2020 Election: Over One Million Ineligible Persons Registered to Vote in California

Did you think California government ran honest elections?  If so, you probably went to a government school and were indoctrinated.  Did you know six counties, between them, have over 1,000,000 INELIGIBLE registrations?  That does not include the three million illegal voters on our voting rolls a Federal judge ordered be deleted—and were not, in violation of a court order.

“In 2017-18, EIPCa sued the LA County registrar and California’s SOS over similar findings. A settlement was reached in which the state agreed to begin removing millions of ineligible, inactive-status registrants from its rolls. While California counties research the eligibility of their inactive registrants, thousands of new voter registrations have been added through the state’s automatic DMV voter registration system, growing the list from eight counties to thirteen. While San Francisco and San Diego counties have made progress by cancelling hundreds of thousands of inactive registrants, new counties joined the list as their new registrations have accelerated.

The one million+ ineligible registrants include inactive registrants (who have not voted in years but are still registered and can vote in any election), persons who’ve likely died or relocated but remain on the active voter list, and tens of thousands of people who have two or more registrations each. EIPCa cannot quantify how many more are ineligible due to non-citizen status or other reasons.”

This is how the Democrats win.  Ineligible voters, than “harvesting” the vote—of people no one knows even exists—but are registered.  Honest elections?  Not in California.

2020 Election: Over One Million Ineligible Persons Registered to Vote in California

Election Integrity Project CA,  3/26/20   w

Despite a lawsuit and resulting efforts to cancel ineligible registrants,

California’s bloated voter list problems continue.

Santa Clarita, Calif. – A review of California’s statewide voter database shows that 13 counties have more registered voters than eligible citizens– totaling over 1 million ineligible registrants– says Election Integrity Project, California (EIPCa). The overage was calculated by adding together each county’s active and inactive-status registrants and comparing the total to the estimated number of eligible citizens from the California Secretary of State’s (SOS) website. Both sources are dated February 18, 2020.

Six counties have the most ineligible registrants and contribute most to the one million+ ineligibles count. The full list includes Imperial, Lassen, Marin, Nevada, Plumas, Santa Clara and Siskiyou counties.

                                    Total #             Total #                         % of                # Ineligible

County                                    Registrants      Eligible Citizens          Eligible            Registrants

Los Angeles                7,040,216        6,184,428                    114%               855,788

San Diego                   2,306,159        2,232,644                    103%               73,515

San Mateo                   534,316           507,291                       105%               27,025

Solano                         320,863           294,638                       109%               26,225

Santa Cruz                  206,585           187,357                       110%               19,228

Ventura                       563,728           546,938                       103%               16,790

Total Six Counties                                                                                          1,018,571

In 2017-18, EIPCa sued the LA County registrar and California’s SOS over similar findings. A settlement was reached in which the state agreed to begin removing millions of ineligible, inactive-status registrants from its rolls. While California counties research the eligibility of their inactive registrants, thousands of new voter registrations have been added through the state’s automatic DMV voter registration system, growing the list from eight counties to thirteen. While San Francisco and San Diego counties have made progress by cancelling hundreds of thousands of inactive registrants, new counties joined the list as their new registrations have accelerated.

The one million+ ineligible registrants include inactive registrants (who have not voted in years but are still registered and can vote in any election), persons who’ve likely died or relocated but remain on the active voter list, and tens of thousands of people who have two or more registrations each. EIPCa cannot quantify how many more are ineligible due to non-citizen status or other reasons.

“One million ineligible registrants allowed to vote opens doors to election crime in the upcoming 2020 election, especially if they’re mailed ballots,” said EIPCa President Linda Paine. “California needs to take immediate action to correct its bloated voter lists.”

#  #  #

NIH failed to test coronavirus drugs, studied drunk monkeys, soap operas, and tailgating instead

Is the NIH—National Institute of Health mismanaged? From this article the answer is easy—of course it is.  Studies and grants go to the politically connected and the esoteric—not the real need for medical research.

““Waste is more than just a waste of money and resources,” Bracken preached to the audience back in July 2016, according to the NIH’s official account of the speech. “It can actually be harmful to people’s health.”

Nearly four years later, Bracken’s sweeping indictment about the financial management, organization and conduct of federal medical research looms large over a series of “what if” questions about the deadly and ever-spreading COVID-19 pandemic:

  • What if the research community hadn’t bet all its marbles on the next pandemic coming from a flu instead of a version of the coronavirus?
  • What if NIH or other agencies had funded research into the efficacy of drugs like chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, and HIV cocktails that had shown promise against coronavirus dating back to 2003?
  • What if more pressure had been applied by the medical governance world to develop vaccines aimed at coronavirus?
  • What if the medical community had simply adjusted its outdated modeling that predicted coronavirus would spread slowly and could be contained to account for the massive growth in global air travel the last decade that transported this virus from China to the West in treacherously fast time?

Another government agency that needs to be shut down, then restarted to meet its original purpose, not the politics of Washington.

Photo courtesy of 401(K) 2013, Flickr

NIH failed to test coronavirus drugs, studied drunk monkeys, soap operas, and tailgating instead

Expert warned agency as much as 87.5 percent of biomedical research was wasteful.

By John Solomon, Just the News,  3/26/20   

On a steamy summer day inside the lecture auditorium of the storied National Institutes of Health headquarters, Dr. Michael Bracken delivered a stark message to an audience that dedicated its life, and owed its living, to medical research.

As much as 87.5% of biomedical research is wasted or inefficient, the respected Yale University epidemiologist declared in a sobering assessment for a federal research agency that spends about $40 billion a year on medical studies.

He backed his staggering statistic with these additional stats: 50 out of every 100 medical studies fail to produce published findings, and half of those that do publish have serious design flaws. And those that aren’t flawed and manage to publish are often needlessly redundant.

“Waste is more than just a waste of money and resources,” Bracken preached to the audience back in July 2016, according to the NIH’s official account of the speech. “It can actually be harmful to people’s health.”

Nearly four years later, Bracken’s sweeping indictment about the financial management, organization and conduct of federal medical research looms large over a series of “what if” questions about the deadly and ever-spreading COVID-19 pandemic:

  • What if the research community hadn’t bet all its marbles on the next pandemic coming from a flu instead of a version of the coronavirus?
  • What if NIH or other agencies had funded research into the efficacy of drugs like chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, and HIV cocktails that had shown promise against coronavirus dating back to 2003?
  • What if more pressure had been applied by the medical governance world to develop vaccines aimed at coronavirus?
  • What if the medical community had simply adjusted its outdated modeling that predicted coronavirus would spread slowly and could be contained to account for the massive growth in global air travel the last decade that transported this virus from China to the West in treacherously fast time?

Correspondent Christine Dolan laid bare in an article Thursday in Just the News how the major failures, miscalculations and bad bets that the official science world made on coronavirus are now coming back to haunt the current pandemic.

As Dr. Carlos Del Rio, the Emory University infectious disease specialist and former CDC disease hunter, aptly noted: “There are multiple faults. And in the end, we were woefully unprepared.”

Del Rio’s assessment — shared by many infectious disease colleagues — will certainly drive plenty of armchair quarterbacking when the current outbreak recedes. Challenging doctors in the middle of the crisis is neither politically popular nor effective when their attention should be on their many critically ill patients.

But at some point — if America is to learn from this crisis — the policymakers and NIH overseers will need to address the clarion warning that Dr. Bracken made four years ago inside Uncle Sam’s most prestigious medical research institution.

His assessment — if true — would mean that $30 billion or more of NIH’s annual funding is wasted, inefficient, redundant, or flawed.

Coming to grips with that problem will undercut the big excuse that medical researchers often make when challenged about failure: There isn’t enough research money, so they make decisions based on the biggest risks they see to public health.

Senate Homeland and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Ron Johnson, R-Wis., told Just the News on Thursday night he plans to investigate why the medical community was so poorly prepared for this pandemic.

“Once the current crisis has passed, Congress must conduct thorough oversight to understand why we weren’t better prepared and take corrective for the future,” he said.

Several of the researchers whom Dolan interviewed suggested there weren’t enough resources to simultaneously plan for both a flu pandemic and a coronavirus pandemic, so they simply skipped the clinical trials on treatments for the latter.

There wasn’t enough in a $40 billion a year pot of money to plan for two pandemics?

As you weigh that question, consider this: In the 15 years since evidence first emerged that drugs like chloroquine might help in a coronavirus pandemic, NIH spent:

Just two days ago, in the midst of surging coronavirus deaths in America, NIH released a joint study by its National Cancer Institute and the National Institute on Aging that came to a heady conclusion: If you walk more, you are likely to live longer.

“We wanted to investigate this question to provide new insights that could help people better understand the health implications of the step counts they get from fitness trackers and phone apps,” the researchers explained.

To accentuate that Dr. Bracken’s warning on redundancy four years ago hasn’t been heeded: NCI funded a prior study published just one year earlier at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School. The conclusion was mostly the same: “Death rates declined with more steps taken each day.”

Tying NIH research to popular fitness trackers and pedometers will get plenty of media attention, but the proposition that more exercise leads to better health is already irrefutably accepted.

And that is little solace to an incubated coronavirus patient laying in an ICU bed who wonders if there is a drug to treat his or her disease.

California’s State and Local Liabilities Total $1.5 Trillion

Even before the Wuhan Virus and the billions needed to keep the doors open, California was in a terrible financial shape.  While the Guv was bragging about a $21 billion “surplus”, he forgot about the $1.5 trillion in liabilities we had.  Surplus—just another government lie.

“Depicted below are the totals for California’s state and local government debt as of 6/30/2017. Without any revision to the officially estimated total for unfunded pension liabilities, the total is $981 billion. We have added to that total another $530 billion, however, to reflect what may be a more realistic estimate of total pension obligations.

Moody’s, the credit rating agency, discounts pension liabilities with the Citigroup Pension Liability Index (CPLI), which is based on high grade corporate bond yields. When Moody’s first introduced its pension methodology a few years ago, the CPLI was 5.67%. More recently, CPLI has fallen: in June 2017, it was 3.87%.

Using the CPLI discount rate, we estimate that the real unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) for California’s state and local employee pension systems is $846 billion, which is $530 billion more than the officially reported (the method for restating UAAL based on a different discount rate assumption is described here). An alternative approach used by the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR) is to discount the liabilities by a rate closer to the risk-free rate. In a recent report, Stanford researchers used a discount rate of 3%. Using Stanford’s methodology, we estimate a UAAL of $1.26 trillion.”

Sacramento needs to admit they have a financial problem—otherwise they will spend the State into the ground—no money for law enforcement schools or roads.  Tax increases will make the situation worse.  Tough times for government—maybe a return to the basics instead of expansive government?

California’s State and Local Liabilities Total $1.5 Trillion

By Marc Joffe and Edward Ring, California Policy Center,  1/3/20   

We estimate that California’s total state and local government debt as of June 30, 2017 totaled just over $1.5 trillion. That total includes all outstanding bonds, loans, and other long-term liabilities, along with the officially reported unfunded liability for other post-employment benefits (primarily retiree healthcare), as well as unfunded pension liabilities.

This represents a rise of about $200 billion – or 15% – over our last debt analysis, in January 2017.

Our findings may appear to contradict reports that suggest a state budget surplus of about $9 billion. But the state’s spare cash and rainy day funds pale before the mountain of long-term liabilities that California governments at all levels have accumulated. Moreover, if the stock market drops, personal income tax and capital gains tax revenue will decline precipitously, wiping out these surpluses.

Our analysis differs from government reporting in a few ways, the most significant of which is governments’ use of a very generous expected rate of return on their pension fund investments. Using a more accurate rate, we calculate the total of unfunded pensions in California at $846 billion – $530 billion more than the official estimate of $316 billion. But even using only the officially reported estimates, California’s state and local governments are about $1.0 trillion in debt.

California’s Total State and Local Government Debt – 6/30/2017 Estimate

Depicted below are the totals for California’s state and local government debt as of 6/30/2017. Without any revision to the officially estimated total for unfunded pension liabilities, the total is $981 billion. We have added to that total another $530 billion, however, to reflect what may be a more realistic estimate of total pension obligations.

Moody’s, the credit rating agency, discounts pension liabilities with the Citigroup Pension Liability Index (CPLI), which is based on high grade corporate bond yields. When Moody’s first introduced its pension methodology a few years ago, the CPLI was 5.67%. More recently, CPLI has fallen: in June 2017, it was 3.87%.

Using the CPLI discount rate, we estimate that the real unfunded actuarial accrued liability (UAAL) for California’s state and local employee pension systems is $846 billion, which is $530 billion more than the officially reported (the method for restating UAAL based on a different discount rate assumption is described here). An alternative approach used by the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR) is to discount the liabilities by a rate closer to the risk-free rate. In a recent report, Stanford researchers used a discount rate of 3%. Using Stanford’s methodology, we estimate a UAAL of $1.26 trillion.

California’s largest pension system, CalPERS, has already told participating agencies they will be required to increase required employer contributions to the retirement fund. This will likely lead to budget cuts that will reduce government services and employment.

California Policy Center analysis released earlier this year extrapolated those officially announced rate increases to estimate that in aggregate, California’s state and local government employers will be required to nearly double their annual pension contributions between 2017 and 2024, from an estimated $31 billion in 2017 to $59 billion in 2024.

Comparisons to Previous California Policy Center Debt Studies

This is the third time the California Policy Center has produced a compilation of all California’s state and local government debt. Because our methodology has evolved over time, our current estimate is not fully comparable to previous estimates. For example, in this study we included approximately $42 billion of “other long-term liabilities” that we previously excluded. These other long-term liabilities include unpaid employee sick leave (known as “compensated absences”), workers compensation claims payable and pollution remediation obligations.

While a precise comparison between the current and previous studies is not possible, we can note a couple of overall trends:

  • Bonded debt obligations have risen very modestly during the last few years, as new issues have been largely offset by repayments of existing bonds.
  • Pension obligations have risen mostly because of lower discount rates.
  • The CPLI declined from 5.67% on June 30, 2011, the relevant date in our first study, to 3.87% on June 30, 2017.
  • CalPERS, CalSTRS and many other California pension systems have made smaller reductions in their assumed rates of return used to produce official pension liability estimates.
  • Finally, we have seen an increase in unfunded OPEB obligations as healthcare costs rise.

Heavily and lightly indebted local governments

Debt burdens vary greatly across agencies.  One way to compare debt burdens between agencies of different sizes is to use the ratio of the entity’s long-term obligations to total revenue. Most California governments have reported debt-to-revenue ratios below 200%.

One local government with an especially large debt load is Los Angeles Community College District. In the 2017 fiscal year, LACCD reported $1.4 billion in revenues, mostly from property taxes as well as state and federal aid. The district’s balance sheet includes $4.2 billion of bond and capital lease obligations – yielding a debt to revenue ratio of 300%.

But if we also consider pension and OPEB debt the situation is even worse.  LACCD’s balance sheet includes $641 million of net pension liabilities, but these are calculated using CalPERS and CalSTRS discount rates which were about 7% in 2017. If we recalculate these obligations using Moody’s methodology, the district’s pension debt triples to around $2 billion.

LACCD’s balance sheet also shows a $100 million OPEB liability. But this is just a fraction of the district’s Unfunded Actuarially Accrued OPEB liability of $568 million. Starting in the 2018 fiscal year, LACCD will be required to reflect the full liability on its balance sheet under new governmental accounting standards.

Finally, the LACCD has over $60 million in other long-term liabilities including compensated absences, workers compensation and a supplementary retirement plan. All told, the district’s long-term obligations can be fairly estimated at $6.8 billion or almost five times revenue. It is notable that despite LACCD’s apparently dire finances, its general obligation bonds carry relative strong credit ratings:  AA+ from Standard & Poor’s and Aa1 from Moody’s. Because these bonds are serviced by a lien on properties within the district boundaries, they would continue to be serviced even if LACCD went bankrupt, lost accreditation or faced some other extreme circumstance.

Not all community college districts are so deeply indebted.  At the other extreme, Feather River Community College District reported $14 million in long term liabilities versus $25 million in revenue. Although the pension portion of its debt would increase sharply if restated using Moody’s methodology, most of its unfunded OPEB liability is already on the district’s balance sheet. Feather River pays only a portion of the medical benefits for retirees before they become eligible for Medicare and nothing thereafter. Only relatively small community college districts like Feather River have low debt levels; LACCD’s high debt burden is more typical of California’s larger Community College districts.

Debt also varies widely among the state’s cities. Santa Paula, a small city in Ventura County, reported $160 million in long term liabilities, more than quadruple municipal revenue.  Most of the debt took the form of water and wastewater revenue bonds. Reported OPEB obligations were less than $1 million while pension debt was just under $23 million.  The reported pension obligation is based on a discount rate of 7.65% and would more than triple if the more conservative Moody’s discount rate was applied.

The city’s debt service requirements may have contributed to its decision to turn its fire department over to the Ventura County Fire Protection District. According to a Ventura Local Agency Formation Commission staff report, the city has been unable to afford fire station upgrades or an additional station.

Other cities with high debt/revenue ratios include Cathedral City, West Covina and Woodland. By contrast, the City of East Palo Alto has relatively little debt despite its modest economic circumstances. The city’s median income is lower than the statewide average and well below that of neighboring communities. As of June 2017, East Palo Alto had no outstanding municipal bonds and did not offer retiree medical coverage. Pension debt accounted for most of the city’s $12 million in reported long-term liabilities, which represented about 30% of municipal revenue. Other cities with low debt burdens included Danville and Lafayette – which don’t provide defined contribution pension benefits – and Rancho Cucamonga – a city whose OPEBs are fully funded.

What does this all mean?

California’s state and local governments have done a surprisingly good job at managing their conventional debt growth over the past five years, but this progress has been more than offset by the growth in unfunded pension liabilities.

Taking into account what we consider to be more realistic discount rates to calculate unfunded pension liabilities, California’s total state and local government debt as of 6/30/2017 of $1.5 trillion was equal to 54 percent of California’s total gross state product in that year.

When added to publicly held federal debt as a percentage of US GDP, 75 percent, the overall state, local and federal government debt/GDP ratio for California is 129 percent. This amounts to a total per individual California resident of $38,344. Based on IRS Statistics of Income, it equates to a total per individual California taxpayer of $85,087. Put another way, if every California taxpayer were to make principal and interest payments on $85,087, based on a 30-year, 5 percent loan, it would cost each of them $5,520 per year prior to paying taxes for any ongoing government operations.

A recent survey by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) found that most respondents preferred to spend California’s current surpluses on healthcare and community college, while only 21% wanted to pay down debt. Perhaps if Californians understood the true magnitude of government debt in our state, they would adopt a different point of view. We hope that our study of government financial statements and related documentation will help educate Californians about the true extent of our public debt.

Federal Flapjacks: Government invested in an IHOP, now may need to give it a bailout

Is it the role of the Federal government to OWN an IHOP franchise?  Apparently Obama thought so.  He authorized your tax dollars to go toward the purchase of a franchise in the D.C. area.

“This week, our award goes to the Department of Health and Human Service’s (HHS) Office of Community Services for spending $765,828 to open an IHOP in D.C.’s up-and-coming neighborhood of Columbia Heights in 2011. Government flapjacks, anyone?

In 2009, the Anacostia Economic Development Corporation (AEDC) applied for a grant from HHS to invest in the franchised restaurant in exchange for a minority equity stake. HHS gave the AEDC $500,000 as an equity injection in DC Pancakes LLC for a 19% ownership interest, according to the 2011 edition ofnewly deceasedformer Oklahoma Republican Sen. Tom Coburn’s annual Wastebook

Why did Biden approve this?  Did he speak out against it?  Maybe it is time for the government to sell it—to local investors and get out of the restaurant business.  What do you think.

Federal Flapjacks: Government invested in an IHOP, now may need to give it a bailout

This Columbia Heights IHOP is about to see its second injection of taxpayer dollars

By Sophie Mann, Just the News,  3/29/20   

:

The Golden Horseshoe is a weekly designation from Just the News intended to highlight egregious examples of wasteful taxpayer spending by the government. The award is named for the horseshoe-shaped toilet seats for military airplanes that cost the Pentagon a whopping $640 each back in the 1980s. 

This week, our award goes to the Department of Health and Human Service’s (HHS) Office of Community Services for spending $765,828 to open an IHOP in D.C.’s up-and-coming neighborhood of Columbia Heights in 2011. Government flapjacks, anyone?

In 2009, the Anacostia Economic Development Corporation (AEDC) applied for a grant from HHS to invest in the franchised restaurant in exchange for a minority equity stake. HHS gave the AEDC $500,000 as an equity injection in DC Pancakes LLC for a 19% ownership interest, according to the 2011 edition ofnewly deceasedformer Oklahoma Republican Sen. Tom Coburn’s annual Wastebook

xThe remaining quarter-of-a-million-plus dollars went to “training costs for new employees, and other consultants.” That would be, pancake consultants. 

HHS justified the investment with a claim that the restaurant would create 70 full-time jobs for individuals in the area who would otherwise qualify for welfare programs. 

AEDC teamed up with the Jackson Investment Company to open the IHOP. The Jackson Investment Company is headed by Tyoka Jackson, a former NFL player who played for the St. Louis Rams in 2001, when they fell to the New England Patriots in Super Bowl XXXVI. Jackson is the franchisee of the Columbia Heights IHOP.

According to his Linkedin page, Jackson’s company manages 45 apartment units and has developed residential communities and commercial properties in Washington, D.C. He “spearheaded the financing, development and successful opening of the first two International House of Pancakes (IHOP) franchises in Washington, DC, and has since added a third.” 

Like many restaurants around the nation, the Columbia Heights IHOP has recently been hurting in the wake of uncertainty and shelter-in-place orders surrounding the coronavirus — though they remain open to serve take-out and delivery orders.

The effects of coronavirus on the restaurant have been “devastating,” Jackson told Just the News. He added that he’s decided to keep the restaurant open its usual hours (24/7) for delivery and takeout, which “may or may not be the most prudent decision” for the business, but he wants to continue serving the community and keeping people in their jobs, to the extent that he is able. “People need these jobs,” said Jackson. 

Luckily, this IHOP may qualify for one of the small business loans available through the $2.2 trillion stimulus package President Trump signed into law on Friday. Jackson says he will be looking specifically at the portion of the bill that transforms a government loan into a grant, if the money is used to pay workers.

“If that’s something we qualify for, then it’s something I have great interest in,” Jackson said. 

For those keeping score, a new grant would be the second time the government has subsidized this International House of Pancakes.

This column’s personal recommendation: If you live in the area, best to cave to those midnight rooty tooty fresh ‘n fruity cravings — the place could use the business, and after all, your tax dollars helped the establishment open its doors originally and might help keep them open now. Might as well enjoy a small return on your investment!

The Department of Health and Human Services did not respond to a request for comment

‘Worst Thing:’ GOP lawmaker slams Senate for $350 million refugee provision in virus law

Amazing.  In the midst of a massive health and financial crisis, the Democrats demanded—and got–$350 million for immigrant resettlement projects.  Resettlement?  Unless it means deportation of those ordered to leave the country, it is not a resettlement—it is helping law breakers hide from law enforcement.

“He said he was concerned that individuals who might benefit from the aid could be in the country illegally.

 “If there was ever a time to emphasize border security it is when, you know, porous borders could potentially infect your people,” Gaetz said during the John Solomon Reports podcast. “But instead of doing that, we’re doing $350 million in just migrant and refugee resettlement and to me that is so offensive to the American people and to the American worker.” 

Earlier this week Gaetz introduced legislation that would prevent Chinese government-owned businesses from receiving any funds appropriated by Congress, including those appropriated in coronavirus stimulus legislation.”

We have a health crisis—lets spend our money on prevention and cures—not on those that laugh at us for promoting them from the law.

Worst Thing:’ GOP lawmaker slams Senate for $350 million refugee provision in virus law

Earlier this week Gaetz introduced legislation to prevent Chinese government-owned businesses from receiving taxpayer dollars

By Alex Nitzberg, Just the News,  3/26/20   

A high-profile Republican congressman on Thursday slammed senators for including $350 million in the coronavirus aid legislation for migrant and refugee resettlement programs, calling it “offensive to the American people and to the American worker.”

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., who was quarantined earlier in the coronavirus crisis because he was exposed to an infected patient, said the refugee aid had nothing to do with the pandemic and was “the worst thing in the bill.”

He said he was concerned that individuals who might benefit from the aid could be in the country illegally.

 “If there was ever a time to emphasize border security it is when, you know, porous borders could potentially infect your people,” Gaetz said during the John Solomon Reports podcast. “But instead of doing that, we’re doing $350 million in just migrant and refugee resettlement and to me that is so offensive to the American people and to the American worker.” 

Earlier this week Gaetz introduced legislation that would prevent Chinese government-owned businesses from receiving any funds appropriated by Congress, including those appropriated in coronavirus stimulus legislation.

“I serve on the Armed Services Committee where we get regular briefings about China’s strategy to try to exert influence with the fusion of their government and autocratic corporate assets. And one of the ways that they do that is to acquire U.S.-based assets as part of that overall strategy,” Rep. Gaetz explained.

He highlighted several examples, noting that “the Radisson hotel group is actually owned by Communist China. The Waldorf Astoria in New York City is owned by Communist China. AMC Theatres is actually controlled by a Chinese entity,” he said.

The congressman highlighted the irony of doling American money out to Chinese businesses as the U.S. reels from the consequences of a coronavirus outbreak that began in China.

“And so I don’t believe that it is the work of a great nation to go and borrow money from China to give to Chinese companies and then pay China back with interest from a virus that we’re having to deal with in greater acuity as a consequence of China,” he explained.

Corona Virus (SARS-CoV2 or COVID-19): How it spreads, and how to contain it.

This is an important article.  It explains, in basic language, how the COVID-19 virus spreads and how to contain it.  It is hoped that drugs and medicines can be created to prevent it and it end it.

Please forward this to your friends, family and co-workers.  Together we can defeat this virus.  Glad to see a GOP congressional candidate reaching out to the community with important  information we all need.  Thanks to Ritesh Tandon!

Corona Virus (SARS-CoV2 or COVID-19): How it spreads, and how to contain it.

Ritesh Tandon,   3/30/20  

The current Corona Virus is a very “stealthy” and “deadlier” version of the family of RESPIRATORY infection viruses. It is spreading exponentially primarily because of two reasons:

  1. In the first 5-7 days of getting an infection, there is no symptom, and the infected person can transmit the virus to other people in this period and in a period of 7-10 days beyond until the person recovers.
  2. We have no effective medicine or Vaccine to stop its progress in the infected person.

A few facts about how it spreads:

  1. Since it infects the respiratory system (lungs, throat), an infected person can eject viruses into the air by cough, sneezing, and normal breathing. The carrier for these viruses is moisture particles or micro-bubbles in your breath, cough, or sneeze.
  2. The distance traveled by these virus-laden moisture particles (sometimes called aerosols or airborne micro-bubbles) from an infected person’s mouth depends mainly on the mechanism of the ejection, i.e., breathing, cough, or sneezing. A loud cough or sneeze can throw these virus-laden micro-bubbles up to 5-6 feet and can hang around in the air for up to 4 hours.

3. These ejected micro-bubbles carrying viruses will generally fall on surfaces that we use every day and can survive up to 4 days, depending on the chemical nature of the surfaces. On Copper, it stays up to 4 hours; on Cardboards (food packages cartons and newspaper paper included), it can live for around one day; on plastic and steel, it can live up to 4 days.

  • You can see that how by being close to people, or touching many commonly shared surfaces (knobs, cartons, counters, etc.) by people, and then touching your face, nose or mouth unknowingly, and even ingesting food that may have been sneezed upon, or touched by infected hands, can inoculate you with the virus.
  • How do we avoid getting infected? Given that we have no vaccine or cure yet to stop the progression of infection, the best solution is to observe social distancing and always “washing hands before touching your face.” It will be at least 1-1.5 years before vaccines can start to show up, and probably longer before these are available in volume to take care of people. Hydroxy-Chloroquine is not proven yet. It is going through trials to test its efficacy. Another method of injecting antibodies extracted from the recovered patients is approved by the FDA but can have scaling issues.
  • In the near future, People MUST follow the social distancing practices diligently to slow down the virus spread substantially.
  • Scale testing measures have to come up in the next month or so. Initial prioritization must be for health workers and first responders, and for workers in essential services of the economy. All communities must take responsibility quickly to create facilities for such mass testing and isolate all infected individuals until they are virus-free.
  • To safely open economic activity in various affected industries, new preventive measures must be devised by businesses to ensure virus free employees, products, and services. They should prioritize testing for their employees, and do it frequently, to make sure that they are not acting as an infection spreading nodes.
  • The next year or so, it will be a difficult period, but we can make the misery much smaller by acting together and safeguarding our communities through diligently following good practices recommended by the CDC.

Reference Research Papers and Websites:

  1. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2004973
  2. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/320690
  3. https://www.cdc.gov/

Ritesh is Congressional Candidate from District 17th, more details visit

www.tandonforcongress.com

ICE Is Using Its Deportation Flights To Bring Home Americans Stuck Abroad

This is a great use of the resources of the United States.  We ship/deport illegal aliens back to their home nation.  Instead of the flights “deadheading” back to the United States, they take Americans stuck in foreign countries, unable to get out, and fly them back to the U.S.

“ICE Air Operations, the air transportation arm of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), has so far rescued 466 U.S. citizens stranded in the Northern Triangle region of Central America amid the coronavirus pandemic.

Following orders of final removal, ICE deported Salvadoran and Honduran nationals back to their home countries on Friday. On the return leg of these flights, the agency took aboard U.S. citizens who were stranded due to COVID-19 lockdowns, according to an ICE press release.”

My guess is that Obama and Biden would just ignore these Americans.  What do you think?

ICE Is Using Its Deportation Flights To Bring Home Americans Stuck Abroad

Jason Hopkins, Daily Caller,   3/29/20   

ICE Air Operations, the air transportation arm of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), has so far rescued 466 U.S. citizens stranded in the Northern Triangle region of Central America amid the coronavirus pandemic.

Following orders of final removal, ICE deported Salvadoran and Honduran nationals back to their home countries on Friday. On the return leg of these flights, the agency took aboard U.S. citizens who were stranded due to COVID-19 lockdowns, according to an ICE press release.

ICE on Friday flew home 130 U.S. citizens from Honduras via two different flights, and another 127 U.S. citizens from El Salvador — all of whom were able to occupy “Space Available” seats on the return leg of these repatriation flights.

These flights come after ICE flew back 209 U.S. citizens from El Salvador and Honduras earlier this month, bringing the total number of those rescued by the agency to 466. ICE says it will keep bringing Americans home, and left the door open to expanding the operation outside the Northern Triangle region.

 “ICE will continue to work with the State Department to facilitate the safe return of U.S. citizens on future removal flight returns from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador throughout the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic,” the agency said in a press release statement on Saturday.

“These return operations could also potentially expand to other countries outside of the Northern Triangle,” the statement continued. This region includes the countries of Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras

The facilitation of these returns comes as airline companies around the world have cancelled flights and governments are declaring nationwide lockdown orders.

The State Department has declared a level-four travel advisory — the highest level possible, and is urging all Americans abroad to return home. U.S. citizens who choose not to immediately return home, the administration warned, risked being stuck in a foreign country for an indefinite amount of time.

“In countries where commercial departure options remain available, U.S. citizens who live in the United States should arrange for immediate return to the United States, unless they are prepared to remain abroad for an indefinite period,” read a press statement from the State Department earlier this month.

One Upside Of The Coronavirus Shutdown, Maybe? Fewer Voter Initiatives

Is this good news?  For several months it looks like there would be a minimum of ten measures on the November statewide ballot.  At best there could be fifteen.  But, without people in the streets, brick and mortar stores closed down, social distancing and you have a problem finding people willing to sign any petition, for any reason. 

““People aren’t out in public, and those who are out in public aren’t inclined to approach a stranger, take a pen, and stand within 6 feet to put something on the ballot,” said Brian Brokaw, a Democratic political consultant who has been involved in several potential ballot measures.

Normally presidential election years attract a slew of initiatives, as campaigns — particularly those pushing liberal ideas — seek approval from a larger and more diverse electorate. Though we won’t know until July exactly how many propositions will be on the ballot, it appears likely that it will be a lot less than in 2016, when Californians voted on 17 statewide ballot measures. Political insiders estimate the final number for 2020 will be in the range of six to 10.”

But, be aware, that the legislature could add items to the ballot, without a single voters signatures.  This is something we will watch and report about.

One Upside Of The Coronavirus Shutdown, Maybe? Fewer Voter Initiatives

By Laurel Rosenhall, CalMatters, Capitol Public Radio,   3/29/20  

California voters may experience a small silver lining amid the coronavirus pandemic: a shorter November ballot, featuring fewer of the statewide propositions that often put voters in the middle of confusing industry fights

Initiative proponents have until the end of April to collect the signatures they need to put their ideas on the ballot — and with millions of Californians staying home, and practicing social distancing when they go out, it may be impossible for some campaigns to collect enough signatures in time. 

“People aren’t out in public, and those who are out in public aren’t inclined to approach a stranger, take a pen, and stand within 6 feet to put something on the ballot,” said Brian Brokaw, a Democratic political consultant who has been involved in several potential ballot measures.

Normally presidential election years attract a slew of initiatives, as campaigns — particularly those pushing liberal ideas — seek approval from a larger and more diverse electorate. Though we won’t know until July exactly how many propositions will be on the ballot, it appears likely that it will be a lot less than in 2016, when Californians voted on 17 statewide ballot measures. Political insiders estimate the final number for 2020 will be in the range of six to 10.

That’s good news for election officials, who could face lower costs for printing and mailing shorter ballots, and for voters who may find the decision-making easier when faced with fewer proposals, said Kim Alexander, president of the nonprofit California Voter Foundation. 

“Sometimes voting in California can feel like you’re taking a test — voters can be intimidated by the length and complexity of the ballot,” she said. “So it could help encourage voter participation if we have fewer complex initiatives sprouting out of special-interest fighting.”

So far four measures have qualified for the November ballot, one measure has submitted signatures that are being verified, and another eight have collected at least 25% of the necessary signatures. (Depending on what type of law an initiative would change, it needs either about 623,000 valid signatures or about 997,000 valid signatures.)

Several campaigns have stopped collecting signatures because of the coronavirus shutdown, including those pushing initiatives to allow sports betting, tax plastic packaging to fund environmental programs, continue funding stem cell research and expand California’s data privacy law. 

None of them are officially calling it quits. Some may already have enough signatures to make it on the ballot, while others are hoping they can resume collecting signatures in time to get more. 

“Because the health and wellbeing of Californians is foremost, we paused paid signature gathering efforts for the time being,” said Jacob Mejia, a spokesman for the Pechanga Indian tribe that is backing the measure to permit sports betting. “Tribal leadership remains committed to bringing this proposal to voters in November and are monitoring developments closely and assessing all options.”  

But the odds of getting back on the street with pens and clipboards any time soon seem slim, as Gov. Gavin Newsom has said the order to stay home to curb the spread of coronavirus may last two to three months

“Everything is on hold until it’s safe,” said Dan Newman, a spokesman for the plastic recycling measure.

He said the campaign will try to get on the 2022 ballot if it can’t resume gathering signatures very soon.

Newsom said this week that companies that are paid to gather signatures for ballot initiatives have asked him to extend the deadlines for submitting signatures so they can have more time to qualify for the November ballot. He was noncommittal, saying only that the question is one of many things he’s processing in response to the pandemic.

California prof claims Israel will put non-Jews ‘in mass prisons’ amid coronavirus

The taxpayers of California are financing the life and bigotry of a Cal State Professor.  His openly anti-Jewish, making crazy comments that ask not whether he should be in a classroom—But should he instead be institutionalized to protect him and society.

“Responding to a tweet from Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom, which had reported on Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s plan to quarantine those who were returning to Israel from abroad, Professor As’ad AbuKhalil tweeted that “non-Jews will be put in mass prisons.” 

“Israel will—I am sure—have different medical procedures for Jews and non-Jews”    Tweet This

“Israel will—I am sure—have different medical procedures for Jews and non-Jews,” AbuKhalil wrote in a tweet. “Non-Jews will be put in mass prisons.”

According to the CSU Stanislaus website, AbuKhalil is a professor in the “Political Science and Public Administration” department at CSU Stanislaus. He teaches courses in American government and Middle Eastern politics.  

He is sick—yet Guv Newsom, claiming support of Jews and for the State of Israel has been silent.  His silence is SUPPORT of the bigotry of this professor.  This is something the Republican Party should expose—does Newsom support or oppose hatred in the classroom?  Will the GOP point this out?  Why not?

Photo Courtesy of Rusty Stewart, Flickr

California prof claims Israel will put non-Jews ‘in mass prisons’ amid coronavirus

Eduardo Neret, Campus Reform,   3/26/20 

More10

  • As countries react to the global coronavirus pandemic, Israel recently announced it may quarantine those who enter the country from abroad.
  • A California professor responded to this announcement and tweeted that Israel will put non-Jews in “mass prisons.”

A California State University-Stanislaus professor claimed Israel will have different medical procedures during the coronavirus pandemic for “Jews and non-Jews.”

Responding to a tweet from Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom, which had reported on Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s plan to quarantine those who were returning to Israel from abroad, Professor As’ad AbuKhalil tweeted that “non-Jews will be put in mass prisons.” 

“Israel will—I am sure—have different medical procedures for Jews and non-Jews”    Tweet This

“Israel will—I am sure—have different medical procedures for Jews and non-Jews,” AbuKhalil wrote in a tweet. “Non-Jews will be put in mass prisons.”

According to the CSU Stanislaus website, AbuKhalil is a professor in the “Political Science and Public Administration” department at CSU Stanislaus. He teaches courses in American government and Middle Eastern politics.  

The radical left will stop at nothing to intimidate conservative students on college campuses. You can help expose them. Find out more »

AbuKhalil told Campus Reform that his comment was “sarcastic.” 

“I made a sarcastic comment about both Saudi Arabia and Israel,” AbuKhalil wrote in an email. “I said: Israel will be putting Arabs in prisons if infected by Corona and said that Saudi Arabia would behead patients of Corona. Obviously those were not ‘information’ but the kind of sarcasm I use on my Twitter account to refer to two states (states not people, mind you) with history of discrimination.”

AbuKhalil also argued that his comments were not discriminatory. 

“My comments were directed against states and not against the Jewish people or the Islamic people,” AbuKhalil continued. “If you bother to look for several days on my twitter account you will see denunciation of anti-Semitism: and even in this Corona crisis, I warned against hatred and prejudice and reminded readers of how Europeans during the “Black Death disgustingly punished Jewish people in Europe because they insanely blamed them for the plague.”

 “I am somebody with a long track record of writings (in Arabic and English) against anti-Semitism and am deeply offended for the attempt to conflate criticisms of Israel (or mockery of Israel) with anti-Semitism,” he added. “There are anti-Semites who support Palestinians and there are anti-Semites who support Israel: I abhor them both equally.  Anti-Semitism, racism, misogyny, and prejudice are plagues that we need to rid the world of.  That has been my stance since I was a teen in Lebanon.”

Campus Reform has reported on other professor comments on the coronavirus, which included an American University professor calling for Trump’s resignation, a Harvard medical professor calling Trump’s response to the crisis a “catastrophic failure,” and a Boston College professor wondering if Trump’s handling of the coronavirus is “Putin’s work.”

HEARD ON THE TOM/TOMS

HEARD ON THE TOM/TOMS

Stephen Frank, California Political News and Views, 3/30/20      

“A people that wants to remain ignorant and free … wants what never has been and never will be” ~ Thomas Jefferson.”

LEADERS LEAD

The Big Story

California Republican Party Cancels Convention till Next February—BUT By-laws MANDATE Convention This Year

Allow me to give an update on the status of the California Republican Party—by the numbers

  1.  They sent out two surveys asking the delegates if they wanted the convention postponed, canceled or held.  The reason they sent the survey twice?  Because they found the list being used to contact delegates was not complete—numerous legislators, delegates, BOARD members and County Chairs were never sent the original survey.  (per a key staffer of the CRP)

Also note that the California Republican Party has not published the results of the survey.  Did delegates WANT to cancel, postpone or hold it? 

  • No voter registration effort by the CRP since March, 2013   They did a one month effort in September, 2019.  Current registration figures are 44% Democrat, 27% NPP and 23% GOP
  • The November, 2020 ballot will NOT have Republican on the ballot for:

19 Assembly Seats

9 out of twenty State Senate seats

8 congressional seats

  •  Salaries

The Chair of the California Democrat Party:  $127,500

Former Chair Jim Brulte, paid at the rate of $180,000

Chair Jessica Patterson   $250,000 per her conversation with the L.A. Times

Based on the above, in an email blast she sent on March 27, to delegates, “The March 3rd California Primary brought significant success for the California Republican Party.”  The SAME email claiming “significant success” was sent on March 29. Must still be having problems with the email list.

  •  Now, the Board of Directors have determined not to have a convention till February, 2021.  Guess none of them read the by-laws:

Section 2.02.01 (B) Frequency of Meetings. Regular conventions and meetings of the Committee shall be held no less than once each calendar year so that the proper business and important activities of the Committee can be carried out. Meetings in even-numbered years shall rotate between North and South as designated by Section 2.02.01(A).

Here is the status that is publicly known:  No voter registration, though promised.  Many races without GOP candidates—so the Party atrophies in those districts, the Board STILL has not endorsed or recommended President Trump for re-election (thought the CRP voter guide notes he was “endorsed”, no one is coming forward saying the Board, with authority, made that decision.

Finally, We are going to have the Executive Committee decide the position of the California Republican Party for the ballot measures on the November ballot.  Check the by-laws—ONE person appoints the majority of the Executive Committee—the Chair.  Yet we are unable to ask why the Board did not even discuss the March 3 Prop. 13—the $26 billion education bond, which the people defeated by about 600,000 votes.

In 2018 and 2019 I said that the 2020 elections will be the last election where the Republican Party in California is relevant…read the above.  Do you see us as being aggressive, promoting candidates in every part of the States, asking people to join our Party.  Heck, in violation of the by-laws, we will not even allow a meeting the CRP delegates.  What do you think the answer can be?

Some are saying, “well, we will hold TWO conventions in 2021”.  Yes, that is what we have done for decades—two conventions a year, until it was decided to try to close down delegate participation in the Party.  Since 1960, as far back as I can find, the CRP has always held two conventions in the year after a General Election.  Nothing to brag about by doing what is responsible.

Oh, the Party could have held a convention in July, August or September, 2020.  The Board can still  hold another vote, a vote to uphold the by-laws.  If this section of the by-laws can be ignored, what other parts will be ignored?  This sets the precedent that by-laws do not need to be enforced.

CONTENT

  1.  Petition to delay April 10 property tax
  1.  The IRS and State government have delayed payment of the April 15 income taxes.  But, counties have not delayed payment of the April 10 property taxes.  There is a petition promoting the delay.  Please sign it and send the URL to our complete.

Go here:  https://www.change.org/DelayPropertyCaliforniaTaxes

 This would be a great project for County committees and political clubs.  Since we are at home we could push for online signatures.  Maybe the CRP will join in this effort for families and communities?

LEADERS LEAD

 (Periodically the California Political News and Views will publish tidbits of political news, to keep you in the loop of what the pooh bahs know.  The phrase “tom/tom’s” comes from my mentor, Lorelei Kinder who never passed a rumor, just called to tell me what she heard on the “Tom/Tom’s”.  This column is named in her honor.)