Could Newsom have cleaned up homeless encampments? And will
he?
When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled June 28 that banning homeless encampments is NOT cruel and unusual punishment, some Democrat Party big-city mayors – who’ve coddled transients for years – have finally said, “OK, the homeless encampments have got to go!”
One of them is San Francisco’s Democrat Party Mayor London Breed, who, on July 18, announced her “very aggressive” sweep of San Francisco homeless encampments will begin in August.
But will they? Earlier this year in Florida, Ron DeSantis and his Republican state legislature prohibited local governments from permitting camping or sleeping on public property.
The State of Florida will oversee local governments that set up new homeless encampments where transients can camp “up to a year.”
This is how to do it: Ban encampments on public property (streets, sidewalks, parks, etc.) and provide temporary group shelters where no alcohol or illegal drugs are permitted, but counseling and drug abuse treatment are required. (Yet Bible-based counseling and salvation would be the ultimate healer.)
Will Big Democrat Gavin Newsom do what Florida’s done, by calling a special legislative session or invoking his “emergency powers” he’s so fond of?
Nope — which is why banning homeless encampments statewide just won’t happen. We’ll have to see which cities actually do it. Because the Democrat Party mayor of Los Angeles won’t, and the Democrat Party mayor of Sacramento probably won’t either.
All Newsom did on July 25 was “order” his administration to clean away homeless encampments on state-owned property (state buildings, state freeways and highways, forests and wilderness areas, along waterways, etc.), which is just a drop in the bucket.
And this isn’t just my opinion. Liberal UCLA professor Chris Herring, who the Big Media likes quoting, said, “Newsom could have issued this order before the (Supreme Court) decision. The only difference now is that states and localities are free to confine and arrest people even when there is no shelter available.”
Bottom line, you can expect most Democrat Party politicians to continue allowing homeless encampments, because it fits their philosophy that people aren’t responsible for their behavior, and advances their New Communist agenda to burden the middle class.
For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat. For we hear that there are some who walk among you in a disorderly manner, not working at all, but are busybodies. Now those who are such we command and exhort through our Lord Jesus Christ that they work in quietness and eat their own bread. The Bible, 2 Thessalonians 3:10-12
Saturday, May 11, 2024, 11:27 am | Randy Thomasson
As the above graphic shows, the current 7 judges (in pale pink fields) of the California Supreme Court, with the exception of one, were nominated by Democrat Party governors.
And since the Democrat Party wants to make the government bigger and the People poorer, when Newsom & Co. recently asked the State Supreme Court to remove from the ballot a rock-solid taxpayer protection initiative that’s already qualified, the state’s high court was “obliged” to hear it — because as recently as 2018, the Democrat-dominated Supreme Court has removed initiatives so the People couldn’t vote on them.
The well-written “Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act” would prohibit the Legislature from increasing a tax or fee or “a levy, charge, or exaction of any kind” without a two-thirds vote of the Legislature. And then the People of California would have to approve it with a majority vote! Same thing for local government tax and fee hikes and ” a levy, charge, or exaction of any kind.” See why the Democrat Party politicians and their establishment county and city tyrants hate this?
In the San Francisco state high court’s building on Wednesday, May 8, our side’s super-duper attorney, Tom Hiltachk, the official proponent of the initiative, told the judges:
The opposing attorneys’ claims are “based not on evidence submitted to this court but on the opinions of people in the government who do not want change.”
“What we have evolved into is it is an administrative state that has far too much power among non-elected bureaucrats, who no one knows their name, setting fees not for a fishing license fee, that’s not what this is about, but raising billions of dollars out of the economy without any legislative oversight.”
Hiltachk warned the judges that removing the initiative from the ballot would be “making a political judgment it should not make…instead that judgment should be entrusted to voters.” And he reminded the judges that California’s legal history is replete with ballot initiatives on taxes. “The people have the last word…this tug-of-war over taxation has been going on for over 100 years.”
After the hearing, Rob Lapsley of the California Business Roundtable talked to the media and succinctly explained why Newsom & Co., the League of California Cities, and big unions oppose this good initiative, saying, “The whole issue here is that they are scared to death of the people of California being empowered to vote on state and local taxes.”
Stop and realize the People of California could vote to reduce the full-time Legislature back to a part-time legislature, and this would not be an unconstitutional “revision” of state government. Similarly, the People could limit the size of the state budget, and this wouldn’t be an unconstitutional “revision” either.
Likewise, requiring the People’s approval for taxes and fees and other government money-grabs reflects the fact that, as the California State Constitution declares in Article II, Section 1: “All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their protection, security, and benefit, and they have the right to alter or reform it when the public good may require.” This means altering or reforming the system to give more power to the People to decide money-grabs is an absolute right.
The “Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act” will go on the November ballot in late June if no more than three of the six Democrat Party judges vote to remove it. Since Gavin Newsom has three judges, they might vote against the People’s rights. It could be that close.
May 22, 2024 UPDATE: This anti-America, anti-democratic-process bill on May 21 passed the California State Senate — Democrats for, Republicans against. Please continue calling afterhours to SB 1174 author Dave Min.
* * *
How can we have a republic if the written law — including election law — is not enforced? And how can we have a democracy if the vote of the People is compromised by fraud?
Please act now against a bad bill PROMOTING election fraud by a Democrat Party state senator who’s running for the “toss-up” 47th U.S. House seat in Orange County.
Urge Dave Min to DROP his bad bill (which is now on the floor of the Democrat-controlled California State Senate). See your 1 action step below!
SB 1174 by Democrat Party State Senator Dave Min of Orange County is on the Senate floor after its May 1 passage in its final Senate committee. If it passes the full Senate as soon as this coming week, this anti-America bill will be sent to the State Assembly.
You see, there’s a constitutional revolution brewing in California, and Min wants to squash it before more conservative cities also require registered voters to prove they are who they say they are. But isn’t true identity the whole point of registering to vote in the first place? You register by claiming you’re a citizen living in a particular locale, then (before mail-in voting took over) on Election Day, you prove your identity before voting. In contrast, Min’s SB 1174 would prohibit cities from requiring registered voters to present identification before voting. Of course, that flies in the face of a rock-solid fact that banks, airlines, and membership stores know — requiring proof of identification prevents fraud (in this case, election fraud by vote-stealing individuals and corrupt “vote counters”).
Min’s SB 1174 would add to the California Elections Code: A local government shall not enact or enforce any charter provision, ordinance, or regulation requiring a person to present identification for the purpose of voting or submitting a ballot at any polling place, vote center, or other location where ballots are cast or submitted, unless required by state or federal law. For the purpose of this section, “local government” means any charter or general law city, charter or general law county, or any city and county.
Yet without voter identification — especially photo ID — the American standard of “one person, one vote” is shattered. And since California state law DOES NOT require voter ID (thank the ruling Democrats), it’s up to cities and counties that care about accuracy and honesty to require voter ID locally. But they can’t do that under SB 1174, a domestic-enemy bill that is both anti-democracy and anti-America.
ACT NOW: Urge Dave Min to DROP SB 1174
Please share this important and urgent alert with friends who live in Orange County and especially in California’s 47th congressional district(Huntington Beach, Seal Beach, Costa Mesa, Irvine, Newport Beach, and Laguna Beach in Orange County).
Do you see why this alert is so important? Stop Min’s SB 1174, so more “charter cities” and even “charter counties” will require voter ID to combat election fraud.
Call TODAY to Dave Min’s Irvine office at 949-223-5472. If that line is busy, or the voicemail is full, try calling Min’s State Capitol office at 916-651-4037.
Leave your live message with a staffer, or your recorded message, saying something like: “I live in Orange County and am appalled that Dave Min is trying to ban voter identification. His bill, SB 1174, attacks our country’s ‘one person, one vote’ standard. Drop your un-American bill. Stop attacking democracy. Drop SB 1174!”
You can call during regular business hours (9am to 5pm) to leave a live message with a staffer, who will also ask your name and your voter registration address. Or you can call weekends or after hours on weekdays (6pm to 9am) to leave your voicemail message.
If you don’t live in Orange County, you can still call anonymously and after hours and weekends without revealing your name or where you live.
Conducted by the Honest Elections Project (HEP) from July 13-16, the survey reveals widespread support among the American electorate for common-sense election integrity policies. According to the poll, 88 percent of Americans support laws mandating voters show a form of ID in order to cast their ballot, including the vast majority of black (82 percent) and Hispanic voters (83 percent). Only 9 percent of those polled opposed ID requirements. The survey’s findings paint a vastly different picture than the one crafted by legacy media and Democrat politicians, who for years have maliciously smeared voter ID laws as Republican-sponsored tools designed to “suppress” the votes of racial minorities. “Poll shows majority of Americans support voter ID,” The Federalist, July 31, 2023
RSS 2.0 Feed