Randy

SaveCalifornia.com Blog//

Archives for September 2011

Is this hope? Jerry Brown threatens “many” vetoes

Wednesday, September 14, 2011, 3:51 pm |

He sounds serious. California’s Democrat Governor Jerry Brown says he’ll veto “many” of the 600 or so bills on his desk. Get ready for the “veto blues,” he said.

From the San Francisco Chronicle: Gov. Jerry Brown today fired a warning shot to state lawmakers, essentially telling them the legislation they have worked on for months is not likely to become law.

“I’m going to veto a lot of bills over the next 30 days,” Brown told reporters after an event to reward schools with high physical fitness achievements.

“So I have to say to some, fasten your seat belt cause this is going to be a rough ride. They’ve given me 600 bills and there’s not 600 problems that we need those solutions for,” he said.

I don’t know Brown’s motivation. But I’m guessing he may want to set a first-year standard that he’s in charge, or perhaps that he wants the Legislature to abandon special interest bills. It’s anyone’s guess.

But this I do know – now is the time to increase pro-family citizens’ opposition to the worst bills on his desk in the hope that Brown tags them as “veto bait.” Brown’s veto threats carry more weight that even Arnold Schwarzenegger’s blanket veto threats, which never materialized.

ACT RIGHT NOW

Urge Brown to veto these 5 bad bills that steal away parental rights, marriage rights, business owner rights, and voter rights.

And read today’s Christian Post story about SaveCalifornia.com sounding the alarm.

“When you go to war in your land against the enemy who oppresses you,
then you shall sound an alarm with the trumpets, and you will be remembered
before the LORD your God, and you will be saved from your enemies.”
Numbers 10:9 NKJV

ALERT: The 4 worst bills on Jerry Brown’s desk

Friday, September 9, 2011, 12:33 pm |

Today (Friday, Sept. 9) is the last day of the California Legislature’s regular session.

Because Democrats control both houses and the Governor’s office, I’ve expected and then seen, to my horror, dozens of anti-family, tyrannical bills pass this year due to the foolish imaginations of the dominating Democrat legislators.

This is why, in the last several years, only the governor could stop bad bills. “Republican” Arnold Schwarzenegger, frequently lobbied by conservative Californians, vetoed most of the anti-family bills his first term. But upon his reelection in 2006, he revealed his immoral heart and started signing bad bills, even bills that he vetoed his first term.

Now, with Democrat Jerry Brown back in the governor’s office, he’s already signed SB 48, mandating blatant homosexual-bisexual-transsexual indoctrination of children without parental consent. Yet Brown’s vetoed other bills that would have imposed new state mandates, coerced more people into costly unions, and limited the power of voter initiatives.

So, it’s worth “testing” Jerry Brown on the worst bills on his desk. With your calls, emails, and faxes, will he veto them? 

SaveCalifornia.com has identified the four worst bills — all authored by Democrats — and urges you to take action:

AB 499 allows school staff, nurses, and others to push the risky HPV vaccine upon girls as young as 12 years old, without parental consent
1. The Gardasil or Cervarix vaccine can harm or kill. The CDC reports there have already been 18,727 reports of adverse events, including 68 deaths.
2. Giving to pre-teen girls is equivalent to telling them to have teenage sex, resulting in disease, pregnancy, abortion, emotional damage, moral ruin, etc.
3. Tramples parental rights because no parental consent is required.
4. Paves way for more anti-parent laws.
5. These injections of minor girls will eventually be paid for by the state (the taxpayers), even though there is no money in the state budget.
CDC: 68 deaths | CalCatholic.com article | AB 499 text

SB 651 would eliminate requirement that homosexual “domestic partners” live together (opens door to fraud); allows minors to become “domestic partners” (roping kids into homosexual lifestyles)
The purpose of SB 651 is to erase any and all legal distinctions between man-woman marriage and homosexual partners. According to the author, San Francisco Democrat Mark Leno, “This bill will remedy those final inequities, including the denial of long-term care insurance to domestic partners who are state employees and requirements related to age and whether couples live at the same residence. As we inch ever closer to equality, the only way to ensure fair treatment is to allow all loving couples the right to marry. Separate is seldom, if ever, equal,” he said.”
“San Diego Gay & Lesbian News”  | SB 651 text 

AB 101 unionizes in-home childcare, forcing it in many cases
According to the Sacramento Bee, “The measure would allow small-business owners who provide child care in their own homes or the child’s home and – this is key – who care for children who receive state child care subsidies to unionize. The child-care providers targeted for unionization, many of them unlicensed grandmothers and other relatives or neighbors, would not be forced to join a union. However, if the child they care for receives state subsidies, they would have to pay union dues whether they joined the union or not…If the bill is approved, like IHSS it will inevitably increase state costs at a time California is broke. Citing costs, former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed several previous baby sitter unionization bills. Given California’s precarious financial situation, increased costs alone should be enough to sideline AB 101 this year.”
Sacramento Bee: Democrats make last-minute push to unionize California child-care workers
Editorial: Baby sitter bill deserves some adult supervision

SB 397 permits online voter registration
There is already voter fraud happening by all the vote-by-mail shenanigans (dead people voting, illegal aliens voting). Can you imagine the fraud if Jerry Brown signs online voter registration? Can you imagine entering in your existing address under another name and thus vote twice or more? There is no reliable way for election officials to ferret out fraud, especially registrations that are close to an election.
SB 397 text | Senate floor analysis | Criticism of similar Michigan proposal

Contact Brown by phone, fax, email

Phone (916) 445-2841
Fax (916) 558-3160
Brown’s contact form

When the godly are in authority, the people rejoice.
But when the wicked are in power, they groan.
Proverbs 29:2 NLT

Looks like Prop. 8 is still alive

Tuesday, September 6, 2011, 2:58 pm |

I’m encouraged that several reporters believe the California Supreme Court will, within 90 days, recommend to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that man-woman marriage supporters should have the right to defend Proposition 8 when former state attorney general and current governor Jerry Brown (Democrat) and current attorney general Kamala Harris (Democrat) and former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (liberal Republican) all shirked their constitutional duty to defend the law.

Here’s what I told a TV news reporter today after the hearing:

“This is about the right to defend the will of the voters — and most of the justices on the state high court seemed to understand that. It’s sad that Jerry Brown shirked his duty to defend Prop. 8, which the majority of Californians supported, because they know deep in their hearts that marriage is naturally and exclusively between a man and a woman, a male and a female.”

So be hopeful. All the media accounts I’m reading suggest this positive outcome based on questions and statements from most of the seven justices on the state high court – even liberal, pro-homosexual “marriage” justices, who are used to seeing both sides represented in every hearing.

See this account from long-time court watcher Howard Mintz, reporter with the San Jose Mercury News:

“So,” Justice Ming Chin asked Olson at one point, “you want the federal courts to answer this question with only one side represented?”

At another juncture, Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye interjected, “What happens to the state’s interest (if state officials refuse to defend an initiative)? Does it evaporate?”

Justice Joyce Kennard, as usual the most active of questioners, was skeptical of Olson’s position as well. “If we agree with your position, it would appear to me that we would nullify the great power the people have reserved for themselves (to enact ballot initiatives),” she said.

Justice Goodwin Liu, hearing his first case less than a week after being sworn in, was also very active in his debut.

“It seems to me the 9th Circuit has set up a hoop initiative proponents have to jump through,” Liu told Olson. “Given how protective we have been (about the initiative process), why shouldn’t we read the California constitution to offer initiative proponents whatever they need to jump through that hoop?”

Now, if the California Supreme Court rules in favor of Prop. 8 proponents, the three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will receive and consider their advisory vote. While I am very confident that the federal appeals court bench will agree and let the case go forward, I remain highly concerned that the 9th Circuit will ultimately rule against Prop. 8 (see my earlier blog explaining why). If that happens, this incredibly moral case will go to the United States Supreme Court, where Californian Anthony Kennedy, the court’s swing vote, will decide everything.

Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; 
but fornicators and adulterers God will judge.
Hebrews 13:4 NKJV