California Dream’n or California Nightmare?

It is getting to be more and more apparent that there needs to be a changing of the guard in Sacramento, if this state is to survive. Although there have been hundreds of disastrous bills passed in our Capitol in the last few years, none have, or are going to have, such an impact on this state as AB32 and SB375. There is not enough room here on this flier to cover these 2 bills in detail, or the ramifications they are going to have on the economy and way of life in California.
 AB32 (Nunes-D) has already given the California Air Resources Board, an unelected and unaccountable agency, unfettered rein over California businesses. The California Air Resources Board, for the 2011-2012 fiscal year had 1,223 employees costing California taxpayers $134,020,000.00. Their projected 2012-2013 budget is over 555,000,000.00. The main goal of AB32 is to get California back to 1990 emission levels by the year 2020, and they will stop at nothing in that quest. This legislation has already severely impacted the trucking and construction industries- remember almost everything you buy is trucked….the costs WILL be passed on to the consumer- the California taxpayer. How did California legislators vote on AB32?

All but 2 Democrats voted FOR it.

One Republican voted for it.

All the rest of the Republicans were AGAINST it.

SB375 (Steinberg-D)

ties transportation dollars to land use, and is the brother legislation of AB32. You will often see Mary Nichols of the California Air Resources Board appearing with Darrell Steinberg (writer of SB375) speaking at public workshops trying to sell their bill of goods to the people.

SB 375 has three major components:

1. Using the regional transportation planning process to achieve reductions in greenhouse gas emissions consistent with AB 32′s goals;

2. Offering California Environmental Quality Act incentives to encourage projects that are consistent with a regional plan that achieves greenhouse gas emission reductions; and

3. Coordinating the regional housing needs allocation process with the regional transportation process while maintaining local authority over land use decisions.

The main goal of SB375 is to get us out of our cars, and in to TOD (Transportation Oriented Development). In layman’s terms, this is high density housing centered around public transportation. They make no secret of the fact that this will all be tied in to land use decisions, which until the creation of regional Councils of Governments, was one of the most important responsibilities of our local governments. Steinberg makes it very clear that local and county governments don’t HAVE to comply with SB375. They just will not receive certain transportation dollars from the state if they don’t. In my book, that is called extortion.

Both of these monumental pieces of legislation are centered around increasingly dubious Climate Change data. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, from which much of the data being used to pass legislation such as AB32 and SB375, has altered data and findings. They are guilty of such things as totally ignoring the Medieval Warming Period, because it does not substantiate their beliefs. James Lovelock, one of the original Global Warming scientists, has admitted to being a “climate alarmist” and is now reversing his stance on the extremes he once thought man-made global climate change would lead us to. He is just one of the thousands of scientists that have reversed their stance on this very important issue.

Joel Kotkin, a leading U.S. demographer, who claims to be a Truman style Democrat, has this to say about California

, “And things will only get worse in the coming years as Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown and his green cadre implement their “smart growth” plans to cram the proletariat into high-density housing. “What I find reprehensible beyond belief is that the people pushing [high-density housing] themselves live in single-family homes and often drive very fancy cars, but want everyone else to live like my grandmother did in Brownsville in Brooklyn in the 1920s,” Mr. Kotkin declares.”The new regime”—his name for progressive apparatchiks who run California’s government—”wants to destroy the essential reason why people move to California in order to protect their own lifestyles.”

Some facts about California…

855,000 is how many private-sector jobs California has lost since the recession started four years ago. The state today enjoys an unemployment rate of 11%, compared with the official national average of 8.3%. San Joaquin County’s unemployment rate is 16%.

 State regulatory environment? George Mason University’s Mercatus Center ranks the Golden State 48th in the nation. New Jersey and New York are numbers 49 and 50, respectively.

 California has by far the largest debt of any US state, at around $612 billion with state and local debt and pension liabilities included

 California also has the distinction of having 12% of the US population and 33% of the nation’s welfare recipients. Governor Jerry’s Brown’s 2012-13 budget proposal includes $100 billion for health and human services, which, on an annualized basis, is more than

all the state and local spending in 27 of the 50 states.

 In 2011, 254 businesses left California, or an average of 5 per week. 202 left in 2010, 51 in 2009. Even “green” businesses are leaving California. Reasons cited are overregulation, and high operating costs. A business saves, on average, between 20% and 40% on costs by moving out of California. According to a 2011 report, 2500 employers ceased operations in California between 2007 and 2011. The great majority of them simply went out of business.

 California has far and away the most endangered animal species, with 111. No other state comes close.

 Nearly four million more people have left the Golden State in the last two decades than have come from other states. This is a sharp reversal from the 1980s, when 100,000 more Americans were settling in California each year than were leaving. Most of those leaving are between the ages of 5 and 14 or 34 to 45. In other words, young families. This may sound good to some people, but remember that this monster of a government needs to be fed, and the less people here, the more they will have to contribute in taxes because there will be less taxpayers.

Something has to change in Sacramento and it is up to the citizens of this state to dictate which direction we want to go. Do you feel that this state is in better shape than it was 20 years ago? If not- DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT- VOTE, AND VOTE WISELY! The future of California is in the hands of a very small number of men and women in Sacramento. CHOOSE WISELY!

About these ads

About goldcountrypatriots

This entry was posted in California and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s