In A Chemically Induced Dream
Facts? Who cares?...
Ray Haynes] 10/31/05
It must be
nice to be a left wing ideologue. Facts don’t matter.
Apparently, the chemically induced dreams of their youth are
the defining aspects of their
lives. If facts or common sense contradicts chemical stupor, too bad.
In the last
two weeks, two separate reports have sought to justify the
actions of the socialists in the state government by minimizing
the impact of their policies. One report, by the Legislative
Analyst Office (LAO), claimed that a 43 percent drop in crime
between 1994 and 1999 could not be explained by the adoption
of “Three Strikes” in 1994. The other implied that
the slow job growth in California was not affected by California’s
hostile business environment. We don’t need to change,
both reports say, we should adopt more socialist policies.
These reports are obviously the result of some college chemical
Haynes is an Assembly member representing Riverside
and Temecula. He serves on the Appropriations and
Budget Committees. [go to Assembly Member Haynes website
at California Assembly][go to Haynes index]
LAO claims in its report, “A Primer, A Report
on the Impacts of Three Strikes,” that the 1994 “Three
Strikes” law may not have reduced crime in California.
Although crime rates fell by ten percent in the three years before
three strikes, and 43 percent in the five years after three strikes,
it claims that those facts don’t necessarily prove that “Three
Strikes” has worked.
What? A 400% difference is not enough? What do they want? Do
they want the answer handed to them on tablets from Mt. Sinai?
Common sense tells
us that if the state locks a bad guy away, he cannot commit
more crimes until he is released. Research data
tells us that 70% of the crimes in this country are committed
by 7% of the criminals. “Three Strikes” tends to
catch more of those 7% and put them in jail, and keep them there.
The result? The crime rate goes down…except in the eyes
of a liberal. Liberals claim that a strong economy, more effective
law enforcement techniques, and a decline in handgun use reduced
crime, not “Three Strikes.” The only problem with
their conclusion is that this same scenario occurred before “Three
Strikes”—without any reduction in crime.
Next, the Public
Policy Institute wrote an article, “Are
Businesses Fleeing the State?” and concluded that they
are not. Between 1991 and 2003, “less than one-tenth of
one percent of the total number of jobs” was lost, according
to this report. The fact that nationally we added jobs, and in
California we lost jobs during this same period, is lost on these “nonpartisan” experts.
Once again, common
sense tells us that a business will locate where it can maximize
its profit. If taxes are higher, the business
loses money. If regulations prevent the business from operating
efficiently, the business loses money. Since price is set by
the market, a business from a more expensive state will make
less profit. This is fact. Lose too much money for too long,
and POOF – you’re out of business. In fact, the report
concludes that most of California’s job losses resulted
from the death of California businesses, not from relocation.
In other words, many who were dumb enough to stay in California
went bankrupt. So, according to the report, it is not relocation,
but stupidity and hence, bankruptcy that cost California jobs.
This is some poor consolation to the people who lost their jobs
and their businesses.
Common sense has
to play a role in public policy. It doesn’t
matter what chemicals you ingested in college, criminals who
are in jail don’t hurt good people, and businesses create
jobs in places that help them maximize their profit. Left wing
platitudes don’t change those facts of life. Apparently,
some of our left wing friends can’t abandon their youthful
drug-induced fantasies, but we can’t allow those fantasies
to affect our laws today. It’s time for a reality check. CRO
Haynes is a California Assembleyman representing Riverside
and Temecula and frequent contributor to CaliforniaRepublic.org.