of leftist
groups such as MEchA (Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan),
who call anyone desiring tougher border
security and immigration enforcement "Right-wing racists."
The problem
isn't about the need for new laws; the problem is about the
lack of enforcement of existing laws. The US Constitution provides
the executive branch with a number of inherent powers such
as the enforcement of immigration laws.
The Constitution
also mandates that the President protect American sovereignty
and the American people. That is the number one priority for
our government -- of it should be. And congress is mandated
to provide domestic tranquility for Americans. Criminal alien
gangbangers do not add to our domestic tranquility.
Why is it
suddenly necessary for congress to pass laws on illegal immigration
when we haven't been enforcing the laws that already exist.
The executive branch has the power to add border agents, equipment
and other resources. The President has the power to use the
military if necessary to enhance border protection. Passing
laws is an easy, painless process. The trick is to enforce
those laws.
And why isn't
the US government arresting illegal aliens while they are protesting
in our city's streets all across the country? The protest organizers,
are said to be sponsored by left-wing groups including Open
Borders and MEChA, are protesting the border security bill
that passed the US House of Representatives in December and
is still awaiting passage by the US Senate.
The University
of Texas at El Paso recently conducted a study that found the
following: Treating illegal immigrants in hospitals accounts
for nearly one quarter of the uncompensated costs at border
county hospitals in Cochise County. That county in Arizona
spends tens of thousands of dollars just picking up trash left
at campsites by these illegals. Prosecuting and jailing illegals
costs this county an additional $5 million a year. And 25 percent
of Cochise County's budget is paid for health care for the
uninsured, the majority of whom are illegally in the country.
In another
study of a sample group of 55,000 criminal aliens, it was discovered
they accounted for over 400,000 arrests and more than 700,000
criminal acts including felonies. In Los Angeles, the city
that's hosting the protest -- which was whole-heartedly endorsed
by its mayor -- 95% of the outstanding arrest warrants for
homicides are for illegal aliens and 65% of all felony warrants
are for so-called undocumented immigrants. Are they committing
the crimes Americans won't commit?
[3/27/06
Monday]
[Found
in the ebag-from PLF] 12:01 am [permalink]
California Officials Seek To Revive Reckless Bond Scheme That PLF Defeated: Late
last year, Pacific Legal Foundation scored a major win for fiscal responsibility
when it persuaded a judge to strike down a dubious borrowing ploy to pay for
government pensions in California. The $500 million-plus in "pension obligation
bonds" were illegal, PLF successfully argued, because they hadn't been
submitted to California voters as required by the state Constitution.
But state
officials haven't given up trying to sell these "no vote" bonds.
This month they are preparing an appeal of PLF's courtroom
victory, to be filed with the California Third District Court
of Appeal. So PLF will have to stay in this fight, battling
all the way up the appellate ladder--perhaps, ultimately, to
the state Supreme Court--in defense of fiscal prudence, voters'
rights, and constitutional integrity.
The "pension
obligation bonds" would saddle future generations with
the burden of paying a single year's--2006's--state pension
costs. Because the state must make a contribution to the pension
system every year, incurring a 20-year debt to pay for one
year's contribution is as reckless as a homeowner taking out
a long-term bank loan to make a single mortgage payment.
The case
also highlights the spiraling cost of public pensions in California.
The state's annual payment to the Public Employee Retirement
System has ballooned from about $160 million five years ago
to more than $2.6 billion last year.
"The
whole purpose behind the Constitution's requirement for voter
approval of state debt is to keep politicians from paying for
ordinary operating expenses with long-term borrowing," said
PLF attorney Harold Johnson. "The pension bonds represent
just such an irresponsible use of the borrowing power."
PLF's client
in challenging the pension bonds is the Fullerton Association
of Concerned Taxpayers (FACT). FACT President Thomas Babcock
said it's essential to fight the state's effort to revive the
bond scheme that PLF defeated: "California lawmakers need
to be taught once and for all that they can't get away with
borrowing billions on the backs of our children because they
lack the fiscal discipline to live within their means."
Read commentary
on PLF's victory over the pension bonds from the Reason
Foundation, The Orange
County Register, and The
Sacramento Bee.
[3/24/06
Friday]
[Wayne
Lusvardi contributor] 12:03
am [permalink]
Behind the Media Curtain of the Eminent Domain Game Eminent
domain is a co-production of media and government - In
Pasadena, California the city uses eminent domain only for
politically correct projects, such as its Fair Oaks-Orange
Grove shopping center developed by a well-known minority political
power broker in the Democratic Party, but not for car dealers
such as the Rusnak Mercedes-Benz auto dealership which moved
to the nearby City of Arcadia. Arcadia is more receptive to
using eminent domain for the Rusnak dealership to the consternation
of some who are urging the signing of a petition at the well-known
1950’s diner Rod's Grill, one of the properties to be
taken by eminent domain (see here)
The so-called
affordable housing crisis in Pasadena may eventually see the
city again use its politically correct version of eminent domain
to acquire a site for a housing project. Look for such a project
to target political constituencies for the Democratic Party
such as unionized public employees, Cal-Tech instructors, even
NASA-Jet Propulsion Lab employees, much like this project in
Prince William Sound which is dedicated for firefighters, policemen,
and teachers (see here).
Contrary to the media spin put forth in the local Pasadena
newspapers, the affordable housing crisis in Pasadena has been
principally caused by the inflation of apartment rents by the
City's Inclusionary Housing Law and by allowing illegal migrants
who now constitute about one-third of the City’s population
to double up in housing, both of which greatly inflate apartment
rents.
"Affordable
housing" is just an official term for well-disguised subsidized
housing for favored political constituencies, often selectively
paid for by landowners rather than all taxpayers (see here: “Inclusionary
Housing as a Peal Shell Game”). In the City of Long
Beach for example, the City is condemning a Filipino Baptist
Church property (ostensibly a "Red" political constituency)
for "affordable housing" (ostensibly for "Blue" constituency
occupants) [see here ].
This is why the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer's Association has now
endorsed the Homeowner's and Private Property Protection Act
(see here).
Other than for true public works projects, eminent domain is
a co-production of government and the media that purports to
serve the public interest while it serves politicized special
voting constituencies.
[3/23/06
Thursday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
One If By Land From the Bill Leonard
Blog March 16, 2006 There is a story going around that State Senate President
Pro Tempore Don Perata posted lookouts at the door to the Senate chambers
to watch out for any Assembly-passed bond bill being transmitted between
the houses. When the sentries called out, “The bond is coming,
the bond is coming,” the Senate abruptly adjourned its session
thus preventing the Assembly-passed bond bill from being considered.
I know this does not have the same drama as Paul Revere's ride, but it
is an indication that for all the press about fights between the Governor
and the legislature, and the struggles between the Republicans and the
Democrats, we should never forget the institutionalized tussle between
the Senate and the Assembly. [Leonard
Blog]
[3/22/06
Wednesday]
[Carol
Platt Liebau - editorial
director CaliforniaRepublic.org] 12:03 am [permalink]
More Fallout
from
the "Revolution" Anyone
who still thought the sexual revolution
was costless should read this piece
from Cathy Young.
It's about men who have sex with women out of wedlock, and are then resentful
when the women choose not to have abortions, thereby requiring them to pay child
support for a baby they didn't plan on making. Women, they argue, can choose
to abort the child or to have it -- a choice they don't get to make. If she chooses
the latter, they insist, they should be able to terminate their financial obligation.
Nice. Sounds like chivalry truly is dead.
First, as Young points out, where does that leave the children? Minus not only
a father, but without whatever money he would have contributed to the child's
upbringing.
Where does that leave the mother? Coerced toward having the abortion, if she
doesn't believe that she could manage without assistance from the father.
Where does that leave society? In many cases, supporting children whose fathers
were happy enough to make them, significantly less happy to deal with the consequences.
It is unfair, as Young points out, that men can have to give up significant
portions of their income for 21 years because they can't control the abortion "choice." But
in the same sense, biology is inherently "unfair," too. Because those men won't
be the ones either to risk the psychological and physical trauma that can result
from an abortion (even one that's freely chosen) or else end up primarily responsible
for a child.
Women can't offload the responsibility of carrying and birthing (or aborting)
a child to men (nor, precious as it is, would most want to). Men can't offload
the responsibility for providing financially for the children they make.
Maybe it's just something to keep in mind before one gets carried away in the
heat of the moment [Liebau
Blog]
[3/21/06
Tuesday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
No Heavy Lifting Required Kudos to Senator Abel
Maldonado for his sound recommendations that the UC Regents take charge of their
own university. I do not think they will listen to him because the Regents long
ago stopped being a true, responsible board of directors and instead take the
perks of regency while delegating away everything to the UC President and the
faculty. Any other corporate or non-profit board would be held personally liable
for corruption, but apparently not our UC Regents. No more jokes about CalTrans
workers leaning on shovels-- if you really want a high paying job with NO heavy
lifting and little expectation that you will even show up for work then contact
President Dynes. There are days like this when I wish that UC had to file a tax
return and pay
taxes like the rest of us. [Leonard
Blog]
[3/20/06
Monday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
Whose Party Is It? Remember the name Michael Huffington? If not,
congratulations on not being a political trivia master. If yes, then you will
not be surprised by his most recent sighting. He is hosting a reception this
week for an organization called “It‚s My Party, Too.” The mission
of the organization is “to keep the big tent‚ approach to the Republican
Party alive and well.” The group”s website says, “It is time
for moderates in the Republican Party to become activists, activists for the
sensible center, for reasonable policies based on the fundamental republican
principles, which address the challenges Americans face at home and around the
world.” I am not sure what that sentence means, what policies could be
derived from it, nor how any particular politician would diverge from whatever
those policies are. Unfortunately, groups like this are the cause of the divisions
they complain about. They seemed determined not to welcome all comers, but to
drive out conservatives. They have their mantra, but it seems to ignore reality.
Consider some key officeholders in California Republican circles: Arnold Schwarzenegger,
Abel Maldonado, Keith Richman, Steve Poizner, Lynn Daucher, Bruce McPherson,
Duf Sundheim. These people are moderates, they are actively engaged in the party,
and they do not need an organization that rails against others to make their
point. [Leonard
Blog]
[3/17/06
Friday]
[Nick
Winter-Found in the ebag - from readers the Parkhursts]
12:02 am [permalink]
Limit
Eminent Domain ~The People’s Initiative This
Initiative is an all voluntary grassroots effort
organized by concerned citizens whose aim is to join
with others throughout California to qualify an Initiative
that would restore eminent domain to TRUE public
use and put an end to its widespread abuse. This
is a nonpartisan California Constitutional Amendment
that is not tied to any political ideology: its sole
purpose is to prohibit eminent domain for private
gain. Local government would no longer be able to
use eminent domain to transfer your property to a
private individual or corporation for development
and private gain and for higher tax revenues.
You have
the opportunity to make a difference and have your voice heard
by going to: http://www.limiteminentdomain.org where
you can download the petition for this very important campaign
to limit eminent domain. You will also find important instructions
for printing and circulation. If you would like a petition
mailed to you, please call (408) 882-5008. We have 8 weeks
to collect 800,000 signatures to qualify this Initiative for
the November 2006 ballot. Time is of the essence! Every initiative
since Prop 13 has used paid signature gatherers. We are different
in that we are grass roots and all volunteer. This is truly
an Initiative for the people, by the people!
[3/16/06
Thursday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
When to Say No When I first
came to the Legislature a veteran Assemblyman (Richard
Hayden for those with long memories) told me that the toughest
decision for a politician is deciding when to leave. Now
with term limits that challenge is mostly gone but every
now and again we see it. I commend Congressman Bill Thomas
for going out on top. Under the arcane rules of the House
Republicans his leadership on the Ways and Means Committee
is over so his choice was to start a new assignment or
leave as the one who put forth the President's tax cuts
of the last 6 years.
Likewise
I commend Senator Roy Ashburn for his decision to stick with
his Senate leadership tenure and run for re-election instead
of making the jump into what would be a nasty Congressional
primary fight. And his classy announcement of his endorsement
for Assemblyman Kevin McCarthy for that Congressional seat
is virtually unheard of in intra-party primary fights.
The same
for Assemblyman Tim Leslie who had indicated he might run for
State Superintendent of Public Instruction. Instead, he appears
to be quietly retiring while still enjoying the love and admiration
of his constituents and colleagues, an example of seriousness
and selflessness in public service.
Then there
is Congressman Elton Gallegy who filed for re-election then
days later decided he did not want to serve anymore. His inept
attempt to withdraw from the race giving no notice to his district
or to would be successors sullied his reputation. This is not
how to cap off a political career.
Or consider
the jumps of Senator Joe Dunn who is now a candidate for statewide
office. He created and abandoned several different committees
before settling on one office where he thinks he has the best
chance of winning. Don't peek at the Secretary of State web
site, can you guess which office Dunn is now running for? Filing
as an act of desperation is not how to go quietly into the
night. [Leonard
Blog]
[3/15/06
Wednesday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
Two-thirds Is More Than Half The
aborted bond deal of last weekend is a prime example in how
the legislature counts numbers.
The majority party is the majority because they hold more than half the seats.
For almost all of
the body‚s rules and practices, it is winner takes all. None of the touchy-feely,
everyone's-a-winner mentality here. The only place where it is okay to discriminate
against a minority is against the minority party in a legislature or a Congress.
This is where the rub comes in. Our California Constitutional drafters decided
that certain decisions were so important that a consensus of an extra-ordinary
majority was necessary before going forward. The state cannot spend money, raise
taxes, or go into debt without two-thirds of the legislature agreeing to the
proposal. For as long as I can remember, the majority party cannot accept this.
They have tried every scheme to go around the Constitution, but they are almost
always caught.
Friday night
the Senate leadership brought just TWO copies of the $47 billion
bond bill to the Senate floor. These leaders (all Democrats)
told their allies that the bill contained all of their priorities.
These leaders told the minority party that if they opposed
the bill they would be accused of shameful behavior and would
be blamed for future levee failures and other disasters. With
only two physical copies available, it is obvious that no one
read the bill. It is also obvious that the debate did not focus
on the merits of the text of the bill but on the process that
the minority party was not engaged in writing this bill. The
debate ended. The vote was counted, and the bill received a
majority vote, and it died.
The two-thirds
vote requirement demands that virtually every legislator be
involved in the writing of these important bills. This is the
only way ever achieve consensus. The sooner the majority party
leadership figures out how to count to two-thirds the sooner
we the people will have real leadership on these important
issues. [Leonard
Blog]
[3/14/05 Tuesday]
[John
Eastman Prof
Law/Chapman & Director @ Claremont
Institute] 12:01 am [permalink]
Eminent
Domain Abuse in Long Beach, CA -
City Aims at Filipino Baptist Fellowship Church - Long Beach Redevelopment
Agency
Votes to Condemn Filipino Baptist
Fellowship Church
At its March
13, 2006 hearing, after extensive comments from the community
about the public good that a Church provides to the community,
and after Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
Director John Eastman noted that the record did not contain
any evidence supporting a finding that condemnation of the
Church was necessary to redevelopment of adjoining property,
the Long Beach Redevelopment Agency Board voted 6-0 to condemn
the Filipino Baptist Fellowship Church in order to make way
for more condos. Although the City still claims to want to
work with the Church to find it a suitable alternative location,
it has still not demonstrated why it needs to take the existing
Church in the first place.
Our Center for
Constitutional Jurisprudence is representing the Church to try to stop
the condemnation.
Fox News Channel's Hannity & Colmes Show featured the case on its March 3,
2006 "It Could Happen To You" program series. Still photos from the show are
available here.
Watch the program, which is available on-line via streaming video here.
Scroll down to the "It Could Happen to You" section, then click on the "Hellish
Fight" video link.
Then help
us do something to stop eminent domain abuse.
Call the
office of Long Beach Mayor Beverly O'Neill at (562) 570-6801,
or e-mail her at mayor@longbeach.gov to
protest condemning a Church to make way for condos. Call 6th
District Councilwoman Laura Richardson at (562) 570-6816 --
the Church is in her district. Call the Redevelopment Board
Members (names
here) at (562) 570-6615 and let them know how outraged
you are by this decision.
You can
also call Barbara Kaiser, Executive Director of the Long Beach
Redevelopment Agency, at (562) 570-6340, or e-mail her at barbara_kaiser@longbeach.gov.
Let the City
hear your views about their efforts to close down a vibrant
community church.
Leave at comment at our Local
Liberty blog if you've had a bad experience with the Long Beach Redevelopment
Agency.
Other
News Coverage:
Baptist
Press (March 9, 2006).
The
Wiley Drake Show, Christian Newswire
World
Net Daily (March 12, 2006).
[3/9/06
Thursday]
[Nick
Winter-Found
in the ebag from
Chuck Poochigian] 12:02 am [permalink]
First
5 Commission’s Executive Director Refuses to Answer JLAC Questions Without
Legal Counsel Committee
Approves Audit Request into Potential Misuse of Taxpayer Funds for “Preschool
for All” Campaign Yesterday, the Executive Director of the First 5 Commission,
Kris Perry, refused to answer any questions from Joint Legislative Audit Committee
(JLAC) members, stating that she was advised by Attorney General Bill Lockyer
to secure legal counsel before testifying. The committee proceeded to approve
an audit request into whether the First 5 Commission misused taxpayer funds in
coordination with a ballot initiative campaign known as “Preschool for
All” (Proposition 82). Following is a statement from Senator Chuck
Poochigian (R-Fresno), who is Vice-chair of JLAC: “The Executive Director's
highly unusual refusal to answer any questions elevates my concern about charges
of wrongdoing. I left the hearing with more questions than I had going
in about what they have to hide. In light of the serious allegations
of violations of the public trust, I will continue to push to expedite investigations
and audits into the allegations of misuse
of taxpayer dollars."
[3/8/06
Wednesday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
Wanted: Murderer Terminator: Surely in all of
California there is a doctor who will assist the people of the state in carrying
out the execution of a violent convicted murderer. While the California Medical
Association shames itself by manufacturing some trumped up ethical argument,
there has to be one volunteer. The judge, the jury, the prison authorities, the
Governor, the appeals court, and all of the people who work in our prisons carry
out their duties to implement our laws; the Medical Association wants a pass
for their members. In truth, a doctor's duty to save a life whenever possible
is no greater than my duty. Likewise for either of us to assist the courts in
carrying out a sentence of execution is part of our duty as citizens of California.
If you are a doctor and are interested in assisting, please contact the Acting
Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Jeanne Woodford,
1515 S Street, Sacramento.
(916) 323-6001. [Leonard Blog]
[3/6/06
Monday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
My Nomination for Column of the Year: I try to
do a lot of reading. Even so, it is a rare occurrence that I read something in
a newspaper that is truly exceptional.
Last week,
Dan Weintraub of the Sacramento Bee penned a piece
for his California Insider weblog column that I am still thinking
about, and I have concluded it deserves special recognition.
Dan is known as a chronicler of political baseball in Sacramento.
This column is only about politics on the surface; at its core
it is a wonderful lesson about economics that would impress
Milton Friedman. Those of you who are economics or social studies
teachers might consider spending time dissecting this column
with your students. What Weintraub does in a few hundred words
is more memorable than the hundreds of pages of what I recall
wading through for college economics.
His basic
thesis is that we need to look for an alternative to employer-managed
health care. To illustrate his point, he talks about what life
would be like if government mandated that employers sign us
up for plans to manage our nutritional needs, or our housing,
instead of letting us deal with these decisions and costs on
our own as we do now. The result would most certainly be bad
food and substandard housing - and probably shortages of both.
Why then are we so wedded to the notion that health care consumers
need something between them and the providers of the health
care? It is exactly the right question to ask -- let the light
shine on this column - [Leonard
Blog]
[3/2/06
Thursday]
[Carol
Platt Liebau - editorial
director CaliforniaRepublic.org] 12:03 am [permalink]
Nice
Try So
much for Arnold's big spending
plans. This
story once again illustrates why it's a fool's errand
to try to placate implacable adversaries. [Liebau
Blog]
[3/1/06
Wednesday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
Teachers
Just “Fudge” My article last
week about educators' use of group learning techniques generated strong reactions
from several teachers. One teacher said that if a teacher puts five students
in a group, then they have one-fifth of the papers/projects to grade. On the
other hand, one teacher told me how her colleagues get around the silliness
of some education fads, like group learning: they fudge.
These teachers know what
works with students and they do not want to be forced into experimental or
ineffectual classroom methods. So,
they submit lesson plans that conform with the latest “requirement” but
they do not teach to those lesson plans. Instead, they stick with what they
know works in their classroom. One problem with this is that administrators
reviewing
good results might think the falsified lesson plans deserve credit when actually
it is the ingenuity of a good teacher. The other problem this identifies is
some principals being completely out of touch with what is happening in the
classrooms
on their campuses. I am curious about how widespread this practice is, and
while I cannot advocate lying, I also cannot condemn a professional who wants
to do
right by their students. I welcome your stories and experiences on this topic.
Send your thoughts to me at bill.leonard@billleonard.org [Leonard
Blog]
Go to CRO
Blog February 2006
Go to CRO
Blog archive index
|
