Schumer: Op-Ed==Traitorous Tears for Terrorists

Senator Schumer is crying over keeping the United States safe.  Senators McCain and Graham, along with GOP Assembly Leader Chad Mayes joined the New York Democrat Senator in complaining about President Trump creating a real vetting process from the seven nations President Obama noted were terrorist nations.  But California GOP Chair Jim Brulte, as noted in a Sacramento Bee article rarely speaks out on policy issues, decided the Democrats and a few Republicans, had to be answered.

“Brulte, who infrequently wades into policy debates as the party chairman, noted Democratic lawmakers weren’t so vocal when former President Obama’s administration deported more than 2.5 million immigrants and, in response to a threat in 2011, instituted a six-month slowdown on visas for Iraqi refugees.

“These Democrats in the Legislature who are crying crocodile tears over this were deafeningly silent when Barack Obama did a temporary ban for people coming from Iraq because he was concerned about the vetting process,” Brulte, a longtime former GOP legislative leader said in an interview with The Bee. “This is politics, and this is what makes voters apathetic.”

“Rather than focusing on needless resolutions, the Democrats might want to fix the California budget deficit that they themselves created,” Brulte added in the interview, accusing the party’s leaders of misplaced priorities.”

If an elected official can not be supportive of a President working to defend our over 320 million people, then who are they really wanting to protect or what are they protecting?

PoliceRiot

Op-Ed: Traitorous Tears for Terrorists

David Hunter,   Did Hunter Blog, 1/31/17 

This executive order was mean-spirited and un-American”. – Chuck Schumer (D-NY) on January 29, 2017

 

Ah, the Fellini farce that is the modern-day Democratic Party. A laughingstock headed by a crying, middle aged pajama boy as Senate minority leader. (This guy’s in desperate need of Linus’s blanket and a pacifier.) In 2011, Barack Obama’s secret six month ban on Iraq refugees is no different than Trump’s new executive order. In fact, the seven jihad-infested countries affected now were first identified by the Obama Administration!

Pro-abortion Democrats, like Schumer and Obama, don’t value human life anywhere: in the womb, on Chicago streets, or abroad. Recall, Obama’s crocodile tears for his hometown—the nation’s murder capital for five of the eight years of his presidency—that he did nothing about. Furthermore, this winner of 2009’s Nobel Peace Prize dropped 26,171 bombs on predominantly Muslim nations in 2016. Twenty-four hours a day: one every twenty minutes. The Guardian characterized this Orwellian warmonger as follows:

“President Obama did reduce the number of US soldiers fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, but he dramatically expanded the air wars and the use of special operations forces around the globe. In 2016, US special operators could be found in 70% of the world’s nations, 138 countries—a staggering jump of 130% since the days of the Bush administration.”

So much for the “Great Peacemaker”—and one goose-stepping Democrat’s teary-eyed claim to care.

Like Obama, Schumer’s weepy theatrics are nothing more than a political stunt. As the ex-president mourns his Trump-dismantled legacy, Schumer bemoans Democrats’ diminished power. Specifically, he’s upset at the absence of future illegal voters (that unfettered migration and open borders perpetuate).

For progressives, every action is a manipulation designed to shore up their waning influence. These insulated liberal ideologues have utterly forgotten their purpose: to represent citizens’ rights. That means honoring the Constitution, the rule of law, and most of all—Americans’ physical safety. The fact that Democrats advocate for others with no legal standing is telling. Thus, Chucky’s antics are an egotist’s dirty trick. An illusion hiding who’s actually mean-spirited and un-American.

 

San Fran Rich Enough to Spend Tax $$ on Illegal Aliens—Does Not Need Federal $$–Cut Them Off

Thanks to the Mayor of San Fran grandstanding, to protect his Progressive credentials and illegal aliens, tens of millions of dollars are going to be withheld from the City for public safety, roads and welfare programs.  But Mayor Lee has made it clear that the city does not need the tax dollars from the people of Orlando, since he has upwards of $25 million to provide attorneys for drug dealers, human traffickers and assorted run fo the mill law breakers from foreign countries.

“Officials with the Department of Environment, for instance, have identified $1.3 million in federal funding in grants from the Department of Energy and one from the Environmental Protection Agency. The city department has a $21 million proposed budget.

The grants fund efforts around brownfield cleanup in the Bayview, solar capacity to power places like hardware stores or grocery stores in the event of a large scale power outage during an emergency, and electric vehicle infrastructure.

Mayor Lee has made his choice—protect criminals and allow the environmental needs of the city go unanswered—wonder what environmentalists think of this.  Lee’s choice and the people lose.

money bag

Federal funding in S.F. in limbo under Trump administration

San Francisco receives grants from the Department of Energy to fund efforts increasing solar capacity in the event of a large scale power outage, among other federal funds that are now in question because of San Francisco’s sanctuary status.

By Joshua Sabatini, SF Examiner,  1/31/17

After a little more than a week in office, President Donald Trump has triggered waves of protests throughout the U.S. including in San Francisco’s streets, outside of City Hall and at San Francisco International Airport over immigration policies and the uncertainty around them.

The national confusion has trickled down into city departments themselves, no matter how much or little they rely on federal funding that Trump last week threatened to cut for sanctuary cities like San Francisco.

Officials with the Department of Environment, for instance, have identified $1.3 million in federal funding in grants from the Department of Energy and one from the Environmental Protection Agency. The city department has a $21 million proposed budget.

The grants fund efforts around brownfield cleanup in the Bayview, solar capacity to power places like hardware stores or grocery stores in the event of a large scale power outage during an emergency, and electric vehicle infrastructure.

Department officials say this grant money is safe since the contracts are already signed and approved by the previous administration. The concern is the future.

Guillermo Rodriguez, a spokesperson for the Department of the Environment, said Monday that San Francisco has relied on federal funding for research and development on “forward thinking” policies.

“For places like San Francisco, they are an important piece of the overall puzzle,” Rodriguez said. “There is easy, low-hanging fruit that we can work on, like change out our light bulbs and turn off our computers at the end of the day. But if we are going to get to the big emissions that we need, we really need to be very creative in our policy thinking locally in order to push agendas that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”

The concern remains whether the federal funding relied upon by the department will only come with conditions attached to immigration policy, or simply not at all.

“We don’t know what direction they are going to go in,” Rodriguez said of Trump’s administration.

Meanwhile, San Francisco has taken the position that Trump’s executive order signed last week to cut funding from sanctuary cities like San Francisco does not apply to it. San Francisco receives about $1 billion annually in federal funding.

The week before the order was executed and the day before Trump’s inauguration, head of Human Resources Micki Callahan sent a Jan. 19 memo to all city government employees outlining The City’s sanctuary laws while also noting that they “are consistent with federal law.”

But that exact point may become caught in legal wrangling, and there are also concerns future federal grants may come with conditions related to immigration policies — another legal point that could end up being decided by the courts.

The memo begins to the illustrate The City’s legal stance.

Federal law section 1373, on which Trump’s executive order is based, states that a “local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.”

But The City says they have no law on the books restricting that transmission of information regarding immigration status.

The memo identifies six specific San Francisco sanctuary laws it says do not run afoul of that federal law such as the prohibition on using city funds for “any question regarding immigration status (other than those required by federal or state statute, regulation, or court decision) on any application, questionnaire, or interview form used in relation to benefits, services, or opportunities provided by the City.”

That’s why Sheriff Vicki Hennessy’s decision not to respond during the past six months to 41 requests by federal immigration officials to be notified of the release of undocumented inmates is, from The City’s perspective, not a violation of federal law.

On Monday, Hennessy along with Mayor Ed Lee and Police Chief William Scott jointly sent a letter to Department of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly refusing to comply with Trump’s executive immigration orders and standing by The City’s sanctuary laws.

The letter said that by “pressing local jurisdictions to become entangled in federal immigration enforcement” public safety would be undermined by eroding community trust.

The letter seems to bolster The City’s legal argument by stating, “The United States Supreme Court and other federal courts have repeatedly emphasized that the administration of immigration laws is the responsibility of the federal government, not cities and states.”

While the Trump era has already caused much alarm, The City is still moving forward with routine plans to secure federal homeland security grants.

On Thursday, the Board of Supervisors Budget and Finance Committee will vote to authorize San Francisco to apply for homeland security grants. Last year, the 12-county Bay Area region received $23 million in federal homeland security grants distributed based on a risk-assessment analysis.

The local effort is spearheaded by the Department of Emergency Management. Kristin Hogan, the government affairs manager, said they are proceeding as they have in the past, but noted there is uncertainty.

“This is a yearly requirement. We are approaching it exactly as we have in the past,” Hogan said. “We can’t really predict the future, whether it will be less or more or any kind of changes to the grant. We are proceeding as business as usual. Everyone is waiting with bated breath to see what the next steps are.”

She added, “We are obviously paying very close attention and trying to get all the information we can as well, so we can be prepared if there are going to be changes.”

 

Need a good job? Go North, young person

California needs to work harder at killing jobs.  We have the highest taxes, the highest cost of living, housing, water and energy costs.  The former Golden State has the worst roads in the nations, failed government schools and elitists pushing the middle class out of the state.

“Gallup’s U.S. underemployment rate is the percentage of adults in the workforce who are not employed but are looking and available for employment or who are working part time but desire full-time work. While GGJ reflects the proportion of adults working full time for an employer relative to the entire population, Gallup reports the underemployment rate as a proportion of adults in the workforce — all those working or seeking work.

New Mexico had the highest underemployment rate, at 17.5 percent, up from 15.5 percent measured in 2015. California, at 16.2 percent, was nearly tied for second place with Mississippi’s 16.8 percent underemployment”

Only New Mexico has more underemployed than California.  Those “kids” at Starbucks, the movies and restaurants are facing the results of the Obama/Brown economy and Democrat policies.  Even Brown understands we are in a recession in California.  Sad

Jobs

 

 

 

       
Need a good job? Go North, young person

Central Valley Business Times, 1/30/17

•  California not along best states for jobs

•  Golden State has nation’s third worst underemployment rate
The most robust labor markets in the U.S. continue to center around the northern Plains states and the nation’s capital, with consistently high rates of full-time employment for an employer and relatively low underemployment, according to a study by Gallup Inc.

The Southwest, Southeast and Appalachian regions continue to have some of the lowest GGJ rates.

California falls toward the bottom of Gallup’s lists.

Underemployment remains a more serious problem for large states on the coasts — such as California, New York and Florida — than for those in the interior of the country. These areas include some of the most populous and densely populated states with more competition for jobs.

Five U.S. states — South Dakota, Maryland, Nebraska, North Dakota and Minnesota — had Gallup Good Jobs (GGJ) rates above 50 percent in 2016. West Virginia, at 36.6 percent, had the lowest rate for the third consecutive year.

Gallup’s GGJ metric tracks the percentage of the U.S. adult population aged 18 and older who are employed full time for an employer for at least 30 hours per week. These results are based on Gallup Daily tracking interviews throughout 2016 with nearly 355,000 U.S. adults. Gallup does not count adults who are self-employed, work fewer than 30 hours per week, are unemployed or are out of the workforce as payroll-employed in the GGJ metric.

The differences in GGJ rates across states may reflect several factors, including the overall employment situation and the population’s demographic composition. States with large older and retired populations, for example, would have a lower percentage of adults working full time. Several of the states with the lowest GGJ rates in 2016 — West Virginia, Florida and Maine — have the largest proportions of residents aged 65 or older. Regardless of the underlying reason, however, the GGJ rate provides an indication of a state’s economic vitality.

A cluster of states in the northern Plains and Rocky Mountains regions made the top 10 on this measure. The two states bordering the nation’s capital, Maryland and Virginia, also had higher rates of full-time employment for an employer.

Gallup’s U.S. underemployment rate is the percentage of adults in the workforce who are not employed but are looking and available for employment or who are working part time but desire full-time work. While GGJ reflects the proportion of adults working full time for an employer relative to the entire population, Gallup reports the underemployment rate as a proportion of adults in the workforce — all those working or seeking work.

New Mexico had the highest underemployment rate, at 17.5 percent, up from 15.5 percent measured in 2015. California, at 16.2 percent, was nearly tied for second place with Mississippi’s 16.8 percent underemployment rate.

Minnesota had the lowest underemployment rate, at 8.9 percent, with South Dakota close behind, at 9.2 percent.

Consistent with the geographical pattern for Gallup Good Jobs rates, states in the northern Plains and Rocky Mountains regions — including Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, Montana and Utah — were among those with the lowest underemployment rates in 2016. Underemployment was highest in the Southwest and Southeast, as well as in a few Mid-Atlantic states and Alaska.

Survey Methods

Results are based on telephone interviews conducted Jan. 2-Dec. 30, 2016, on the Gallup U.S. Daily survey, with a random sample of 354,980 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. For results based on the total sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is ±1 percentage point at the 95 percent confidence level. All reported margins of sampling error include computed design effects for weighting.

Margins of error for individual states are no greater than ±6 percentage points and are ±3 percentage points in most states. The margin of error for the District of Columbia is ±6 percentage points. All reported margins of sampling error include computed design effects for weighting.

Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 60 percent cellphone respondents and 40 percent landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by time zone within region. Landline and cellular telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods.

 

 

 

 

JOBS

 

Sacramento Weather Forecast, CA (95814)

 

·  How to compete against Wal-Mart

·  Stockton mom turns a need into a business

·  The entrepreneur is in

·  Writing her own success story

·  Growing a small business the family way

·  The future pencils positive for this company

·  Niche marketing — Italian style

·  Sipping success with niche marketing

·  Roasting a business out of his passion

·  Success as an independent consultant takes more than expertise

·  Avoiding the traps of employee law violations

·  Cracking the voice-over market

·  The American Dream realized, one package at a time

·  Female winemaker plunges into business

·  A new take on nurse education

·  Family sees moving business success

·  STEM thrives in pockets of education innovation

·  STEM goes solar in Stockton

·  Quick! There’s a robot in my pool

·  Retiring seniors can mean new business

·  Predawn biotech class trains next generation of science workers

·  Staying ahead of the competition the old fashioned way

·  Central Valley sees mismatch between high-tech jobs and job seekers

·  STEM starts young

·  Get ready – the future is here now

·  STEM Education: Growing the Valley’s Future

·  They’re low power in wattage only, not ideas

·  Thinking success spawns Successful Thinkers

·  Small business success can mean finding the right niche

·  This franchise has real muscle behind it

·  Getting the scoop on small business success

·  Reshoring could rebuild America’s manufacturing

·  Marketing that’s deliberately anchored to the past

·  Guitar artist plays his way to success

·  Paralysis no handicap for this entrepreneur

·  Boost sales with better communication

·  Making sandwiches sexy with a franchise

·  Going solar without spending a lot of money

·  They’re cute and cuddly. But are they a business?

·  Opportunity sails forth in the Delta

·  How bad etiquette on the job could kill your career

·  Growing their way out of hunger and poverty

·  Finding small business success from floor to ceiling

·  Why he’s public enemy #1 – for gophers

·  Running a home-based business successfully

·  Your boss needs a vacation – really

·  Couple makes transition from big corporations to small business

·  Carving a small business niche with a better idea

·  Calm is the goal of computer service and education franchisor

·  Developer squeezing new life into downtown with juice franchise

·  Signs of a recovering economy

·  How to keep a family business in the family

·  Ford dealership expands despite the Great Recession

·  Utility Telephone connects with customer service

·  Crowdfunding basics

·  The roar from crowdfunding is getting louder

·  California water wars’ bulldog

·  Water wars heat up in California

·  Helping businesses grow with a stronger STEM

·  How to retain your best employees

·  Small business runs success up the pole

·  Winery expands in Lodi

·  Lodi wineries tapping into growing Chinese market

·  Has the jobs picture brightened for the Valley for 2012?

·  The right education will be needed for 21st Century jobs

·  Where new jobs for San Joaquin will come from

·  Developing jobs for San Joaquin – Part 2

·  Developing jobs for San Joaquin

·  Fruits of his labor

·  Helping grow food security in the Valley of plenty

·  Doing a business turnaround despite the recession

·  Keeping customers loyal helps build her business

·  Expo exposes businesses to utility contracting ideas

·  Drink mix maker taps expertise to blend success

·  Entrepreneur finds success in a basket

·  Tips for catching resume fraud

·  There’s no checking out for this small business owner

·  Entrepreneurs take Valley sports play-by-play to the world

·  Starting a winery from scratch

·  Job hunting tips for the long-term unemployed

·  In the Central Valley, opera isn’t always the Grand Ole Opry

·  Branding ideas for small businesses

·  The ump’s not blind, but the players are

·  Finding success by tapping your brain in a new way – Part Two

·  Finding success by tapping your brain in a new way

·  Machines talking to machines is the future

·  Getting involved in the fight against AIDS

·  Franchised divorce says it’s a better way

·  Small business owner is brewing a success story

·  To beat the Great Recession, they’ve expanded

·  Taking a swing at strokes

·  Alert your taste buds – here comes Taste of San Joaquin

·  This franchise has real muscle behind it

·  Passion for his city drives him

·  Vicente Fox speaks out on U.S.-Mexico relations

·  Give your support staff recognition and reap top performance

·  Central Valley baker gets top honors for Royal Wedding pie

·  Asparagus Festival ends on high note

·  Stockton close to annual ‘tipping’ point

·  Framing small business success

·  Small business sees Affordable Care Act helping its bottom line

·  What you eat – and when – helps local restaurants

·  Coping with the aftermath of foreclosure

·  How to raise charming children

·  Central Valley grad school goes all-iPads

·  Solution to Delta water wars voiced

·  Making sure your personal bottom line is covered

·  Small California winemaker is all family

·  Small winery relies on family and innovation to compete

·  Central Valley company says it has a better way to store solar power

·  What’s wrong — and right — about local TV news

·  What planning means to small business success

·  Making the leap to small business

·  Out of work at middle age? Experts offer advice

·  Small business marketing, one article at a time

·  Congress on your corner as it’s supposed to be

·  Central Valley city’s heritage rediscovered

·  Central Valley school is building students’ foundations

·  Job tips from the expert

·  Long-term jobless worker re-invents himself

·  Building a new power plant means jobs for Central Valley

·  Sacramento reaches for the stars with new science center

·  Lodi Chamber opens China’s doors to small business

·  Writing books for fun – and sometimes profit

·  Black Friday shopping? How to protect yourself from scams

·  California winemakers can find added rewards overseas

·  Wine makers tap overseas markets from Lodi

·  A new revenue stream for Central Valley small businesses

·  Food bank seeks more business support

·  Tips for finding a job in the Great Recession

·  State may solve some of its prison woes with new Stockton facility

·  A solution to underwater mortgages

·  Should public libraries be managed by private firms?

·  Central Valley moves ahead with critical water project

·  Dee Dee Myers and the increasing impact of women on small business

·  How women are growing their small businesses

·  A market with a mission

·  Retailer ‘paints’ solutions to cash flow challenge

·  An answer for the unemployed – return to school

·  A ‘golden’ small business success story

·  Central Valley winegrapes blessed

·  Rubbing out the recession with a franchise

·  Surviving the recession as a small business

·  It’s personal, union says of Stockton fire cuts

·  How old it too old to start a new business?

·  They’ve found the recipe for small business success

·  MBA students help revive Central Valley farmers market

·  Classic wooden yachts anchor in Stockton for weekend

·  Foreclosures, short sales – a bank president comments

·  The strength of family helps this small business compete

·  Festival spears success in Central Valley

·  Social media helps keep family business prospering

·  Central Valley students get training in ‘green’ futures

·  Knives readied as Valley cities slash services

·  Central Valley jobless picture still grim

·  Delta residents told to ready for water war

·  Opportunities outlined for Central Valley small businesses

·  Rewiring your brain for success

·  Central Valley no longer ‘shell shocked’ by recession

·  To fix California’s government, look to London

·  Taking your sales pitch to the next level

Local Guides

Adoption
Bankruptcy
Carpet
Contractor
Cosmetic Surgery
Counseling
Dentist
Divorce
Education
Electrician
Flooring
Flowers
Marketing
Mortgage
Photography
Plumber
Roofing
Staffing
Tires
Web Design

Democrat Bill AB 163: PROTECT Bullies in Classrooms

If the Democrats get their way, your child will be in a classroom with bullies, drug dealers and users, those that assault other students and disrupt the classroom.  Thanks to Restorative Justice Schools no longer expel or suspend bad actors in the classroom—they are sent back to the same class, after a lecture.  Now if AB 163 is passed even the police can do nothing.  What a lot of violence outside of school, pass AB 163.

“AB 163 prohibits law enforcement officers from arresting students for “low-level misconduct” and require that school counselor and not police handle crimes such as bullying, harassment, and other “nonviolent incidents.”  The ability of officers to interview any student on campus during school hours, be they suspect or victim, would be prohibited “absent a real and immediate physical threat to pupils, teachers, or public safety.”  A peace officer seeking to interview a student-suspect or victim during school hours could only do so after getting the consent of the school principal and a parent and providing Miranda warnings before questioning.  If the officer wanted to arrest a student on campus, they would have to notify a parent before the arrest, provide the principal reason for both the arrest and need to make the arrest at school, and possess an arrest warrant.”

Expect more class disruptions, violence and fear among good kids.  Another reason government schools are failures—students, by policy are not safe anymore in school.

560px-School-education-learning-1750587-h

A Bully’s Bill of Rights

 

By Eric Siddall, Association of Los Angeles Deputy District Attorneys, 1/31/17  

 

Bullying, sexual assaults, and gun violence are recognized problems in our schools. Not according to Assemblywoman Shirley Weber who introduced AB 163. This latest piece of legislation, initially proposed by the ACLU in a 2016 report, seeks to protect suspects of these crimes and prohibit police from investigating or arresting the perpetrators of these crimes.

AB 163 prohibits law enforcement officers from arresting students for “low-level misconduct” and require that school counselor and not police handle crimes such as bullying, harassment, and other “nonviolent incidents.”  The ability of officers to interview any student on campus during school hours, be they suspect or victim, would be prohibited “absent a real and immediate physical threat to pupils, teachers, or public safety.”  A peace officer seeking to interview a student-suspect or victim during school hours could only do so after getting the consent of the school principal and a parent and providing Miranda warnings before questioning.  If the officer wanted to arrest a student on campus, they would have to notify a parent before the arrest, provide the principal reason for both the arrest and need to make the arrest at school, and possess an arrest warrant.

The restrictions above are clearly intended to severely hamper the ability of law enforcement to conduct any law enforcement activities on school grounds.  This restrictions are not based upon the US or California constitutions, because they go way beyond the protections afford under both the 4th and 5th amendments.

For example, the 4th amendment only requires probable cause for an arrest, not the arrest warrant requirement in AB 163.  Likewise, the 5th Amendment only requires a recitation of Miranda rights when there is a custodial interrogation, not during a consensual interview or during a detention.

Therefore, notwithstanding the restrictions made by AB 163, violations of this law would still subject the individuals to criminal prosecution.

This is not the first time we have had concerns about Assemblymember Weber’s legislation – see our blog entitled Shirley You Jest – Stanford Sexual Assault. There are other troubling sections of the bill demonstrating a lack of understanding of the criminal justice system, and frankly, a lack of common sense.   For example, the bill treats all students, be they victim or suspect, alike. Thus, if Jane Doe tells a teacher (a mandatory reporter) of a sexual assault, beating, or other crime committed against her the previous week by her parents, when police are called the officer would be prohibited from interviewing the student at the school absent parent consent.   Similarly, if there were a rash of thefts at school with students as victims, a not uncommon occurrence, school staff would be prohibited from calling a police officer to investigate that crime.  Should a student or parent independently report the theft, officers would be prohibited from responding to school-where all the victims were located and interviewing the victims unless the time-consuming process of contacting a parent of each student victim was contacted and consented to the interview.

A similar lack of common sense is the prohibition of an arrest on school grounds unless a warrant is obtained and a parent notified.  It is not uncommon for officers to be unable to locate juvenile suspects in the community, but instead find them at school.  Thus, if Johnny Juvenile rapes an acquaintance the week prior and his parents hide him from police, upon learning Johnny was at school officers would have to first go through the time-consuming process of getting an arrest warrant and then notify Johnny’s parents prior to trying to arrest Johnny.

What is equally disturbing is the vague language replete in AB 163. The bill states police can only be called when there is a “real and immediate physical threat to pupils, teachers, or public or when required by existing law.”  What constitutes a “real and immediate physical threat” is a phrase that would give hours of delight to those also interested in knowing how many angels can dance on the tip of a needle.

Similarly, AB 163 prohibits arrests for “low-level misconduct,” a term not found in the Penal Code.  However, what are some of the crimes the drafters of AB 163-the ACLU-consider “low-level misconduct?”  From their 2016 report, here are a choice few: battery against school staff; battery on school property; physical altercations that do not involve a weapon; verbal harassment; possession of a small pen knife; pepper spray or toy gun unless being brandished as a weapon; and vandalism.

Putting aside the notion that beating a teacher or another student is simply is “low-level misconduct,” the Penal Code is in disagreement as well.  Possession of a penknife that has a blade longer than 2 ½ inches, and a “toy gun” capable of discharging a metallic pellet at a school is a felony, whether the item was brandished or not.  Likewise, it is a felony for a minor under 16 to possess pepper spray, and vandalism causing damage over $400 is also a felony.

As mentioned above, this bill is the product of the ACLU report which was a mixture of “facts,” incomplete, anecdotal accounts, and statistical projection. With overwrought language, it decried law enforcement presence on campus as feeding a “school to prison pipeline” and made recommendations that have now become AB 163.  A mixture of the “facts” in the report have been questioned. The LAUSD Police Chief called out the report’s inaccuracies when recounting the agencies arrest rate of African American students, searches of students, and police staffing on school campuses.  Likewise, an anecdote about a Taser use by a police officer at a San Diego area, high school failed to include the facts that the officer tasered the students only after the three students brutally beat the officer into brief unconsciousness, or that all three students later admitted their guiltto criminal charges stemming from the attack.

AB 163 begins with the incomplete and head scratching rationale in its “findings and declarations” for the Legislature. Using the theory of “disparate impact,” AB 163 cites differences in the arrest and suspension rates for of minority student but ignores the behavior prompting those arrests or suspensions.    However, a 2014 study in the Journal of Criminal Justice concluded that “the racial gap in suspensions was completely accounted for by a measure of the prior problem behavior of the student – a finding never before reported in the literature.”  The study went on to note that “great liberties was taken in linking racial differences in suspensions to the racial discrimination” and cautioned that “it is entirely possible that the body of evidence and the conclusions drawn from the evidence on racial differences in school suspensions represents not the sum total of rigorous scientific analysis but the process of confirmation bias.

A similar head-scratcher in AB 163 is a “finding” that a law enforcement presence on campus “increases disorder” because it makes students fearful of staff and police.  It’s not the thousands of weapons on campus in Los Angeles and across the state recovered each year, the violent brawls at schools, the necessity to provide “safe passage” to get students to school or school bullying and fights aren’t what make students fearful-it’s law enforcement on campus.

With dubious rhetoric and faulty data behind it, a grab bag of requirements that are at odds with settled constitutional law, and the limitations on law enforcement to conduct and investigate criminal activity and make arrests, AB 163 makes our staff and students at our school less safe.  A careful dissection of those factors by the state legislature should lead to its defeat.

 

As A Mother Of A Son, Kellyanne Conway Gets Why Feminism Has Become Toxic

We know that all male students are rapists on college campuses—just ask an Administrator or female.  By definition if a male looks at a female, “it is proof of microagression” and an advance act before the rape.  Think a male should get a job?  That would be male privilege and wrong—only females should work.

“Most of us can still shrug this off, assuming things will get better as our sons get older. Things don’t get better. They get worse.

In elementary school, when we drug little boys (and active girls) so that they all conform to our notions of the good little student — that is, the eager-to-learn little girl — the drugs seem to help, for a while.

The assumptions against men, however, are hard for a boy’s mom to miss when her child loses the look of a young boy and begins to look like a young man. In our household, this happened a couple of years ago. People started looking at my son differently. His sisters’ friends’ parents started hesitating about playdates — not because my son had done anything wrong. Just because he was a boy, and boys are threats.”

Discrimination against women is wrong—discrimination against men is also wrong.  Isn’t it time to meet the needs of all of us, that all people, regardless of gender, be treated as individuals and fairly?

Kids

As A Mother Of A Son, Kellyanne Conway Gets Why Feminism Has Become Toxic

Toxic feminism tells our daughters their worth is in their career. It tells our sons they are worthless.

By Leslie Loftis, The Federalist,  1/31/17

All women in public life have to answer the question, “Are you a feminist?” After becoming the first female campaign manager to win a U.S. presidential campaign, Kellyanne Conway drew that question in an interview with the Washington Post:

You don’t consider yourself a feminist?

I don’t consider myself a feminist. I think my generation isn’t a big fan of labels. My favorite label is mommy. I feel like the feminist movement has been hijacked by the pro-abortion movement or the anti-male sentiments that you read in some of their propaganda and writings. I’m not anti-male. One does not need to be pro-female and call yourself a feminist, when with it comes that whole anti-male culture where we want young boys to sit down and shut up in the classroom. And we have all of these commercials that show what a feckless boob the man in the house is. That’s not the way I see the men in my life, most especially my 12-year-old son. I consider myself a postfeminist. I consider myself one of those women who is a product of her choices, not a victim of her circumstances.

Her answer is typical from Gen X women who refuse to call themselves feminists, and I’ll wager a dime that most of those objections will center on women seeing themselves as products of their choices, not victims of their circumstances.

It is an excellent comment, very Margaret Thatcher-like, and forms the basis of my early feminist shunning. What if I chose a flexible career so I could remain at home when my children were young, my 17-year-old self wondered when older women scoffed at my plans. But while I am no fan of feminism as it is practiced, it is as a mother of a son that I’ve gotten downright angry.

What Feminism Says to Our Sons

Like Conway, I have a son and three daughters. My son is 13 and thus Conway and I have seen what boys endure in today’s society. Feminism as currently practiced lies to us and our daughters, telling us that our worth is tied to our career and our sex life. But it tells our sons they are worthless.

These realizations sneak up on us. When we have our baby sons in our arms, we do not connect that all those horrible things feminists say about men apply to our tiny sweet bundle. The first whispers start in nursery school. The need to have day care mean something more than child minding has sprouted testing for all manner of things, from scissor skills to sight reading. General rambunctiousness or later verbal and fine motor skills common in males mean that the boys fall behind before they even really start school.

Most of us can still shrug this off, assuming things will get better as our sons get older. Things don’t get better. They get worse.

In elementary school, when we drug little boys (and active girls) so that they all conform to our notions of the good little student — that is, the eager-to-learn little girl — the drugs seem to help, for a while.

The assumptions against men, however, are hard for a boy’s mom to miss when her child loses the look of a young boy and begins to look like a young man. In our household, this happened a couple of years ago. People started looking at my son differently. His sisters’ friends’ parents started hesitating about playdates — not because my son had done anything wrong. Just because he was a boy, and boys are threats.

Yes, Cultural Assumptions Matter

Society tends to think of all boys as budding little abusers and rapists. Really, someone even wrote a book on just that, to great acclaim. “Asking For It” by Kate Harding has 60-plus reviews and a 4.5/5-star average for claiming that boys grow up feeling entitled to women’s bodies and thinking that they can go for it whenever the urge strikes.

My objections are two: first, how in this day and age do we in America think this kind of blanket stereotyping is acceptable? Second, what happens when we assume the worst of our sons? If we insist on seeing them through base desires, then why fight those base desires? Be the monster they expect you to be. As I recall, that was one of the arguments feminists used about women’s confidence—that when we treat females as little women, they conform to our expectations.

Sometimes we mothers of sons rationalize that these expectations will not be a problem for our sons because we raised them right. We told them about harassment, sexism, and consent. Well, so did the mothers of sons who formed Families Advocating for Campus Equality. Their stories of basic due process violations are too many to link here, but this one is the latest I’ve seen.

The horror can continue after college. Talk to any mother who has watched her son lose contact with his children due to rather commonplace divorce results. As a media member of Leading Women 4 Shared Parenting, I have interviewed many of these men and a fair few of their mothers.

It doesn’t matter how we raise our sons. Cultural assumptions run against them, and eventually most of us learn this truth, sometimes the hard way.

Leslie Loftis is a lawyer turned freelance writer. She writes on feminism, law, politics, parenthood, and pop culture, particularly where they intersect. She is a founding member of the Houston Policy Forum (website coming soon) and a member of Leading Women for Shared Parenting. She currently lives in Houston with her husband and four children.

 

Unions/Special Interests Use Homeless for $350 Million Scam of Taxpayers

Billions have been spent on affordable housing and affordable housing for the homeless.  The benefit has gone to the developers in a cabal with the union create these projects.  The unions get workers and the developers get “credits” to build market price housing==-everyone wins, except for the homeless, the veterans and the poor.  Look around we have a housing crisis due to government control of the housing market.  Too little housing—look at government for making the rules to limit housing, causing prices to go up—making homes less affordable.

“”Measure H is the most substantial effort we’ve ever undertaken to end and prevent homelessness across L.A. County,” County Supervisor Mark Ridley- Thomas said. “The coalition that supports Measure H is broad and powerful — labor and business, homeless service providers and environmental advocates. This coalition will drive our efforts to victory on March 7.”

Supporters say the proposed tax — which needs approval from two-thirds of voters — would generate about $350 million a year for 10 years, with the proceeds going toward homelessness-prevention services, supportive services such as mental-health care and job training, along with permanent housing. Backers contend the funding will end homelessness for 45,000 people across the county.”

Like all promises, sounds nice.  But note—this is a coalition that includes developers and unions—expect a lot of money to be spent, little done—as usual.

http://www.dreamstime.com/-image526791

Southland Officials Begin Campaign for Homeless Tax

Supporters say the proposed tax would generate about $350 million a year for 10 years for homeless programs.

By Patch CA, 1/30/17      

LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CA — Southland elected officials and business leaders gathered Monday to formally begin the campaign in support of a proposed countywide quarter-cent sales tax on the March 7 ballot to raise money for anti- homelessness programs.

“Measure H is the most substantial effort we’ve ever undertaken to end and prevent homelessness across L.A. County,” County Supervisor Mark Ridley- Thomas said. “The coalition that supports Measure H is broad and powerful — labor and business, homeless service providers and environmental advocates. This coalition will drive our efforts to victory on March 7.”

Supporters say the proposed tax — which needs approval from two-thirds of voters — would generate about $350 million a year for 10 years, with the proceeds going toward homelessness-prevention services, supportive services such as mental-health care and job training, along with permanent housing. Backers contend the funding will end homelessness for 45,000 people across the county.

The proposal comes on the heels of a $1.2 billion bond measure approved in November by city of Los Angeles voters to fund homelessness initiatives.

“Last November, we voted to house 26,000 people in the city of Los Angeles, but we can do more,” said Rusty Hicks, executive secretary-treasurer of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor. “Measure H will offer comprehensive supportive services, like mental health care and job training. Training for jobs that can lead to good careers and a second chance at life.”

 

AB 540 (2002) Promotes Illegal Aliens Taking Seats in California Colleges

One of the last things Gray Davis did to harm the good people and students of California was to sign AB 540 in 2002—to assure law breakers, illegal aliens can take college seats belonging to honest students, paid for by honest parents.  If your child does not get into the college of their choice in California, could it be the AB 540 unstated QUOTA of illegal aliens is the reason?

Santa Barbara Cal SOAP helps prepare low-income, first-generation junior high and high school students for college by offering tutoring, campus tours and workshops.

The Scholarship Foundation of Santa Barbara provides free financial-aid advising for all students in Santa Barbara County.

Samantha Alvarez, the organization’s program advisor, said a total of $8.76 million in scholarships were given to more than 3,000 students in 2016.

How do they get around calling the scholarships, quota’s and programs illegal alien assistance?  By call it help for “first generation college goers” makes it sound nice and warm.  Just a good use of language to get us to support discrimination and abuse of honest students and taxpayers.

classroom

Local Immigrant Students Are Front and Center at AB 540 College Night

12th annual program is geared to providing resources about college-level education for undocumented students

By Brooke Holland, Noozhawk, 1/30/17

The hallway at La Cumbre Junior High School was lined last week with community nonprofits and resources available to help local immigrant students learn about higher-education options.

Families and students browsed the tables, picking up flyers and packets filled with information about college admission and the application process.

The school theater housed more than 30 attendees at the 12th annual AB 540 College Night, a two-hour event geared towards providing resources about college-level education for undocumented students in the U.S.

AB 540 — which was installed in 2002 — allows qualifying students, including undocumented immigrants students, the right to enroll in a California public college or university and pay in-state tuition fees, according to the law.

The event aimed to offer informational resources and a supportive community, said event organizer Cuca Acosta.

“You are not alone,” Acosta said to the crowd. “You are part of the community. If things change, we are going to support you.”

At the time of the event, the ink was barely dry on a pair of executive orders that President Donald Trump signed last week, which call for planning to begin for a new wall on the United States southern border and a crackdown on illegal immigration.

Trump’s executive order that temporarily bans immigration to the U.S. from seven countries and indefinitely banned Syrian refugees from entering the U.S. was not signed at the time of the event.

Santa Barbara County has approximately 108,080 immigrants, and more than 39,500 of them are undocumented, according to an estimate from CAUSE.

Educational leaders also attended the event.

Santa Barbara Unified School District Superintendent Cary Matsuoka and district board members Laura Capps and Ismael Ulloa were among the crowd.

“We have a great deal of support from the community,” Acosta said.

Attendees learned more about the California Dream Act application process, which allows some undocumented students to apply for and receive state-based financial aid and institutional scholarships, according to the law.

The California Dream Act, also known as Assembly Bill 130 and Assembly Bill 131, allows eligible AB 540 student to apply for and receive financial-aid resources.

Students can receive private scholarships provided through public universities, state-administered financial aid, university grants and community college fee waivers, according to the law.

“With President Trump, there’s uncertainty with families worried that everything will go away — in California, the California Dream Act is not going away,” said Dos Pueblos High School counselor Silvia Pereira. “We feel confident our California legislation and governor at the time is supportive.”

Pereira has 23 years experience as a counselor and has been at Dos Pueblos for 13 years.

She provided translation at the event and has been involved with AB 540 College Night since the first year.

“We are here to continue to support our undocumented families and students to help them achieve college,” Pereira said.

In addition to presentations, a handful of community nonprofits and resources were available.

“The goal is for the community to understand the available resources,” Acosta said.

Services ranging from student programs to counseling services were available.

Santa Barbara Cal SOAP helps prepare low-income, first-generation junior high and high school students for college by offering tutoring, campus tours and workshops.

The Scholarship Foundation of Santa Barbara provides free financial-aid advising for all students in Santa Barbara County.

Samantha Alvarez, the organization’s program advisor, said a total of $8.76 million in scholarships were given to more than 3,000 students in 2016.

Santa Barbara City College, the Adsum Education Foundation, AB 540 Coalition of Santa Barbara, UC Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara Unified School District and the Carpinteria School District also sponsored the event.

Visit the AB 540 Coalition of Santa Barbara site to learn more about additional services within the county.

Women’s studies professors divided over whether women’s studies is too vagina-centric

This is the center of the problem in America today—college students and those with IQ’s above room temperature do not know simple physiology.  “At the University of Southern California, student leaders voted unanimously recently to change the name of the Women’s Student Assembly to the Student Assembly for Gender Empowerment. Why? The name Women’s Student Assembly moniker is not inclusive enough to transgender students.

These examples come on the heels of some campus Vagina Monologues performances opening up the cast to “women without vaginas.”

In the real world, a person without a vagina is usually a male—I have never seen a women that did not claim to have one, have you?  Imagine USC students can not tell the difference between a male and female—guess they need remedial science—maybe their parents forgot to tell them.  Sadly, this is a serious story.  BTW, why should womens studies be about women?  Isn’t that the point of wasting time in education?  Instead of taking a real course, get a degree in women’s studies and you are qualified to make coffee at Starbucks.

Teacher

Women’s studies professors divided over whether women’s studies is too vagina-centric

Jennifer Kabbany, The Colleg Fix,  1/31/17

Women’s studies professors are now divided over whether women’s studies is too vagina-centric.

The controversy centers on a planned panel called “Pregnancy Without Women” slated for an upcoming National Women’s Studies Association conference.

At issue is the fact that biological men (even ones who dress like women) cannot get pregnant, and some women’s studies professors are reportedly tired of pretending they can.

Inside Higher Ed reports:

Some … objected to the idea of discussing pregnancy without women, and some of those arguments suggested that being a woman should reflect biology alone. Transgender people and those who study them have a wide range of views on gender identity but generally reject the idea of a biologically driven gender binary. And they view those scholars who state such a binary as the only way to look at gender as hostile to the rights of transgender people.

One comment in particular angered trans scholars.

“We don’t need supposedly progressive folks downplaying the importance of women’s reproductive functions at this time. Let us stop this game now. Only women get pregnant and it serves women not at all to pretend this is not true!”

Eventually, those in favor of transgender rights called for a boycott of the discussion group listserv the “Pregnancy Without Women” debate took place on. Then a moderator shut down commenting on it. Then she was criticized for not condemning the anti-trans comments.

Karen Weingarten, associate professor of English at Queens College of the City University of New York, told Inside Higher Ed the “anti-trans response was awful — it was vitriolic, discriminatory and so narrow-minded. Even after several people wrote moving emails sharing their personal experiences and pleading with people to stop posting hateful rhetoric on the Listserv that attacked members’ identities, it didn’t stop. I agree with those who argued that the moderators shouldn’t have allowed such hateful rhetoric to be posted on the list.”

This latest brouhaha represents an emerging trend facing women’s studies professors and feminists. For example, regarding the recent Women’s March on Washington, some suggested “the vagina imagery at the women’s march was offensive to women without vaginas.”

At the University of Southern California, student leaders voted unanimously recently to change the name of the Women’s Student Assembly to the Student Assembly for Gender Empowerment. Why? The name Women’s Student Assembly moniker is not inclusive enough to transgender students.

These examples come on the heels of some campus Vagina Monologues performances opening up the cast to “women without vaginas.”

 

Sand: Right-to-Work on the Move–27 State and Growing

Out of the 50 States, workers are free from totalitarians bribe demanding unions, is 27 States.  By the end of 2017 there might be two more States where workers are free to work.  The best news is that States, like NY, California and Illinois are failed, spiraling into recession and bankruptcy—and where government force workers to pay bribes if they want to work.

“For example, NEA insists that RTW damages workers – lower pay, fewer jobs, etc. – but in reality when a state opts for worker freedom, it experiences higher population, wage, and job growth. As Mackinac Center director of labor policy, F. Vincent Vernuccio and reporter Jason Hart point out, “From 2012, the year Michigan passed right-to-work, until mid-2015, incomes in Michigan rose over nine percent, faster than the national average. In December, the Census Bureau reported that seven states lost population between July 2014 and July 2015. Only one was a right-to-work state.”

The right to right movement is about freedom and nothing less.  Should government force people to pay a bribe to a third party in order to get or keep a job.  In the real world that is corruption and a crime—except when a union does it.  Free the workers.

Unions2

Right-to-Work on the Move

By Larry Sand, Union Watch, 1/31/17   

Since November, Kentucky has joined the right-to-work club and four new employee freedom cases have emerged.

On January 7th, Kentucky became the 27th right-to-work state in the nation. The term “right-to-work” (RTW) very simply means that workers don’t have to pay dues to a union as a condition of employment. In a few short years, the movement has picked up considerably. Between 1947 and 2011, just three states opted for worker freedom. But since 2012, five states have been added to the RTW column, and other states are moving in that direction.

Why the uptick? Michigan Capitol Confidential’s Tom Gantert writes, “Economic and labor experts point to two factors that account for the growing popularity of a law that frees employees from having to financially support a labor union as a condition of employment. One is that labor unions are losing their political clout. The other is that Republican candidates have been winning more elections at the state level.”

Needless to say, the unions – notably the National Education Association – are in a tizzy about the direction of the worker freedom movement. On its website, NEA insists “Right to Work Hurts Students, Teachers and Public Education,” and proceeds to slog through all the usual lies and half-truths about the wonders and glories of forced unionization.

For example, NEA insists that RTW damages workers – lower pay, fewer jobs, etc. – but in reality when a state opts for worker freedom, it experiences higher population, wage, and job growth. As Mackinac Center director of labor policy, F. Vincent Vernuccio and reporter Jason Hart point out, “From 2012, the year Michigan passed right-to-work, until mid-2015, incomes in Michigan rose over nine percent, faster than the national average. In December, the Census Bureau reported that seven states lost population between July 2014 and July 2015. Only one was a right-to-work state.”

NEA claims that RTW states spend $3,392 less per year than forced union states on education. While that dollar amount can be debated, the union is right that RTW states do generally spend less. But higher spending does not translate to improved student performance, which is about the same when you compare RTW states to forced union states. In fact, forced-union New York spends over $20,000 a year per student while RTW Utah’s outlay is just $6,500, yet Utah test scores far exceed New York’s. Clearly throwing large sums of money at education does not ensure student achievement.

As the RTW movement grows, some individuals are not content to wait for their legislatures to come around. Spurred by the Friedrichs case – which would have turned the entire country RTW for public employees had it not been for SCOTUS Justice Antonin Scalia’s untimely passing a year ago – several other cases have sprung up.

In November 2016, the National Right to Work Foundation, along with the Liberty Justice Center, filed a brief on behalf of two Illinois government employees. In Janus v. AFSCME, Mark Janus, a child support services worker at the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, and Brian Trygg, a transportation engineer, resent their unions’ forced dues regimen and are suing them. The case could make it to the Supreme Court as soon as next year.

Then earlier this month, three new federal court cases challenging the constitutionality of forcing public employees to pay union dues were filed. Government workers – including Pennsylvania teachers, California medical center employees, and New York school employees – are plaintiffs. These cases, being filed with legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation, argue that “state requirements that the plaintiffs pay mandatory union fees as a condition of government employment violate the First Amendment.”

Nathan McGrath, vice president and chief litigation counsel for the Fairness Center, which is also litigating the Pennsylvania case, argues that “Teachers should not have to give up their constitutional rights to teach our kids. This lawsuit is designed to clearly and cleanly address the core issue that was left undecided in the Friedrichs case. We intend to provide the Supreme Court with another opportunity to end more than 40 years of union coercion.”

If any of these cases pass muster in the Supreme Court, teachers and all public employees in the U.S. would be freed from any obligation to join or pay a union as a condition of employment. Please note that despite the anguished whines from organized labor, these cases have nothing to do with outlawing public employee unions, nor will they have an effect on unions’ ability to collectively bargain.

What the RTW legislation and litigation amounts to is freedom of association. You should not be coerced to join a union or pay dues to one, despite all the union claims that they benefit you. When you bought your last car, you were not forced to join AAA because they “advocate for you.” And if you bought a gun recently, an NRA rep didn’t suggest you join that organization because it “fights for Second Amendment rights.” Forced unionization is a dark relic of the past, one that needs to be placed in a museum, right next to the dinosaur bones.

Larry Sand, a former classroom teacher, is the president of the non-profit California Teachers Empowerment Network – a non-partisan, non-political group dedicated to providing teachers and the general public with reliable and balanced information about professional affiliations and positions on educational issues.

Trump plans to cut EPA staff in half

Do we really need all those people, 15,000, to enforce regulations based on junk science?  Do we need that many to blackmail businesses, families and communities to abide by junk science?  With Scott Pruitt as EPA Director, we will have a reasonable person, using real science and that many bureaucrats will no longer be needed to harm the economy while pretending to “save” the environment.

“Ebell told the Associated Press that Trump is likely to seek significant reductions in the agency’s 15,000-person work force. Slashing half of the work force would leave 7,500 at the agency, which would dramatically reduce its capacity to move out regulations quickly.

Other reports say Ebell advised the Trump administration to make the staffing level to be on par with that 45 years ago when the EPA was started during the administration of former Republican President Richard Nixon. That would mean as few as 5,000 employees would remain.”

The good news is that this type of auditing of employment level needs is going on in all government agencies.  We might see, beyond the employment freeze, a real sizeable cut in government workers.  Certainly 900 State Department employees that signed the letter denouncing President Trump earlier this week need to leave or be assigned to Outer Mongolia—staff that country up.

EPALogo

Trump plans to cut EPA staff in half

By John Siciliano, Washington Examiner, 1/27/17

President Trump is seeking to slash the number of workers at the Environmental Protection Agency by at least half, leaving it significantly gutted as the administration mulls further cuts, the former head of Trump’s EPA transition team said Friday.

“Let’s aim for half and see how it works out, and then maybe we’ll want to go further,” Myron Ebell said now that he has returned to his position as director of the Center for Energy and Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Ebell left the Trump transition team a week ago.

Ebell told the Associated Press that Trump is likely to seek significant reductions in the agency’s 15,000-person work force. Slashing half of the work force would leave 7,500 at the agency, which would dramatically reduce its capacity to move out regulations quickly.

Other reports say Ebell advised the Trump administration to make the staffing level to be on par with that 45 years ago when the EPA was started during the administration of former Republican President Richard Nixon. That would mean as few as 5,000 employees would remain.

Stay abreast of the latest developments from nation’s capital and beyond with curated News Alerts from the Washington Examiner news desk and delivered to your inbox.

President Trump said during the campaign that he would like to abolish the EPA, or ‘leave a little bit,'” Ebell said. “I think the administration is likely to start proposing cuts to the 15,000 staff, because the fact is that a huge amount of the work of the EPA is actually done by state agencies. It’s not clear why so many employees are needed at the federal leve