Monday, August 3, 2020, 10:10 am | Randy Thomasson
“Can’t you cut the waste instead?”
They’ve already hurt you, and intend to hurt you more.
You already know California state government has made you poorer. But did you know that the California Legislature has been virtually controlled by Democrats for the last 60 years? And that Democrats control three-quarters of both the State Assembly and State Senate?
This year, your Democrat-controlled state government is destroying small businesses and family livelihoods with their extremely harmful lockdown. And now, they’re coming in for the kill with AB 1253 to directly raise income taxes without a vote of the people.
As a native Californian, I can’t remember anything like this. But the over-confident, thieving Democrat politicians are drunk with power. That’s why they’re daring to massively raise taxes by government fiat, not letting the voters decide, and doing this damage the same year that state government has financially injured Californians, and in an election year too.
AB 1253 would massively raise taxes on the rich, as if California taxes punishing success weren’t already too high. As California Political Reviewexplains:
AB 1253 would add Revenue and Taxation Code Section 17044 to create three new tax rates for amounts of income above specified thresholds. As a tax levy, it would take effect immediately upon the Governor’s signature and chaptering by the Secretary of State. The bill would apply retroactively to tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2020. As a tax increase measure, it would require a 2/3 vote of both houses of the Legislature pursuant to Article XIIIA, Section 3 of the California Constitution.
Specifically, AB 1253 would add a new section to the Revenue and Taxation Code to provide the following three higher tax rates (in addition to the existing ones):
A 1% tax on income above $1 million, but not over $2 million A 3% tax on income over $2 million, but not over $5 million A 3.5% tax on income over $5 million
This would make the state with the highest income taxes even more infamous about taking money from the responsible to give to the irresponsible.
Under AB 1253, the most successful earners would see their state income tax rate jump from 13.3% to 16.8%. Making things worse, this tax would be retroactive to January 2020!
Now before you breathe a sigh of relief and think, “I’m glad my taxes won’t go up — this is only a tax on the rich,” think again. Because the power to tax is the power to destroy. Taxing one group always has intended consequences, hurting other people too.
Here are four ways AB 1253’s huge new tax on the rich would hurt everybody:
Million-dollar earners will move out of state. We’ve seen this before and we’ll see it again. The wealthy already have the highest mobility in society with the greatest number of options of where to live. Expect to see an exodus of wealthy Californians, even if only to the Nevada side of Lake Tahoe. That means the ruling Democrats will be more likely to raise taxes on lower earners instead. Because water always finds its way to the lowest level, doesn’t it?
In turn, you’ll experience inflation. Million-dollar earners that stay in California are smart enough not to lose money. So, because most of them own businesses, they’ll look for more ways to get more money from their customers. This means higher prices for us all. Ready to suffer more?
It’ll be easier for the ruling Democrats to directly raise taxes on you later. By accepting a huge tax hike on one “class” of Californians, then by reelecting the tax-hikers, we’re telling them we accept regular tax increases as “normal.” This will throw gasoline on the fire for more sales tax hikes, car tax hikes, and income tax hikes creeping into more tax brackets. Remember, to be a good Democrat politician today, you have to think other people’s money is yours. AB 1253 is training them to do that ever so much more so to you and your family.
AB 1253’s huge tax hike hides all the wasteful spending. Not once will the ruling Democrats say publicly there’s any waste to slash. They won’t admit there’s a mountain of waste, fraud, and abuse throughout California state government. Making it easy for them to deceive and hide waste is 60+ years of Democrats controlling the State Legislature, and no independent, out-of-state, Texas-style audit. And this year, in the midst of the destructive lockdown of Gavin Newsom and the Democrats, government workers continue to be paid, and government pensions continue to rise. AB 1253 is the equivalent of a bad employee — who’s been hurting your customers, wasting your resources, and not caring to do his job — coming to you and demanding a raise. Don’t give the ruling Democrats a raise — fire them!
TAKE ACTION NOW: Please contact your own state assemblymember and state senator, as well as Governor Gavin Newsom. Tell them, “Oppose AB 1253. No new taxes!” Enter your voter registration address here to reveal the websites of your state assemblymember and state senator. Click their links to see the telephone numbers and web contact forms for each. To contact Governor Newsom, click here.
What do you get with California’s recently-concluded primary election? A chance to “change some faces” in Sacramento. In other words, this 2020 election year, you can help improve the State Legislature!
SaveCalifornia.com has crunched the numbers for you. Although the final vote tallies are still subject to change, here’s what I confidently think you can be glad or sad about:
1. Potential of pro-family conservatives to hold or gain seats in the State Legislature:
State Senate:
SD 5 in San Joaquin County, with some overlap with Stanislaus and Sacramento counties: This contest has the best chance of taking back a Senate seat from the ruling Democrats. Stalwart conservative Jim Ridenour powered into 2nd place to make the general election a real choice between a constitutional Republican and an unconstitutional “LGBTQIA+” Democrat. Add up the votes for 3 Republican candidates, and Republicans received more than the 2 Democrat candidates.
SD 19 in Santa Barbara and Ventura counties: Could this Central Coast senate seat be won by a conservative Republican? If pro-family congressional candidate Andy Caldwell brings out more Republican voters, the campaign of state senate Republican candidate Gary Michaels could benefit. But Michaels would have to successfully court independents to improve his numbers.
SD 23 in San Bernardino and Riverside counties: This district is currently represented by one of the best pro-family state senators, Mike Morrell, who’s termed out of office. If Republican Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh holds this seat for Republicans, it will disappoint Democrat strategists, who want this district as their own. In the primary election, Republican candidates earned 55% support over the Democrats.
SD 28 covering most of Riverside County: Family-values representation could get better with pro-family champion Melissa Melendez taking the lioness’s share of the primary election’s votes to replace half-conservative Jeff Stone, who resigned last fall to work for the Trump Administration. If the voters for the other Republican in the race, John Schwab (13.4%), add their votes to Melendez’s supporters (41.5%), this seat has a good chance of becoming reliably more pro-family. Because of Stone’s resignation, this district is on a special election calendar. So the run-off between Melendez and whatever Democrat opponent eventually wins second place in the primary is coming soon, on May 12.
State Assembly:
AD 8 covering the Sacramento County communities of Citrus Heights, Fair Oaks, Carmichael, Rancho Cordova, and Vineyard: Incumbent Democrat Ken Cooley (who votes for Democrat bills nearly all the time) got a surprise in the primary election when Republican newcomer Cathy Cook came within 6,000 votes. If she mounts a real campaign exposing Cooley’s unpopular votes, this district could become competitive.
AD 32 covering Kings County and much of Kern County: This district wrinkles its nose at the values of San Francisco and West Hollywood, but their Democrat assemblyman, Rudy Salas, votes against his district values nearly all the time. But this primary election, Republican gun shop owner Todd Cotta is mounting a serious challenge, and scored within 2,000 votes.
AD 33 in the High Desert from the Victor Valley to the Nevada and Arizona borders: This district’s probably getting morally better with Thurston “Smitty” Smith being the top vote-getter in the primary election. Smith says he’s “a devout family man and Christian,” taxpayer advocate, and NRA member. Sounds like he wouldn’t vote to force schools to retroactive change the sex of a student on official records, like current Republican Assemblyman Jay Obernolte did. In November, Smith will face off with fellow Republican Rick Herrick of Big Bear Lake.
AD 38 in Simi Valley, Santa Clarita, Newhall: This seat is open, since liberal Democrat Christy Smith is running to fill the seat of her good friend, bisexuality activist Katie Hill. But a Republican will win here, since Republicans Suzette Valladares and Lucie Volotzky are the two top vote-getters. Just do your homework to determine which one is really pro-family, conservative, and constitutional.
AD 42 in Beaumont, Palm Springs, La Quinta, Yucca Valley, and Twentynine Palms: Former RINO, now independent, Chad Mayes has voted several times for “LGBTQIA+” bills. And this year, as the current official holder, he has a conservative Republican challenger going into November. The primary election numbers are fairly close. Andrew Kotyuk says he’s a “conservative Republican,” has memberships with the NRA and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, and is thought to be pro-life.
AD 60 in Corona, El Serrito, Norco, Eastvale, and Mira Loma: Republican Chris Raahauge made a good showing here, within 1,000 votes of the Democrat incumbent, liberal “LGBTQIA+” lesbian Sabrina Cervantes, who’s “married” to another woman. Four years ago, this was a solid Republican district.
AD 65 in Fullerton, Anaheim, Buena Park, Cypress, Stanton in north Orange County: Will conservative Republican Cynthia Thacker beat incumbent liberal Democrat Sharon Quirk-Silva in November? Thacker got nearly 10,000 votes less than Quirk-Silva, but if she mounts a real campaign and fights hard, she might get in striking distance.
AD 66 in Torrance, Gardena, Lomita, Manhattan Beach, Hermosa Beach, Redondo Beach, and the Palos Verdes peninsula: It’s going to be interesting to see how Arthur Schaper exposes the very liberal Democrat Al Muratsuchi. While a long-shot to win, Schaper is a committed, creative, Christian activist, and we wouldn’t be surprised if he could educate many voters to turn about Muratsuchi’s voting record.
AD 74 in Huntington Beach, Newport Beach, Laguna Beach, and Irvine: Will this long-time Republican seat be recovered in 2020? In the March 3 primary election, the two Republican challengers earned nearly 50% of the vote together. In November, Diane Dixon will face off with Democrat incumbent Cottie Petrie-Norris.
AD 76 in the north San Diego County cities of Oceanside, Carlsbad, Vista, and Encinitas: In this former Republican district, Republican Melanie Burkholder, who is said to be pro-life, is about 16,000 votes behind the incumbent Democrat, Tasha Boerner Horvath. Burkholder’s website says, “Melanie is active in our community, a dedicated volunteer at her church, a member of the Carlsbad Republican Women Federated…” Her Issues page talks about, “When government over-reaches it infringes on our parental rights, our property rights…” Horvath could be toppled if Burkholder is able to rally local churches.
AD 77 in north San Diego city and county communities of Clairemont, Miramar, Mira Mesa, Scripps Ranch, Poway, Rancho Penasquitos, Rancho Bernardo, and Rancho Santa Fe: The current seat-holder, Brian Maienschein, was the most liberal Republican in the State Assembly before becoming a Democrat in 2019. Because this district was sold one thing and got another in 2018, Maienschein’s conservative Republican challenger June Cutter might take this Republican district back for Republicans. In the primary election, Cutter came in second by nearly 20,000 votes less than Maineschein, but she has several months to try to reach Republican and independent voters.
2. Republicans try to “clean house”
AD 72 in the Orange County cities of Westminster, Garden Grove, Seal Beach, Fountain Valley, and Huntington Beach: Republican Assemblyman Tyler Diep being challenged by former state senator Janet Nguyen (pronounced “win”) received more than 9,000 votes more than Diep, who’s narrowly in second, and might still lose to a Democrat challenger. Nguyen and the county Republican party are angry with Diep for being the only GOP vote for AB 5 to force most independent contractors to become employees.
AD 73 in the south Orange County communities of Trabuco Canyon, Coto De Caza, Mission Viejo, Laguna Niguel, Ladera Ranch, Dana Point, and San Clemente: Current Republican Assemblyman William Brough has been rejected for re-election after being opposed by the county Republican party and conservative groups due to allegations that Brough committed sexual and financial misdeeds. In the November runoff are conservative Republican Laurie Davies (who, as a city councilwoman, has stood against union bosses) versus homosexual activist Democrat Scott Rhinehart.
3. Other outcomes to be happy or sad about
CD 50 covering most of the inland potion of middle and northern San Diego County: Carl DeMaio, a homosexual activist who’s “married” to another man, was prevented from advancing to the runoff for this conservative congressional seat when he got third place.
SD 13 between San Jose and San Francisco: in this Democrat stronghold, former state assemblywoman Sally Lieber, who was notorious for trying to label good parents as criminal “child abusers” because they occasionally spanked their children for rebellion, apparently will not make the top two.
SD 17 on California’s Central Coast between San Jose and Santa Maria: Democrat homosexual activist John Laird could become a state senator, making it 3 homosexual activists state senators in the Democratic caucus. Laird, who authored several “LGBTQIA+” bills when he was in the State Assembly, came in first place.
CD 8 blanketing most of San Bernardino County and all of Inyo and Mono counties: Many pro-family Californians remember Tim Donnelly for his moral, social, fiscal patriotism in the State Assembly and when he ran for governor in 2014. Yet, when outgoing and pro-transsexuality U.S. Representative Republican Paul Cook, U.S. House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy, and President Donald Trump endorsed pro-transsexuality Assemblyman Jay Obernolte, that kept Donnelly, a definite moral threat to the establishment, in third place and out of the general election running for this congressional seat.
ACTION: Please contact the candidate of your choice and ask how you can help. For wherever you apply your love and values, you can be an overcomer and bear fruit!
Consider well the important trust . . . which God . . . [has] put into your hands. . . . To God and posterity you are accountable for [your rights and your rulers]. . . . Let not your children have reason to curse you for giving up those rights and prostrating those institutions which your fathers delivered to you. . . . [L]ook well to the characters and qualifications of those you elect and raise to office and places of trust. . . . Think not that your interests will be safe in the hands of the weak and ignorant; or faithfully managed by the impious, the dissolute and the immoral. Think not that men who acknowledge not the providence of God nor regard His laws will be uncorrupt in office, firm in defense of the righteous cause against the oppressor, or resolutly oppose the torrent of iniquity. . . . Watch over your liberties and privileges – civil and religious – with a careful eye. 1803 election sermon of Pastor Matthias Burnett of Hanford, Connecticut
Monday, December 16, 2019, 7:35 am | Randy Thomasson
In our increasingly brutal and non-Christian culture, Californians who want “life insurance” for themselves and their family members often own a gun or guns.
And, of course, guns need bullets and shotguns need shells in order to function for their loving purpose of defending and saving innocent lives. But protecting yourself, your family, and other innocent people is getting harder because of bad politicians and foolish voters.
Remember, our Democrat Governor has already sent the message that you can get away with murder and he’s even let convicted murderers go loose. What’s more, California voters didn’t think critically about how approving Proposition 47 in 2014 and other soft-on-crime measures endanger you, your family, and your neighbors, by increasing thefts, robberies, assaults, rapes, and murders.
I recently learned that 62,000 otherwise law-abiding Californians have been denied bullets and shotgun shells. This includes members of law enforcement, who would never officially be labeled a “prohibited person” who can’t legally possess ammunition. These 62,000 “safe” folks were prohibited from buying between July and November this year.
These denials of Californians’ Second Amendment rights are happening because of Proposition 63 in 2016. Multi-million-dollar deception from Prop. 63 sponsors Gavin Newsom and the California Democratic Party resulted in foolish voters passing this scheme to require background checks and registration for ammunition, among other restrictions.
And unless and until a constitutional lawsuit gets this struck down in the federal courts, Californians interested in basic safety for themselves and their families will suffer from uncomfortable bureaucratic hurdles, unjust delays, higher expenses, and lack of privacy.
Here’s the Rhode lawsuit and other Second Amendment cases of which reasonable Californians hope will eventually free up their ammunition purchases again:
“The lawsuit, titled Rhode v. Becerra, challenges California’s new ammunition sales restrictions as a violation of the Second Amendment and Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.
“The filing of Rhode marks the fourth lawsuit filed by CRPA attorneys with support from the NRA challenging the provisions of Proposition 63 and the other ‘Gunmageddon’ bills. Once such lawsuit, titled Duncan v. Becerra, has already succeeded in obtaining an important injunction against Proposition 63’s ban on the possession of magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds. The other two lawsuits, titled Rupp v. Becerra and Villanueva v. Becerra (both of which challenge California’s ‘assault weapon’ restrictions and registration requirements), are also seeking injunctions while those lawsuits are pending.” Source
So, until relief is granted, here’s how to buy ammo in California:
1. You can no longer buy ammunition out of state and bring it back yourself or have a seller ship it to you.
2. You can buy online, but your ammunition must be shipped to a licensed vendor in California, who will charge you a processing fee of around $20:
“To dispel the confusion, yes, ammunition can still be bought online or through a catalog. However, you can’t have ammunition sent directly to your residence. Furthermore, your packages must be shipped first to a licensed ammunition vendor who must then charge you a processing fee.” Source
3. When buying at a store or online, you must pay for a $1 instant background check. If your name and address on file with the Department of Justice matches your California Drivers License name and address, then you can buy. Here’s a step-by-step guide.
If you pass the $1 background check, you can buy ammunition right there at the store counter, yet the sale will now be accompanied by paperwork listing who you are, what you bought, how much you bought, the salesman’s name, etc. This amounts to “backdoor registration” on ammunition sales, since the government will now know what you own and how much you own (it’s not known how long the State will hold onto your information).
4. Unfortunately, you’ll fail your instant $1 background check if your DL name and address doesn’t match your DOJ registration, or if you don’t have already have a firearm registered in your name with DOJ. If denied, you’ll pay $19 for a deeper DOJ background check that will further invade your privacy and could take a couple months to conditionally pass you. See the information you must provide.
“The DOJ says in court filing more than 19,000 ammunition buyers weren’t in the database at all, so they were denied when they went to buy ammo. More than 22,000 were rejected because of address mismatches, many of them due to having moved since they last bought a gun. Nearly 8,000 people had names in the state’s gun registry that didn’t match their identification, according to the Department of Justice filing.”Source
5. Stop and realize that California’s Democrat-controlled government wants your private information so they can send police to take your gun away if you’re considered a threat:
Under the state’s “red flag” laws, Californians can petition a court to have police remove firearms from those threatening to harm themselves or others. The law was recently expanded to allow teachers, employers and coworkers to seek the temporary removal of firearms from the homes of people making threats.
“Because of this DOJ database, (it) allows law enforcement to know that that person has arms, to know what kind of arms they have and to know where they reside, so they can ensure that the people who have been subject to threats are safe and that guns are removed from that dangerous situation,” he said. Source
6. To avoid the intensive and lengthy $19 background check that locks your details into the state database, an expert gun shop manager told me he would avoid this process by simply buying a new firearm. This way, he said, you’re only updating your address.
He also said to stop by an expert shop anywhere in California to ask about the process, since if you have an existing firearm that you bought years ago, and have since moved, you can verbally provide the gun store with a California address where your firearm was and is registered with the state.
Either way, this automated online update can take up to 48 hours. He said if you’re declaring an existing firearm already registered with the State, you must provide your old address, your new address, and your gun information, including its serial number.
7. The gun store expert I talked with also told me that if I bought a handgun before 1991, I wouldn’t have to declare my purchase at all, since there were no California handgun registrations required before that year. He also said that registrations for handguns purchased between 1991 and 1996 have not necessarily been retained by the State, and that 2012 was the first year the state required registration for long guns.
So there you have it. My next ammunition purchase, I will do my homework in advance and work with a gun store that I trust. But if I were low on ammo, I would quickly assemble any needed paperwork, and talk with an expert at my first opportunity. Lastly, I’d compare prices for online suppliers that still ship ammunition to California, like this one does.
However, if you want to prevent theft, avoid a home-invasion robbery, and not have to confront someone breaking in, the very first thing I recommend you do is harden your doors and windows. See this product, which will make your doors virtually kick-proof.
In closing, the Democrat politicians’ attack upon guns and ammunition is wrong-headed. Crimes committed with guns are a sin problem, and if guns are outlawed, outlaws will still have guns. And if outlaws couldn’t get guns, they’d hurt or murder others with sharp or heavy instruments (as they’ve done through the centuries).
A culture that doesn’t acknowledge sin commits even more sin and crimes, and, in its denial, psychologically projects upon guns and gun owners the blame for the sins of individual criminals. Yet reasonable people should reject these anti-gun lies and protect their families by fully exercising their Second Amendment rights.
The first step in stopping mass shooters is a realization among people that nobody in government is going to get it done. A realization that includes an understanding of what it’s come down to. Hard to digest for Christians, but the realization that we have to be the protectors that this country needs. Not just spiritually. But physically, should it be necessary. And that means being ready to do whatever is necessary should a shooting breakout where we are. The Christian Gun Owner Role In Stopping Mass Shooters
RSS 2.0 Feed