California Supreme Court: No Right to Education, Just Pay Your Taxes

There is a section in the State Constitution that guarantees every child an education in California.  That section was just nullified by the State Supreme Court.  They ruled that even special needs children do not need real, in person education.  They kids hardest to help are being through out on the trash dump of society and our judges and pretend educators.  This should not be an issue.

So, if you think the State or Federal Constitution protects you—forget it.  No schools, churches closed by order of government, social media banning free discussion of issues, jobs being killed by order of government  Now, the Harris/Biden Administration has decided to give away $3 trillion of your money (not a typo) to foreign governments that hate us—and in return we will closed down American businesses they do not like.

You can feel the emotional and economic Depression hitting America—in just 48 hours.

California Supreme Court Turns Down Petition To Partially Reopen LA Public Schools

Petition would have reopened in-class instruction for special needs students

By Evan Symon, California Globe, 1/21/21 

The California Supreme rejected a petition on Wednesday that would have started reopening Los Angeles public schools for special needs students.

The petition, which was filed in December by child advocacy organizations the Alliance for Children’s Rights and the Learning Rights Law Center, wanted a return of in-class school for special needs students due to learning difficulties remotely. Both groups said that the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) broke a state law that requires education agencies like school districts to have in-person classes and give “the appropriate resources to avoid learning loss, prevent behavioral regression, and protect students’ mental health and well-being.”

The organizations, as well as many parents, believed that the continued denial of in-person classes would lead to permanent harm on students with added difficulties, such as those with special needs, English language learners, and those with handicaps. Many parents even went further, saying that their children were not learning behind a screen.

“There is no question that severe learning loss has already occurred, is ongoing, and will lead to irreparable harm for these students,” the petition said. “This slow-motion catastrophe — with potentially irreversible and life-long negative consequences for students— can and should be immediately addressed. In-person instruction in small cohorts is possible as long as it is safe from a public health perspective.”

“They failed to provide the appropriate resources to avoid learning loss, prevent behavioral regression, and protect students’ mental health and well-being.”

As a remedy, the groups wanted as much in-person schooling to open up as soon as possible for those in the greatest of need. According to Los Angeles County public health guidelines, this would have meant that up to 25% of a school’s enrollment could have come back for in-person classes if the schools had met all COVID-19 public health and safety guidelines.

However, this was flatly rejected by the court, which did not even issue a written ruling on the matter. The denial will essentially let the LAUSD keep an all-remote class schedule into the near future. And due to continual high COVID-19 figures in LA County, even measures such as Governor Gavin Newsom’s $2 billion school reopening plan would not effect the district’s plans.

Many teachers even signaled relief following the Supreme Court’s denial.

“LA County has had over 3 million COVID-19 cases now, with 1 out of every 5 being tested coming up as positive,” Los Angeles teacher Natalia Baca told the Globe Thursday. “I agree that special needs students do deserve better instruction. All students do. But, right now, health is more important. We cannot risk reopening schools, even to a small extent, because there would still be a lot of people even if it was just for a few classes and a skeleton crew keeping everything going. You just need one person from any of their households to make it more spreadable.”

“It’s heartbreaking for us, but it’s like people being unable to see their families during Christmas or not being able to see sick loved ones. It’s necessary so more people don’t become infected. Or dead.”

Other attempts to bring back at least partial in-person classes to LA public schools remain ongoing.

In College, Biden’s Pick For Top Civil Rights Lawyer Argued Blacks Are The Superior Race

We knew the Harris/Biden Administration was racist.  In the primary Sen. Kamala Harris, who is herself a racist, denounced Joe Biden as a racist.  Now his pick to lead the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice is an open and proud racist—she believes one race is superior to all others.

“While in college, Clarke advocated for Afrocentric racist theories of black superiority and hosted then defended a notorious antisemite. Even more recently, she endorsed Tamika Mallory when the head of the Women’s March faced documented charges of antisemitism and support for racial hatemonger Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam.

If she were a Republican who had, say, endorsed white supremacy while in college, that would be the end of her nomination, even if the events in question took place 26 years ago, as they did with Clarke.”

She is a moderate in the Democrat Party.  That is the sad part.

In College, Biden’s Pick For Top Civil Rights Lawyer Argued Blacks Are The Superior Race

Photo Courtesy of Rusty Stewart, Flickr

If Kristen Clarke is confirmed, it will mean Biden’s pledges to fight hate and antisemitism will be abandoned even before he begins to govern.

By Jonathan S. Tobin, The Federalist, 1/22/21   

Kristen Clarke was a natural choice to be Joe Biden’s pick for the next assistant attorney general for civil rights. Clarke is the head of the left-wing Lawyer’s Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and served in a similar position in the office of New York state’s attorney general.

Clarke’s enthusiastic support for the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement gives her exactly the sort of left-wing credentials Biden’s transition team wanted, with her nomination earning plaudits from all of the usual Democratic interest groups. The selection also garnered approval from the liberal Anti-Defamation League, which is somehow still treated as a reliable antisemitism watchdog despite its embrace of partisan politics.

Clarke’s Senate confirmation, however, may prove a heavier lift than anyone in Biden’s camp imagined when her name was announced along with attorney general pick Merrick Garland and the rest of the proposed leadership for the Department of Justice.

While in college, Clarke advocated for Afrocentric racist theories of black superiority and hosted then defended a notorious antisemite. Even more recently, she endorsed Tamika Mallory when the head of the Women’s March faced documented charges of antisemitism and support for racial hatemonger Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam.

If she were a Republican who had, say, endorsed white supremacy while in college, that would be the end of her nomination, even if the events in question took place 26 years ago, as they did with Clarke.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh was branded a rapist over uncorroborated accusations about an event that allegedly took place in high school. Court of Appeals Judge Naomi Rao was raked over the coals during her confirmation hearings over an op-ed she wrote as an undergraduate at Yale University in which she made the anodyne observation that both men and women who are under the influence of alcohol must be held responsible for their behavior.

But since the news about Clarke’s past became known, the legacy media has treated it as a non-story. Just last month, The New York Times thought a story about an ordinary Tennessee teenager uttering a racist slur in a three-second video three years ago was worthy of the front page of their Sunday edition, yet hasn’t printed anything about Clarke’s history. Nor has the Washington Post. Neither CNN nor MSNBC has uttered a word about the story.

Control of the Civil Rights division of the DOJ is a big deal for how far the government will go to back up the BLM movement, support race-based admissions, and institutionalize critical race theory in the upcoming years.

The fate of Clarke’s appointment is important for another reason. It’s a test case to see whether the way the media handled last fall’s Hunter Biden controversy — in which The New York Post’s story of the younger Biden’s influence-peddling was boycotted by corporate outlets — was a one-off that won’t be repeated, or if it reinforces a precedent that will ensure that any controversy that embarrasses a Democrat can and will be ignored by mainstream outlets with no consequences. So far, it’s pretty clear which way this is going.

In December 1994, Clarke co-authored a letter-to-the-editor of the Harvard Crimson as part of a debate about Charles Murray’s controversial book “The Bell Curve” and its discussion of differences in cognitive ability between human races. But in attacking Murray’s claims, Clarke put forward a counter-theory in which she argued research showed that African-Americans were the superior race, writing, “Melanin endows blacks with greater mental, physical and spiritual abilities — something which cannot be measured based on Eurocentric standards.”

A month later, in her capacity as head of the Black Students Association, she invited Wellesley College professor Tony Martin to speak at Harvard. Martin was a rabid antisemite and Holocaust denier who had published a book called “The Jewish Onslaught” that attacked Jews and Judaism. Yet, in the Crimson, Clarke defended him saying, “Professor Martin is an intelligent, well-versed back intellectual who bases his information [his antisemitic slurs] on indisputable fact.”

Seeing the need for some damage control, Clarke gave an exclusive interview to The Forward, a left-wing Jewish online site that gave Clarke a chance to spin the controversy. To The Forward, Clarke claimed her paean to black racial superiority wasn’t meant to be taken seriously. It was, instead, a parody that was intended to be read as exposing the absurdity of Murray’s claims in “The Bell Curve.” Yet it reads instead as a straight-forward defense of crackpot race theories promoted by the Nation of Islam and Farrakhan.

For her invitation and defense of Martin, Clarke admits she was wrong. The words “apologize,” however, or any acknowledgment of the effect of her behavior on other students, was absent from the interview.

Clarke now says she “unequivocally denounce[s] antisemitism,” and backs up the statement by mentioning that while working for the New York AG’s office she “promoted religious accommodation, combated religious discrimination and ensured that Jewish employees were given flexibility so that they could observe the Sabbath.”

While that’s commendable, it’s hardly courageous. Accommodating religious observance wasn’t optional, and had she refused to accommodate Jewish employees, she would have been sued.

The Forward also asked why Clarke stood by the leaders of the Women’s March when they were called out for their antisemitism. Mallory marginalized and excluded Jews from the group’s leadership. She’s also a vocal supporter of Farrakhan and appeared at a Nation of Islam gathering and cheered him. Yet Clarke signed a letter defending Mallory, who has gone on to be a prominent voice in the BLM movement.

Rather than make amends for that stand, Clarke doubled down:

The marginalization of women of color is a threat to disrupt democracy, and what led me to join that letter was a grave concern about seeing another woman of color marginalized and silenced. Let me be clear, I denounce antisemitism wherever and whenever it shows up.

But the first part of that statement gives the lie to the last part. Given an opportunity to “denounce antisemitism,” Clarke prioritized defending “women of color,” even if they were guilty of promoting hate. This means the person Biden is trusting with the nation’s civil rights policy thinks antisemitism is bad unless it involves people “of color.”

While Senate Republicans will likely grill Clarke over her past, her fate depends on whether Democrats prioritize partisanship over principle. That will be made a lot easier if the mainstream media continues to give her the Hunter Biden treatment. It will also be helped if partisan Jewish groups like the ADL similarly decide that their BLM ally’s fate is more important than doing their job and fighting antisemitism.

Sadly, if Clarke is confirmed, it will mean Biden’s campaign pledges about fighting hate and antisemitism will be abandoned even before he begins to govern.

Another billion-dollar tech company swaps San Francisco for Austin

By the time we return to normal in California, San Fran will be the size of Beverly Hills, 34,000.  Like Beverly Hills it will be populated with the very rich and the illegal aliens.  No major businesses will be headquartered in either city.  Yes, another billion dollar San Fran tech company is leaving the slums and high taxes of San Fran for Austin, Texas.

“”The central location, affordable cost of living, highly educated workforce and supportive business climate have helped make Texas an epicenter for business activity and technology growth,” said CEO A. William Stein in a press release last week.

Digital Realty’s new headquarters will be located off of Southwest Parkway, near Mopac, just a few minutes from downtown Austin. 

Importantly is the cost of housing and the lifestyle. Who wants to live in a city where you have to step over the homeless and human feces to get to your office?  Who wants their kids to see drug use on every street and the police standing by to pick up those that overdose.

Another billion-dollar tech company swaps San Francisco for Austin

By Katie Friel Austin Culture Map,  1/19/21 

By the time we return to normal in California, San Fran will be the size of Beverly Hills, 34,000.  Like Beverly Hills it will be populated with the very rich and the illegal aliens.  No major businesses will be headquartered in either city.  Yes, another billion dollar San Fran tech company is leaving the slums and high taxes of San Fran for Austin, Texas.

“”The central location, affordable cost of living, highly educated workforce and supportive business climate have helped make Texas an epicenter for business activity and technology growth,” said CEO A. William Stein in a press release last week.

Digital Realty’s new headquarters will be located off of Southwest Parkway, near Mopac, just a few minutes from downtown Austin. 

Importantly is the cost of housing and the lifestyle. Who wants to live in a city where you have to step over the homeless and human feces to get to your office?  Who wants their kids to see drug use on every street and the police standing by to pick up those that overdose/

Another billion-dollar tech company swaps San Francisco for Austin

By Katie Friel Austin Culture Map,  1/19/21  https://austin.culturemap.com/news/city-life/01-19-21-another-billion-dollar-tech-company-swaps-san-francisco-for-austin/

Another big-time tech company is decamping from the City by the Bay to the City by Town Lake. It may not have the name recognition of Apple or Tesla, but Digital Realty, a multibillion-dollar company specializing in digital data, announced it is moving its headquarters from San Francisco to Austin.

“The central location, affordable cost of living, highly educated workforce and supportive business climate have helped make Texas an epicenter for business activity and technology growth,” said CEO A. William Stein in a press release last week.

Digital Realty’s new headquarters will be located off of Southwest Parkway, near Mopac, just a few minutes from downtown Austin. 

Of the company’s approximate 1,300 employees, about 20 percent are based in Texas, though it’s still premature to project exactly how many will call Austin home. No cutbacks or layoffs are expected to happen in Digital Realty’s other hubs.

Austin also gives the tech giant a chance to strengthen its foothold in Texas. Today, Digital Realty owns more than 30 data centers across the state, encompassing more than 4 million square feet and over 100 megawatts of customer capacity, the company says.

Among those is a connectivity hub the company scooped up in downtown Dallas in 2002. Along with its big move, Digital Realty also announced on January 14 that it “recently expanded upon its initial investment … at 2323 Bryan Street in Dallas” and is likely to grow its presence in the Big D now that its headquarters are just a three-hour drive down I-35. 

“As we continue to make strategic investments to best position Digital Realty for long-term growth, we are confident our expansion in Texas will help us meet the needs of our more than 4,000 global customers, while continuing to deliver value for our stakeholders, employees and the communities we serve around the world,” Stein continued.

Digital Realty joins an ever-growing chorus of companies trading sunny California for (also sunny) Texas. In recent months, Tesla, Oracle, and even TikTok have announced plans to grow their local footprint, perhaps unsurprising, considering Austin once again was named the best tech city in the U.S. in November, outranking both Silicon Valley and San Francisco for the second year in row.

Another big-time tech company is decamping from the City by the Bay to the City by Town Lake. It may not have the name recognition of Apple or Tesla, but Digital Realty, a multibillion-dollar company specializing in digital data, announced it is moving its headquarters from San Francisco to Austin.

“The central location, affordable cost of living, highly educated workforce and supportive business climate have helped make Texas an epicenter for business activity and technology growth,” said CEO A. William Stein in a press release last week.

Digital Realty’s new headquarters will be located off of Southwest Parkway, near Mopac, just a few minutes from downtown Austin. 

Of the company’s approximate 1,300 employees, about 20 percent are based in Texas, though it’s still premature to project exactly how many will call Austin home. No cutbacks or layoffs are expected to happen in Digital Realty’s other hubs.

Austin also gives the tech giant a chance to strengthen its foothold in Texas. Today, Digital Realty owns more than 30 data centers across the state, encompassing more than 4 million square feet and over 100 megawatts of customer capacity, the company says.

Among those is a connectivity hub the company scooped up in downtown Dallas in 2002. Along with its big move, Digital Realty also announced on January 14 that it “recently expanded upon its initial investment … at 2323 Bryan Street in Dallas” and is likely to grow its presence in the Big D now that its headquarters are just a three-hour drive down I-35. 

“As we continue to make strategic investments to best position Digital Realty for long-term growth, we are confident our expansion in Texas will help us meet the needs of our more than 4,000 global customers, while continuing to deliver value for our stakeholders, employees and the communities we serve around the world,” Stein continued.

Digital Realty joins an ever-growing chorus of companies trading sunny California for (also sunny) Texas. In recent months, Tesla, Oracle, and even TikTok have announced plans to grow their local footprint, perhaps unsurprising, considering Austin once again was named the best tech city in the U.S. in November, outranking both Silicon Valley and San Francisco for the second year in row.

Smittcamp unloads on Los Angeles DA over “extreme” policies

One by one California DA’s are refusing to support, help or approve of the pro-crime, pro-anarchy DA of Los Angeles, George Soros-Gascon.

“Tuesday, Smittcamp sent a letter to Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón announcing that she will refuse to grant him and his office jurisdiction in cases that involve both counties because of a set of special directives he issued shortly after taking office last December. 

“Your Special Directives are extreme, and they are already wreaking havoc on crime victims and ignoring their Constitutional rights,” Smittcamp wrote. “Your lack of concern for victim’s rights and public safety is of great concern to all of us who pride ourselves on protecting those very things. Crime has no boundaries, and these Special Directives will certainly impact areas outside of Los Angeles County.” 

Smittcamp makes a good point.  Criminals see what Soros-Gascon does in Los Angeles and they think they can get away with crimes everywhere in California.  The San Fran DA—Soros-Boudin and L.A. DA Soros-Gascon would be better suited as DA’s for the County of Havana, Cuba, than any American city.

Smittcamp unloads on Los Angeles DA over “extreme” policies

Photo credit: Michael Coghlan via Flickr

Daniel Gligich, The Sun,  1/21/21 

Fresno County District Attorney Lisa Smittcamp is taking issue with the job her counterpart in Los Angeles County is doing – and she isn’t holding back expressing it.

Tuesday, Smittcamp sent a letter to Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón announcing that she will refuse to grant him and his office jurisdiction in cases that involve both counties because of a set of special directives he issued shortly after taking office last December. 

“Your Special Directives are extreme, and they are already wreaking havoc on crime victims and ignoring their Constitutional rights,” Smittcamp wrote. “Your lack of concern for victim’s rights and public safety is of great concern to all of us who pride ourselves on protecting those very things. Crime has no boundaries, and these Special Directives will certainly impact areas outside of Los Angeles County.” 

Smittcamp’s letter comes after similar efforts from both the Sacramento County and San Diego County district attorneys. San Diego District Attorney Summer Stephan revoked Gascon’s jurisdiction in a case of a man who was charged with armed robbery in San Diego County and a murder in downtown Los Angeles in 2019. 

Like Smittcamp, Sacramento District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert took preventative action and informed Gascon that he will never have jurisdiction in Sacramento County while his policies are active. 

There are four directives in question: 

  1. Elimination of cash bail: Bail is completely eliminated, and the DA’s office will seek detainment for violent offenders. 
  2. Sentencing enhancements: Sentencing enhancements will only be pursued in certain cases such as child abuse, hate crime, elder abuse, sexual abuse and human trafficking. 
  3. Crimes involving juveniles: Minors accused of misdemeanors will no longer be prosecuted. 
  4. Resentencing: Resentencing rules have been changed to largely benefit inmates. 

“Criminals, like all human beings, need structure, guidance, authority, rules and order to chart a productive path,” Smittcamp wrote. “Your directives encourage a lack of accountability and responsibility for criminal activity. By discounting their responsibility to be productive members of society, you are hurting them too.” 

Smittcamp said her refusal to grant Gascón jurisdiction is not out of a lack of support for criminal justice reform. 

“I stand in support of meaningful and productive reforms,” Smittcamp wrote. 

However, Smittcamp feels that Gascón’s reforms are not the productive avenues that should be sought out. 

“The criminal justice system is designed so that there is a representative for the People (which includes victims and the community at large), and a representative for the accused,” Smittcamp wrote.

“You are not serving the People by ignoring victims and solely focusing on the mass incarceration you seek to eliminate.”

Zoom Privilege: COVID-19 restrictions are making the rich richer & everyone else poorer

Is Zoom part of the reason government is not pushing to re-open society?  Can it be that the rich, the business leaders do not care, since they can do business from their office or home, no traveling, just over and done via Zoom.

“The remote work economy is functioning perfectly well for people who have already established themselves with robust income streams. For those still struggling to obtain the American dream – not so much.

Americans who were already earning six figure salaries have reported an increase in income for 2020, while those making between $50k-$100k reported a drop in income. Tragically, respondents earning under $50k have been absolutely hammered by destructive pandemic policies, reporting by far the largest income drop among their peers.

The survey also shows that the less fortunate faced a variety of health consequences in 2020, registering a decline in both physical and mental health, in addition to a declining job security and overall personal life.

No wonder Silicon Valley does not care if your local barber shop or restaurant is open—they are living better than ever—and not having lots of travel expenses to make it happen.  They get richer as our economy goes into a Depression.

Zoom Privilege: COVID-19 restrictions are making the rich richer & everyone else poorer

“Non-essential” Americans are being drowned by draconian policies.

   Jordan Schachtel    

, Dossier,   1/21/21   

Wall Street, Washington, D.C., and Silicon Valley are swimming in cash and prosperity. 2020 could not have gone better for the country’s elites. The vast majority of Americans, on the other hand, have been forced into financial, physical, and emotional ruin. 2020 served as the year that government dictates — purposed with fighting a disease with a 99.8% recovery rate — manifested unprecedented wealth inequality, and created health issues far more dangerous than COVID-19. The unintended consequences of “fighting a virus” with the power of government are now on display for the world to see.

A stunning survey just released by Morning Consult has revealed part of the extent of the devastation caused by COVID-19 lockdowns and other wealth and health destroying restrictions.

The remote work economy is functioning perfectly well for people who have already established themselves with robust income streams. For those still struggling to obtain the American dream – not so much.

Americans who were already earning six figure salaries have reported an increase in income for 2020, while those making between $50k-$100k reported a drop in income. Tragically, respondents earning under $50k have been absolutely hammered by destructive pandemic policies, reporting by far the largest income drop among their peers.

The survey also shows that the less fortunate faced a variety of health consequences in 2020, registering a decline in both physical and mental health, in addition to a declining job security and overall personal life.

Meanwhile, the world’s billionaires have been swimming in cash. Several of the world’s richest men saw their net worths increase multiple times over in 2020. The COVID-19 policy response has created a windfall for these titans of American and global industries. 

The tremendous wealth gap shows that the stock market is far from a good indicator of overall prosperity in America. Only about 9% of Americans earn six figure salaries. They are able to make their money work in the stock market and invest it in other profitable avenues, while those struggling need to keep their depreciating, zero-interest savings on hand to pay bills and other expenses. While the Zoom and Netflix “work-from-home until the scary virus disappears” crowd continues to demand further restrictions in the name of “stopping the spread,” over 9 in 10 Americans continue to suffer under the weight of a destructive COVID-19 safety regime.

Kamala Harris: “Water Policy is Racist”—Seriously

It did not bother Kamala Harris that Joe Biden is an open racist.   How do we know Biden is a racist?  During the 2020 Democrat Primary she called Biden a racist and a sexist.  Yet, she agreed to be his mouthpiece.  Does that make her a racist?  Now she is accusing California if “water inequity”.  If so, why did she not blame the previous Governor for eight years, Jerry Brown or the current Governor, Gavin Newsom?  They are responsible for water policy.  Does she just like accusing people and policy of being racist?  Looks like it—certainly not a serious person, just listen to her cackle.

“Residents in the majority-Latino town had contaminated tap water after a 50-year-old well failed. They joined roughly 1 million other Californians with toxic tap water. People of color, including in farmworker communities and historically-Black communities, are disproportionately affected.

During the wave of Black Lives Matter protests against police brutality, she partnered with civil-rights leader Dolores Huerta to co-author “a fight for racial justice,” a call-to-action to address drinking water access and affordability.

Why did she support two Democrats that did nothing to stop the racism of water policy?  How can she be taken seriously? Oh, she is a Democrat, she has a double standard.

Kamala Harris says California’s water crisis is a racial injustice. Will she champion equity?

By Monica Vaughan, Merced Sun,  1/21/21 

A month before she began campaigning for the second-highest political position in the United States, now-Vice President Kamala Harris briefly turned her attention to a small town with a big drinking water problem.

“Utterly unacceptable that in 2020, we still can’t guarantee clean water to communities across America. It’s a fundamental human right,” Harris said in a July 9 tweet about the town of Earlimart in California’s Central Valley. “We have the solutions to address this crisis. Congress just needs to act.”

Residents in the majority-Latino town had contaminated tap water after a 50-year-old well failed. They joined roughly 1 million other Californians with toxic tap water. People of color, including in farmworker communities and historically-Black communities, are disproportionately affected.

During the wave of Black Lives Matter protests against police brutality, she partnered with civil-rights leader Dolores Huerta to co-author “a fight for racial justice,” a call-to-action to address drinking water access and affordability.

 “(In) 2020, the United States remains divided between those with the privilege of having clean, running tap water and those who don’t,” the op-ed stated. “As we reckon with systemic racism, our fight for safe and affordable water cannot be disentangled from the fight for justice.”

The women called for a $1 trillion investment in water infrastructure to meet the country’s needs in the next 25 years, to address disparities remaining after a long history of decisions that failed certain residents.

“Racism is fueling disparities in access to safe water,” Harris and Huerta wrote in the July 2020 the op-ed, published by The Mercury News.

“Systemic barriers, including redlining, disinvestment, unregulated pollution and neglect of Tribal water rights stand in the way of safe and affordable water for millions of people, particularly Black, Indigenous and communities of color,” they said.

Water and wastewater systems are crumbling across the country, from arsenic-laden water in Pixley, California to Fountain, Colorado where wastewater was leaching into a river, and lead poisoning from old pipes in Flint, Michigan.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Federal funding for drinking water infrastructure drastically declined over the last half-century. According to a state report released in February 2020, “the percentage of federal support in infrastructure spending for water utilities has fallen from over 30% in the 1970s to less than 5% in 2015.”

As a California senator, Harris proposed the Water Justice Act, a bill to invest $220 billion in drinking water infrastructure and establish a $10 billion program to help states offset expensive water bills in low-income communities.

Californians’ need for financial assistance has only grown in the six months since that op-ed was published.

With record-breaking unemployment and reduced working hours because of the pandemic, residents’ water bills have piled up. The State Water Board estimates Californians owe an estimated $1 billion water debt. Families are at risk of having their water shutoff or liens placed on their homes.

Old infrastructure is failing to deliver clean water and the pandemic could postpone potential fixes, according to a State Water Board report released Tuesday. Reduced revenue exacerbates the financial strain on small water systems that don’t have a customer base that can pay to build costly water treatment plants to filter out contamination.

Californians — mostly low income, many Black, Latino or Native American — can’t afford to pay for water that many can’t safely drink.

With Harris now sworn in as vice president, will she follow through with equitable solutions?

Advocates who work to bring clean and affordable drinking water to Californians are optimistic, but cautiously so.

“California just sent one of our own to the White House,” said Jonathan Nelson, policy director with Visalia-based Community Water Center.

The organization is pushing water justice as a key part of the recovery from COVID.

Water is basic PPE — you can’t wash your hands without running water. Meeting the huge need for building water infrastructure will lead to jobs, often in the very same communities most hit by the COVID-19 economy, Nelson told The Fresno Bee.

“Drinking water investments is a channel, a pathway to economic recovery, especially in smaller and rural communities,” Nelson said.

Advocates are looking for federal assistance in two forms:

  • Economic assistance for low-income residents faced with unpaid water bills
  • Massive investment in water and wastewater infrastructure

Michael Claiborne, an attorney with Leadership Council for Justice and Accountability, said he is optimistic following the inauguration.

“I think there is at least the possibility that the federal government could invest in drinking water and wastewater infrastructure,” Claiborne said. “I think it’s necessary. It’s definitely needed.”

In addition, he pointed out that President Joe Biden has proposed an additional $5 billion for water and energy assistance to renters as part of a broader $30 billion rental assistance program.

The last relief package Congress passed in December included $638 million for grants to states and Indian Tribes to assist low-income households pay water bills or for systems to reduce charges. California expects to get about 10% of that.

California’s water crisis didn’t happen overnight. Both Nelson and Claiborne said it won’t be solved quickly.

“‘Will Harris be a champion for water justice?’ I think that’s the question,” Nelson said. “She certainly understands it, and she has an opportunity to be a champion for water justice.”

,

Biden Creating Major U.S. Depression Using Economic/Environment Policy

So far Biden has killed 43,000 U.S. jobs and billions in revenues and taxes by killing the Keystone Pipeline.  He is also forcing us to buy oil from terrorists nations in the Middle East—giving them needed funds to destroy Israel—another of his goals, one which Obama tried but failed.

In his phony COVID $1.9 trillion bill he is increasing the minimum wage.  According to the CBO that will kill approximately one million American jobs.  He is going for amnesty for those who violated our laws and opening the borders—at last five million illegal aliens are holding jobs that Americans should have.

Then he signed the Paris Climate Accords.  He agreed, without a vote of the Congress ot transfer $3 trillion (not a typo) to corrupt nations around the world—and to kill American businesses and jobs.

Now, he is ending our oil independence by stopping the drilling of oil on Federal land.  That will mean billions in tax revenues NOT going to the Federal government or the States.

The Harris/Biden Administration wants to strangle our economy—and in just 48 hours they have laid the groundwork for the economic destruction of our nation.

Biden administration orders halt to new oil and gas drilling on federal lands for 60 days

By Derek Draplin | The Center Square, 1/21/21   

 (The Center Square) – President Joe Biden’s administration issued an order temporarily halting leases and permits for oil and gas development on federal land, fulfilling a pledge he made during his campaign, despite pushback from the industry and states that rely on revenue from energy development.

Acting Interior Secretary Scott de la Vega signed an order that suspends approval of new land leases and drilling permits for 60 days. The order also “temporarily elevates review” of other agency decisions for DOI leadership.

“The Order does not impact existing ongoing operations under valid leases and does not preclude the issuance of leases, permits and other authorizations,” DOI said in a statement Thursday.

Biden, whose campaign pledged to ban new leases and reinstate environmental regulations rolled back by the Trump administration, has nominated U.S. Rep. Deb Haaland, D-N.M., to serve as DOI secretary pending the Senate’s approval.

The order was criticized Thursday by energy industry groups and praised by environmental watchdog organizations.

American Petroleum Institute President and CEO Mike Sommers said in a statement that the move means the U.S. will have to rely on foreign countries for energy development and risks American jobs.

“With this move, the administration is leading us toward more reliance on foreign energy from countries with lower environmental standards and risks to hundreds of thousands of jobs and billions in government revenue for education and conservation programs,” he said. “We stand ready to engage with the Biden administration on ways to address America’s energy challenges, but impeding American energy will only serve to hurt local communities and hamper America’s economic recovery.”

Kathleen Sgamma, president of the Denver-based Western Energy Alliance, warned that the temporary ban is “a precursor to a longer-term ban.”

Sgamma added that if the acting secretary does not hold quarterly lease sales as required by law, the Alliance is “prepared to challenge this intended ban in court at the appropriate time.”

Dan Ritzman, the lands, water and wildlife director for the Sierra Club, tweeted that the organization “welcomes this opportunity for the Biden administration to chart a new path for our country’s lands and waters.”

“Pausing new fossil fuel decisions brings us closer to healthier communities, a healthier climate and healthier wild places,” he said.

Several western states rely heavily on tax revenue from energy development that takes place on federal lands, such as Wyoming and New Mexico.

A federal lease moratorium would result in a $639.7 billion hit to gross domestic product (GDP) in Wyoming, New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Montana, North Dakota, California, and Alaska by 2040, according to a report released last month that was commissioned by the Wyoming Legislature.

“The economic predictions are devastating, to be blunt, to Wyoming,” Gov. Mark Gordon said when the study was released.

Gordon’s office did not respond to a request for comment on the DOI’s order.

Conservation projects also rely heavily on revenue from energy development on federal lands. 

DOI disbursed $8 billion from offshore and federal land energy development to the states in 2020, down from $11.69 billion in 2019

The Great American Outdoors Act (GAOA), which passed Congress with bipartisan support, relies on oil and gas development royalties to pay off the National Park Service’s $12 billion maintenance backlog. 

The Land Water Conservation Fund, which GAOA requires to be funded with $900 million annually, is funded by federal offshore oil and gas revenue, which in turn is distributed to states for conservation projects.

DOI announced on Tuesday that LWCF’s State and Local Assistance Program will get over $302.3 million for fiscal year 2021 that’s apportioned to states.

Colorado, for instance, is set to receive almost $5.2 million of that apportionment.

A Colorado Parks and Wildlife spokesperson told The Center square the funding will “help support critical Colorado Parks and Wildlife projects and allow us to provide opportunities for both recreation and resource conservation. This funding helps us to ensure Coloradans will be able to enjoy our resources for generations to come.”

The Bozeman, Mont.-based Property and Environment Research Center (PERC) recommends utilizing user-based funding streams for conservation and recreation instead of relying on oil and gas revenue. 

“Arguably, recreationists and conservationists would benefit the most from unshackling funding from energy revenues. Establishing a federal advisory committee could be an initial step toward finding a user-based model that can provide the resources necessary to steward our public lands for future generations,” PERC said in a recent report

Biden also revoked the Keystone XL’s permit and rejoined the Paris Climate Accord, among other orders on his first day in office.

L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti Announces ‘Implicit Bias’ Training for All City Employees

If you are an employee of the City of Los Angeles, you will find out, if you are white, you are a racist.  If you are a person of color you will be taught you are a victim—giving you the grounds for suing the city.  Instead of uniting the employees, making them a Team, Mayor Garcetti is trying to divide the employees and isolate them –he wants them to be leery of their fellow workers.

“Garcetti, speaking from Dodger Stadium at a press conference about the city’s coronavirus vaccination effort, said that the city would use “equity” in its distribution of vaccines, to prioritize minority communities hardest hit by the pandemic.

He then added that “in the midst of the clarion calls for racial justice that we saw in the streets of this country,” L.A. would require all city employees to undergo “anti-bias learning” and “mandatory implicit bias training” to help “dismantle racism for good.”

The City of Los Angeles currently employs more than 50,000 people.

The policy of Garcetti, the Democrats and Los Angeles is racism.  Shame.

L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti Announces ‘Implicit Bias’ Training for All City Employees

Joel B. Pollak, Breitbart,  1/22/21 

LOS ANGELES, California — Mayor Eric Garcetti announced Thursday that the City of Los Angeles would require all employees to undergo “implicit bias” training as part of an effort to achieve “racial justice.”

Garcetti, speaking from Dodger Stadium at a press conference about the city’s coronavirus vaccination effort, said that the city would use “equity” in its distribution of vaccines, to prioritize minority communities hardest hit by the pandemic.

He then added that “in the midst of the clarion calls for racial justice that we saw in the streets of this country,” L.A. would require all city employees to undergo “anti-bias learning” and “mandatory implicit bias training” to help “dismantle racism for good.”

The City of Los Angeles currently employs more than 50,000 people.

Garcetti acknowledged that the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) already conducts such training, but noted that it would be extended across all departments, on an annual basis.

In a separate press release, the city announced that it would be using a training program developed by Ohio State University:

An agreement was made with The Ohio State University’s Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity to adopt its highly-regarded implicit bias training and adapt it for City staff.

The Kirwan training centers on three broad concepts: first, understanding implicit bias; second, recognizing our own biases; and third, mitigating the impact of negative bias, with a focus on identifying, understanding, and counteracting implicit bias on the individual level.

The program uses a combination of video, reading content, and interactive quizzes to help participants explore the historical, psychological, and institutional causes of implicit biases, along with how these long-standing structures directly affect the way people think and interact. Built into the training is the opportunity for each trainee to take the Harvard University Implicit Associations tests to learn of their own implicit biases.

“Racism is woven into the systems that define our daily lives and we must be relentless in rooting it out,” said Capri Maddox, Executive Director of the Civil + Human Rights and Equity Department, in the release.

The Kirwan training can be found here. It makes claims such as “research suggests that most Americans – regardless
of race – hold an anti-Black/pro-White implicit bias.”

Last year, President Donald Trump used an executive order to suspend racial bias training in the federal government that used “Critical Race Theory” as a basis, and forbade federal contractors from using such programs.

Critical Race Theory holds that racism is inherent in American institutions. “On a practical level, Critical Race Theory teaches that social interactions are guided by “white supremacy,” and that society is corrupted by “systemic racism,” according to which black Americans must always be victims — even if unconsciously so. Critical Race Theory is the ideology animating the Black Lives Matter movement that has brought unrest to America’s cities,” Breitbart News noted at the time.

President Joe Biden rescinded that order on his first day in office, citing the “unbearable human costs of systemic racism.”

In December, the United Kingdom ended a program of “unconscious bias training” for civil servants after finding that it did not work. The Harvard “implicit association tests” have also come under significant criticism.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His newest e-book is How Not to Be a Sh!thole Country: Lessons from South Africa. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship.

Auditor: Calif. unfairly targeted Valley cities by withholding coronavirus cash

Now you know why Newsom is going to be Recalled.  He is a hypocrite, he refuses to use science as the basis of his decisions and he hides that facts from the public.  Newsom has sent armed agents of the State to raid businesses if he thinks they may be breaking his illegal mandates and continuing to serve the public.

Now we see he is punishing the people of the Central Valley. He fact he is abusing the money from the Federal government.

“A report released Tuesday by California’s State Auditor finds that residents of large counties – the 16 counties with a population of 500,000 people or more – received more than double the coronavirus relief funding per person than 42 of California’s smaller counties.

The report found that large California counties received between $190 and $197 per person, between Federal and state coronavirus relief appropriations.

Smaller counties, however, received $102 per person.

Breaking down per-capita relief funds in large counties, the report finds that the bulk of the funding – $174 of the $190 total – came via Federal government’s CARES Act.”

Auditor: Calif. unfairly targeted Valley cities by withholding coronavirus cash

Alex Tavlian, The Sun, 1/19/21 

As the State of California unleashed a torrent of financial relief to respond to the raging coronavirus pandemic last year, a new analysis of spending says that state financial officials short-changed residents of smaller counties.

It also found that state officials, furious at two Valley cities – Atwater and Coalinga – for defying Gov. Gavin Newsom’s coronavirus regulations in the early aughts of the pandemic, failed to equally scrutinize other California cities for their compliance with coronavirus rules.

Or, in short, the squeaky wheel of California’s municipalities received the financial crackdown.

A report released Tuesday by California’s State Auditor finds that residents of large counties – the 16 counties with a population of 500,000 people or more – received more than double the coronavirus relief funding per person than 42 of California’s smaller counties.

The report found that large California counties received between $190 and $197 per person, between Federal and state coronavirus relief appropriations.

Smaller counties, however, received $102 per person.

Breaking down per-capita relief funds in large counties, the report finds that the bulk of the funding – $174 of the $190 total – came via Federal government’s CARES Act.

The State of California provided additional funds to large counties in the amount of $16 or $23 per person, depending on the county.

A key section of the report centers on the California Department of Finance’s actions to reprimand two San Joaquin Valley cities: Atwater and Coalinga.

The two cities approved resolutions either partially or fully declaring themselves sanctuary cities for small businesses to operate, a move conflicting with Gov. Gavin Newsom’s then-operative shutdown order.

The Auditor’s report found that the finance officials – working in cooperation with California’s Office of Emergency Services – failed to consistently evaluate California cities’ compliance with Newsom’s rules.

“Emergency Services could not demonstrate that it had evaluated all cities,” the report read. “Emergency Services used an informal process to evaluate Coalinga’s and Atwater’s adherence with State public health orders, stating that it reviewed the resolutions, the subsequent city council meeting minutes, and the meeting webcasts to make its determination, but it did not develop written evidence of its assessments.”

The audit report contrasts the process undertaken by the Office of Emergency Services in reviewing Atwater and Coalinga with the compliance check process undertaken by the California Department of Public Health – and ultimately reported to the Department of Finance – which included “a robust analysis” detailing coronavirus testing and contact tracing efforts in California’s 58 counties.

“Instead, Emergency Services only provided information to Finance about Coalinga and Atwater,” the report continues. “Because Emergency Services was unable to demonstrate that it reviewed all 476 cities, we question whether other cities may have passed similar resolutions and may not have been eligible for CRF funds.”

The State Auditor found at least one additional, unscrutinized instance where a local jurisdiction – the City of Imperial – approved a resolution allowing businesses to reopen in violation of Newsom’s orders.

“However, Imperial continued to receive [coronavirus relief fund] funding of $246,000,” the report said.

Unlike Atwater and Coalinga, state emergency officials informed the auditor they knew of the resolution but “believed that it was a symbolic gesture and had concluded that the resolution itself did not conflict with the State orders.”

The state’s auditor, however, vehemently disagreed.

“Based on the discussion during that city council meeting, we believe the city council passed its resolution with the clear intent of not complying with the State’s required timelines for reopening businesses, which should have also made Imperial ineligible to receive CRF funds.”

It’s Not Just Trump. California Labor Unions Are Trying To Reverse the Outcome of an Election Too.

The people of California spoke.  We passed Prop. 22 to allow workers to hold jobs without being forced to join a corporation or pay unions dues (bribes).  In America, people should be free to make their own decisions in conjunction with those that want to work.  Third parties and government should not interfere.  But, we know that unions only support elections if they win.  When they don’t, they sue.

“For starters, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) announced last week a lawsuit challenging the results of Proposition 22, which exempted drivers for companies such as Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash from the ominous provisions of Assembly Bill 5. That’s the “landmark” legislation that mostly bans companies from using contractors as their workforce.

The voters were unequivocal, given that the proposition passed with a nearly 59-percent “yes” vote. That result is not a huge surprise. The law obliterated moderate-income service jobs—and not just in the burgeoning gig economy. Because of the blowback from freelancers losing their livelihoods in the midst of a pandemic, the Legislature exempted 100 industries from this bad law’s provisions.

Why do unions hate workers and freedom?  Why do the workers allow this and continue to pay dues?

It’s Not Just Trump. California Labor Unions Are Trying To Reverse the Outcome of an Election Too.

California Democrats and their labor union allies are embracing anti-democratic principles to thwart the will of the people.

Steven Greenhut, Reason, 1/22/21 

In his first inaugural address in January 1911, California’s progressive Gov. Hiram Johnson detailed a far-reaching “people’s reform program” that would help wrest control of the state’s government from what his contemporaries called “The Octopus”—a reference to muckraker Frank Norris’ 1901 novel about the outsized power of Southern Pacific Railroad.

As Norris explained, the Cyclopean sea monster was a “symbol of a vast power, huge, terrible, flinging the echo of its thunder over all the reaches of the valley, leaving blood and destruction in its path.” Drawing heavily from that corporate-power theme, the new governor touted something that would define California politics for the next century: the initiative, recall, and referendum.

California’s emerging experiment in direct democracy would “prevent the misuse of the power temporarily centralized in the Legislature,” Johnson argued, noting that supporters of these reforms believed in the ability of the people to govern themselves. However opponents “may phrase their opposition, in reality (they) believe the people cannot be trusted.”

Ironically, modern California’s progressives have become increasingly hostile to the direct democracy concept, as evidenced by their repeated attempts to place limits on these voter initiatives. The reason has less to do with political ideology and more to do with raw political power.

Democrats exert ironclad control of the Legislature and don’t like the Johnson era’s checks on its power. For example, the state’s Democratic-heavy electorate nevertheless took remarkably conservative positions on the statewide ballot initiatives during the Nov. 3 election—and gave lawmakers a comeuppance on some key issues.

We’ve seen these anti-democratic tendencies arise in recent days, which is ironic timing given the fracas in Washington, D.C. I’ve also been appalled at Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of a legitimate presidential election even as 60-plus courts, state legislatures, and federal agencies rebuke his claims. Apparently, California Democrats now share Trump’s litigious approach: they support elections, but only if they yield the desired result.

For starters, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) announced last week a lawsuit challenging the results of Proposition 22, which exempted drivers for companies such as Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash from the ominous provisions of Assembly Bill 5. That’s the “landmark” legislation that mostly bans companies from using contractors as their workforce.

The voters were unequivocal, given that the proposition passed with a nearly 59-percent “yes” vote. That result is not a huge surprise. The law obliterated moderate-income service jobs—and not just in the burgeoning gig economy. Because of the blowback from freelancers losing their livelihoods in the midst of a pandemic, the Legislature exempted 100 industries from this bad law’s provisions.

In their wisdom, California voters added additional exemptions and they assured that the companies they’ve come to depend upon will continue to exist. Yet Democratic leaders are much less trusting in the intelligence of the people than their ideological forebear, Johnson.

“Prop. 22 not only created a permanent underclass of workers in California—it stripped the Legislature of its power to step in and improve the working conditions for … app-based workers,” said Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego), who authored A.B. 5. She’s peeved that “corporations can use the initiative process to write their own laws with artificial barriers designed to block elected representatives from doing their jobs.”

Ironies abound. I understand that Gonzalez doesn’t like Proposition 22, but that’s an issue that voters had a chance to consider. Furthermore, the unequivocal purpose of the initiative process—and I’d recommend that she spend some time studying California’s political history—was to block elected representatives from doing their jobs.

Whatever their claims, such opponents simply don’t trust the people, as Johnson understood. Certainly, SEIU and the opponents of this (or any) initiative have the right to challenge its constitutionality, just as Trump had the right to file his election-challenging lawsuits. That doesn’t make it the right—or democratic—thing to do.

Gonzalez complains about the power of corporations to use the process, which is another irony, given that direct democracy targeted corporate power. Yet Democratic lawmakers have nothing to say about the modern-day robber barons who more commonly place initiatives before voters: public-sector unions. Note that the failed property tax hike measure (Proposition 15) was largely a union endeavor.

In another fit of hypocrisy, Democrats last week blasted the movement to recall Gov. Gavin Newsom. “This recall effort, which really ought to be called ‘the California coup,’ is being led by right-wing conspiracy theorists, white nationalists, anti-vaxxers, and groups who encourage violence on our democratic institutions,” said California Democratic Party Chairman Rusty Hicks. He didn’t provide evidence to back such inflammatory allegations.

Again, I’d refer Hicks and his Democratic cohorts to Johnson’s inaugural words. He said the initiative, referendum, and recall are not panaceas, but they give voters “the power of action when desired, and they do place in the hands of the people the means by which they may protect themselves.”

This column was first published in The Orange County Register