#CaliforniaDemocrats would rather see #Dreamers deported than work with President #Trump to find a solution

Screenshot 2018-01-31 at 09.28.56.png
California’s leaders continue to target Latinos for brutality.

In his State of the Union address Tuesday night, President Donald Trump vowed to reach across the aisle on topics from immigration to infrastructure.

California Democrats however can’t seem to afford a bipartisan compromise, on anything.

The East Bay Times reports that Democrats blasted the speech’s tough line on immigrants and what they described as empty platitudes toward unity.

Trump’s address included both calls for bipartisanship and hard-line talk on topics like terrorism.

In California, Trump’s remarks about immigration gained the most attention. He laid out his proposal for immigration reform in more specifics, calling for giving “Dreamers” — young undocumented immigrants brought to the country illegally — a path to citizenship, while securing the nation’s borders to keep terrorists and brutal gang members off of America’s streets.

Screenshot 2018-01-31 at 09.33.43.png
California Democrats turn down path to citizenship, hand dreamers over to ICE.

Democrats like Sen. Kamala Harris are OK with screwing Dreamers because they think doing so makes President Trump look bad. In short, they’d rather see Dreamers deported than work with the President to find a solution.

Others objected to Trump’s extended discussion of the MS-13 gang, in which he introduced families of Americans killed by its members. Apparently MS-13 hasn’t killed enough people to impress the Democrats.


#Facebook takes #JoeCamel to heart, looks to hook kids on #socialmedia

Screenshot 2018-01-31 at 09.09.09.pngSaying young children are “simply not ready” for social media, health experts and children’s advocates are urging Facebook to discontinue Messenger Kids, its new messaging app.

The app is aimed at children younger than 13, which until now has been the minimum age for users of Facebook and other social networks.

According to the Mercury News, when Facebook introduced it last month, there was no shortage of concern among parents, pediatricians and consumer advocates even though the company touted Messenger Kids as a tool to keep parents connected to their kids.

Now, advocacy groups have sent a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, dated Jan. 30.

Screenshot 2018-01-31 at 09.02.27“At a time when there is mounting concern about how social media use affects adolescents’ well being, it is particularly irresponsible to encourage children as young as preschoolers to start using a Facebook product,” the letter says.

Facebook continued to defend Messenger Kids.

“We worked to create Messenger Kids with an advisory committee of parenting and developmental experts, as well as with families themselves and in partnership with National PTA,” a spokeswoman said. “We continue to be focused on making Messenger Kids be the best experience it can be for families.”

But “there’s a clear business rationale,” said James Steyer, founder and CEO of Common Sense Media, a San Francisco nonprofit dedicated to children’s online safety. “They’re trying to get kids hooked early.”

It worked for Joe Camel.

Criminal mayor scams Central Basin Municipal Water District for $1.5 million

Screenshot 2018-01-31 at 08.40.06.pngSeven work days into Ron Beilke’s job at the Central Basin Municipal Water District, the agency’s governing board placed an item on its next meeting agenda. It called for firing him from his $98,000-a-year job as assistant to the general manager.

Two hours later, Beilke crashed headfirst into a wall on the second floor of the district’s headquarters in the City of Commerce. One employee later said she watched Beilke fly across the frame of her door, arms stretched out, like Superman.

Beilke, who was taken away by paramedics in a neck brace, later collected workers’ compensation and sued for wrongful termination. Central Basin commissioned a report that quoted employees who questioned whether Beilke’s fall had been deliberate.

According to the Los Angeles Times, by the time Central Basin settled with him nearly four years later, the agency racked up costs of nearly $1.5 million.

In the wake of the costly incident, some have questioned why Beilke was hired in the first place. A former Pico Rivera mayor, Beilke had been convicted of political misconduct.

What’s to question, in our opinion, this guy is clearly a scam artist.

The Central Basin Municipal Water District had been mired in years of scandal when it hired Beilke.

The agency has been caught up in so many legal claims that they were a factor in the agency losing its insurance coverage. In one case, the district’s insurance paid $670,000 to a woman who alleged that a board director sexually assaulted her.

A 2015 audit found that the agency was plagued by budget deficits and credit downgrades. A former general manager and board member were fined after steering contract work to a company that gave them almost $8,000 worth of gifts. It hired unqualified staff and illegally created a secret $2.75-million trust fund, the audit said.

#TavisSmiley actually believes he did nothing wrong? Seriously?

Screenshot 2018-01-31 at 08.32.06.pngPBS host Tavis Smiley was suspended and his namesake nightly talk show yanked off the air following allegations of sexual misconduct with several subordinates.

He denies he did anything wrong.

He recently announced a deal for a new inspirational series called “The Upside With Tavis Smiley” to air in April on the Word Network, a religious broadcaster with cable and digital platforms aimed largely at an African American audience.

The veteran host and author kicked off a five-city tour of town halls titled “The Conversation: Women, Men and the Workplace,” in which he and a panel of experts and scholars address the #MeToo movement and what he termed the confusing and conflicting dynamics in the workplace between male and female employees.

He’s clearly out for payback…revenge.

Last month on “Good Morning America”, he didn’t deny that he had consensual sexual relationships with subordinates at the company he owns.

Apparently he’s OK with that. It’s common knowledge that every other boss gets nailed for that, but for Mr. Smiley it’s apparently no big deal.

According to the Los Angeles Times, in a statement provided after Smiley’s “Good Morning America” appearance, PBS was critical of the TV personality’s reaction to its investigation and reluctance to name the accusers. “Mr. Smiley claims he applauds women who have come forward, yet his company requires former and current employees to sign nondisclosure agreements,” the statement read. “Witnesses who have bravely come forward to speak with the independent investigators retained by PBS report a fear of retribution for speaking out. PBS stands by its decision to respect the anonymity of those who are afraid to come forward publicly.”

With Mr. Smiley, the word “pathological” comes to mind.

Union defends firefighter who cheated on #CalFire test

Screenshot 2018-01-31 at 08.07.43A high-ranking state firefighter with 24 years of experience was compelled to resign last month because Cal Fire nailed him for helping a fire captain cheat on a test.

Some hero eh?

Jeff Isaacs’ ouster as an assistant chief for the department’s Fresno unit is a sign of the tough line Cal Fire has taken on discipline since a 2014 investigation revealed sex-related misconduct and inappropriate drinking at its fire academy.

Rampant cheating, patronage, drinking and sex scandals has forced Cal Fire to build up a professional standards program while simultaneously enhancing its resources for internal investigations in order to weed out the pervasive criminal element within the department.

Well done Cal Fire!

The Merced Sun Star reports that the case against Isaacs centered on a 23-minute phone conversation he had with a former subordinate at Cal Fire’s Atwater station after Isaacs learned that he would sit in on interview panels for the exam.

Naturally the firefighters union is deafening Isaacs’ criminal activity.

“Jeff Isaacs was railroaded,” said Mike Lopez, president of Cal Fire’s firefighter union. “I’m very disappointed that a veteran of 24 years of the fire service had his career cut short because of hearsay with no physical evidence.”

Yeah, right.


If we are to believe firefighters are heroes, then we have a right to expect them to act like heroes.

#CalState tries to blackmail Legislators for more money

Screenshot 2018-01-31 at 07.38.18.pngCalifornia State University trustees are considering raising tuition for the second straight year.

It’s a blackmail move to try and shake-down the Legislature for more money.

According to the Merced Sun Star, Gov. Jerry Brown’s proposed state budget allocates a fraction of what the system’s 23 campuses need to maintain their quality of education at a time of record-high enrollment, university officials told the trustees at a meeting in Long Beach.

A “fraction”? Seriously?

The governor’s proposed budget includes $3.8 billion for CSU in 2018-19, which includes a $92.1 million increase in state funding.

The Legislature will approve the budget in June.

The University of California is also considering raising tuition at its 10 campuses due to what it calls inadequate state funding. The UC Board of Regents last week delayed a vote on increasing tuition until May, saying its officials also will lobby the Legislature in the interim.


Another punishing #drought looms ahead for California

Screenshot 2018-01-31 at 07.35.53.png
Politicians have done nothing since the last drought to alleviate California’s water shortage problem.

California’s Sierra Nevada snowpack — a key source of the state’s water supply — is 30 percent of normal.

Experts say February is the peak season for snow accumulation. Nearly all of California’s rain and snow falls between Nov. 1 and March 31. So time is running short.

Ominously, the forecast for the next two weeks calls for more hot weather across the state, with almost no chance of rain or snow.

Over the past 90 days, the average temperature in the Sierra has been about five degrees hotter than average.

The good news, according to the Mercury News, reservoirs around California are in good shape. Most are nearly full after last year’s storms, reducing the chance of summer water restrictions.

So there’s no real crisis, leaving plenty of maneuvering space for California’s lazy politicians to blame President Trump for the lack of rain.

#Leftists try to free convicted #Islamic #terrorist and return him to #Lodi

Screenshot 2018-01-30 at 08.34.53.pngThe ramifications are frightening.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Leftist attorneys for an Islamic from Lodi who was convicted 12 years ago in a terrorism case that drew national attention, argued in federal court that his confession was false, the result of leading questions and exhaustion.

More than a dozen friends and relatives of Hamid Hayat are expected to testify over the next several weeks that they were with the young man when he was purported to have attended a terrorist training camp in Pakistan. He is now 35 and has served half of his 24-year sentence in federal prison.

The evidentiary hearing in federal court in Sacramento is Hayat’s latest and perhaps strongest bid to overturn his 2006 conviction. Prosecutors stand by their case, saying Hayat confessed multiple times to attending a terrorist training camp.

“I have no doubt he is completely innocent,” said Nasim Khan, another Islamic from Pakistan, one of the world’s leading exporters of terrorism.

In 2005, when the FBI arrested a then-21-year-old Hayat and his father, Lodi ice cream vendor Umer Hayat, officials said they had broken up a terrorist cell. The case drew national media to Lodi, where Hayat, who was born in California, lived with his family.

A year later, jurors convicted Hayat after a two-month trial on charges that he trained at a terrorist camp in his family’s homeland of Pakistan from 2003 to 2004 and returned to the United States while waiting for orders to kill Americans. He was also convicted of initially lying to the FBI about his terrorist training.

Umer Hayat, who was accused of making false statements to the FBI, pleaded guilty to lying about his finances and spent 11 months in jail.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes agreed to review the case, which is expected to take several weeks and include late-night hearings in order to conduct live video conferencing with witnesses in Pakistan. A ruling in the case could take several months.


Blue states cashing in on #immigration

Screenshot 2018-01-30 at 08.28.12.png

Why do you think Leftis love open borders? In case you haven’t figured it out, they’re cashing in…bigtime.

Immigration, and how to handle it, continues to be a contentious topic in the United States in 2018. Recent issues include court battles over the Trump administration’s travel ban on certain countries, along with the possible upcoming end of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. But political differences aside, there’s no question that immigration as a whole affects the economy.

In light of recent developments in U.S. immigration policy, WalletHub compared the economic impact of foreign-born populations on the 50 states and the District of Columbia. We determined which states benefit the most — and least — from immigration using 19 key indicators. Our data set ranges from median household income of foreign-born population to jobs generated by immigrant-owned businesses as a share of total jobs. Read on for our findings, additional commentary from a panel of experts and a full description of our methodology.

It’s not that white elites who run blue states care about immigrants. It’s all about the money with them. It always is about the money.

It’s a big “Cha-Ching” for blue states. Read the full report here:  https://wallethub.com/edu/economic-impact-of-immigration-by-state/32248/

Legislative Committee Rules

Screenshot 2017-10-07 at 07.50.29By Chris Micheli

Each standing committee of the Senate (there are 21 of them) and Assembly (there are 32 of them) operate under the Joint Rules of the Legislature, as well as the Standing Rules of the Senate and Assembly, respectively. Each standing committee may adopt rules governing the operation of their committees. These committee rules set forth the procedures and guidelines that are used to conduct the business of the legislative committee.

These rules set forth the date, time and location of the committee hearings and that a majority of the committee’s member constitute a quorum, which allows the committee to officially operate. Most committees’ rules contain the following provisions:

Committee Worksheets — When a bill (or constitutional amendment or resolution) is referred to the committee, then the committee staff provides the bill’s author a worksheet (“Background Information Request”) to be completed as part of the preparation of the Committee analysis.

Setting Bills – As a general rule, no bill may be set, nor file notice published, until it has been referred to a committee. Once referred, the Committee may set the bill for any available hearing date, at its discretion. Recall that no bill may be heard or acted upon until, after its introduction, it has been in print for 30 days. This rule may be suspended concurrently with the suspension of the requirement of Section 8(a) of Article IV of the California Constitution.

Notices – A bill of first reference being heard in the Committee must be noticed in the Daily File at least four days prior to a hearing. Otherwise, notice must be published in the Daily File two days prior to the hearing. This requirement can be waived by a majority vote of the Assembly.

Three Set Limit – A bill may be set for hearing in a Committee only three times. A bill is considered “set” when it has been noticed in the Daily File for one or more days. If the author postpones the hearing of a bill, or submits amendments causing the hearing to be rescheduled, such action may count as a set. If the Committee postpones the hearing on the bill, such action does not count as a set. This requirement may be suspended by approval of the Rules Committee and a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the Assembly.

Committee Analyses — A Committee analysis is required for every bill. Analyses are generally made available to the public at least one working day prior to the hearing, with a working day being defined as any day on which the Assembly Daily File is published. In the case of special meetings, analyses are made available to the public at the beginning of the hearing.

Order of Agenda – The general rule is that bills of the Committee members are taken up after all other authors present have taken up their measures. The Committee consent calendar may be taken up as determined by the Chair.  When the Chair finds that another order of business would be more expedient, measures may be taken up out of order or set as a special order of business.

Author’s Representative — If a bill is to be presented by someone other than the author, it will be taken up after all present authors (including those temporarily “passed over” and Committee members) have been accommodated. The representative must be an Assemblymember or Senator, a member of the author’s staff, or staff of an Assembly or Senate committee. No lobbyist, sponsor or supporter of the bill may present the bill before the Committee. Staff or members other than the author wishing to present the bill must first provide the Committee with a signed authorization letter from the author.

Amending Bills – The usual rules are that, when submitting amendments to Legislative Counsel for a bill in the possession of the Committee, or such a bill in the subsequent possession of the Senate or Assembly Floors, the author’s office shall provide a copy to the Committee as a courtesy.

Author’s Amendments Offered in Committee – The general rule is that, if an author offers amendments at the hearing, and the amendments are substantive, the Chair may put the bill over to allow adequate time for Committee staff to reanalyze the bill and provide an updated analysis to the Committee members. The Chair shall determine whether or not an amendment is substantive. Committee staff shall be responsible for preparing any amendments adopted in Committee.

Meetings — All Committee meetings, except for an authorized closed session, are open and public, and all persons shall be allowed to attend the meetings. A special meeting can be held in an area readily accessible to the public and not in the Chambers, and the Committee must take care that every effort is made to inform the public that a meeting has been called.

Limits on Testimony — When it is necessary, due to the number or complexity of the bills on the agenda at a hearing, to limit testimony on one or more of the bills in order to ensure that all of the bills on the agenda have a fair and reasonable opportunity to be presented and discussed by the Committee, the Chair, at his or her discretion, may limit testimony, the number of witnesses, etc.

Role of the Vice Chair — If, at a hearing commenced by the Chair, the Chair is not present or otherwise is presenting a bill to the Committee, the Vice-Chair temporarily presides. If the Vice-Chair is absent when the Chair must also be absent, the Chair may designate another Committee member to temporarily assume his or her duties.

Voting – A quorum is required to conduct official business. A majority of the entire Committee constitutes a quorum. A quorum is necessary to take action or to adopt amendments. Any vacancy on the Committee does not reduce the number of votes required to take action on a bill. The Chair may, at any time, order a call of the Committee. If requested by any member of the Committee or the author of the bill under consideration, the Chair shall order a call. In such a case, the Chair shall send the Sergeant-at-Arms for those members who are absent and not excused by the Assembly. If a quorum is not present, the Chair may commence the hearing as a subcommittee and receive testimony on any scheduled bill. A majority of the entire Committee is required to report a bill out of Committee. Committee action on bills, including reconsideration, shall be by roll  call vote, and shall show all votes for and against, all members absent, and all members not voting. In the case of a tie vote, a motion fails. The final action of the Committee shall be announced by the Chair.

Making of Motions — A member who desires to make a motion shall first obtain recognition by the Chair. The member then opens by stating his or her motion, and may not speak to the merits of the motion at that time, but confines any remarks to those necessary to explain the motion. If the motion is in order and is seconded, the Chair shall state such to the Committee. If the motion is debated, the Member who made the motion shall be recognized to open debate on the motion.

Reconsideration – In committees, reconsideration of a bill may be granted only one time. And there are specified instances where a motion to reconsider can be made.

Interim Study and Information Hearings – A Committee may refer the subject matter of any bill to the Rules Committee for interim study by a majority of those present and voting or by unanimous consent. The Committee may, however, subsequently reconsider and act on the bill.  In addition, the Chair may call the Committee to sit during interim or recess to conduct public hearings, gather information, discuss proposed legislation, or for any other proper purpose, conditioned on the approval of the Speaker and publication of the appropriate four-day file notice.

Letters of Support and Opposition — Letters communicating a formal position on a bill (support, opposition, concerns, etc.) must be received by the Committee by a specified day the week preceding the scheduled hearing of the bill in order for the position to be referenced in some form in the analysis. Letters received after that time may be referenced at the discretion of the Committee Consultant.

Public Records — The Committee Secretary is the custodian of the Committee’s legislative records. The Secretary preserves the Committee’s current legislative records and may store the Committee’s past legislative records with the State Archives. The legislative records contained in an official Committee file that are in the possession of the Secretary are open to inspection and reproduction by the public in the Committee office by appointment during normal working hours, subject to Assembly requirements. The records held in the State Archives are open to inspection and reproduction pursuant to the procedures established by the Secretary of State.

Committee Bills – The general rule is that a Committee may introduce a bill germane to any subject within the proper consideration of the Committee in the same manner as any member. A committee bill must contain the signature of a majority of the members of the Committee, including the Chair. The Committee, at the discretion of the Chair, may consolidate related subject matter into a single legislative proposal whenever appropriate.

Most committees of the California Legislature have adopted similar rules to those outlined above. However, each is free to adopt its own rules so long as there are not contrary to the Standing Rules of the house, nor the Joint Rules of the Legislature.


Chris Micheli is an attorney and registered lobbyist with the Sacramento governmental relations firm of Aprea & Micheli, Inc. He serves as an Adjunct Professor at McGeorge School of Law.

Racial hate is the cornerstone of California school police

Screenshot 2018-01-30 at 08.06.24.png

It’s a fact of our time, brutal white men with badges and guns, run roughshod over high school students in California every day. Many of them are just plain racist.

So it should come as no surprise to anyone that more than 100 people — community members and police officials — met for nearly two hours Monday at Helix Charter High School to address issues of trust, diversity and justice.

The forum was called to handle unrest in the aftermath of a campus incident in which a school resource officer body-slammed a female student to the ground, an image captured on video.

According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, La Mesa Police Chief Walt Vasquez and several of the department’s officers, members of the community, and Helix Executive Director Kevin Osborn, Helix administrators, teachers and students spoke at the event. They tried lamely to to gloss over the reality that their cops are brutal, hate-filled, and racist.

The most recent incident was captured on video and since then, Helix students have staged several protests, including a walkout and a march from the campus on University Avenue two miles up the road to the police station.

Students, this is your world from now on. If you’re a person of color, it will become worse as you become adults.

Or, change it.

#Rich #whitepeople always defend sex criminals like #LarryNassar

Screenshot 2018-01-30 at 07.52.57.pngAccording to the San Francisco Chronicle, here are many lessons to be learned in the horrible Larry Nassar sexual-abuse case and its continuing fallout.

However, being elite and white, the Chronicle’s staff missed the most important one:

White elites who run our universities will always defend sex criminals.

For years, gymnasts tried to tell their story, their horror, their shame. They were ignored by almost every responsible adult in their lives. As a consequence, USA Gymnastics — and by extension, the image of the U.S. Olympic movement — is in tatters. A national shame.

Now, it turns out that the “responsible adults” (read white elites) at Michigan State were extremely skilled at ignoring the complaints and voices of other assault victims, not just the gymnasts.

The entire athletic program is in danger of unraveling, with the jobs of basketball head coach Tom Izzo and football head coach Mark Dantonio hanging in the balance.

Before Michigan State, there was Penn State and Baylor — and don’t forget the parade of sex criminals rampaging through UC Berkeley.

This has been the reality of the world of big-money. When cash is on the line, th white elites who run our nation’s universities will throw sex crime victims under the bus.

The #GrammyAwards, mostly white, mostly men

Screenshot 2018-01-30 at 07.38.21.png

Mostly white men wanted.

The Recording Academy has largely avoided the sort of criticism over lack of diversity that’s been leveled at the Oscars. But hours after men swept all but one of the categories given out on live television, #GrammysSoMale was trending.

Indeed, of the 84 Grammy categories handed out Sunday the Los Angeles Times reports that only a dozen or so went to women or acts co-led by women, which is pretty much in keeping with the damning research paper recently published by Stacy L. Smith, Marc Choueiti and Kate Pieper of the USC Annenberg Inclusion Initiative. Looking at the gender breakdown of nominees, it found that just 9.3% of them between 2013 and 2018 were female.

Having apparently learned nothing from the many men forced to walk back tone-deaf commentary during the #MeToo movement, Recording Academy President Neil Portnow almost immediately made things worse. He responded to the hashtag by urging women to “step up.”

Just like the #OscarsSoWhite campaign forced the film academy to reconsider its almost all-white, mostly male membership, this year’s male-dominated Grammy results prompted many variations on the same unanswered question: Who, exactly, is deciding the winners of music’s most coveted award?

Unemployment hits rock bottom in L.A., but the elite media still hates President #Trump

Screenshot 2018-01-30 at 07.34.04.pngYou’d think the elite media would be happy for you?

According to the Los Angeles Daily News, unemployment in Los Angeles County finished 2017 at the lowest year-end rate in at least 27 years.

State jobs stats show the local unemployment rate for December was 4.2 percent, same as November but down from 4.7 percent a year ago. Last year’s joblessness was far below the average 6.9 percent of the past five years. Perhaps more remarkable, this is the lowest December reading since 1990, breaking the Los Angeles record-best of 4.4 percent set in December 2006.

Last month’s job count was up 54,700 vs. a year ago — a rise of 1.23 percent. Year-over-year job growth has averaged 32,150 the past five years.


Nope, none of this is good enough for the elite media. They still hate the President, and everyone who supports him.

That’s journalism today.

#Leftists, and the #elitemedia continue to defend #AzizAnsari’s sex crime

Screenshot 2018-01-30 at 07.18.13.pngIt appears that Leftists, and their allies in the elite media have had enough of watching the #MeToo movement cut down their sex criminal friends in Hollywood.

The Los Angeles Times is leading the charge with help from UC Berkeley.

The story on Babe.net, an online news site styled for hip young women, was long and lurid. Its title: “I went on a date with Aziz Ansari. It turned out to be the worst night of my life.”

It was, at best, an epically bad date, according to the account, with heavy-handed sexual advances made, partly rewarded and finally rebuffed, and it ended with the woman leaving Ansari’s Manhattan apartment in tears of outrage and humiliation. But the article is more than a sob story. Suddenly, the account of that evening in September has achieved an incendiary cultural renown in the wider furor over gender bullying — “a critical flash point in our reckoning with sexual violence,” as Slate describes it, and as Atlantic.com writer James Hamblin says, “crystallizing debate over an entire movement.”

Ansari is an accomplished and popular actor, author and comedian, the star of NBC’s “Parks and Recreation,” creator of a well-regarded Netflix series, a winner of Emmy and Golden Globes awards. He has feminist cred for gestures in support of the #MeToo movement.

According to the Los Angeles Times, the question is whether any of this is newsworthy and whether the account of it that ran in Babe.net constitutes responsible journalism.

Under fire for a heinous sex crime, the Times suddenly has a problem with the evidentiary issue: Its sourcing is wafer-thin — a single informant. Her identity is concealed (she’s renamed “Grace”), so her credibility can’t be appraised. Second, the question of taste: The account is driven by a description of sexual doings that’s so detailed it’s practically pornographic.

Finally, above all looms the privacy issue: The incident it chronicles isn’t offered up as fitting a pattern either of sexual predation on Ansari’s part or of institutional coercion — no professional advantage was being proffered in exchange for sexual favors, nobody’s suggesting she was just one of Ansari’s many victims. This was a date, a one-on-one disaster. And because that’s normally a personal matter that happens in a private space, it’s reasonable to ask whether the writer is justified in bringing this intimate behavior into the public gaze.

Really? Suddenly a sex crime victim’s word isn’t good enough anymore? When did this happen?

#SOTU: Leftists and white elites will tune in to hate-watch President #Trump

Screenshot 2018-01-30 at 07.05.38.pngThe fake news media continues to writhe in agony as President Trump’s supporters remain solidly in his corner.

So they’re doubling down ahead of his first State of the Union address before a joint session of Congress and a national television audience.

Trump will have about 60 minutes of prime time which will allow him to bypass the filtered news from fake news outlets like the Los Angeles Times.

In the Times’ fantasy world, the president and his party faces the prospect of losing control of the House and perhaps the Senate in the midterm election.

Leftists and white elites will tune in to hate-watch President Trump, though the president’s fans are usually more likely to watch such speeches than are opponents.

Only about 4 in 10 of America’s white elites approve of President Trump’s performance in office, numerous polls have shown. These are the same polls that predicted Hillary Clinton would be president now.

The white elites continue the fake news narrative surrounding the special counsel’s investigation into whether his campaign colluded with Russia to win the election and whether Trump, as president, has sought to impede the inquiry.

Immigration will be a prominent topic. The President will promote the legislative deal he proposed last week to address the plight of young beneficiaries of the Obama-era program called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, that he ordered to be ended in March.

He proposed to protect from deportation the so-called Dreamers, who came to the country illegally as children, and to provide them a path to citizenship. But Trump also wants to increase border security spending, build his proposed southern border wall and cut legal immigration. A win-win for everyone.

#Facebook plans to increase its practice of manipulating the news

Screenshot 2018-01-30 at 06.58.18It it’s ongoing effort to manipulate public opinion, Facebook says it’s prioritizing local news on the social network.

They’re doing this for your own good right? Just like the elite media.

“People consistently tell us they want to see more local news on Facebook. Local news helps us understand the issues that matter in our communities and affect our lives,” Facebook CEO and co-founder Mark Zuckerberg wrote in a social media post.

If a user follows a local news outlet or a friend posts a local story, it may show up higher on the News Feed, he said.

A clearly miffed Mercury News reports that a growing number of Americans are consuming news stories from social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter. But Facebook, which also competes with news outlets for ad dollars, has faced criticism that it isn’t doing enough to combat misinformation from going viral.

Facebook says it has been revamping its News Feed to show more posts from family and friends and fewer posts from businesses, brands and media.

In 2017, about two-thirds of Americans got at least some of their news on social media, according to the Pew Research Center.

Meanwhile, U.S. newspapers continue to face declining circulation and ad revenue. In 2016, ad revenue for the newspaper industry was about $18 billion, a decrease of 10 percent compared to the previous year, according to the center’s annual report about the state of the news media.

Legislative Committees and Their Jurisdictions

Screenshot 2017-12-30 at 07.31.01By Chris Micheli

Both houses of the California Legislature provide committees of legislators, based upon subject matter jurisdiction, to handle the business of the respective houses. With fewer legislators, the Senate has a fewer number of committees than the Assembly. Nonetheless, they both consider legislation from their house of origin, as well as the other house. This article provides an overview of the Senate and Assembly standing committees and their basic jurisdictions.


There are 21 standing committees in the Senate pursuant to Rule 12 of the Standing Rules of the Senate. Those committees and their subject matter jurisdictions are as follows:

Agriculture — Bills relating to agriculture.

Appropriations — Bills that are subject to Joint Rule 10.5 and are not referred to the Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review. Bills that constitute a state-mandated local program.

Budget and Fiscal Review — The Budget Bill and bills implementing the Budget. Bills that directly affect the State Budget, including deficiencies and reappropriations.

Business, Professions and Economic Development — Bills relating to business and professional practices, licensing, and regulations. Bills relating to economic development, commerce, and international trade.

Education — Bills relating to education, higher education, and related programs. Bills relating to education employee issues and collective bargaining.

Elections and Constitutional Amendments — Bills relating to elections and constitutional amendments, ballot measures, the Political Reform Act of 1974, and elected officials.

Energy, Utilities and Communications — Bills relating to public utilities and carriers, energy companies, alternative energy development and conservation, and communications development and technology.

Environmental Quality — Bills relating to environmental quality, environmental health, air quality, water quality, waste management, recycling, toxics, and hazardous materials and waste.

Governance and Finance — Bills relating to local government procedure, administration, and organization. Bills relating to land use. Bills relating to state and local revenues, bonds, and taxation.

Governmental Organization — Bills relating to horse racing, public gaming, and alcoholic beverages. Bills relating to the management of public safety emergencies and disaster response.

Bills relating to state government organization and bills regarding the use of state-controlled lands and buildings, state contracting, and interstate compacts.

Health — Bills relating to public health, alcohol and drug use, mental health, health insurance, managed care, long-term care, and related institutions.

Human Services — Bills relating to welfare, social services and support, and related institutions.

Insurance, Banking and Financial Institutions — Bills relating to insurance, indemnity, surety, warranty agreements, financial institutions, lending, and corporations.

Judiciary — Bills amending the Civil Code, Code of Civil Procedure, Evidence Code, Family Code, and Probate Code. Bills relating to courts, judges, and court personnel. Bills relating to liens, claims, and unclaimed property. Bills relating to privacy and consumer protection.

Labor and Industrial Relations — Bills relating to labor, industrial safety, unemployment, workers’ compensation and insurance, and noncertificated public school employees.

Natural Resources and Water — Bills relating to conservation and the management of public resources, fish and wildlife, regulation of oil, mining, geothermal development, wetlands and lakes, global atmospheric effects, ocean and bay pollution, coastal resources, forestry practices, recreation, parks, and historical resources. Bills relating to water supply management.

Public Employment and Retirement — Bills relating to state and local public agency collective bargaining; state and local nonschool public employees; classified public school employees; public retirement systems; public employees’ compensation and employment benefits, including retirement and health care; and state social security administration.

Public Safety — Bills amending the Evidence Code, relating to criminal procedure; the Penal Code; and statutes of a penal nature. Bills relating to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and the Board of State and Community Corrections.

Rules — Proposed amendments to the rules and other matters relating to the business of the Legislature.

Transportation and Housing — Bills relating to the operation, safety, equipment, transfer of ownership, licensing, and registration of vehicles, aircraft, and vessels. Bills relating to the Department of Transportation and the Department of Motor Vehicles. Bills relating to highways, public transportation systems, and airports. Bills relating to housing and community redevelopment.

Veterans Affairs — Bills relating to veterans, military affairs, and armories. Bills amending the Military and Veterans Code.


There are 32 standing committees in the Assembly pursuant to Rule 11 of the Standing Rules of the Assembly. Those committees and their subject matter jurisdictions are as follows:

Accountability and Administrative Review — Primary jurisdictions are identifying efficiencies in the management of state government, reviewing and studying the implementation, operation, and effectiveness of state programs and agencies.
Aging and Long-Term Care — Primary jurisdiction includes area agencies on aging, California Department of Aging, long-term supports and services, Older Americans Act, Older Californians Act, senior citizen advocacy activities, the California Senior Legislature, services for seniors in residential and day settings and the California Commission on Aging.

Agriculture — Primary jurisdiction includes agriculture, agricultural chemicals, agricultural commodities and commissions, Department of Food and Agriculture, expositions and fairs, food labeling, labeling of agricultural commodities, livestock and poultry, marketing law, milk and milk products, pest management, and veterinary issues relative to agriculture.

Appropriations — Primary jurisdiction is fiscal bills, including bonds and alternative public financing.

Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism, and Internet Media — Primary jurisdictions are programs and policies affecting the recording, motion picture and other entertainment industries, tourism and arts programs and museums, professional and amateur sports including the State Athletic Commission and the regulation of athlete agents, and Internet media.

Banking and Finance — Primary jurisdictions are Financial Institutions, Real Property Finance, Consumer Finance, and Corporate Securities Law.

Budget — The Budget Committee’s jurisdiction is the Budget.

Business and Professions – Bills involving “Sunrise,” the creation of new regulatory entities within the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA); “Sunset,” the oversight and elimination of regulatory entities within the DCA; Health care professional licensing; Veterinarian licensing; Occupational licensing; Vocational education; The Department of General Services (building standards); Product labeling (except agricultural and medical product labeling).

Communications and Conveyance – Primary jurisdiction over cable, common carriers, moving companies, broadband, telecommunications, and transportation network companies.

Education — Primary jurisdictions are education generally, certificated employees of schools, school finance, and school facilities.

Elections and Redistricting — Primary jurisdictions are elections and redistricting.
Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials — Primary jurisdictions are toxic substances and hazardous materials, hazardous waste regulation, drinking water regulation, and pesticides.

Governmental Organization — Primary jurisdictions include alcohol, Indian gaming, horse racing, gambling, tobacco, public records, open meetings laws, state holidays, outdoor advertising and emergency services/natural disasters (this can be shared with the Housing and Community Development Committee and Local Government Committee).

Health — Primary jurisdictions are health care, health insurance, Medi-Cal and other public health care programs, mental health licensing of health and health-related professionals, and long-term health care facilities.

Higher Education — Primary jurisdictions are university, state university, and community college systems, postsecondary education, and student financial aid.

Housing and Community Development — Primary jurisdictions are building standards, common interest developments, eminent domain, farm worker housing, homeless programs, housing discrimination, housing finance (including redevelopment), housing, natural disaster assistance and preparedness, land use planning, mobile homes/manufactured housing, redevelopment: housing, and rent control.

Human Services — Includes child welfare services, foster care, child care, adoption assistance, CalWORKs, CalFresh, developmental disability services, In-home Supportive Services (IHSS), community care licensing, adult protective services, and SSI/SSP.
Insurance — Primary jurisdictions are insurance (excluding health insurance), workers compensation, and unemployment compensation.

Jobs, Economic Development, and the Economy — Primary jurisdictions are business advocacy within California and the United States; business advocacy of import/export trade; California-Mexico relations; California overseas trade offices; Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development; development and expansion of new technologies, except energy; development of international high tech markets; economic disaster relief; economic impact reports; effect of balance of trade issues on California; expansion of overseas markets; foreign investments by California; foreign investments in California; impacts of federal budget on high tech projects; impacts of federal budget on international trade; industrial innovation and research; international capital, including capital formation; international trade, research and import/export finance; interstate commerce; seaports and physical infrastructure; sister state agreements and friendship agreements with other nations; small business development and operations; state and local economic development; women and minority business enterprises (WBME).

Judiciary — Primary jurisdictions are family law, product liability, tort liability, Civil Code, and Evidence Code (excluding criminal procedure).Labor and Employment — Primary jurisdictions are wages, hours, employment discrimination, Cal-OSHA, employment development, and public job programs.

Local Government — Primary jurisdictions are General Plan, land use, housing element, local agency formation commissions (LAFCO), city and county organization and powers, special district governance and finance, special taxes, Subdivision Map Act, Brown Act, Public Records Act, redevelopment (as it relates to governance and financing), infrastructure financing districts, local government finance, charter cities and counties, eminent domain, joint powers authorities, Williamson Act, design-build (for local governments), military base reuse, public private partnerships (for local governments), state mandates, county clerks/ recorders, and civil grand juries.

Natural Resources — Primary jurisdiction includes air quality, climate change, energy efficiency, renewable energy, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), coastal protection, forestry, land conservation, oil spills, solid waste and recycling.

Privacy and Consumer Protection – Jurisdiction spans a wide range of technology-related issues, and includes matters affecting consumer protection in both the digital and analog worlds.  Specifically, the Committee has jurisdiction over matters related to privacy, the protection of personal information (including digital information), the security of data, and information technology, as well as false advertising, charitable solicitations, weights and measures, and consumer protection generally.  The Committee is also responsible for oversight of the Department   of Technology within the State’s Government Operations Agency.

Public Employees, Retirement, and Social Security — Primary jurisdiction is oversight of Classified school employees, Judges Retirement Law, Public employee collective bargaining, and Public retirement administration and investment strategy.

Public Safety — Primary jurisdiction is the California Penal Code.
Revenue and Taxation — Primary jurisdiction is the Revenue and Taxation Code.

Rules — Primary jurisdictions are proposed amendments to the rules, and other matters relating to the business of the Legislature.

Transportation – Jurisdiction includes California High-Speed Rail Authority, California Highway Patrol, California Transportation Commission, Department of Motor Vehicles, Department of Transportation (Caltrans), driver’s licenses, freight, regional transportation agencies, transit authorities, intercity rail, mobile sources of air pollution, fuels, rules of the road, state highways, local streets and roads, vehicles, aircraft, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and vessels.

Utilities and Energy — Primary jurisdictions are California Energy Commission; California Independent System Operator; California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC); CPUC oversight and reform; Electric generation: biogas, biomass, coal, geothermal, hydroelectric, natural gas, nuclear, renewables, solar, and wind; Electric grid; Energy efficiency, energy conservation, and demand response; Energy service providers; Natural Gas; Power plant siting; Railroads; Supplier diversity related to CPUC regulated energy, water, and railroad; Utility rates: electric, gas, water, and vessels; Water utilities.

Veterans Affairs — Primary jurisdictions are Cal-Vet loan program, Department of Veterans Affairs, National Guard, State military, and Veterans.

Water, Parks, and Wildlife — Primary jurisdictions are water resources, flood management, fish and game, parks and recreation, and wildlife.


Chris Micheli is an attorney and registered lobbyist with the Sacramento governmental relations firm of Aprea & Micheli, Inc. He serves as an Adjunct Professor at McGeorge School of Law.

#LindseyGraham’s effort to destroy President #Trump and his supporters

Screenshot 2018-01-29 at 07.18.15
A white elite, Graham is desperately afraid of losing political power.

Despite new protestations from the White House that President Trump has no plans to fire Robert S. Mueller III, the Los Angeles Times reports that two leading Republican senators on Sunday called for legislation to protect the special counsel leading the Russia investigation.

“I’ve got legislation protecting Mr. Mueller, and I’ll be glad to pass it tomorrow,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said on ABC’s “This Week,” adding that “Mr. Mueller is the perfect guy to get to the bottom of all this, and he will.”

Graham also appeared to brush aside the White House campaign to dismiss the probe as politically motivated and the president’s denial that he tried to fire Mueller last year, as was reported by the New York Times and subsequently confirmed by other news organizations.

“We’re not going to say it’s fake news and move on,” Graham said.

Maine Sen. Susan Collins, another prominent Republican, said she had faith in Deputy Atty. Gen. Rod Rosenstein, to whom the special counsel reports and who would have to sign off on any attempt to dismiss him.

But she said on CNN’s “State of the Union” that it “certainly wouldn’t hurt” to pass a bill that would block any move by Trump to fire Mueller.

Collins, who sits on the Senate Intelligence Committee, also added that in her opinion, Trump, who has tweeted prolifically about the investigation for months, should “never” talk about the probe except in private with legal counsel.

Both bills put forward in the Senate to protect Mueller are bipartisan. Graham’s version was crafted with Democratic Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey; a similar proposal is being co-sponsored by Sens. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.).

It’s how the white elites roll in Washington. A democracy that doesn’t obediently support them must be destroyed.

#Whitesupremicists mock #SanFrancisco #sanctuarycity law

Screenshot 2018-01-29 at 07.05.18.png

A sign mocking San Francisco’s sanctuary city policy was hung early Sunday over the Yerba Buena Island Tunnel in San Francisco.

The sign read “Danger” in red letters and “Sanctuary City Ahead” with a skull and crossbones on both sides of the poster. It was visible to Bay Bridge motorists driving west on Interstate 80 but was quickly removed according to the politically correct California Highway Patrol.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the sign was attributed to Identity Evropa.

According to Identity Evropa’s website, the group is made up of “a generation of awakened Europeans who have discovered that we are part of the great peoples, history, and civilization that flowed from the European continent. We reject the idea that our identities are mere abstractions to be deconstructed.”

The organization attempts to recruit college-age, white students to discuss white interests, according to the law center.

It was founded in March 2016 by Nathan Damigo, a 31-year-old Marine and student at Cal State Stanislaus.

#Leftists engage porn stars in their war against #America, and the President

Screenshot 2018-01-29 at 06.43.25A gleeful Los Angeles Times reports that porn star Stormy Daniels is taking her road show to Las Vegas. It’s all part of the campaign to make American not so great again.

The president has denied the affair. Fake news. But the economy of fame needs fuel, so venues like the Times are pushing the story of the porn star and the president.

This saga may crescendo on Tuesday, when Trump delivers the State of the Union address and a Daniels interview with Jimmy Kimmel airs later that night. A denouement in tweets is always a possibility.

But for now, the story is rooted in a Wall Street Journal report that alleged Trump paid Daniels $130,000 late in the 2016 campaign to stay quiet about an affair they had a decade earlier, shortly after his wife, Melania, gave birth to their son, Barron. The stories have included such details as her slapping Trump with a Forbes magazine — which may have blazed a pioneering moment of kink in the porn industry.

The Times has apparently forgotten all about Harvey Weinstein.


#LA’s homeless crisis is off the charts

Screenshot 2018-01-29 at 06.23.31.png

In the Liberal Utopia known as Los Angeles, the forgotten people are known as the homeless. They’ve become a blight that the white elites are trying to desperately exterminate.

According to the Los Angeles Times, they’re part of the streetscape, as familiar as the swaying palm trees and idling traffic, living under freeways, alongside riverbeds and on canyon hillsides.

How poetic their plight has become.

The mentally ill, the drug addicts, the economically disadvantaged, many with their life belongings in a backpack or shopping cart. The police harass them every single day.

On skid row it is not possible to walk on the sidewalk. Rows of tents and blue tarp shanties lined the entire stretch, extending all the way to the curb, so you had to walk in the street.

There’s a growing constellation of skid rows across greater Los Angeles, from Burbank to Bel-Air and Pasadena to Pacific Palisades. Los Angeles, rich beyond dreams, is a refugee camp, its riverbeds and alleys draped in blue tarpaulin.

It’s how L.A. rolls.

#ElonMusk enters the retail flamethrower business

Screenshot 2018-01-29 at 06.11.40.png

Elon Musk, the mastermind behind PayPal, Tesla and SpaceX, has another innovative product up in his sleeve: a $500 flamethrower.

The Mercury News reports that Musk announced the flamethrower, after weeks of teasing a possible flamethrowing product for his newest venture, The Boring Company.

His legions of followers have lapped up the chance to buy a flamethrower, with over 2,000 people pre-ordering the device.

The California Health and Safety Codes 12750 to 12761 outline that owning or selling flamethrowers is illegal without a permit granted from the state fire marshal, joining Maryland as the only two states in the country to have flamethrower regulations.

However, Musk’s flamethrower emits fire less than the defined 10 feet, so they aren’t required to get a permit.

“Flamethrowers that shoot a flame over 10 feet long require a permit in (California),” a company spokesman said in an email. “This flamethrower projects a flame that is shorter than 10 feet and as such does not require a permit.”

Some on social media are speculating this was a joke. When asked whether the flamethrower is a joke, the spokesman said this is no practical joke.

“It is real,” he said. “You can place an order on the website and we will start shipping in the spring.”


Brutal #FresnoPD sued for covering up brutality targeting the homeless and people of color

Screenshot 2018-01-28 at 09.52.29Fresno Police Chief Jerry Dyer doesn’t care about the Constitution, or your rights. He’s willing to hide public records and cover up brutality to make sure you never find out about the crimes the Fresno Police Department commits.

That’s why he’s being sued.

The Fresno Bee reports that the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California contends city and police officials have violated the California Public Records Act, which typically requires public agencies to make records available within 10 days of a request.

The requested records pertain to training in areas such as officer bias, use of force, the discharging of firearms, investigating civilian complaints and interacting with the public.

The ACLU’s petition says the organization first requested the training records on Dec. 1, 2016. Since then, police have turned over some of the information, but not all of it, the petition says.

The ACLU said in court papers it is requesting the records “due to community concerns about the Fresno Police Department’s use of force and its interaction with communities of color.” The organization wants a judge to order the city to turn over all training-related records, except those that the court has determined to be lawfully withheld.

The petition is a latest salvo by the ACLU of Northern California against the city.

In 2009, a federal judge in Fresno gave final approval to a $2.35 million class-action settlement to hundreds of Fresno’s homeless residents, whose personal property, including essential medications, family photographs and personal documents had been confiscated by police and city workers.

The homeless were represented by the ACLU of Northern California, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and the law firm of Heller Ehrman LLP. U.S. District Judge Oliver W. Wanger ruled that the city and the California Department of Transportation had violated the homeless residents’ constitutional rights and issued an order that prohibiting the two agencies from continuing to seize and destroy the property of homeless people.

Also in 2009, the ACLU prevailed against Fresno in a Public Records Act lawsuit to compel the police department to release the names of two officers who were caught on video repeatedly punching a homeless man.

The latest court filing comes in the wake of an ACLU report, released in November, that says Fresno police officers fire their guns most often at black or Latino people. Many times, shooting incidents involve officers who discharged their weapons before, the report said.

In its petition, the ACLU says Fresno officers discharge their weapons more frequently that officers in other agencies. Between 2001 to 20016, Fresno police fired their weapons 146 times. “This is an average of approximately nine officer-involved shootings per year in Fresno, even though other jurisdictions can go years without a single officer-involved shooting,” the petition says.

In addition, 55 Fresno police officers have discharged their firearms more than once, and about seven officers have discharged their firearms four or more times, the petition says.

The ACLU contends the shootings have severely affected minorities and low-income individuals living in southern areas of Fresno. For example, between 2011 to 2016, the petition says, “black and Hispanic individuals account for 80 percent of officer-involved shootings victims in Fresno.” In comparison, the white, wealthier areas of north Fresno have had zero officer-involved shootings between 2006 and 2016, the petition says.

Sex crime victims continue to line up to accuse #JeremyPiven

Screenshot 2018-01-28 at 08.24.15.pngSex crime charges continue to pile up against the Hollywood elites.

Meet Jeremy Piven.

Naturally he has strongly denied allegations of sexual misconduct from at least three women. It’s what the elites do.

However he’s facing further accusations as new victims continue to bravely step forward.

Three additional women claim Piven acted in a physically aggressive or threatening manner, according to a report in the Fresno Bee.

The women said they were speaking out because of frustration over Piven’s previous denials.

One incident allegedly involved a high school student working as an extra. Other encounters took place in the 1990s, according to the report.

One woman told reporters that Piven followed her into a set trailer, held her down and attempted to grope her. She fended him off and fled, she said.

Despite relentless attacks from the elite media, the President’s #SOTU speech will be a good one

Screenshot 2018-01-28 at 08.01.12.pngDespite the relentless attacks from a white elite, America-hating media, President Donald Trump will look to continue sending his strong message of putting Americans first during his State of the Union address.

And why not? Clearly his tax cut and economic policies are already benefiting every American.

According to the Sacramento Bee, the theme of his Tuesday night address to Congress and the country is “Building a safe, strong and proud America,” and the president is looking to showcase accomplishments of his first year while setting the tone for the second.

Aides say the president plans to set a tone of compromise, and to make an appeal beyond his base.

The annual address is a big set piece for any president, a prime-time window to address millions of voters. Every word is reviewed, every presidential guest carefully chosen, every sentence rehearsed. The stakes are enormous for Trump, hoping to move past a turbulent first 12 months in office.

The elite media will find nothing but hate and scorn for the President. Everyone else will get it. The President’s speech will no doubt be a good one.


So they can trash President #Trump, the #MercuryNews offers up immigrant family to #ICE

Screenshot 2018-01-28 at 07.47.04.png

In the San Jose Mercury News‘ relentless desire to destroy President Trump, they’ve decided to throw one immigrant family to the wolves.

Immigrants across the Bay Area and around the country, their fates lie in the hands of a contorted Congress and a mercurial president who can’t come to terms over immigration legislation.

President Trump’s latest proposal would create a path to citizenship for 1.8 million young undocumented immigrants, known as “Dreamers,” who were brought to the country illegally as children. That’s nearly double the number who were protected under the Obama administration, but Trump’s plan would strictly limit families from bringing relatives — other than spouses or children — to the U.S. and end the visa lottery system. It also would beef up immigration enforcement and set aside $25 billion for a border wall.

Trump’s proposal would protect Ernesto Perez’s two children who are “Dreamers” — Angela, a senior at Cal State Long Beach, and Max, a security guard at Walmart — and likely the youngest of the family, Cristina, a Silver Creek High School junior who has yet to apply. But it won’t help their father in San Jose or their mother, who doesn’t live with the family.

So knowing ICE was targeting California because of the state’s sanctuary laws, the Mercury News decided to put the Perez family right there in the paper….making it easy for ICE to come and get them.

What compassion. What journalism. Enjoy your Police State.

#SanDiego’s infrastructure continues to crumble

Screenshot 2018-01-28 at 07.35.41San Diego is facing decreased funding for infrastructure combined with a longer list of needed projects, creating a $1.57 billion gap that is jeopardizing the city’s ability to fix sidewalks, build bike lanes and keep parks in good shape.

Welcome to Libtopia, a place where an ordered society is managed by state mandates, and where happy taxpayers pick up the tab.

According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, the gap is $310 million larger than it was a year ago, despite increased focus on the problem by city officials and a 2016 ballot measure that created the first revenue stream devoted to infrastructure projects.

And the list of needs only covers the next five years, not the city’s long-term infrastructure backlog which has been estimated at roughly $5 billion.

The five-year funding gap is expected to grow because less private development and fewer grants will likely shrink revenues, while state storm water mandates and other needs have lengthened the project list.

A new analysis presented recently to the City Council’s Infrastructure Committee shows needs over the next five years approach $4.37 billion, compared to $2.8 billion of available funds. That’s a gap of $1.57 billion.

A similar five-year infrastructure outlook completed last winter showed funding needs of $4.3 billion with just over $3 billion available, a gap of $1.27 billion.

Teaching Lawmaking in California

California LegislatureBy Chris Micheli and Diane Boyer-Vine

As part of its efforts to enhance its Capital Lawyering Program, the University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law offers a number of courses to train aspiring lawyers who plan to work in and around government. One such course is Lawmaking in California, a course which covers the fundamental components of the California legislative process, as well as discussions involving the rulemaking process and avenues of direct democracy.

The Lawmaking in California course is in integral part of McGeorge’s overall curriculum in its Capital Lawyering Program. After students take the required Introduction to Capital Lawyering class, this course and the California Lobbying and Politics course are next in the sequence, with students usually then participating in the popular Legislation and Public Policy Clinic where all of their coursework is put to the test.

Course Overview

The topics covered in this course include legislative procedure, bill drafting and analysis, legislative history and intent, advocacy, relationships with the executive branch, and the powers and limits of the legislative branch of state government. Students in this class learn about statutory and regulatory lawmaking and develop important legal skills of research, analyzing and writing by having practical experience in drafting legislation and bill analyses.

This course is taught in downtown Sacramento at the State Capitol, rather than on the law school campus, as this provides students with the feel of the practice of capital lawyering. The course runs 14 consecutive weeks and meets once per week in the evening for 2 hours. It begins right after the workday concludes so that guest speakers in and around the State Capitol can easily make class presentations.

This course exposes students to numerous aspects of the legislative process and the making of statutory law and its increasingly critical role in our legal system. This course also prepares students who want to continue their studies in the legislative arena by participating in the Legislation and Public Policy Clinic. The course relies heavily on class discussion with guest speakers bringing expertise and insights into topics covered.

This course is unique – we believe it is one of only a handful of law school courses dedicated specifically to forms of lawmaking in California. While regulatory process and direct democracy are briefly covered in two separate class sessions, the bulk of the course focuses on the state legislative process and the influences over that process.

Prior Version of this Course

This class was formerly the Legislative Process, Strategy and Ethics course, and was also intended to expose law students to the practical world of politics and the lawmaking process. Changes from the previous iterations of this course included the addition of a 600-page reader full of substantive information that could readily be used as a reference guide for anyone working in or around the legislative and/or regulatory processes. Both a mid-term and final exam were created and writing assignments were added.

As a result of these substantial changes, the course went from a P/F basis to a graded class. This course is intended to provide a great deal of substantive material and practical knowledge so that a student who successfully completes this course, along with the California Lobbying and Politics class and Legislation and Public Policy Clinic could work in and around the State Capitol immediately.

ourse Materials

This course does not use a standard textbook. Instead, it uses a Reader which was written and compiled by Professors Chris Micheli and Diane Boyer-Vine. The Reader provides students with the essential background to participate in class discussions and consider the case studies that will be used during the semester. The Reader is comprised of two volumes of materials.

In terms of the class reader, most recently called Materials and Cases on Lawmaking in California, the professors hope that it will serve in the future as a reference guide, something that graduates will keep on their credenza or bookshelf at their job in or around the State Capitol. Some of the material may need to be updated on occasion, but most of the material is not likely to change much so that it will be of benefit in the future.

Several of the guest speakers provide additional written materials for the students. They receive examples of all types of bills, budget materials, and other relevant materials that can be used as reference guides in the future.

Course Exams

There is a graded mid-term exam worth 20% of the final grade, as well as a final exam at the end of the course, which is also worth 20% of the student’s final grade. Each exam covers half of the course. The exams consist of multiple choice, true/false and short essay questions. The mid-term is given in the second hour of the seventh class, and lasts one hour. The final exam is given during “exam week” after the conclusion of classes and lasts 90 minutes.

We have found that true/false, multiple choice and short essay questions enable us to adequately test the information from class. All exam questions are clearly in the written materials, are discussed during the appropriate class session, and are of a nature that would be expected to be known. The exam questions are intended to ensure that students know and understand the salient points from the respective class sessions and topics. They essentially test what students should derive from the topics covered.

Although graduates of the class will not have the same practical work experience of those working under the Capitol Dome, they will have been exposed to many of the common issues and scenarios that experienced individuals will have over a number of years working in and around the  Capitol.

The purpose of this writing assignment is to provide an opportunity to participate in one of the most important roles of a legislative lawyer – drafting bill language. Students must first decide upon a state public policy issue that they want to address by legislation. Then they must research that issue and decide upon what type of statutory language is needed — adding new code sections and/or amending existing code sections.

Then the hard part comes – drafting the actual bill text. Although an entire class period is spent with the Chief Deputy Legislative Counsel who walks students through all of the possible versions of bill drafts and amendments, the drafting will fall upon the student.

The second amendment is to draft a substantive amendment to address one or more opposition concerns that could be raised with the original bill. There is also required a drafting of an urgency clause and the justification for why the bill should take effect immediately as an urgency statute. The students are required to combine both of these amendments into a second draft of the bill.

In evaluating the bill and amendment drafting project, the professors look for accuracy in the bill language, that the bill format is followed, the rules of statutory construction are kept in mind, and that the language is easily understood.

Bill Analysis Drafting Project

A few weeks after completing the bill and amendment drafting project, the students will switch hats and become committee consultants as they prepared a lengthy policy committee analysis of their drafted bill in its amended form.

The second writing assignment is to research and write an analysis of the amended bill. Significant thought and analysis will go into this writing assignment, which also must be done in an objective manner, similar to the bill and amendment drafting project.

An entire class period is spent with the staff director of a legislative committee who shares insights on how to research and write a thorough bill analysis that could be relied upon by legislators and staff to make a decision about how to vote on a bill and by practitioners who could understand what was intended by those voting to enact the bill’s provisions.

Similar to the bill and amendment drafting project, the hard work naturally comes with drafting the actual bill analysis that is limited in page length, but that is expected to be thorough and demonstrate a clear understanding of how and why to analyze legislation.

In evaluating the bill analysis drafting project, the professors look for
the students following the format for a policy committee bill analysis, writing a clear and concise explanation of the bill’s provisions, analyze the measure’s provisions, and provide an independent description of the arguments that would likely to be posed for and against this bill.

Student Participation

The course is interactive and student participation is crucial to the learning experience. The students’ final grade may be increased or decreased by 1/3 as the participation component of the students’ grade is designed to enhance their learning experience, as well as their oral participation and advocacy skills.

Attendance and class participation are an integral part of this course in order to facilitate learning by the students. Regardless of whether there is a small number of students in a seminar room or a large classroom filled dozens of students, the quality and quantity of student participation is necessary for success in a course such as this.

Through the professors’ use of the Socratic Method of teaching, lecturing, sharing perspectives among participating students, and class discussions, students will be called upon to apply their knowledge and utilize their critical thinking and analysis skills. There are numerous opportunities to engage in these interactive discussions, and the professors assess the student’s ability to apply knowledge and critical thinking skills.

The professors will also assess the student’s ability to identify and understand key concepts in substantive law and procedure that are reviewed and discussed in the readings and class sessions. Finally, the professors will assess the students communication skills, including effective listening and critical reading, as well as interpersonal speech and oral advocacy.

Guest Speakers

The guest speakers are always leading experts in their fields and have extensive experience and key insights to share with students to gain exceptional insight in particular aspects of state government in California. Critical readings are provided to students in advance so that they are exposed to key issues for the relevant class discussions each week and can engage in valuable interactions with the guest speakers.

Overview of Weekly Class Sessions

The first class deals with a course overview, review of the syllabus and begins in earnest with views on the Legislature and the lawmaking process. The learning objective is to gain a high-level understanding of representative democracy and how legislatures are viewed in America. The purpose is to understand where this course fits into the McGeorge Program and then to understand  views of legislatures in general.

The second class is the first one on the legislative process,
which covers the legislative calendar and the committee system. There are two guest speakers: a committee secretary or assistant and either the Senate or Assembly Bill Referral Consultant. We examine the Assembly and Senate legislative processes. The learning objective is to understand legislative rules that apply to bills and amendments moving through the legislative process. This class focuses on bill introductions, amendment deadlines, and rules that relate to bill referrals and the committee process.

The third class deals with legislative powers and limits, reviewing constitutional provisions and relevant case law. The class speaker is the former Chief Deputy Legislative Counsel. This class involves a thorough examination of the legislative branch of government. The learning objective is to understand the scope of the powers of the legislative branch vis-à-vis the judicial and executive branches. Also, we review the scope of legislative power as it relates to the people’s power of initiative and referendum.

The fourth class returns to the legislative process, this time examining floor sessions and legislative publications. The Secretary of the Senate and the Chief Clerk of the Assembly are the guest speakers. The learning objective is to understand legislative rules which apply to bills and amendments moving through the legislative process. This session focuses on the floor process and will introduce students to various legislative publications that are useful to working effectively in the process.

The fifth class turns to drafting bills and amendments. The class period is spent with the current Chief Deputy Legislative Counsel. The purpose is to gain an understanding of bills and amendments and specific drafting rules used by the Legislative Counsel. The learning objective is to understand the basic tools of drafting legislation in California from initial inception of an idea through preparation of the text of a measure and amendments to that measure.

The sixth class concerns the drafting of bill analyses and includes as its guest speaker a long-time policy committee staff director. The learning objective is to understand how a bill analysis is prepared and used in the committee process. The class also focuses on the committee consultant’s role in the process.

The seventh class examines statutory research and legislative intent by examining general rules of statutory interpretation as well as relevant case law. The guest speaker is a retired appellate court justice who examines these issues from the vantage point of the judiciary. The learning objective is to understand how legislative intent is determined and what may be used to establish legislative intent.

The eighth class is focused on the role of the lobbyist in the legislative process. A Policy Advocate for the California Chamber of Commerce is the featured guest speaker. The learning objective is to define what the role of a lobbyist is in the legislative process and understand the pros and cons of lobbying activities in a democracy.

The ninth class is focused on ethics in the legislative process. The guest speaker is either the Senate Ombudsperson and Chief Counsel to the Senate Ethics Committee or the Chief Counsel to the Assembly Committee on Ethics. The learning objective is to understand the laws and rules regulating the conduct of legislators and legislative staff in conducting business.

The tenth class is focused on the media’s role in the legislative process. The featured speakers have been current and former Capitol Press Corps members. The learning objective is to understand the media’s role in the legislative process and this class includes discussion about how news organizations determine what issues to cover at the Capitol.

The eleventh class is focused on working with the Governor’s Administration. The featured speaker is a Deputy Legislative Secretary in the Governor’s Office. The learning objective is to understand the Governor’s role in the legislative process.

The twelfth class is focused on the state budget process. The featured speaker is the Budget Director for the Assembly Speaker. The learning objective is to understand California’s budget process from introduction of the Governor’s budget in January, through the subcommittee hearings, May Revise, and final enactment.

The thirteenth class is focused on the state rulemaking process. The featured speaker is a key staff member of the California Office of Administrative Law. The learning objective of this class is to understand the intersection between statutory enactments and rules promulgated to implement those statutes. The class is intended to provide students with a basic understanding of the structure of the rulemaking process.

The fourteenth and final class is focused on forms of direct democracy – the initiative and referendum processes in California. The main learning objective of this class session is to understand the scope of the initiative power in comparison to the power of the Legislature.

Chris Micheli is an attorney and legislative advocate for the Sacramento governmental relations firm of Aprea & Micheli, Inc. Diane Boyer-Vine is the Legislative Counsel for the State of California. Both serve as Adjunct Professors at McGeorge School of Law in its Capital Lawyering Program.

California officials doing sex crimes cost taxpayers millions every year

Screenshot 2018-01-27 at 09.26.19.pngThey are despicable and belong behind bars. Yet they’re not, and you, the taxpayer, are responsible for cleaning up the devastation they caused.

California has paid more than $25 million in three years to settle sexual harassment claims against the state and public universities, with most of it paid by taxpayers, the Mercury News reports.

According to recently disclosed information, 92 sexual harassment settlements involving 24 state agencies and 10 university campuses were involved in sex crimes during the three years ending June 30, 2017.

The payouts ranged from $500 for a prison inmate to $10 million paid in 2016 by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to four wards at a state youth correctional facility. The young men said a male staff counselor coerced them into sex acts.

The state does not officially track costs for litigating and settling sexual harassment cases. Officials like to cover this kind of thing up.

#Dreamers OK with President #Trump’s wall

Screenshot 2017-12-13 at 08.06.51When Gerardo Gomez of San Francisco opens Facebook these days, he is often confronted by posts raising the same question — one that is largely theoretical but has generated unusually fierce debate in the community of immigrants known as “Dreamers” to which he belongs.

Would they accept President Trump’s wall at the U.S.-Mexico border if it meant citizenship for the nearly 700,000 people protected by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program?

“It’s usually, ‘I’m willing to have a wall if I stay,’ or ‘Would you be OK with having a wall if it means citizenship?’” said Gomez, who came to the United States from Mexico at age 3 and will see his DACA status expire in August unless Congress emerges from negotiations with a fix.

The San Francisco Chronicle says the debate is a sign of the profound worry gripping DACA recipients, whose protections were established by former President Barack Obama but are being phased out by Trump.

The Chronicle also editorialies (yes, in a news story) that it also exposes the raw feelings about the wall, which is seen as a symbol of Trump’s anti-immigrant agenda on both the left and right.

Not really. Dreamers aren’t stupid. They’re OK with the President’s deal.

“You’ll be the first one in line to apply” if there’s a compromise, read one posting.  For most DACA recipients, the wall is no big deal.

Ana Rodriguez, a 26-year old who lives in Union City and works at a day care center, expressed a different perspective. She said thinking about the prospect of a life without a work permit and protection from deportation — which DACA now provides her through October — can be too much.

How would she be able to make a life for herself, she asks, and to have a family?

“If building a wall leads us to having citizenship, then I’m all for it,” Rodriguez said. “The U.S. is what I know and that’s where I want to live my life — I want to be a part of it in full.”

Leftists naturally freak out and try to downplay such sentiments. After all, they really want open borders. Anything that makes President Trump or America look good, causes them to recoil in horror.


The crack fantasy that dominates the #LATimes coverage of President #Trump

Screenshot 2018-01-27 at 08.39.07In the crack fantasy that dominates the Los Angeles Times‘ coverage of President Trump, here’s what the President has done to impede and control the Russia investigation.

Has President Trump obstructed justice? It’s a question that has consumed Leftists and divided Washington for months.  Critics accuse the president of tampering with the continuing Russia investigation that has now been exposed as a fabrication of a corrupt and totally discredited FBI.

Real lawyers and scholars disagree.  Despite that, Leftists continue to claim a clear pattern has emerged of Trump trying to influence the case’s outcome. As if his calling it “fake news” makes him guilty.

It’s how Orwellian, and dangerous the Left has become.

The latest reminder came from Thursday’s reports that last year Trump ordered the firing of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, who’s leading the probe, but backed down after the top White House lawyer threatened to quit.

Never mind that this report, fabricated by the New York Times, has been totally discredited.

The Los Angeles Times, another dying newspaper, still hasn’t connected the dots…fake news is costing them readers, and revenue.


The #LADodgers latest ticket scheme is just another way to jerk fans around

Screenshot 2018-01-27 at 08.28.28The Dodgers are taking a cue from state leaders. They know Angelenos are sheep to be sheared, cows to be milked, so they’re jacking up prices.

Now, the Los Angeles Times reports, if you would like to see the Dodgers from a field-level seat overlooking the bullpen, the team will charge you $80 for your seat.

That’s on April 21. If you can wait four days, the Dodgers will charge you $33 for the very same seat.

Sort of like Uber’s surge pricing…the numbers keep moving. Remember, you’re just the customer. Why would the Dodgers care what you think?

The Dodgers put single-game tickets on sale Friday, with seats available in as many as 40 classifications and games priced based on six levels of anticipated popularity. Opening day tickets were not available Friday; the team currently is selling them only as part of multi-game packages.

The Dodgers have dropped the number of games for which they offer their lowest price from 16 four years ago to two again this year — two weekday games that start at 4:35 p.m.

The cheapest ticket for those games is $14. But for a working parent who wants to take his or her children to Dodger Stadium but cannot make either of those games, the cheapest ticket on sale Friday was $23.


More taxes for Californians to love coming to the June ballot

Screenshot 2018-01-27 at 08.20.50.pngCalifornians love taxes as much as they love drugs.

That’s why the Los Angeles Times happily announces that California’s secretary of state assigned numbers Friday to the four propositions on the June primary ballot, proposals crafted by state lawmakers last year. The list includes issues such as borrowing for drought, parks projects and restrictions on raiding new fuel tax revenues.

Under a 2011 law signed by Gov. Jerry Brown, proposals submitted by the public appear only on November statewide ballots — and as many as a dozen are now making their way through the process of collecting voter signatures.

In contrast, the four propositions voters will consider in June were the result of legislative negotiations on a variety of topics.


#Islamics continue to kill people and blow stuff up

Screenshot 2018-01-27 at 08.09.49

This is the real Islam.

The Taliban carried out their second massive bombing against a well-secured Afghanistan target in a week on Saturday when a suicide bomber stuffed explosives into an ambulance and detonated the vehicle outside a hospital in central Kabul, killing 63 people, officials said.

The Los Angeles Times reports that the attacker got past a security checkpoint by telling officers that he was taking a patient to the hospital, said Nasrat Rahimi, deputy spokesman for the Afghan Ministry of Public Health.

More than 150 people were wounded in the blast, which was heard across Kabul and damaged multiple buildings in the area.

Screenshot 2018-01-27 at 08.08.10

Last week, Islamics attacked Kabul’s six-story Intercontinental hotel and killed 22 people in an hours-long siege that ended only after Afghan and U.S. special operations forces went room-to-room to find the attackers and several guests escaped by jumping off balconies.

Several American citizens were killed or wounded in the hotel attack, Afghan officials said.

It’s what Islam is all about.

#BayArea man to father of 2-year-old daughter: Can I touch your sexy baby?

Screenshot 2018-01-26 at 20.12.57.png
Need another good reason to NOT visit the Bay Area. Well here you go.

A homeless man who allegedly asked a father if he could touch his 2-year-old daughter and later told an officer he thought the girl was “sexy” has pleaded not guilty to one felony count of annoying or molesting a child, according to the Mercury News.

The encounter occurred near the Redwood City Main Library. The suspect, identified as 46-year-old David Lewis, was rummaging through trash cans when the father and daughter walked past him.

Prosecutors said Lewis asked the father if he could touch his daughter. The father told him “no” and called Redwood City police.

Lewis allegedly told an officer, “I thought the little girl was cute and wanted to touch her,” and as they were walking to the officer’s patrol car, he spontaneously said, “I was thinking about sex a little bit. She’s sexy.”

According to the Mercury News, this pervert was previously convicted of a misdemeanor count of annoying or molesting a child.

Teaching Introduction to Capital Lawyering


By Chris Micheli

As part of its Capital Lawyering Program, the University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law offers several courses to develop the capital lawyer. There is one mandatory course, which is titled, “Introduction to Capital Lawyering” (ICL). This course is taught in downtown Sacramento, as well as on the law school campus, as this provides students with the feel of the practice of capital lawyering.

The ICL course runs 14 consecutive weeks and meets once per week for 2 hours. It is open to day and evening students, as well as those in McGeorge’s Master of Science in Law (MSL) program. This course is geared to giving students the proverbial “30,000-foot level” review of the three levels of government and the three branches of government, with particular emphasis on California state government.

The objective of the course is to ensure that students are aware of the different forums and avenues to address a client’s legal issue, whether the capital lawyer works inside or outside of government. In this way, students will be well positioned to develop a winning strategy to ensure the client’s issue is properly and efficiently addressed in the most appropriate venue.

This course introduces students to the lawyer’s role in developing, modifying, implementing, advocating, and influencing public policy, including: legislation, regulations, executive orders, court orders, and other policy edicts at the national, state, and local levels.

Students learn how to do policy analysis; learn the essential organization and procedures of the various policymaking venues; are able to consider and weigh strategic implications associated with the various venues and processes; conduct research using a variety of sources unique to policymaking in California and other settings; learn and develop skills for advocacy, negotiation and compromise in a policymaking setting; and, practice applying course knowledge and skills to important public policy matters of the day.

Learning Objectives

The primary learning objective of this course is to introduce and acquaint students with the fundamental knowledge and skills that are essential to lawyering in connection with California state government and with government in general. Upon successful completion of this course, students should possess the following knowledge and skills essential to lawyering in government settings:

  • Students will be able to perform policy analysis using a variety of methodologies that are the problem-solving rubric in the capital and other policymaking settings. 
  • Students will be able to consider and weigh the various venues for proceeding with a particular policy change and will be able to make decisions regarding the venue which provides the greatest strategic advantages and chances for success.
  • Students will be able to apply advocacy, negotiation and compromise skills that are both necessary and common in policymaking settings, including bilateral and multilateral negotiation, win/lose and win/win negotiation techniques, and methods for achieving compromise.
  • Students will be able to apply course knowledge and skills to address current public policy problems that confront California, the nation as a whole, and local communities.  

While the primary focus of the course is devoted to the lawyer’s role in the context of California state government, policymaking venues and processes at the federal and local government levels in California are also addressed. This is because California state government does not operate in a vacuum. Federal laws, programs and funding decisions are implemented by the state and have a huge effect on the state and its local communities.

In addition, the state does not have exclusive control of the policymaking agenda. The federal government and California’s local governments are regularly considering and adopting policies that are of concern to those working with state government. As a result, a capital lawyer must also be able to work with other policymaking venues.

The secondary learning objective of the course is to enable students to make more informed decisions regarding not only their areas of interest and course choices in the Capital Lawyering Program, but also the diverse array of employment opportunities that exist in connection with California state government and government practice generally.

Preparing Students for Capital Lawyering Careers

With the foundation provided by this course, as well as the other Capital Lawyering Program courses offered at McGeorge School of Law, students will be equipped to pursue their specific employment interests through a range of elective courses designed to prepare students to work in an extensive and diverse array of positions in and around California state government. This course and the Capital Lawyering Program are intended to provide essential preparation for:

  • Working in the California Legislature as committee consultants, staff to legislative leaders and members, staff to party caucuses, or other legislative support agencies such as the Legislative Counsel;
  • Working for the Governor in such areas as legal affairs, legislative affairs or appointments;
  • Working in state agencies as attorneys, legislative advocates, administrative law judges, enforcement officers, and other positions;
  • Working for businesses and nonprofit organizations that seek to influence policy on legislative and regulatory matters;
  • Working for private law firms that specialize in political and government law; and,
  • Working for lobbying firms that are retained to influence policy on both legislative and regulatory matters.

Course Materials

This course does not use a standard textbook. Instead, it uses a Reader entitled Introduction to Capital Lawyering, which was written by Professor Thomas J. Nussbaum with supplemental materials provided by other adjunct professors. The Reader provides students with the essential background to participate in class discussions and consider the case studies that will be used during the semester.


There is a graded mid-term exam worth 30% of the final grade, as well as a final exam at the end of the course, which is also worth 30% of the student’s final grade. Each exam covers half of the course. The exams consist of multiple choice, true/false and short essay questions. The mid-term is given in the second hour of the seventh class, and lasts one hour. The final exam is given during “exam week” after the conclusion of classes and lasts 90 minutes.

In terms of assessing the students’ knowledge of the course materials and their ability to apply the information covered during class sessions, the exams test the student’s recall of critical information through testing, as well as application of the information in their short essay questions. The multiple choice and true/false questions are relatively straight forward and come directly from the class readings and are covered a second time during class discussions. The short essay questions are intended to test the students’ writing ability and applying the information they have reviewed in class sessions.

Written Project

Each student completes a written project for the class that involves working on an actual, current public policy problem facing California or the nation. The project is worth 40% of the final grade. Students submit a final paper for addressing the public policy problem. This paper is due prior to the final class.

The written paper must formally apply a policy analysis methodology and demonstrate knowledge and skills acquired from the course. The first step in completing the written paper is to select the current public policy problem by the third-class session. This step involves consultation with the professor. While the professor provides a list of potential topics, that list is not exclusive and the problem statements are not precisely framed in the same manner as the student will do in his or her project paper.

Students are free to propose other topics or rephrase those that have been suggested by the professor. The professor provides feedback, approval or further direction. In the final paper, students are expected to explain in detail the components of his or her proposal, applying what they have learned from further research and analysis of the public policy problem. In addition, the final paper should reflect knowledge and skills acquired from the course. Use of footnotes or endnotes is required to provide authority/reference/support for the policy analysis.

Students are provided evaluation criteria for their written projects at the start of the course so that they understand what is expected and how they will be graded. There are four major areas that are reviewed:

Thoroughness and quality of research – The professor is evaluating the extent to which the student became informed about the public policy problem, the various alternatives to addressing the problem, the views of the key parties of interest, and other relevant points. In addition, the professor is evaluating the degree to which the student used an extensive and diverse array of research materials to support his or her analysis, including footnotes or endnotes to provide reference, authority and support for assertions made in the paper.

Application of methodology – The professor is evaluating the extent to which the student correctly applied a policy analysis and development methodology in putting together the paper.

Quality of analysis – The professor is evaluating the extent to which the student did a sophisticated policy analysis of the problem. The professor wants to see the student go beyond a rigid and mechanical application of the policy analysis methodology. The professor is looking for the student to identify and focus on the most crucial or pivotal aspects of the policy issue he or she is addressing.

Quality of writing – The professor is evaluating the extent to which the student’s paper is well organized, readable and well written.  Proper grammar, usage and mechanics enhance a policy analysis; whereas, improper grammar, usage and mechanics detract from an analysis.

Class Participation

Attendance and class participation are an integral part of this course in order to facilitate learning by the students. Regardless of whether there is a small number of students in a seminar room or a large classroom filled dozens of students, the quality and quantity of student participation is necessary for success in a course such as this.

Through the professor’s use of the Socratic Method of teaching, sharing perspectives among participating students, and class discussions on various public policy issues, students will be called upon to apply their knowledge and utilize their critical thinking and analysis skills. There are numerous opportunities to engage in these interactive discussions, and the professor assesses the student’s ability to apply knowledge and critical thinking skills to perform competent legal analysis, reasoning and problem solving.

The professor will also assess the student’s ability to identify and understand key concepts in substantive law, legal theory and procedure that are reviewed and discussed in the readings and class sessions.  Finally, the professor will assess the student’s communication skills, including effective listening and critical reading, as well as interpersonal speech and oral advocacy.

Overview of Weekly Class Sessions

The first class, as one would expect, begins with an introduction and overview of the course, review of the class syllabus and Reader, course expectations, the written project and two exams, discussion of McGeorge’s Capital Lawyering Program, and getting into the course materials on policy analysis. Policy analysis is a core function and skill necessary for successful work as a capital lawyer. According to Professor Nussbaum, “Policy analysis is the rubric for problem-solving that is typically applied in policymaking settings.”

The second class continues with policy analysis and students become familiar with and practice various policy analysis methodologies. It is important for students to understand the difference between policy analysis and policy development, and the different methodologies addressed in the assigned readings. The goal is to have students be able to do a simple policy analysis using one of the methodologies addressed in the assigned readings.

The third class focuses on applying policy analyses to “real world” issues that are especially relevant and important for attorneys who work in or in connection with California state government. This class focuses on the national issue of illegal immigration and the state issue of public pensions. Students are expected to demonstrate the ability to do policy analysis regarding these two issues. The goal is for students to work with classmates and the professor in an attempt to reach consensus on how the various problems could be addressed by California and the federal government.

At the fourth class, we focus on the public health problem of obesity as a means of exploring how public policy matters can be addressed through a wide variety of venues (by legislative bodies such as the California Legislature or the U.S. Congress; by California or federal regulatory agencies; by local government agencies such as cities, counties, or school districts; by the initiative process, or by the courts). Students are expected to understand and be able to describe how problems can be addressed through a wide variety of public policy venues and processes and be able to perform a policy analysis using the “Methodology for Policy Analysis and Development: Addressing a Cluster of Related Problems”.

The fifth class is the first of four sessions devoted to the venues for lawyering in California state government. In these four sessions, we focus on the California Legislature, the executive branch and Governor, the role of state agencies, the initiative process, and the role of our state courts in making policy. For this session, the focus is on the California Legislature.

The sixth class is the second of four sessions devoted to the venues for lawyering in California state government.  For this session, the focus is on the executive branch of California state government, especially the role of the Governor in the state’s lawmaking and budget processes.  Topics include an overview of the executive branch of state government, how the Governor is involved in the legislative process, how the Governor is involved in the budget process, how the Governor makes policy via executive orders, and how the Governor directs and influences state agencies.

The seventh class is the third of four sessions devoted to the venues for lawyering in California state government.  For this session, the focus is on California state agencies. Topics include: the array of state agencies in California government, the rules and procedures that govern the adoption of regulations by state agencies, the open meeting laws that apply to California state agencies, and the role of state agencies in carrying out statutory responsibilities that are established through the legislative process.

The eighth class is the last of four sessions devoted to lawyering in California state government.  For this session, the focus is on California’s initiative process and the role of the state courts in policy development. Topics include the legal requirements and procedures for initiatives, key research tools regarding initiatives, analysis of recent trends, strategic considerations, upcoming ballot measures, and how state courts get involved in setting policy.

The ninth class is the first of two sessions devoted to lawyering with the federal government.  This session focuses on Congress and the topics include the organization of the legislative branch, the legislative process, the committee system, the roles and influence of political parties, the role and influence of interest groups, key procedural and voting requirements, and research regarding federal legislation. The objective for students is to understand the basic and essential aspects of Congress.

The tenth class is the second of two sessions devoted to policy development and lawyering in the federal government.  For this session, we focus on the President’s role in the legislative and budget processes; the executive branch of the federal government; the President’s power to issue executive orders; processes for rulemaking/regulation by federal agencies; research regarding federal agencies, regulations and policy issues; and, the role of the federal courts in making public policy.

The eleventh class is devoted to lawyering in local government in California. Topics include the broad variety of local government entities, state statutory and constitutional provisions that govern their activities (including open meeting laws) or limit their authority, and the types of policy matters typically within the regulatory purview of local agencies. The objective is for students to have a basic understanding of the broad variety of local government agencies in California, including the laws that govern their operations and the subject matters within their regulatory purview.

The twelfth class is devoted to an analysis of the various forces and constraints that make public policy development increasingly difficult not only in California, but also at the federal level. Many analysts have concluded that current-day policy development is “gridlocked.”  As such, any capital lawyer attempting to make or influence policy at the California or federal levels should have a working knowledge of these forces and constraints, including what has been done or could be done to address them.

The thirteenth class is focused on advocacy, negotiation and compromise in policymaking settings. Advocacy, negotiation and compromise are involved at all levels of the policymaking process, and any capital lawyer attempting to make or influence policy must have a working knowledge of and basic skills in advocacy, negotiation, negotiation techniques, and methods for achieving compromise.

The fourteenth class is the final session devoted to subject matter areas that are especially relevant and important for capital lawyers who work in and around California state government – the State Budget. Students are expected to become familiar with the timeline and process for the State Budget. The objective for students is to gain a basic understanding of the California Budget including timeline, process, organization, historical trends, and how the State Budget affects virtually every state and local agency of government. In addition to reviewing broad issues such as taxes, spending and government services, students also evaluate proposals for reform.


The ICL course is designed to provide exposure to capital lawyering in general while educating students about the levels and branches of our government so that they understand that government may provide an avenue to resolve a client’s legal problem beyond traditional litigation or alternative dispute resolution. Being aware of these different avenues to address client’s issues will be invaluable to students as they enter the legal profession.

The students will know that changing the law may be the best approach to solving a legal issue rather than litigating it. Students will also be aware that executive branch agencies and departments play a critical role in the lives of legal clients as our legal system has become one based more on statutes and regulations than case law to address the roles and responsibilities of individuals and businesses in our state.

Chris Micheli is an attorney and legislative advocate for the Sacramento governmental relations firm of Aprea & Micheli, Inc. He serves as an Adjunct Professor at McGeorge School of Law.


#UC continues to be a sick and brutal place to work if you’re a woman

Screenshot 2018-01-26 at 09.42.08.png

Tyann Sorrell has won a $1.7 million sexual harassment settlement with the University of California.

Sorrell is a reluctant hero of the “Me Too” movement, a soft-spoken and poised mother of five who challenged one of UC’s most hallowed institutions, the UC Berkeley School of Law, and its newly hired leader.

As an executive assistant at the law school, joining in 2012, Sorrell described her initial years as positive and her relationship with then-Dean Christopher Edley as “a wonderful bond.” Everything changed in mid-2014, she said, with the arrival of Sujit Choudhry, a constitutional law scholar who replaced Edley and became Sorrell’s new superior.

He was a sex criminal. The University did nothing.

According to the Sacramento Bee, an internal investigation found that Choudhry had violated university policies with his “unwelcome” kissing, hugging and touching of Sorrell, according to the report, but he was not placed on leave. As discipline, he was given a temporary 10 percent pay cut from his $472,917 annual salary and required to write an apology letter to her.

That means nothing.

Sorrell, who had made numerous internal reports about Choudhry’s behavior, said she was required to use her accrued sick and vacation time to take time off to avoid being around him. In March 2016, she filed a lawsuit in Alameda Superior Court.

Under the settlement reached last year with Sorrell, the UC Regents still denied her claims and allegations.

Besides the $1.7 million settlement, Choudhry struck a separate agreement in which he will pay $50,000 to Sorrell’s attorneys and $50,000 to charities of her choice that deal with sexual harassment and violence. He will voluntarily resign in May as part of his own agreement with the regents.

UC is sick, brutal, and perverse.

#GovernorBrown pushes #deltatunnels and #highspeedrail in final #SOTS speech

Screenshot 2018-01-26 at 09.29.36.pngDespite a pathological obsession with global warming and a white-hot hatred of President Trump, California has prospered over the years despite hapless Republican critics’ warnings of doom and financial collapse.

Gov. Jerry Brown, arguing in his final State of the State speech, defended his embattled high-speed rail and delta tunnel plans which will hopefully emerge as successful projects that greatly benefit the public.

In a wide-ranging speech, the San Francisco Chronicle reports that the 79-year-old governor passionately argued for the unpopular undertakings, saying any big project has setbacks.

Brown told lawmakers at the Capitol that governments have to do what individuals can’t, such as building big infrastructure projects. He reminded lawmakers that often, in these big projects, like the building of the new eastern span of the Bay Bridge — costs escalate — but that this should not deter the state from being bold and moving ahead. Those projects, he said, ultimately serve a public need.

Like with his previous 15 State of the State speeches, Brown highlighted education and criminal justice reform. He touted his Local Control Funding Formula, which gives more money to school districts with low-income, foster and English learner students.

Brown also urged lawmakers to look at the state’s criminal justice system — with its growing prison budget and massive penal code provisions.

Over the years, #white #elite #Leftists have done nothing to help #California’s #Latinos

Screenshot 2018-01-26 at 09.18.13.png
Face it, the people who run California are just racist jerks.

Hollow words about immigration issues dominated a gubernatorial debate focusing on issues affecting the state’s Latinos.

Univision anchors Jorge Ramos and Ilia Calderón moderated the debate asking the six gubernatorial candidates, only one who is Latino, about deportations, farm workers, sanctuary cities, health and education.

Democrats Antonio Villaraigosa, Delaine Eastin, Gavin Newsom and John Chiang; and Republicans John H. Cox and Travis Allen participated in the debate at UCLA’s Royce Hall.

The first question of the debate came from two youths asking about deportations.

Chiang, the state’s treasurer, spoke of his family’s immigrant roots and got the biggest cheer during the first round of questions, saying of Trump: “I think we ought to deport him.”

“I want to make sure we keep our families intact,” he said.

Yet so far, in all his years in office, Chiang has done nothing to help Latinos.

The white elite’s favorite, Gavin Newsom, lieutenant governor and former mayor of San Francisco, often touted the sanctuary status of his city and said he would “commit strongly” to push back against the Trump agenda.

San Francisco police meanwhile continue to brutalize Latinos.

The Republicans offered nothing but racist gibberish.

Antonio Villaraigosa, former mayor of Los Angeles, at times switched from English to Spanish and said he has made a living out of standing up for immigrants.

Eastin received rousing applause from the crowd when she referred to Trump as the “orange-haired misogynist rapist.” Nice, but everyone knows she’s done nothing to help Latinos either.

Psycho sets fire to homeless couple’s tent in Orange County

Screenshot 2018-01-26 at 09.07.38.pngA psycho has been arrested on suspicion of setting fire to a tent occupied by a homeless couple in Orange County.

The Orange County Register, parroting their Police State masters, reports that “James Anthony Lawlor, 35, of Santa Ana was booked into jail on suspicion of arson of an inhabited structure/property; possessing/manufacturing/disposing of material or device for arson; threatening crime with intent to terrorize; attempted murder; arson of property; and assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury.”

The suspect allegedly approached a tent occupied by a man and a woman in a vacant lot. When the man in the tent stuck his head out to talk to the suspect, he was immediately kicked twice on the head.

The suspect then left the scene in a black truck and returned about five minutes later holding a red gasoline container. He poured gasoline on the tent and set it on fire before fleeing south on Bristol Street in the truck, the homeless couple reported to police.

Both victims escaped from the tent.

The suspect will likely be let go and receive a commendation from Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas. As you know from reading CalNews.com, Orange County hates the homeless.

#White #elite #Leftists rally behind #GavinNewsom

Screenshot 2018-01-26 at 08.59.48.png

Former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and her husband, astronaut Mark Kelly, are endorsing Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom for governor.

Giffords and Kelly are the darlings of the white elites who struggle to maintain control of California’s government.

Peter Ambler, the executive director of the Giffords’ political action group, said the couple is endorsing Newsom because of his history of action on progressive causes. Things that have nothing to do with helping the poor, the homeless, the mentally ill or people of color.

“When we were deciding who to support for important offices like who’s going to be the next governor of California, we need somebody who’s going to have the courage to promote evidence-based policies that are actually going to save people’s lives,” Ambler said. “Gavin has illustrated that quality during his entire career.”

Gavin is also a white, elite, Leftist.

#YouTube censoring content to appease advertisers

Screenshot 2018-01-26 at 08.53.06.png

Video producers have long been considered the lifeblood of YouTube’s thriving community of so-called creators.

But that same grassroots community that helped YouTube spark a paradigm shift in media consumption has also become a growing source of risk for the Google-owned property.

Advertisers recoiled during a bruising year for YouTube’s image that started with charges of anti-Semitism against one of the platform’s biggest stars.

It progressed to outrage about disturbing videos disguised as children’s content, and culminated on New Year’s Eve when a YouTube star posted a video of himself discovering a dead body in Japan’s “suicide forest.”

YouTube rolled out a new advertising policy that requires creators to attain more subscribers and more hours of viewership to earn revenue.

The Los Angeles Times reports that now video producers say they’re losing money. Others worry that in YouTube’s bid to appease advertisers, the company may grow even more sensitive to material that the creators consider benign.

YouTube is now at a crossroads, analysts say, torn between harnessing the power of its dedicated army of creators and placating the risk-averse advertisers needed in ever-greater numbers to make the platform profitable.

And it comes as the stakes grow higher for YouTube, which is establishing itself as media company to be reckoned with by investing in original content and offering a streaming alternative to network and cable TV.

YouTube doesn’t care about your rights…just your money.

#TonyRackauckas refuses to prosecute psycho #LAPD thug who shot at 13-year-old

Screenshot 2018-01-26 at 08.43.47.pngJose Hernandez of Anaheim held a sign reading, “No Justice, No Peace” as he stood near where Officer Kevin Ferguson lived in the 1600 block of West Palais Road, which is close to Euclid Street. It was unclear if he still resides in the house.

Hernandez said Ferguson’s firing his weapon during the Feb. 21, 2017 confrontation with a 13-year-old boy was inexcusable.

“We are angry and frustrated and can’t let it happen, “he said. “He should be fired and held accountable (by prosecutors).”

As the protesters walked along Palais Road, brutal Anaheim police officers, who have increased patrols on the street to ensure peace, watched.

The Orange County Register reports that Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas announced there wasn’t enough evidence to file any charge against Ferguson.

The confrontation started when the psycho LAPD thug pulled a gun on teens walking across his front lawn. It gained widespread attention after videos of the incident surfaced.

Enjoy your Police State.

California Ethics Rules for the Lobbying Profession

Screenshot 2017-12-30 at 07.31.01By Tom Hiltachk, Chris Micheli and Charles H. Bell

Lobbying of the government is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment which protects the right to “petition government.” This protection applies to petitioning and lobbying whether the petitioners, including lobbyists, are compensated or not. Lobbying is an honorable profession and, just like in other professions, the vast majority of those involved in the lobbying profession are honest, trustworthy and hardworking individuals who take their role and profession very seriously.

Moreover, lobbyists and the legislators they lobby generally act responsibly and in compliance with applicable state and federal laws. However, because there is so much scrutiny on politics and the legislative process, when something improper does occur, it gets into the public domain quickly. As a result, when there is an alleged violation of the law, it becomes a high profile matter that garners public attention and discussion.

There have been several recent instances of lobbyists being fined by the FPPC for violating California’s Political Reform Act of 1974 (PRA). Generally, these cases deal with violations of the gift limits, failure to timely file, or accurately disclose payments made to a lobbyist. In a notable case, the FPPC fined a lobbyist who also serves as a political consultant and had carried unpaid fees for campaign services for several legislators. The fine was for violating the law prohibiting lobbyists from holding legislators “under personal obligation.”

There are only a few specific laws addressing ethical rules for lobbyists. Beyond those, lobbyists are encouraged to abide by codes of ethics in conducting their activities. The Institute of Governmental Advocates (IGA), to which many Sacramento lobbyists belong, has adopted a Code of Ethics.

In addition, the California Legislature has adopted by rule certain recommended conduct rules for lobbyists. Also of interest is the code of conduct by the federal lobbying trade association. All of these provisions provide substantial ethical guidance for lobbyists who lobby California state government. This article is intended to generally review these codes and laws.

State Lobbying Laws and Their Ethical Proscriptions

The Political Reform Act of 1974, adopted by the voters as Proposition 9, contains the main statutes concerning ethics rules for the lobbying profession in the State of California. The PRA’s key provisions can be found in the California Government Code. The purpose of regulating lobbying activities is set forth in Gov’t Code Section 81002(b), which states:The activities of lobbyists should be regulated and their finances disclosed in order that improper influences will not be directed at public officials.”

The Government Code provides the following main provisions:

Lobbyists cannot make or arrange gifts in excess of $10 per calendar month to any state legislators, most legislative staff members, and state agency officials whom they or their firm lobby.

Effective January 1, 2015, lobbyists and lobbying firms may not pay for expenses of fundraising events held at their home or office for officeholders and candidates they are registered to lobby.

The PRA bans honoraria and limits most gifts to state officials and candidates for state office. As a result, payments cannot be given in consideration for legislators giving speeches, writing articles, or attending gatherings. The general gift limit is currently $460 per calendar year by lobbyist employers.

Be aware that the California Constitution prohibits legislators from receiving earned income from lobbyists.

The most specific lobbyist ethics provisions in the PRA are found in Government Code Section 86205, which provides that no lobbyist or lobbying firm shall:

 (a) Do anything with the purpose of placing any elected state officer, legislative official, agency official, or state candidate under personal obligation to the lobbyist, the lobbying firm, or the lobbyist’s or the firm’s employer.

(b) Deceive or attempt to deceive any elected state officer, legislative official, agency official, or state candidate with regard to any material fact pertinent to any pending or proposed legislative or administrative action.

(c) Cause or influence the introduction of any bill or amendment thereto for the purpose of thereafter being employed to secure its passage or defeat.

(d) Attempt to create a fictitious appearance of public favor or disfavor of any proposed legislative or administrative action or to cause any communication to be sent to any elected state officer, legislative official, agency official, or state candidate in the name of any fictitious person or in the name of any real person, except with the consent of such real person.

(e) Represent falsely, either directly or indirectly, that the lobbyist or the lobbying firm can control the official action of any elected state officer, legislative official, or agency official.

(f) Accept or agree to accept any payment in any way contingent upon the defeat, enactment, or outcome of any proposed legislative or administrative action.

Agency Ex parte Communications

Although not a part of the PRA, other State laws impose ex parte communication restrictions on participants in administrative adjudicatory proceedings and before certain state agencies, such as the Public Utilities Commission. Lobbyists who work on regulatory and adjudicatory matters at state agencies should familiarize themselves with such restrictions on their communications when they communicate with officials of those agencies.

Revolving Door Rules for Public Officials Who Become Lobbyists

Revolving door prohibitions affect public officials who go into lobbying and essentially preclude them from communicating with or appearing before any state agency for which the official worked during the 12 months before leaving state employment. Note that this prohibition does not apply to legislative or judicial branch employees.

Criminal Laws

There are also Constitutional and statutory State and federal criminal laws that affect lobbyists who engage in wrongdoing. State bribery and extortion laws, as well as federal laws on bribery, extortion, mail fraud and wire fraud, and Racketeering Influenced Criminal Organizations (RICO) statutes that are based on violations of state laws, all have been used to prosecute State lobbyists in the past.

For example, Article IV, Section 15, of the California Constitution provides: “A person who seeks to influence the vote or action of a member of the Legislature in the member’s legislative capacity by bribery, promise of reward, intimidation, or other dishonest means, or a member of the Legislature so influenced, is guilty of a felony.”

Finally, although there are no recent examples of its use, violations of the PRA by lobbyists can be prosecuted criminally as misdemeanors and a conviction would disqualify a person from acting as a lobbyist for four years.

Legislative Code of Ethics

The Legislature years ago adopted a Legislative Code of Ethics for Lobbyists. Its provisions are the following:

You may not offer employment to any Member or legislative employee which impairs his or her independence of judgment as to his or her official duties.

You may not offer employment which would require or induce a Member or legislative employee to disclose confidential information.

You may not use or disclose any confidential information obtained from a Member
or legislative employee for personal financial gain or conspire with any person for such purpose.

You may not offer any employment, fee or any other form of compensation to any Member or legislative employee for appearing, agreeing to appear, or taking any other action on behalf of you or a client before any state board of agency.

You may not give or agree to give, directly or indirectly, any compensation, reward, or gift to any Member or legislative employee for any service, advice, assistance, or other matter related to the legislative process.

You may not offer, arrange for, give or agree to give to any Member or legislative employee, any interest, financial or otherwise, direct or indirect, or engage in any business or transaction or professional activity with that member of legislative employee, which is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of his or her official duties and responsibilities.

Any person is prohibited from inducing or seeking to induce any Member or legislative employee into committing a violation of any provision of the Code of Ethics. A violation is  a misdemeanor, but any person who conspires to violate any provision of the Code of Ethics is guilty of a felony.

Institute of Governmental Advocates’ Code of Conduct

In addition, members of the Institute of Governmental Advocates (“IGA”), a professional association for California lobbyists, have agreed to abide by their Code of Conduct, in addition to the ethics rules imposed by law. The following rules comprise the standards of conduct agreed upon by the membership of IGA:

1. Obligations To The Public And Participants Of The Governmental Decision-Making Process:

1.1 All IGA members (“Members”) acknowledge and accept the concept of owing an ethical obligation to the public and participants of the governmental decision-making process.

1.2 A Member owes members of the State Legislature and their staffs, the Governor and members of the Executive Administration, and all governmental employees an obligation of respect as legitimate and proper participants of the governmental decision-making process.

1.3 A Member has a duty to protect confidences when information is given to him or her with an expectation of confidentiality.

1.4 A Member owes participants of the governmental decision-making process an obligation not to mislead them. A Member owes participants of the governmental decision-making process an obligation to correct as quickly as practically possible any incorrect information that the Member provided them.

1.5 A Member owes participants of the governmental decision-making process an obligation to make every reasonable effort to become, and to stay, as informed as possible on the issues and process involved in the Member’s activities.

1.6 A Member owes the public an obligation to make every reasonable effort to promote public understanding of the governmental decision-making process and the proper role of advocacy within that process.

1.7 A Member owes a public officeholder an obligation to inform the officeholder of the Member’s planned opposition to a proposal by the officeholder prior to the Member’s active opposition.

1.8 A Member owes participants of the governmental decision-making process an obligation to inform them of potential adverse effects of proposals to the extent that it can be adverse to known interests of those participants.

1.9 A Member owes the public and participants of the governmental decision-making process an obligation to immediately cease representing a client in a pursued objective and inform the client as quickly as practically possible of the Member’s inability to continue representing the client in the pursued objective if it becomes known to the Member that the client’s effort in the objective is purely harassment, taken out of spite, or otherwise not in good faith, or if the continued representation would violate applicable law or this Code.

2. Obligations To The Client:

2.1 All Members acknowledge that he or she has ethical obligation to their clients.

2.2 A Member owes his client an obligation of understanding, knowledge, competence and continuing effort throughout the process of representation. A Member owes his client an obligation to make every reasonable effort to become, and to stay, as informed as possible on the issues and process involved in the objectives pursued by the Member on his client’s behalf.

2.3 A Member owes his client an obligation that any assurances made by the Member to the client must be regarded as an obligation.

2.4 A Member owes his client an obligation to make all legal and ethical efforts to accomplish an objective pursued by the Member on his client’s behalf. A Member owes his client an obligation to inform the client of the Member’s inability to accomplish a pursued objective as quickly as practically possible after the Member has determined such inability.

2.5 A Member owes his client an obligation to fully inform the client of all material information accumulated and/or known by the Member relating to the objectives pursued by the Member on his client’s behalf. A Member may also owe another party an obligation to protect such material information from the client as confidential. In such a case, the Member must exercise great care and wisdom in properly dealing with the situation and parties to whom the obligations are due.

2.6 A Member owes his client an obligation not to mislead the client. A Member owes his client an obligation to correct as quickly as practically possible any incorrect information that the Member has provided the client.

2.7 A Member owes his client an obligation to advise and counsel the client as to the proper course of conduct upon knowledge and/or suspicion of any contemplated action by the client related to the objectives pursued by the Member on his client’s behalf which is contrary to applicable law, this Code, or the best interests of the client.

2.8 A Member owes his client an obligation not to pursue an objective if the Member’s attitude, opinion or another obligation interferes with the duties to be assumed by the Member within the scope of the pursuit. A Member owes his client an obligation to immediately cease pursuing an objective on his client’s behalf and inform the client as quickly as practically possible of the Member’s inability to continue pursuing the objective if the Member’s attitude, opinion, or another obligation interferes with the duties assumed by the Member within the scope of the pursuit.

2.9 A Member owes his client an obligation to avoid known or anticipated conflicts of interest arising from an inconsistent economic interest between the client and another client, the Member, an associate of the Member, a participant in a joint venture with the Member, or other persons or interests which share in any material way in the revenues of the Member. A Member owes his client an obligation to immediately inform the client of the existence or appearance of any such known or anticipated conflict. A Member owes his client an obligation to sever the relationship with the client if the existence or appearance of such a known or anticipated conflict between the client and the Member, an associate of the Member, a participant in a joint venture with the Member, or other persons or interests which share in any material way in the revenues of the Member cannot be resolved between the conflicted parties. A Member owes his client an obligation to sever subsequently-formed relationships with other clients who have or appear to have such a known or anticipated conflict with the client if the conflict cannot be resolved between the conflicted parties.

2.10 A Member owes his client an obligation to immediately cease pursuing an objective on his client’s behalf and inform the client as quickly as practically possible of the Member’s inability to continue pursuing the objective on his client’s behalf if a physical, mental, or similar condition causes the Member to be unable to pursue the objective in an effective manner.

2.11 A Member owes his client an obligation not to charge fees incommensurate with the objectives pursued by the Member. A Member owes his client an obligation to return any charged fees incommensurate with the objectives pursued by the Member, unless the client has conducted himself in a manner which would render such a return of fees an inequity. A Member owes his client an obligation to return any charged fees unearned by the Member upon severing the relationship with the client, except fees charged solely for the purpose of insuring the availability of the Member.

2.12 A Member owes his client an obligation to include the subject of expenses in any contractual agreement between the Member and the client. A Member owes his client an obligation to only charge those expenditures made on behalf of the client and in furtherance of the objective pursued by the Member on his client’s behalf, unless expressly agreed upon by the client to the contrary in the contractual agreement.

2.13 A Member owes his client an obligation to communicate to the client as quickly as practically possible any significant offers of compromise or settlement. A Member owes his client an obligation to decide within the understanding of the effort any significant offers of compromise or settlement on his client’s behalf if it is practically impossible to timely communicate the offer to the client; and thereafter as quickly as practically possible communicate with the client the Member’s decision.

3. Obligations To Other Governmental Advocates:

3.1 All Members acknowledge and accept the concept of owing an ethical obligation to each other, and all other lobbyists.

3.2 A Member owes other lobbyists an obligation to inform a fellow lobbyist if the Member is contacted by a potential client, and the Member knows, or should know, that the potential client is represented by the other lobbyist; and advise the potential client that the matter of potential employment should not be discussed without either involving the other lobbyist or severing that pre-existing relationship.

3.3 A Member owes other lobbyists an obligation not to mislead them if the Member chooses to provide them information. A Member owes other lobbyists an obligation to correct as quickly as practically possible any incorrect information that the Member has provided them.

3.4 A Member owes other lobbyists an obligation to inform any other lobbyist with whom the Member is in communication on a pursued objective on his client’s behalf as to the specific interest the Member represents. A Member owes other lobbyists an obligation to clarify to any other lobbyist with whom the Member is in communication on a pursued objective on his client’s behalf as to the specific interest the Member represents if the Member makes an appearance representing an interest other than the interest of which the Member originally apprised the other governmental member.

3.5 A Member owes other lobbyists an obligation to respect the positions advocated by other lobbyists, even those in conflict with the positions of the Member’s client.

3.6 A Member owes other lobbyists an obligation to avoid acts or utterances which intentionally may have adverse economic effects upon the business of another governmental advocate.

3.7 A Member owes other lobbyists an obligation to inform a lobbyist of his or her client’s interest on a pursued objective when his client’s interest conflicts with the position advocated by the other governmental advocate and such communication will not compromise the client’s interest.

The foregoing rules are a statement by IGA regarding the standards of conduct for lobbyists mutually agreed upon by the membership. These rules reflect a general consensus of what the public, participants of the governmental decision-making process, clients, Members, and other lobbyists expect of IGA members in pursuing the objectives of their clients in the legislative and regulatory arenas. In general, these rules abide by the venerable maxim that you should deal with others as you would have them deal with you.

These statutes, enforceable by civil and criminal laws, combined with the associational ethical guidelines set forth above, provide a web of rules that govern lobbyists in conducting their professional work and activities. Compliance not only is essential to stay out of trouble, but also fundamentally demonstrates respect to fellow lobbyists, their clients, the elected and appointed officials they lobby, and the institutions of State government in which they operate.

Thomas W. Hiltachk is the Managing Partner of Bell, McAndrews & Hiltachk, a law firm specializing in political law. Chris Micheli is a Principal with the lobbying firm of Aprea & Micheli, Inc. Charles H. Bell is the Senior Partner of Bell, McAndrews & Hiltachk. Hiltachk serves as General Counsel to the IGA. Micheli is a member of the IGA Board of Directors.

Rich white people in #LagunaBeach sue the #FAA

Screenshot 2018-01-24 at 07.25.33As if being rich, white, and on the beach wasn’t good enough for the residents of Laguan Beach, the Orange County Register reports that Laguna Beach city officials have reached an agreement with the Federal Aviation Administration that should keep low-altitude planes and their noise away from town.

The agreement with the FAA follows a lawsuit filed by the Laguna Beach City Council in 2016 challenging the accuracy and efficacy of the FAA’s environmental assessment of a proposal to reroute flights at John Wayne and 20 other Southern California airports.

Departure procedures at John Wayne now will call for aircraft to cross the coast south of Laguna Beach where they must be at an altitude of more than 10,000 feet, thereby decreasing noise impact. Planes that follow the flight path must have the appropriate equipment and pilots the necessary training.

The city and the FAA also agreed to cooperate on possible modifications to the commercial jet approach to JWA during Santa Ana wind conditions — when flight patterns are altered — so that Laguna Beach residents experience as little noise as possible. A consultant is expected to begin working on these modifications next month.

Michele Monda, who for two years has been battling the FAA over these issues, said Tuesday’s announcement may have eased the burden for most of Laguna but doesn’t help her or her neighbors in South Laguna.

Rich white people don’t like being disturbed.

Disgraced and embarrassed, the #FBI continues to roil in controversy

Screenshot 2018-01-24 at 07.14.30A humiliated FBI Director Christopher Wray is making changes to his senior leadership team, as President Donald Trump has continued to attack the bureau for blatant biases against him.

Expect more heads to roll at the disgraced bureau.

Officials said Tuesday that Wray, who started the job in August, is replacing two top aides who were promoted into their roles by his predecessor James Comey.

The Sacramento Bee reports that the changes are notable amid President Trump’s public pressure on Wray to get rid of officials who were confidantes of Comey, and who worked tirelessly to help Hillary Clinton win the 2016 election.

President Trump’s blistering attacks on the FBI have proven a tough challenge for Wray in his first months on the job as he tries to make changes while maintaining public confidence and restoring bureau morale.

Wray, a Trump nominee, has faced relentless criticism from Republicans over perceived political bias in special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe of possible Trump campaign ties to Russia during the 2016 presidential election, as well as in the handling a year earlier of an FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server, which ended without criminal charges.

Trump has been especially critical of disgraced Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who is being forced to retire from the bureau in March. McCabe’s supervision of the Clinton’s email investigation came under scrutiny because his wife’s Virginia Senate campaign received contributions from Clinton ally Terry McAuliffe’s political action committee.

The FBI is nothing more than a criminal enterprise. It must be fixed.

Will Governor Brown allow feckless #UC regents to jack up tuition again?

Screenshot 2018-01-24 at 07.09.57Greedy University of California regents face a showdown with Gov. Jerry Brown as they prepare to vote on a plan to raise tuition and student services fees for the next academic year.

The Los Angeles Times says the proposed increase would amount to 2.7% — or $342 for state students.

Brown opposes any increase, though his 2018-19 budget proposal would give the 10-campus public research university system $34 million less than UC officials expected. In recent years, he has increased UC’s base budget by 4%. This year he is suggesting 3%.

He recently said UC officials must live within their means, cut costs and “more creatively engage in the process of making education more affordable.”

Feckless George Kieffer, chairman of the UC Board of Regents, said the governor’s proposed funding would not even keep up with inflation. He said in an interview that UC will need to raise more money to protect the university’s vaunted quality while it continues to find ways to cut costs.

If regents vote to increase tuition despite Brown’s opposition, the governor could reduce UC’s state funding when he revises his budget plan in May.

Brutal Los Angeles County Sheriff’s deputy still hasn’t been fired

Screenshot 2018-01-24 at 07.03.00.pngThe Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department has completed an internal investigation into a deputy who was seen in a video declaring his intention to ignore a call about a shooting, but it has not determined if he will be punished for the incident, an official said.

The deputy, Jeremy Joseph Fennell, remains on paid leave pending a separate probe into allegations that he was violent with an ex-girlfiend.

The Los Angeles Times says Fennell, 27, was sitting in his patrol car in uniform when he recorded a video message to his ex-girlfriend, telling her he wanted her attention so badly that he would not respond to an incoming radio call about a possible gunshot victim.

After the woman published the video on YouTube last February, the department said an internal investigation into the incident was underway. The review was completed on Jan. 10, but a decision about whether to discipline Fennell has not been made.

Sheriff Jim McDonnell has previously said the deputy’s actions were disturbing and at odds with department values. However McDonnell obviously doesn’t see the need to move quickly to resolve the situation.

Expect this brutal psycho to stay on the job. It’s how the Police State rolls.

#ElCajon effort to starve the homeless fails

Screenshot 2018-01-24 at 06.59.14.pngA humiliated city of El Cajon, which found itself under an international spotlight because of its ban on feeding the homeless, lifted the temporary order on Tuesday.

The San Diego Union-Tribune reports that city officials enacted the ban on sharing food in city parks in October as a safety measure after the San Diego County Board of Supervisors declared the region’s growing hepatitis A outbreak a public health emergency.

As the story goes, on Tuesday, the county ended its health emergency declaration and the city of El Cajon followed suit. Wrong, El Cajon tried to starve the homeless in a brutal attempt to get them to leave the city. The hideous plan failed.

Critics called El Cajon’s ban a punitive measure meant to dehumanize and criminalize the homeless and in protest staged several food-sharing events at one of the city’s most popular parks, Wells Park near the downtown hub.

International media, including the BBC, picked up on the ban after volunteers distributing food earlier this month were arrested. It also attracted plenty of national attention, much of it unflattering, to the East County city of nearly 100,000.


#Marijuana law targets immigrants for harassment, arrest, deportation

Screenshot 2018-01-24 at 06.48.02.pngHere’s another new way the Police State can jerk around immigrants.

The Mercury News reports that anyone who is not a U.S. citizen should use extreme caution before partaking in California’s newest legal recreational activity because it could have serious immigration consequences.

Marijuana is still illegal at the federal level, and it doesn’t take a conviction for using it to affect a non-citizen’s future. If a port official finds out that someone entering the U.S. with a visa has used the drug, the official can ban the person from the country for life.

That means if a green card holder is selected for a search after traveling outside the U.S. for vacation and officials find a receipt from a dispensary, cellphone or social media photos at a pot shop, or anything else to suggest the immigrant has consumed marijuana, that person can be kicked out of the U.S. forever.

San Francisco insults Italian-Americans, boots #ColumbusDay

Screenshot 2018-01-24 at 06.34.19Despite opposition from Italian-Americans, the Board of Supervisors voted Tuesday to replace Columbus Day with Indigenous Peoples Day — advancing a nationwide movement to cease honoring the Genoa explorer and instead the victims of colonization.

The Board of Supervisors voted 10 to 1 to amend the administrative code “to declare the second Monday in October to be Indigenous Peoples Day.”

The legislation was introduced by Supervisor Malia Cohen as part of a nationwide movement by Native American activists to do away with the federal holiday, which began in 1937. They argue it is wrong to celebrate a day named after the white Italian explorer since the land he discovered was already inhabited, and it marked the start of colonization that decimated their ancestors.

Italian-Americans, who have long celebrated their heritage on that day, opposed the legislation.

The Italian Athletic Club, the Italian Cathedral of the West, Sts. Peter and Paul Church, the sponsors of the Italian American Heritage Parade and Italian Community Services were excluded from the process until representatives of these groups were first phoned by the San Francisco Examiner.


Brutal #LAPD crackdown on code-of-conduct violations on trains

Screenshot 2018-01-24 at 06.28.21.pngThe Los Angeles Police Department has launched a use-of-force investigation into a videotaped incident in which a sergeant pulled a young woman from a Metro subway train and then detained her because she refused to take her foot off a seat, according to the video and authorities.

The Los Angeles Times reports that the department began its investigation Monday after receiving a complaint, Deputy Chief Bob Green said. Two women were detained in the incident, which occurred at the Westlake/MacArthur Park station.

The confrontation began when the sergeant approached a young woman about having her foot up on a seat.

The sergeant told her to get off the train. After she refused, he grabbed her arm and pulled her off as she attempted to cling to a railing. She complained that the lawman wasn’t allowing her to get her cellphone and other belongings.

Once off the train, the sergeant held her arms behind her back. People in the station gathered around, and an onlooker filmed the entire encounter.

“Come on, you think you can do this?” a woman shouted at the sergeant.

“Yeah, I can,” he replied.

When people protested, saying the woman was only 18, he responded, “I don’t care.”

The sergeant called for backup, and at least six additional officers arrived.

When asked about the incident at an unrelated event in North Hollywood on Tuesday evening, Mayor Eric Garcetti defended the police.

California mayors head to D.C. to bleat about President #Trump, immigration

Screenshot 2018-01-24 at 06.22.58.png

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti is scheduled to be in Washington, D.C., today for the three-day U.S. Conference of Mayors’ 86th Annual Winter Meeting, where he will preside over discussions on immigration and infrastructure.

Expect a lot of bleating and hand-wringing at the event by white elite mayors pretending to like immigrants. Of course they all hate President Trump and the deplorables who elected him.

Garcetti will participate in a news conference in Washington this morning.

Anaheim Mayor Tom Tait, a co-chair of the conference’s Immigration Reform Task Force, is also a moderator of the panel discussion on immigration.

The Daily News reports that nearly 250 mayors of cities with populations of 30,000 or more are set to attend the meeting, which will also include sessions on the opioid crisis, disaster preparedness and recovery, and the economic future of cities.

California tech companies busted for doing crimes in the E.U.

Screenshot 2018-01-24 at 06.14.33.pngEuropean anti-monopoly regulators fined Qualcomm $1.23 billion for making payments to Apple in exchange for exclusively using Qualcomm smartphone radio chips in iPhones between 2011 and 2016.

Qualcomm said it disagrees with the decision and will immediately appeal to the General Court of the European Union.

The large fine comes as Qualcomm is embroiled in a fierce legal battle with Apple and global antitrust regulators over its business practices surrounding patent licensing.

According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, Qualcomm already has been fined by regulators in China, South Korea and Taiwan, and it’s facing a lawsuit from the U.S. Federal Trade Commission.

The European Commission ruled that Qualcomm abused its market dominance in 4G LTE baseband chips – which link smartphones to cellular networks. Qualcomm’s 4G LTE chip were exclusively used in iPhone 4 through iPhone 6 models.

“Qualcomm paid billions of U.S. dollars to a key customer, Apple, so that it would not buy from rivals,” said European Union Commissioner Margrethe Vestager in a statement.

“These payments were not just reductions in price – they were made on the condition that Apple would exclusively use Qualcomm’s baseband chipsets in all its iPhones and iPads.”