Charlie Baker: Red State Governing In Blue Mass

Of all the election victories in 2014, the only one I was the most worried about was. . .Charlie Baker of Massachusetts.

He is liberal on social issues. During the 2010 Gubernatorial election, when he ran for the first time against incumbent "Mr. Governor" Deval Patrick, Baker announced that he was "to the left of Obama" on social issues. At the time, President Obama was opposed to gay marriage, but Baker had already embraced it. Four years later, and Obama caved on the issue, in large part because of his big-mouthed Vice President.

Baker effectively removed all the hot-button social issues and embraced the liberal positions on some issues.

To his credit, Baker attended the latest meeting of the Republican Governors' Association shortly after his election. He also prepared a budget without raising taxes or fees. He also fired the liberal racketeer Jonathan Gruber, who gleefully shared with like-minded Big Government academics that they lied about Obamacare because of the stupidity of the American voters".

He has some conservative wins under his belt, I suppose. Democrats definitely liked him because he is a "numbers guy". One conservative shared with me privately that he would not vote for him or endorse him, because he was basically a Democrat. Another committed Republican offered that Baker is a moderate, definitely not a RINO.

Governor Charlie Baker (R-Massachusetts)

The Sentinel's Peter Lucas offered and interesting and positive take on Baker:

Baker arrived with no assembly required
 

Here is why veteran Statehouse observers are high on Charlie Baker: No politician in modern Massachusetts history has come to the governor's office better prepared or more qualified than Charlie Baker. And it is beginning to show, not only because he has scored high in the public-opinion polls -- polls are fleeting -- but because, even as a Republican in a sea of Democrats, he has had an exceptionally successful beginning.   

Baker came to Beacon Hill experienced and ready to govern. Not afraid to work with his colleagues but also get down to business, he recognized the need to work with a Democratic legislature, no matter how hard it would be to press for real reforms.

Lucas is unsparing in his criticism of the previous Governor.

Recall how his predecessor, Democrat Gov. Deval Patrick, stumbled around for months when he was first elected. A terrific campaigner, Patrick had never held any state office but came from the corporate boards of Coca-Cola and Texaco. He had zero Statehouse experience and was too proud, or arrogant, to admit it. While he was popular with the public, he was never popular at the Statehouse. Democrats in the Legislature, let alone Republicans, were never comfortable with Patrick. He came in with a chip on his shoulder and left with two.

"Terrific campaigner", just like the current Commander in Chief Barack Obama, who is chiefly not interested in commanding anything. Patrick was a big government liberal who loved to lambaste Republicans for their spendthrift ways during the Bush II Administration. Of course, Obama has outdone the spending sprees of his predecessor, but at least Baker has done better than his. Lucas points out that Patrick was tone deaf to the optics essential to politics, even in one-party state Massachusetts. He tricked the corner office with lavish curtains and other frills. Baker does not work in the Big Office, but settled for humble trappings and reaches out to everyone.

Politics is not brain surgery. If you treat people with dignity and respect, you tend to get dignity and respect in return. That seems to be Charlie Baker's basic approach to the governor's job. It may be part of his character or something he learned along the way.

Wow. What a concept!

Certainly, the eight years he spent in state government at the Cabinet level -- first as secretary of Health and Human Services and then as secretary of Administration and Finance -- working for former Republican Govs. Bill Weld and the late Paul Cellucci, helped shape the way Baker governs. Both Republicans were able to build a good working rapport with the Democrat-controlled House and Senate, and Baker learned from that. Also, in the private sector, Baker headed Harvard Pilgrim Health Care at a crucial time and is credited with turning that money-losing organization around. 

Baker the businessman is cooking up good compromise in Massachusetts. Some conservative partisans are already upset with Baker because he has not turned the state around from its deep-blue, nearly socialist hue. One thing at a time.

 "His government and private-sector experience is absolutely invaluable," Weld said of his protégé. "He knows what he thinks. He knows what he's doing. He's comfortable in his own skin." Weld said he admires the way Baker took on the MBTA [Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority] winter shutdown crisis and the need for MBTA reform. In some ways, the crisis was similar to the one Weld faced in 1991, when, upon becoming governor, he was faced with a $2 billion deficit left by outgoing Democrat Gov. Michael Dukakis. Like Weld, Baker immediately established a smooth working relationship with the Democratic legislative leadership. Baker gets along with both better than Rosenberg and DeLeo get along with each other.

Fascinating. The Republican governor works better with both Democratic leaders than with each other. This three-way alliance could help Baker and the Republican Party in the future.

Without much fuss or fanfare, Baker closed the $760 million budget deficit that Patrick left him and then dealt deftly with the state's annual $38 billion budget. Baker signed legislation sending $200 million to the cities and towns for road repairs, and got both legislative leaders to set up a five-member MBTA control board. He established a hiring freeze and a program for early retirement for 5,000 state employees, launched a program to deal with family homelessness, and has promised to take on the state's opiate crisis. He smartly has taken a thoughtful wait-and-see attitude toward the Boston 2024 Olympics, and has halted the questionable expansion of the convention center in South Boston.  He works the job well. He does not look down with disdain on reporters, the way Patrick did, and is open and available. He is a workhorse, not a show horse. He has changed the atmosphere at the Statehouse for the better. He shows up for work, says what he means and means what he says. And he won't raise taxes. So what's not to like?    

Interesting comments all around. Let's hope that this recipe for Red State Governorship in blue states like Massachusetts will work out for the long-term. Boston has declined its bid for the 2024 Olympics. Conservatives from "Red Mass Group" have viewed his tenure positively, too.

And. . .Baker won't raise taxes. What's not to like?

NVGOP Removed Abortion/Marriage from Platform. What About CAGOP?

There is a lot of talk among Republican partisans in blue states.

Should they start going soft on certain issues, like the marriage issue and the subject of life and abortion.

Some states have already done that.

The Massachusetts GOP recognizes exceptions in certain cases for abortion. The National platform does not.

The Nevada GOP platform has already removed mentions of life and marriage from its platform.

This move occurred in 2014, even though nearly half the state delegates were present, and a great deal of dissent broke out among the ranks of members there.

The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported:

Amid raucous debate, Nevada Republican Party conventioneers on Saturday stripped opposition to gay marriage and abortion from the party platform and endorsed Gov. Brian Sandoval for governor in the June 10 primary despite misgivings by conservatives, his criticism of the process and his absence from the meeting.

This language is immediately misleading. The current platforms do not announce that the party favors abortion on demand or the radical definition of marriage.

Click on this link to the see the statewide NVGOP platform. Click on this link to see the Clark County platform.

The Review-Journal continues, detailing reasons why the state party decided to remove key planks from the party platform:

“I think it was about inclusion, not exclusion,” McDonald said, referring to the platform. “This is where the party is going.”

Inclusion can become self-destructive and counter-productive if not focused on specific core issues. A big tent stretched too big covers nothing and protects no one.

Republicans who sat on the platform committee said they decided not to deal with social issues this year because the U.S. Supreme Court and lower courts have weighed in and it doesn’t make sense for the party of “personal freedom” to have the government or the political party get involved in people’s personal lives.

Fair enough. A libertarian strain is essential for a conservative political party to advance. Ronald Reagan, himself the standard-bearer for conservative Republicanism stated: "The heart of conservatism is libertarianism."

One caveat emerges, however. Libertarians are still divided among themselves on abortion. Ron and Rand Paul, the leading political celebrities on this contentious issue, are unabashedly pro-life. Libertarian academics like Murray Rothbard (who taught at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas), were pro-choice as a matter of public policy. If the discussion starts on the matter of life within a mother's womb, to be pro-choice would violate the rights of that individual. If the discussion is a matter of personal determination for the mother, then the concerns about state encroachment can complicate the issue.

As for marriage, perhaps the winning argument for Republicans should stress on getting the government out of the institution entirely, and leave the issue of marriage contracts and parental guardianship to private agreement. In the United States, marriage was a private matter as voluntary agreement and religious ceremony for centuries. Besides, political parties do not affirm basic realities like "2 + 2 = 4" in their endorsing values.

“The issue was how can we back out of people’s personal lives,” said Dave Hockaday of Lyon County, who sat on the platform committee. “We need to focus on issues where we can have an impact.”

Lyon County is a conservative section of the state, and represented by one of the three Republican Congressmen in the House delegation.

Previously, the state party platform defined marriage as “between a man and a woman,” as does the Nevada Constitution. The past document also described the party as “pro-life,” or against abortion, a stance most Republicans still agree with.

So, just as most common-sense people recognize that higher spending leads to greater deficits and lost future funding, or something as basic as 2 + 2 = 4, perhaps there is no longer a need for political agendas which protect life as a matter of political discussion.

Or perhaps now more than ever the Republican Party must embrace its pro-life stance and fight against looming state intervention which subsidizes abortion on demand in clinics like Planned Parenthood.

Of course, let us not forget that the paper is a part of the Liberal Media, and interested in highlighting divisions among Republicans:

The party has been riven by divisions for several years — much like the national GOP — with establishment Republicans pitted against conservative Tea Party members and voters who backed former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, for president. Establishment Republicans led the movement to kill the endorsements, while conservatives backed the idea.

Democrats are worse than divided in Nevada. They have been pushed into minority status, despite the Harry Reid machine, which has blanketed the state since the late 1980s.

Nevada is now a GOP trifecta, controlling the Governorship along with both houses of the state legislature. Three of the four House reps are Republicans, along with one of the US Senators, and if current polling remains constant and consistent, a second Republican will be joining Dean Heller in 2016. Hopefully, Republicans will hold onto Congressman Joe Heck's seat, too.

Final Reflection

Republicans have taken over a large part of an otherwise swing state, and may be able to tilt it back into the GOP column for Presidential election 2016. Did removing the abortion and marriage planks assisted Republican outreach in the Silver State? Taking away Democratic talking points on divisive issues can assist Republicans wanting to focus on personal liberty, constitutional rule, and limited government.

However, would backing away from defending marriage hurt Republican outreach to African-American communities? What about Evangelical voters who prize the social conservatism of the Republican brand, the same Christian Coalition which helped elected Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984?

So far, California Republicans may be bracing for a fight on these "social issues" in the fall. Stephen Franks of Capitol Review reports:

How do you know a Republican? The way I try to discover if someone is truly a Republican is to ask them about their principles and values. When a smart attorney type tries to use words that look like one thing but mean another, I understand they are hiding something. When someone leaves out an important element of an issue, like amnesty makes illegal aliens “legal”—so they qualify for citizenship and to get to the head of the line, I am concerned.

Franks shares concerns that a number of issues are going to be watered down, with the removal of key words which can open up liberal positions into the Republican brand, including an end to defining life at conception, upending concealed carry for firearms, and allowing amnesty for illegal aliens.

Breitbart's Michelle Moon shared similar concerns following the Capitol Review article:

Frank detailed efforts to weaken the party platform, including proposed changes to the definition of marriage; on immigration policy and amnesty; on right-to-life and abortion positions; and on the right to keep and bear arms, to name a few. Each change serves to erode the spine of the party, he said, gradually transforming Republicans into milquetoast Democrats.

. . .

Jon Fleischman, Politics Editor at Breitbart California and publisher of FlashReport.com, said, “Charles Munger Jr, who four years ago was supportive of efforts to water down the entire platform, has since invested significant financial resources to expand his influence over the California Republican Party. It’s quite possible he will succeed this go around.

As far as this writer is aware, a number of Republican delegates, whether as former or current candidates for office, or elected officials, have shared no interest in changing key elements in the platform.

J's Deli in Woonsocket, RI: A Work Ethic and Welfare Problem?

Woonsocket, RI City Hall

Following  my review of WaPo's Pulitzer Prize Winning reports on Woonsocket, RI and its cycle of welfare dependency, the Ocean State Current then the Providence Journal printed my analysis on how welfarism would engulf an entire city, creating more takers than makers.

My ProJo editorial elicited a number of responses, including the following:

Great article! In a similar note, I understand that students in Woonsocket are eligible for free breakfast, lunch AND dinner. And in nearby Central Falls, parents/guardians join the students for dinner. Talk about learned helplessness!

And also:

Mr. Schaper - congratulations on such a well-written piece on the Welfare City of Woonsocket.  Those of us that are natives of RI, have long been aware of the conditions that you've so aptly described.  My wife and I were both born in Cumberland, RI. . . .  When each of them [our children] reached high school age, we sent them to Mt St Charles Academy in Woonsocket because it was run by the Christian Brothers and had a great college prep program.

 

In retrospect, it was the only feature of that city that I felt was worthy of compliment.  The rest of the City defied logical explanation...and, as you know, it has steadily declined from there. You also seem to understand that its gotten that way because of the pervasive corruption of State and municipal governments in RI. 

 

Another post in the ProJo editoral mentioned the sudden closure of J's Deli in Woonsocket, and I decided to investigate further

WPRI reported:

WOONSOCKET, R.I. (WPRI) — The owner of J’s Deli has closed his location in Woonsocket because he says he can’t find enough quality workers to keep it running properly.

James Hallal has been in the sandwich business for years, and has served a steady stream of customers at all three of his deli locations.

J's Deli closed sign (Woonsocket Patch)

He said it breaks his heart that he had to close up shop in Woonsocket. A sign on the door says he’s been  unsuccessful at finding “a full team of motivated & friendly staff” to run the deli.

“You have to be an invested person when you come in, you have to be motivated,” he said Wednesday. “It’s been the last three years that I’ve found this extremely difficult.”

Could it be that the rampant welfare culture in the city has made it difficult to find good workers? I contacted the Smithfield shop for the next week to seek comments from Mr. Hallal. Finally, I got in touch with one of the general managers at the Smithfield deli, Erick Lynch, who spoke on behalf of James Hallal, the owner of the deli shops:

"He [Hallal] doesn't want to be an employment advocate. He just wants to run a good shop and serve his customers."

Lynch pointed out, just as the closed sign had indicated, that they could not hire enough good working people to keep the shopping running well. "We're not like a Subway. We are real deli and we want to offer the best service. If someone called in sick, it really through us off."

Lynch also informed me that they were not just hiring from people in Woonsocket, but from other neighboring towns, and even out of state: "I'm from New Hampshire, but I live in Cumberland now", Erick told me.

There is good news in this Woonsocket tale.

"We have already hired eleven new people, and we are training them already. We plan on opening up again on September first."

I asked Lynch why the local press had made an issue out of the Woonsocket deli's closure in the first place, since to him and his boss it had nothing directly to do with the high unemployment or welfarism in the city. He directed me to the Woonsocket, RI Patch, which had first reported the story.

The preliminary remarks in the Patch column indicate why the story took off as a commentary or in connection with the unemployment problems in Rhode Island:

In Woonsocket, a city that has been grappling with an unemployment problem for years, you’d think that a local company with pay that starts above the minimum wage would have no problem finding eager workers.

At first glance, one gets the impression that Hallal is a hard heart because he closed the shop down. Anyone working in retail or customer service can attest that when one employee does not show up, it can throw the whole day off.

Not the case at all, even if one reads further into the Patch post:

The inability to secure a decent crew of workers has been a head-scratcher for Hallal. J’s Deli isn’t a bad place to work, he said. The business has been named best deli/sandwich shop in Blackstone Valley by the readers of Rhode Island Monthly Magazine in their annual contest for several years in a row, including the just announced 2015 awards.

“It’s a wonderful place to work,” Hallal said. “It’s not what you’re thinking: $8 or $9 an hour place. We’re well above that. Well above.

Some of the comments below included statements from former employees who enjoyed working at J's Deli in the past. Local news, whether print or television, have reported on employers who struggle to find good workers. Sometimes, the ready application for unemployment insurance has ensured that more people stay out of work.

In the case of J's Deli, the bottom line came down to not having enough employees at one time, which had forced Hallal to stretch his staff thin. Even though the Woonsocket was the least profitable deli of the three, business was still doing very well, but the staffing was not adequate to keep up with the demand.

Final Reflection

 Can one really argue that the welfarism in one city forced a business to close temporarily? Bearing in mind that Hallal was hiring people from all over the state, the cycle of dependence in the city cannot justify this business move. Arguments may contend that he was a bad employee, or that the pay was not enough. Yet in a city with such high unemployment, plus his interest in hiring the best, that argument does not resound.

Other critics could put forward that Hallal was not offering enough pay, yet already his shop has gotten not one hundred but four hundred applicants. There are worker out there willing to work, but that a work ethic is essential for any business to thrive.

In a way, local news sources were looking for a story that probably wasn't there to begin with. A better question would be: why does the media have a hard time understanding that businesses must provide good service with "invested, motivated" people?

LA Times Fires Left-Wing Cartoonist Ted Rall

The Los Angeles Times has fired left-wing political cartoonist Ted Rall and will no longer print his cartoons on the Times’ editorial page.

The termination began in response to a May 11, LA Times Opinion blog post, in which Rall reported getting roughed up by LAPD. Rall blogged at the time:

This one is personal.

Just over 10 years ago, I was ticketed – and handcuffed – for an alleged pedestrian violation while crossing Melrose Avenue. Ironically, this was one of the rare times that I was innocent of even jaywalking, something I do every day.

All of a sudden, a motorcycle officer zoomed over, threw me up against the wall, slapped on the cuffs, roughed me up and wrote me a ticket. It was an ugly scene, and in broad daylight it must have looked like one, because within minutes there were a couple of dozen passersby shouting at the cop.

The LAPD dismissed this story, and said that it never happened. Further research into the internal report records confirm the account.

Nicholas Goldberg, LA Times Editorial Pages Editor, released the following statement, explaining the paper’s decision to terminate the cartoonists’ contributions:

In a May 11 post on The Times' OpinionLA blog, Ted Rall — a freelance cartoonist whose work appears regularly in The Times — described an incident in which he was stopped for jaywalking on Melrose Avenue in 2001.

Since then, the Los Angeles Police Department has provided records about the incident, including a complaint Rall filed at the time. An audiotape of the encounter recorded by the police officer does not back up Rall's assertions; it gives no indication that there was physical violence of any sort by the policeman or that Rall's license was thrown into the sewer or that he was handcuffed. Nor is there any evidence on the recording of a crowd of shouting onlookers.

Ted Rall (Yoshin Yamada)

In Rall's initial complaint to the LAPD, he describes the incident without mentioning any physical violence or handcuffing but says that the police officer was "belligerent and hostile" and that he threw Rall's license into the "gutter." The tape depicts a polite interaction.

In addition, Rall wrote in his blog post that the LAPD dismissed his complaint without ever contacting him. Department records show that internal affairs investigators made repeated attempts to contact Rall, without success.

Asked to explain these inconsistencies, Rall said he stands by his blog post.

As to why he didn't mention any physical abuse in his letter to the LAPD in 2001, Rall said he didn't want to make an enemy of the department, in part because he hosted a local radio talk show at the time. After listening to the tape, Rall noted that it was of poor quality and contained inaudible segments.

However, the recording and other evidence provided by the LAPD raise serious questions about the accuracy of Rall's blog post. Based on this, the piece should not have been published.

Rall's future work will not appear in The Times.

The Los Angeles Times is a trusted source of news because of the quality and integrity of the work its journalists do. This is a reminder of the need to remain vigilant about what we publish.

Rall contends his honesty, integrity, and innocence. He shared with CBS Los Angeles:

I would do it all over the same way today,” he said. “I’m disgusted that the Times took the LAPD’s word, based on nothing.”

He said the audio recording misrepresents the officer interaction, since the officer knew he was being recorded and much of the recording is static. He’s hired an audio expert to sift through the recording.

“To say the sound quality is bad is charitable,” Rall said. “There’s nothing on the tape.”

Rall, whose work has also appeared in NYC-based MAD Magazine, has courted controversy before. He once depicted President Obama with ape-like features. Rall denounced any insinuations that he is racist. Nevertheless, The openly progressive news site Daily Kos banned Rall’s work in turn.

In 2006, He also threatened to sue conservative writer Ann Coulter for libel, then backed off by the end of the year. In 2004, and even more recently, Rall faced conservative backlash for depicting former National Security Advisor then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as a “house nigga”.

The Case of Dr. Church: Freedom of Speech/Truth Under Attack in Massachusetts

For the past two years, as a freelance writer for the New England press as well as nationally and locally, I have reported on a number of disconcerting trends which originated in New England, and now have started working their way nationally. The progressive agenda has encouraged the increased encroachment of the state into citizens’ private, and has taken on an unprecedented push in this region, one where Republicans and conservatives stood up against government sponsorship of human slavery and maintained long-standing resistance against Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal.

Government school boards began in Massachusetts. Big Labor took on collective bargaining powers and found a firm stronghold in Rhode Island. Gay marriage began in New England, with Vermont sanctioning civil unions, followed by Massachusetts imposing gay marriage by judicial fiat. In the Bay State, the land where The American Revolution’s “shot heard round the world” was first fired, government bureaucracies, in collusion with Big Labor and Big Lawyers, have inculcated cronyism and corruption to unprecedented heights.

 

Dr. Paul Church

 

Massachusetts, now one of the most heavily dominated one-party Democratic states in the country, also passed laws preventing protests outside of abortion clinics. Even after the Supreme Court struck down those strictures because of their infringement on the First Amendment, former Governor Deval Patrick and Attorney General Martha Coakley sought to reform the initial law in order to protect a woman’s “right to choose” (although not her right to speak).

State-sponsored laws have made war on families and freedom in other venues, too.

Two years ago, the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families held young Justina Pelletier against her and her family’s will. Besides the ongoing work of local activities and Fox News anchor (and Presidential candidate) Mike Huckabee, no one knew about this Orwellian dystopia nightmare. Finally, after much pressure (including my reporting in the Worcester, MA media), Justina was released to another facility in her own state of Connecticut. The greatest failure in this disturbing case of government overreach? The widespread media failure not to report.

Following the judicial fiat imposition of gay marriage on the Commonwealth, the homosexual lobby worked its way into many facets of public life in Massachusetts. Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) has promoted education materials to push the LGBT agenda into public education. In counter protest, Catholic teachers in California walked out of schools in refusal to condone same-sex marriage and conduct. Earlier, though, a Lexington, MA parent was arrested after he protested lessons on homosexuality in his son’s kindergarten class.

Now private industries, including the medical field, are embracing Gay Pride programs, even if it means bullying individual employees to comply with the activities or lose their jobs. ALthough Buzzfeed played up the imposition of gay marriage as a small, benign matter with happy festivities and “more love all around”, pro-family groups like Mass Resistance and TFP Student Action depict a more severe, less warm and fuzzy reality of what happened afterwards.

One current and distressing example of this concerns the case of Dr. Paul Church, an established urologist at Beth Israel Deaconness Medical Center and the administration which faulted him for his views on homosexual conduct, including his concerns about the medical implications of the behavior, and his resistance to participating in pro-gay pride activities promoted by the hospital.

Mass Resistance, the pro-life and pro-family group based in Boston, MA reported the following:

On March 30, a major Harvard-affiliated hospital in Boston, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), expelled a well-respected urologist from its medical staff because he voiced concerns about the unhealthy nature of homosexual behavior and objected to the hospital’s aggressive promotion of “gay pride” activities.

Dr. Church has worked in a number of countries and worked on issues pertaining to sexual conduct and the consequences of high-risk behaviors. For over a decade, he voiced initial concerns about the hospital’s investment and promotion in “Gay Pride” activities. He and his like-minded colleagues first met token opposition, even ridicule.  Despite the initial backlash, Dr. Church proceeded to report the medical concerns as well as the moral opprobrium connected with homosexual behavior.  Read this timeline for more information. He faced tighter sanctions from this administrators, including one who was eventually forced to resign following immoral dalliances with a subordinate. They eventually imposed a gag order on the doctor. Finally, he was asked to resign, then summarily terminated.

Mass Resistance commented:

This is outrageous. A respected physician – particularly one on the staff of Harvard Medical School and a major hospital – should not have his career essentially ended because he’s simply telling the truth.

Aside from the Patch news service, and a report from the Boston  Business Journal, the Massachusetts media, liberal and conservative, have reported nothing on this trampling of freedom of speech. Following press inquiries to Liberty Counsel, the law firm representing Dr. Church in his upcoming appeal, media personnel responded that they are not issuing and press releases until after the appellate hearing, in compliance with Massachusetts law.

 

Dr. Church (center) with Liberty Counsel

 

The Boston Business Journal reports:

"Dr. Church has objected to the promotion of homosexuality because of the inherent dangers of homosexual activity," Mast said. "... Dr. Church has repeatedly made known his objections (to homosexuality) in a medical capacity, and his wishes that he not be the recipient of these (LGBT events) based on his Christian-based beliefs. Both of those requests have been ignored."

Final Reflection

Perhaps Associate Justice Antonin Scalia was right, and the Supreme Court’s decision to create another right at the expense of others explicitly in the Constitution have transformed the judicial branch “the greatest threat to American Democracy”.

Whatever one’s views about same-sex conduct or the role of the state in defining marriage, or a private institution’s knowledge or dissemination on either, a professional’s standing and career should not be in jeopardy for speaking one’s mind and voicing concerns on the subject.

Up to press time, media silence reigns over the Church controversy, as in the Justina Pelletier case. How much longer will these attack on individual liberty continue unabated?

Big Labor in El Segundo, CA

El Segundo, CA Logo

Big Labor is mustering its strength once again in the South Bay. Public sector unions have tried to push Redondo Beach mayor Steve Aspel around, but he won't be bullied. Now the El Segundo City Council is facing off against their own Big Labor juggernaut, and it looks as if they are going to win. The Daily Breeze reports:

El Segundo police, fire unions protest planned cuts

 

The article has its pro-labor slant, giving the impression that the public sector employees are victims, and the emotional reaction from city residents in the article suggest a lack of understanding about labor policies and local politics.

One of the photos at the beginning of the article carried the following description:

El Segundo police officers, firefighters and residents showed up en masse to protest what they are calling excessive pay concessions despite the city having a $3 million surplus in budget. Protesters stand at door of packed council chambers. (Robert Casillas / Staff Photographer)

"En masse"? How many people were there, really? One hundred? What about the rest of the city? How many of the working taxpayers can show up and protest a selected number of labor unions seeking more money?

By Carley Dryden, Daily Breeze

Posted: 07/08/15, 8:04 PM PDT|Updated: 2 weeks, 4 days ago              

At the height of the recession, the El Segundo police and fire unions shelled out millions to help keep the city afloat.

I have to take exception to this comment. The police and firefighters did not "shell out" money. It was never their money in the first. It was the city taxpayer's money. They never gave anything.

The concessions have continued for seven years — a pay freeze here, furloughs there.
And now, they just want to be left alone.

From what I have learned from city leaders and residents, what I have seen personally in the city: it is a privilege to work in El Segundo. If the police and firefighter do not like the pay, they can work somewhere else.

Dozens of police and fire employees, along with supportive residents, flooded the El Segundo City Council meeting Tuesday night to protest purported cuts forthcoming to the public safety budgets.
Although union contract negotiations are conducted in closed session, union officials have gone public with the details, stating that the city is requesting financial cuts totaling about 11 percent of the police and fire budgets despite projecting a $3 million budget surplus next year.

One again, "en masse" is not the city. "En masse" is made up of the labor union members who come to agitate and intimidate local leaders.

The city is asking that the police and fire association employees start paying the 9 percent contribution to their pension plan, without providing an adequate pay increase to offset it, union officials said.

The fact that these employees are drawing a pension in the first place should placate further demands. It is appalling that these unions keep on demanding and demanding. Who is supposed to pay for these pensions and benefits? If these criticisms seem unfair, further comments below will correct that misunderstanding.

“We’re not asking for raises. We just want the city to stop the cuts,” said Geoff Gerny, vice president of the El Segundo Firefighters Association. “We’ve endured seven years of continuous concessions to balance the city’s budget. Now El Segundo is demanding unreasonable cuts. (The council) is on the precipice of turning El Segundo into a stepping-stone city. This demoralizes everyone that works here. It’s setting up El Segundo for failure, for a complete breakdown.”

So, the world is coming to an end if the city council enacts serious budget reforms and expects city unions to pay their fair share. Wow.

The unions want tit for tat — if the city is proposing the unions pay 9 percent toward pensions, then they want a 9 percent pay increase to match it, making it a wash, he said.

A pay increase in perfect match with higher pension contributions will not save the city or the residents anything. Such gimme gimmicking labor negotiations have no moral standing.

“All the other cities, because they care about their employees, give them raises to offset them paying for their PERS,” said Officer Brandon Browning, president of the El Segundo Police Officers Association. “That’s all we’re asking for. The city has said, ‘We want you to pay our 9 percent, but we’re only willing to give you a 2 percent increase.’ That’s basically a 7 percent cut.”

Here the labor union leader plays the Emoti-Card: "If you make us pay more for our pensions, then you don't care about us!" If the city employees really care about their city, they would stop gouging the taxpayers and be happy with the pay they are receiving.

He said the city also wants to take away longevity pay for police officers, an automatic bump they receive every five years, among other things.

No one should be getting a pay increase just for being on the job. Longevity increases should be commensurate with service. If an individual employee has served for a long period of time, there is nothing wrong with rewarding that employee with more pay, but it should not be automatic.

Meanwhile, he said, the city has told the unions they expect a surplus next year, and that money is not an issue.

“They just feel like we make too much money,” he said. “But all the salary surveys show we’re right in the ballpark, right in the middle.”

This argument "we are right in the middle" is a part of widespread labor tactic called "patterned bargaining". One city gets a pay raise, then employees in another city demand more pay in turn. Other city labor unions then start complaining in turn: "What about us?"

Browning acknowledged that the groups are toward the top of the chart in some areas, but said they are average when it comes to total compensation. Manhattan Beach, Los Angeles, Santa Monica and Culver City are among the cities with a higher base salary than El Segundo, he said.

The last time I spoke with a local activist in the city, one hundred people applied for one firefighter position in El Segundo. If the current labor force in the city does not like the pay, they can go somewhere else. It is time for the city council to call the labor unions' bluff.

Advertisement

Some of the more striking total compensation numbers for city employees on the yearly charts are often due to employees working overtime to fill the roles of those out on leave or the positions that have been reduced, Gerny said.

He said the Fire Department staffing has been cut by 26 percent since 2008, with 14 firefighters now on duty per day, compared to 19 in 2008.

How many fires are there in  El Segundo from year to year? Just asking. Did anyone in the firefighters' association provide any information on this matter? Anyone?

For police, the department had 70 officers 10 years ago but 58 officers today, with 10 officers threatening to leave the force if the city imposes its proposed contract, Browning said.

Tell them: "Thank you for your service" and wait for a long list of applicants to step in and take their place.

During the recession, the Police and Fire departments took the brunt of the hits since they make up the majority of the budget, Gerny said.

“Less than 100 people gave the city millions of dollars. Basically, we wrote them checks to balance the budget,” he said. “Now, they’re $3 million in the black, expenses are dropping, revenues are increasing, and they want to come after us and the four other groups. They’re asking fire for $1 million in cuts.”

Excuse me? The Firefigters' Association did not write anyone anything. It was NEVER their money.

Word of the yearlong, tense union negotiations has irked many residents and triggered an online petition, “Save ESPD from budget cuts,” which has garnered 225 signatures and 57 comments since it was posted a week ago.

 I wonder who wrote those signatures. They police and firefighters and their family and friends, perhaps.

Dozens of residents showed up at council chambers Tuesday night, holding up blue signs that read, “Stop the Cuts,” pleading with the council to treat the public safety employees fairly or risk losing them to other coastal cities that will pay more.

“Years ago, when the city was struggling and needed help, police and fire helped you get to a number,” resident Lance Giroux said. “Now ... there’s a surplus in the budget. Why are you asking the same people to give you money when there’s a surplus? Why double dip on the guys that helped you get (back to a surplus) in the first place? It seems to be a gratuitous shot at public safety.”

There is a surplus in the budget precisely because the city council stopped handing out money to the  labor unions.

Melissa Brankovic, the mother of young children, said she’s scared of what she’s seeing in the city.
“When I see discussions about cuts when we are seeing crime that we never saw before, it is very disheartening,” she said.

The crime issues are connected to other trends, such as Prop 47 (perhaps) and other cultural issues (illegal immigration). Blaming the city council for the crime wave, when the leadership just wants to balance its budgets is just outrageous. Again, there are more people seeking jobs in the public peace and safety core than are leaving. All this fear-mongering is immoral as well as uninformed.

“We’re here for our safety. That’s what really stands out in this town,” echoed resident Tara Van Buskirk. “If you cut the pay of our police and fire, we’re going to be like every other city around here. I’ll just move to Torrance. It’s cheaper.”

Oh give me a break! One resident threatens to move to Torrance because of public safety concerns. There is more crime in this city, too. More police and fire can be hired, but that depends also on the same labor unions which claim to want a fair deal being fair in turn and serving their cities and not just themselves.

But not everyone believes the unions are getting the short end of the stick.

Former City Councilman Mike Robbins said, according to the city’s 2014 earnings data, of the 272 employees, 163 of them were paid more than $100,000 last year.

I am a good friend of Mike Robbins, and he has shown me these data before. Why are more than half the city employees taking in six figure salaries?

Fifteen employees had total earnings of more than $300,000, 27 with more than $250,000 and 55 with more than $200,000, not including medical and other benefits, he said.

What?! I cannot fathom why anyone in the public sector is taking in so large a salary. These large salaries do not include the lavish benefits, either. One can only imagine what the total compensation would look like factoring in the medical, dental and pension benefits, too. Public sector workers are living it up like kings, and the city homeowners, residents, and small businesses have to pick up the tab, long after the employees retire.

Robbins forgot to mention that most of the city employees do not even live in El Segundo, so they extra compensation does not necessarily circulate back into the city, either.

“The unions are campaigning with deceptive scare tactics as usual,” he said. “Cut the wage, cut the fat and cut the union corruption.”

I have a better idea: cut the whole collective bargaining option for public employees in the first place.
 

Final Reflection

Thank goodness that the city residents in El Segundo rejected tax hikes and then threw out a liberal mayor last term. Suzanne Fuentes is a conservative Republican who is not beholden to labor unions. She is working to represent the better interests of the entire city, rather than placating a select number of politically active interest groups.

Big Labor may be showing some muscle this year in part because the national consensus is pushing back against labor unions and their false, even bullying tactics against local leaders and individual residents. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's major wins against the public sector collective bargaining units in the Dairy State were a two-fold loss for Big Labor: the legislative process stripped them of their unjust entitlements, and they showed their true, menacing core not just protesting the state capital, but attacking Scott Walker personally as well as professionally. Democratic lawmakers fled the legislature to prevent a quorum (it failed), and the labor unions even protested and harassed Walker's family.

Such wicked behavior did not go unnoticed. The right-to-work movement is revving up all across the country, too, dealing another blow to Big Labor, in growing part because of Big Labor thug tactics like the ones in Wisconsin, Michigan.

El Segundo, CA from Sepulveda Blvd.

And even here in Torrance, CA, where unions picketed outside Torrance City Hall demanding retroactive pay increases. Another union dumped a huge pile of manure in front of Exxon-Mobil after the explosion at the refinery earlier this year, too.

South Bay Pushing Back Against Big Labor

El Segundo, CA

From El Segundo to LA Harbor, Big Labor is taking bigger steps to keep power throughout the South Bay. Strangely, Big Labor does not want to play by the very rules which it pressed for, including the widespread push to force the minimum wage to $15 an hour. South Bay cities should welcome LA businesses now fleeing the higher costs and heavier regulations weighing on them. City councilmembers in Torrance have told me that their city will be bracing for more businesses to establish themselves in the Balanced City, as El Segundo has already enjoyed.

Private-sector unions are losing their grip on key industries, which have offered better wages and benefits to employees who do not organize. The public sector unions still pose a greater threat, as readers have seen in El Segundo, where peace officers associations are demanding that the city council pay over the city’s surplus to the employees.

One statement from the local press was particularly galling: “The . . .unions shelled out millions to keep the city afloat.” Excuse me? The money was never theirs to begin with, but belonged to the taxpayers. Still, this hegemony of forced membership and dues may be coming to an end, not just because of local activists pushing necessary reforms, like COIN ordinances, but also from local leaders like El Segundo Mayor Suzanne Fuentes, who are telling labor unions that they cannot keep taking in more money for pensions and benefits from hard-working yet heavily stressed taxpayers, homeowners, and small businesses.

Conservative Rep Meadows Files to Oust Boehner

Congressman Mark Meadows (R-NC)

Sparks have flown before between House GOP leadership and more conservative members in the caucus. At one point, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz of Utah had announced to one of his sub-committee chairman colleagues, Mark Meadows of North Carolina, that he would be stripped of his assignment for his vote against Fast-Track trade promotion authority.

Conservative pushback from grassroots efforts and conservative media, plus the fact that his fellow committee members refused to comply with the move, forced Chaffetz and GOP leadership to back off.

Now, Meadow has thrown down the gauntlet, and challenged Boehner’ speakership outright. As an outstanding member of the House Freedom Caucus, he has established considerable influence with his conservative caucus members already and has pressured House Leadership already. NewsMax reports:

Emboldened by recent successes and growing membership rolls, the far-right House Freedom Caucus has plans to capitalize on its influence by trying to block GOP initiatives and demand others are altered to make them more conservative, Politico reports.

Blocking the renewal of the Export-Import Bank, raising spending caps and creating a "'Contract with America'-style manifesto of legislative proposals that it will lobby GOP leaders to take up" are among the caucus' plans, according to Politico.

This boldness has now reached a new height: dethrone Boehner, a rising sentiment echoed on ads blanketing conservative blogs, as well as conservative bloggers and radio hosts.

The Washington Post reports on Meadows’ move:

In a blistering resolution, Meadows slammed Boehner for causing the “power of Congress to atrophy” and using his office to “punish members who vote according to their conscience instead of the will of the Speaker.” The measure was referred to the Rules Committee, aides said.

No one has challenged sitting speaker in over 100 hundred years (the last time), and even then, the presiding officer retain the speakership

Included in the resolution, the Tar Heel Republican listed complaints like “bypassing the majority of the 435 Members of Congress and the people they represent” and causing “the power of Congress to atrophy, thereby making Congress subservient to the Executive and Judicial branches, diminishing the voice of the American People”, as well  as “continues to direct the Rules Committee to limit meaningful amendments, to limit debate on the House floor, and to subvert a straightforward legislative process.”

Harsh words, but Meadows is not alone.  Other House members have bemoaned the overbearing executive branch, including Executive Amnesty, among other Presidential acts of overreach. Meadows voted against reinstating Boehner before, too.

WaPo continued:

One of Boehner’s staunchest House critics, Rep. Walter Jones Jr. (R-N.C.), suggested that anti-Boehner Republicans might be trying to gin up support among conservative media  — a drumbeat that could get louder while lawmakers are home in their districts.

“I hope the talk show hosts who are so frustrated would pick up on this thing and beat the drum so loud that other members feel like they can be encouraged to join this effort to change the leadership of the House,” Jones said, according to DeBonis.

Similar efforts grassroots-media effort enabled Meadows to keep his committee assignment. Would a similar revolt from voters and new media sites force individual members to vote their conscience and constituency as opposed to party lines, corporate interests, and lobbying efforts?

Some complaints have suggested that Meadows is fomenting drama, not in the best interests of the House GOP caucus. Congressman Devin Nunes of California called the resolution a “fundraising tool”.

 The Macon, Georgia Telegraph called the Meadows’ resolution a “largely symbolic gesture” not likely to leave its first committee stop. Breitbart reporter Matthew Boyle offered a more dramatic and positive take:

It’s unclear if this will be successful, but over the past few years there have been two major coup attempts at Boehner. Both were unsuccessful—but extraordinarily close to succeeding—and centered around plays at the beginning of this Congress and the beginning of the last Congress.

This move will focus on centering around a different strategy, and it all comes after Boehner’s leadership team unsuccessfully attempted retaliation against Meadows for opposing Obamatrade.

Following US Senator Ted Cruz’ backlash against Senate Majority Leader McConnell, combined with the rising discontent among conservative voters expecting more confrontation from the entrenched House GOP majority and newly established US Senate GOP caucus, these upstart maneuvers from more conservative elected officials may find more success in the coming months, especially with the coming August recess.

Still, some members and outside partisans find this ouster less than outstanding. A petition has also begun on MoveOn.org to have Meadows removed from office. CNN reported the frustration of another member, who asked to remain anonymous:

"We were all really angry, frustrated and saying, 'Why now?' We need to focus on the Iran deal," the member said. "This is the best thing that could happen to President Obama. He just took the focus off Iran."

The response from national sites and interest groups will more likely determine the long-term influence, for better or for worse, regarding Meadow’s attempts to steer the House GOP caucus toward more conservative legislative ends for the remainder of the 114^th Congress.

The NRSC Called: They Can't Have My Money (Yet)

I get emails and phone calls every week from the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Don't get me wrong: I love the US Senate!

They are the august body, the chamber where hot, heated populist ideas go to cool off.

Unfortunately, it seems that in the last few years, the US Senate has become the cauldron for Big Government cronyism, and the more popular House of Representatives has had to stop the juggernaut of Obama's negative, disgraceful and unconstitutional policies.

Like many conservatives, I was thrilled beyond measure to see the Republican Party sweep nine seats into the GOP column, and wipe out an unprecedented five Democratic incumbents.

Colorado's Cory Gardner ran one of the smartest, if not the best, campaigns in recent memory, taking away a number of hot-button issues and pushing back against the left-wing Big Blue machine threatening to turn the Colorful State into another shade of blacked blue.

Joni Ernst of Iowa was a hit and hoot, as she promised to go to Washington DC and make them squeal.

Tom Cotton of Arkansas is a born fighter and he put the entire US Senate on notice about any Iran Deal. At one time, he was the most powerful man in the upper chamber.

Of course, Rand Paul has actually talked the talk and filibustered dubious executive nominees and killed bad legislation. That's what filibusters are for. Mike Lee of Utah has worked with grassroots and Tea Party crowds throughout the county, telling them to brace for the long haul.

Aside from these outstanding senators, the problem of status quo inaction remains.

The problem is -- aside from some outspoken conservatives, there has been too much business as usual. Majority Leader McConnell forced through Keystone, even though the President vetoed the legislation, and before that the Democrats had decided to eat one of their own and kill the legislation in December last year.

Today, I do not see an upper chamber fighting for what is right. They allowed the Executive Amnesty to go through. The leadership sided with the Democrats to confirm Loretta Lynch. Ted Cruz had the courage to call out McConnell as a liar for promising not to reauthorize the crony ExIm bank, which he did.

Finally, there is some talk about gutting Planned Baby-Killing (I mean, Parenthood)

But this is not enough. These fights needed to happen yesterday. Where is the media onslaught from the US Senators in touch with bloggers and conservative grassroots efforts? The fight to take back this country, to restore constitutional rule, limited government, and individual liberty has just begun, and still there is no fight for what is right. There are still too many elected officials in the US Senate who are listening to Big Business, Big Labor, or Big Green, instead of Little Me and You.

Then came the fundraising call from the NRSC.

The caller wanted to let me know that Democrats have outraised Republicans again this month, even though NRSC outdid the Dems last month.

Then came the rant.

"I will not giving any money until I see conservative principles and leadership in place. I applaud Senator Cruz for calling out Majority Leader. If he does not start leading, then he should step down. Until there is some real conservative action in the US Senate, I am not donating one dime."

The caller hung up on me. I would suggest for anyone who cares about Washington's actions (and inaction), give the National Republican Senatorial Committee more than a piece of your mind.

#MAKEDCLISTEN

NRSC
425 2nd St. NE
Washington, D.C. 20002
Our phone number is:
Phone: (202) 675-6000

Common Core on the Rise (or Fall)

I was not worried about Common Core for a long time.

Frankly, what difference did it make what kind of curriculum our kids were receiving in the classroom.

As long as young people had good teachers, good parents, or at least a strong support system in place, it would not matter how good or bad the curriculum put in place.

What does matter, is the leading and guidance which young people receive.

The more that I learn about Common Core, however, the more that I want it removed from our schools.

A lady from Palos Verdes has been leading one incredible fight to get rid of the Big Government and Big Business program writ large from South Bay Schools.

She gave an incredible talk about Common Core, and how Torrance parents worked hard twenty years ago to get rid of a similar program.

When she mentioned "Integrated Science", she had my full attention.

I still remember the setbacks I faced from that program. I also took Integrated Mathematics for Algebra I when I was in eighth grade.

Because I was on the Honors Track, I ended up taking traditional mathematics courses from then. I wish that I had done that sooner. I wish I had followed a similar traditional path for science, as well. I took Integrated Science One and Two, and many students like myself complained that the students were left to do all the work.

Because of Integrated Science and its poor foundation for learning, followed by the lack of preparation for higher order learning in Chemistry and Physics, I did not take a science course my junior year, and I had to make up the credits in a Community College. Granted, that summer session was free, but the time and resources lost for that one year were very frustrating for me. How many more kids are going to find themselves held back from harder, college-level courses, and then struggle for acceptance to top-ranking universities in the future?

The Palos Verdes parent informed me that Common Core at the high school level side-lined academic success for college. Algebra One was pushed up to Freshman year in high school, which right away prevents kids from getting into Calculus, a must-take for college entrance, including prospective engineering students.

Not only that, but the growing bent of the new curriculum seems bent on getting rid of teachers altogether and reducing them to mere facilitators, with technology taking over as the primary educator. Students need teachers, especially in tougher subjects like math and science. Critical thinking is meaningless if there is nothing to think about, or if students are working with ideas that are not true or subjects of mere opinion and fancy. Such attitudes toward learning and thinking have no place in math and science.

So, the leading opposition against Common Core in Palos Verdes signaled to me and other concerned citizens that the pro-CC groups were trying to push an Integrated Science approach to learning on all subjects.

I recognized this danger when I learned that Common Core was going to dumb done literary reading in upper level English classes. Parents are having a harder time teaching their own kids and working with the very difficult homework assignments.

One principal argued that Common Core math would engage young kids to understand the reasons why behind basic math concepts. Such discussions, however, require deeper analytical skills which young children do not possess yet.

Lydia Gutierrez, a teacher and community activist, pointed out that pushing kids too hard into these deeper strains of mathematic thought can cause them long-term pain and hardship later on in the learning process.

There is a high enough drop-out rate as it is in the inner-city schools. Common Core math, science, and English may end making it worse.

More parents are opting out of Common Core testing, and more of them are taking their kids of out of public education altogether.

With the politicization of public education, including the slow and steady indoctrination of kids into left-wing, secularized learning, parents find that the moral as well as academic fiber of many schools are failing their children and not preparing them for the rigors of adult life and growth.

As more parents, students, and community leaders learn about Common Core, no one should be surprised that they are pushing back against its implementation.

Like Governors Scott Walker and Bobby Jindal, along with US Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, I was not that big on getting rid of or exposing Common Core as a major problem. Walker and Jindal were tacit supporters or at least permitted its implementation. Like them, I learned that CC should be DOA in our schools, as major contributors and proponents of the program either have a misplaced faith the state (Ohio Governor John Kasich), or are out to make more money (Bill Gates)