The main reason behind the incompetence is the centralized-focused politicians in Sacramento. Anyone living in California
knows what a mess Sacramento has created for all of us. If you believe that Sacramento is an example of efficient government
or you arent aware of the problems that these politicians create, then please read these articles, dated as they may be.
Liberal disease totally paralyzes San Francisco and California
California, once the Golden State, finds itself in a self-inflicted case of paralysis. This total inability to move forward
on any front is a direct result of control of the state by ultra-liberal thinking and policies. Like many self-inflicted illnesses,
the victim in this case is still in denial. Once, California was the envy of the country for its education system, a magnificent
freeway system, majestic bridges, and a progressive and entrepreneurial spirit. Now, the State is fast becoming a national
joke for its inability to solve even basic problems, let alone break new ground on leading edge matters. The behavior pattern
in the State has switched from stressing excellence in all endeavors to a pervasive and endless concern for victims, or potential
victims, of our society. In fact, liberal thinkers view excellence as elitist and discriminatory.
Since San Francisco is also totally under liberal domination, it suffers the same effects. No matter what it is, they
just can't get it done. PacBell Park is the sole exception, and therefore even more of a miracle.
Listed below are a few of San Francisco and California's persistent problems that flow directly from the prevailing liberal
* A flawed deregulatory approach made the problem worse, but the recent power crisis had its true origin in a shortage
of power supply This shortage of power supply was caused by the failure to build new power plants for 12 years. Why? Because
power projects never got off the ground because of environmental and regulatory barriers.
* The Governor and the Chron convinced the majority of the people that there really wasn't a power problem, just greedy
Texas companies taking advantage of California ratepayers. This is a pathetic example of disingenuous manipulation of the
facts by the liberals, and represents an escalation of the original problem. Despite this spin, there is now a furious rush
to build the new power plants that were deferred by ultra-environmental forces.
* Now, the state has entered the power business as an over-reaction to the supply-demand imbalance. As a result they have
signed long-term contracts above prevailing market prices. The worst of this is yet to come. Selling off the surplus power
purchased by the State for July cost the taxpayers $46 million.
* San Francisco International Airport has one of the worst "on-time" records in the country. It badly needs
another runway to cure the problem. Environmental pressures will almost certainly keep it from happening, with some 30 regulatory
agencies that must first be satisfied. Small chance!
* The Muni rail system in the City is a horrible mess, and no approach acceptable to the liberals will solve the problem.
* The City is unable to keep the fancy French public toilets working. Misuse by the homeless and the derelicts is the
problem, and good liberals aren't about to offend that group.
* Gasoline prices are higher in the state than anywhere in the country because no new refineries have been built in 10
years. Once again, this is the result of environmental and regulatory pressures. Also, California has the most stringent standard
for gasoline, which creates the state's own supply-demand imbalance problems.
* The Mayor of San Francisco has 350 personal assistants who are mostly friends and hanger-ons. Business with the City
is openly done on an influence basis without provoking any serious public or media criticism. Any business firm expecting
to get a job approved by the City is told that they must hire the Speaker of the House as a consultant. There seem to be no
real duties for such pay. All of this simply raises the cost of doing business, public and private, and it comes out of all
* Public education is a disaster. Scores get lower and lower, but nothing ever changes. Any real solution is blocked by
the teacher's union through their veto power over Democratic Party policy. The media does nothing to object to that control.
Competition is the real answer, but that will never happen. In fact, Edison was kicked out of the City despite good results.
* Real estate prices are out of sight as a result of restrictive practices that hold down the creation of new supply.
The poorer people, so coveted by the liberals, are the real losers in this situation created by those very same liberals.
* The streets of San Francisco are littered with the homeless and the derelicts, who make areas of the City they frequent
look like a garbage dump. But, the liberals see them as victims of our society who must be tolerated no matter how they behave.
This is the vintage liberal pattern : find victims, show care and concern, offer no solution to the problem, feel good about
it all. Result? The City is an unqualified mess, despite spending almost $1 million per year on the problem.
* The Presidio Trust is fast spending its initial funding with no real results in return.
* The City passed a proposition to encourage solar power, whether it makes sense or not.
* The Hetch Hetchy water supply system, under City control, badly needs repair.
* We recently learned that there has been a massive misuse of funds by the SF United School District.
* San Francisco General Hospital was once one of the institutions that the City and the state could be proud of. Now,
it is in financial trouble. Also, it is the only trauma center in a major city without a helicopter pad. Cases must be transported
by ambulance from SFO. Why? Pressure against building the heliport by nearby residents. Remember the liberal rule: create
no victims, no matter how important the project.
* Lastly, we also just learned about another thing that liberals can't do, and that's to count votes. Several examples
have come to light raising serious questions about vote counting in past City elections.
California's real problem
Maybe it is just local pride on my part, but I think California is the purest example of liberal fundamentalism. New York
and Massachusetts have their claims on that title, but California is not called the Left Coast for nothing.
Some recent examples: After an initiative was put on the ballot to curb panhandling in San Francisco, Democratic State
Senator John Burton threatened to go into court to fight it, even if the voters passed it into law.
Governor Gray Davis recently added to his Left Coast record by signing into law a bill that will allow illegal aliens
to get California driver's licenses. Given our lax election laws, this may enable those illegal aliens to vote.
Meanwhile, Lt. Governor Cruz Bustamante, running for governor in the recall election, has denounced businesses for not
paying "their share" of taxes and for violating an "unwritten social contract" by not providing enough
benefits to their employees.
Just what is the right share of California's high taxes for business to pay? In one word: More. And just what is in this
unwritten social contract? Whatever Bustamante says is in it.
This is liberal fundamentalism at its purest: Protect parasites and law-breakers -- and attack those who are producing.
The exodus of hundreds of thousands of Californians to other states does not make a dent in this kind of thinking.
Killing the goose that lays the golden egg is a viable political strategy, provided the goose doesn't die before the next
election. It could take decades to ruin California completely -- and meanwhile liberals can keep on getting elected again
When the state finally goes down the drain, by then who will remember John Burton, Gray Davis or Cruz Bustamante? By then
there will be a thousand other reasons concocted to explain California's problems.
Already there is the all-purpose explanation for the state's problems, trotted out on many occasions -- Proposition 13.
Prop 13 kept California homeowners from being eaten alive by property taxes that kept rising as the value of their homes rose,
even though homeowners' incomes were not rising nearly as fast.
The only way for a homeowner to translate high real estate prices into actual cash would be to sell the home and either
live outdoors or leave California to go to some state where home prices had not yet gone into orbit.
To liberal fundamentalists, the answer to all problems is higher taxes. The very thought of cutting spending is taboo
Even amidst widespread hand-wringing about California's record budget deficit, bums on the streets in San Francisco still
get monthly incomes of several hundred dollars each from the taxpayers, quite aside from what they can get panhandling on
the streets. Every little city or county government offers all sorts of services free or at subsidized prices, even in the
most affluent communities.
Since local governments are subsidized by the state government, all this free-spending largess comes home to roost in
the state budget. Its deficit is like the ghost of Christmas past -- only every day is like Christmas in California, with
the taxpayer in the role of Santa Claus.
Generosity toward those who are not producing is matched by hostility toward those who are. The greatest hostility is
toward those who are producing what the state most needs -- more housing. The very word "developer" is anathema
In other parts of the country, liberals have to dilute their liberalism with a certain amount of concessions to reality.
But no such galling compromises are necessary in order to get elected in California.
Here you just advocate all the things that liberals find desirable and don't worry about whether they are mutually contradictory,
such as "open space" laws and "affordable housing." Nor do you need to worry about whether all the heavy
taxes used to finance giveaways are causing people and businesses to flee the state, taking the taxes they pay with them.
After all, there are plenty of illegal aliens and panhandlers coming in to replace them.
California -- Liberal Laboratory
By Lynn Woolley
August 29, 2003
Suppose a major region of the United States of America decided to adopt a strict diet of European-style liberal policies
-- what would happen? Well, that region is California where the state is almost $40 billion in the hole, the governor is being
recalled, and businesses are moving out in droves.
So what is really causing all the problems in the nation's most populous state? Embattled Governor Gray Davis says it's
the fault of President George W. Bush, the soft economy, and Enron. And he says his own situation with the recall is a part
of the Vast Right Wing conspiracy. Oh, so?
In reality, California is less a victim of circumstances and conspiracies than of its own left-leaning, socialistic policies.
As a border state, California has an influx of immigrants with as many as 2.3 million of them in the state illegally. This
puts a massive burden on the California social services system including healthcare, education and the prison system. But
it's not PC to deport illegals or even to deny them services. So taxpayers simply pick up the tab. (In fiscal year 1999, California
asked for compensation from the federal government for 11,236,513 days of detention of illegal aliens. The cost amounted to
almost $616 million. The state received $238 million, leaving California taxpayers to cover the rest.)
Governor Davis, for his part, has taken to supporting a measure that would allow illegal aliens to get California driver's
licenses. That could help sign up many new voters through the Motor Voter program, possibly creating a new Democratic Party
Then, there's the strongly Democratic California legislature that seems determined to drive business out of the Golden
State. If that's the goal, the strategy is working nicely since about 289,000 manufacturing jobs have departed the state since
2001. Part of the reason for that is a spate of laws that are making the cost of doing business in California prohibitively
Three of those laws -- as outlined in the August 11, 2003 edition of Fortune Magazine -- are particularly onerous.
Take, for example, the new California paid family leave act that will soon allow employees to request six-weeks' leave
every year for a variety of reasons ranging from family illness to caring for a new baby to migraine headaches. Businesses
can hardly wait for this law to kick in.
And how about the new rules for worker's compensation? Under this law, Fortune says that California businesses contribute
the highest premiums in the nation per $100 of wages. The cost per employee for some companies amounts to four to five times
what it would cost in Texas.
Then there's the new California overtime rules that mandate overtime to be paid for any employee that works more than
eight hours per day. What that means is that certain companies that depend on longer workers' shifts will be moving to states
that adhere to the federal 40-hour workweek.
In the socialist state of California, the government treats illegal aliens with all the rights accorded to citizens. In
the liberal laboratory of California, businesses are treated, not as creators of jobs and wealth, but as enemies of the people
who must be punished for their failure to hand out more frequent and more generous benefits. And so the government mandates
Surely other states and the federal government are watching California and are learning from the mistakes that are being
made on the Left Coast. You'd think so, but the American People will be fortunate indeed if any real reforms are made based
on the California model of socialist failures.
Spending on social services and new entitlements is not going away just because California is tanking. To the contrary,
the most popular program around the country right now is the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) which puts government
in charge of insuring children instead of parents. Our borders are still not secured and talk is re-emerging of an amnesty
plan for illegal aliens. Democrats and Republicans are in no disagreement about whether to start a new pharmaceutical entitlement;
they only argue about how large it should be.
Those who ignore the mistakes of others are doomed to repeat them. California has made some big mistakes. We can only
hope the President of the United States, the Congress, and the forty-nine other states are paying close attention.
COMING TO AMERICA
California panel rejects
Environmental concerns overrule national security in southwest U.S.
Posted: February 19, 2004
Expressing more concern about environmental habitat than national security, the California Coastal Commission yesterday
rejected a federal government request to build two fences along the border to help contain illegal immigration.
The commission, which has long battled with private-property owners over the right to use their land, this time thwarted
the U.S. Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, reported the San Diego Union-Tribune.
The agency wants to build the final three-and-a-half miles of a triple-fenced security zone along a 14-mile stretch from
the Otay Mesa border crossing to the Pacific Ocean.
The commission decided the fence and proposed patrolling of roads in the area would threaten a sensitive reserve that
drains into a national estuary, the paper reported.
"We've got to do better than this," said commission Chairman Mike Reilly of Sonoma, Calif.
According to the report, the decision could set up an inter-government battle if the Department of Homeland Security ignores
the ruling, which it can do. The commission could then try to obtain in injunction in federal court. Such an injunction could
be overruled by President Bush on national-security grounds, the San Diego paper reported.
Thomas Diaforli of the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection said he hopes to negotiate with the commission to reach
"We want the fence; we need the fence," he is quoted as saying.
The fence, which the federal agency had hoped to begin constructing in 2005, has a price tag of $58 million.
Part of the project, an earthen bridge, would increase erosion that could harm the Tijuana River national estuary, reported
Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-El Cajon, Calif., has supported the project for years, arguing it would protect San Diego's many
defense facilities from terrorists who illegally cross the U.S.-Mexico border. Hunter says the environment actually would
benefit from the fence since illegals would not be trampling sensitive habitat in the border area.
An archaeologist argued clearing the land to create the border enforcement zone could harm numerous 8,000-year-old archaeological
"This would be a huge loss of cultural data," said Cindy Stankowski of the San Diego Archaeological Center,
according to the Union-Tribune.